I realize I may get some flack for this, but here goes.

[yellow dahlia]

Last edited Wed Jan 29, 2025, 09:44 PM - Edit history (1)

Apparently on an interview with Jon Stewart, AOC said: "We need to become BRAWLERS for the working class” **
This is how she sees that "democrats could win back messaging and make real progress for real people".

I have a problem with those trying to turn the Democratic party into a specific category or a monolith, in any way. Isn't the whole point of the Democratic Party is that is a "big tent" party.

There has been a lot of talk since the election about how the Dems need to learn to speak to "regular folks". This strategy is sometimes portrayed (from my perspective) as the Dems apologizing for the elites and academics. I have seen some playbooks that sound like they are encouraging the "dumbing down" of the Democratic Party.

I do not agree that the result of the last election can be blamed on the Democrats having the "wrong message", or directing their message to the wrong people.

So is AOC advocating for focusing on a certain population, that does not include some of us?

Are academics and intellectual elites excluded from that working class?

Are aging hippies comfortably (financially and otherwise) living out their years in a cabin in Vermont, excluded from the Democratic base?

Is anyone who happens to be financially secure and no longer working excluded as a priority for the Democratic Party.

Is anyone who happens to be financially secure, period, not in need of the policies of the Democratic Party?

There are those who are limited by their disabilities and unable to work. They are clearly not the "working class".

Are all of us on this forum the working class? Shouldn't the Democratic Party be representing and protecting and defending and "fighting" for all of us?

And I have a question about the word "brawler"?

Is that not a word that reflects a tough attitude of the Bronx?

I don't know that speaking like a tough person from the Bronx has an overall appeal to the American citizenry. There are a lot of people in need of the help of the Democratic Party right now. Some of those people don't respond to the tough brawler persona.

I find a lot of incredibly smart people on this forum. A lot of us would describe ourselves as part of the "resistance". I would say we represent the "opposition". I see much discussion that is geared toward saving our democracy and the future of this country. Do all of us see the brawler stance as the future approach for the Democratic Party?

Don't get me wrong. I think AOC is smart and effective. Right now the Democratic Party can use her energy in the House, and I think she does a great job in Committee.

** I had to make an edit and correct the word "middle class". It was supposed to read "working class". I copied and pasted it from somewhere and didn't realize they had changed the quote. BIG MEA CULPA!
For clarification, my criticism was of the phrase "working class" and its limited meaning. That was indeed the phrase she used. I just found the article in which the phrase was used. Here it is. https://www.commondreams.org/news/aoc-democrat

[gab13by13]

1. It appears to me

that Hakeem Jeffries agrees with AOL.

Jeffries held an emergency zoom meeting with Dems and came out of the meeting saying they were prepared for a street brawl.

Democrats now have a plan of action.

[tableturner]

2. I totally disagree!

We are not tough enough...we SHOULD become brawlers!

What the Democrats in Congress are doing is not enough! If the roles were reversed, the Republicans, not just office holders, but also surrogates, and LOTS of them, would be furiously and unrelentingly venting on TV, social media, and everywhere there is an opportunity to do so. Yes, Republicans go full throttle to make their points, which usually are total garbage.

We don't take it that far, and while our people are out exposing the horrible truth, not enough of them are, those who are, are not doing it with enough fury, and they are not filling the airwaves like the Republicans do. Can you honestly say that our efforts regarding this or any issue are as intense as what the GOP does to attack an issue? You know that our side does not come close to matching that. We are fighting on this issue the way we have always done it, and the way we have always done it has led to more losses than should be the case, given that we have the facts on our side.

Which is why:

They take a complete nothing and turn it into a big something.

We take a big something and turn it into a complete nothing.

They fight hard non-stop and win...we fight with a lot less intensity, and we get our asses kicked over and over. Even when we win, we win by less than we should for the same reasons.

Democrats should do what Republicans do to attack us with lies (but we can do it with the truth!), which is to have our reps and surrogates unrelentingly spew the truth with the same focus, repetition, and venom that the Republicans use when they spew lies!

Those of us who think the Democrats are doing enough are part of the problem.

Edited to add: You wrote: I do not agree that the result of the last election can be blamed on the Democrats having the "wrong message", or directing their message to the wrong people.

My response: Oh yeah? Then why are so many buying the lies and garbage from the Republicans if our messaging is effective? A huge number of people in this country believe totally ridiculous bullshit, thanks to the Republicans' strong messaging and our WEAK messaging!

[yellow dahlia]

13. A. I did not say I think Dems aren't doing enough.

As EarlG has given us permission to criticize Dems, in the interest of solutions and moving forward, I often do so.

B. I often say that the Dems need to work harder on the counter-narrative.
But I do not need that counter-narrative needs to push some away.

C. I absolutely believe that one of the key factors that influenced the past election was the misinformation and disinformation form the right and the RW media.

Further follow up - one of the things I have spent time doing in recent years is fact-checking. I believe that the Dems should have been doing more fact checking themselves. I do not believe they should let the lies slip by.

One of the points I made not have made clearly enough. I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[stopdiggin]

3. you're right in a lot of what you say here.

I'm not sure your 'assumptions' about what AOC is 'saying' (or in fact meant) is one of those points.

I really don't know what AOC meant by the term 'brawler'. Kinda' hoping she didn't mean somebody in the mold of MTG ... (big thumbs down on that!). But if she did - so be it. Her words not mine. And I'll let her provide explanations and definitions.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[tableturner]

7. What "brawler" means in AOC's context....

It simply means fight hard, fight hard non-stop the way the GOP has been doing which has caused people to believe total BS, and stop being so nice! They are trying to destroy our country and enslave us! If you cannot fight with maximum intensity in the face of that possibility, then when would you ever do that?

[yellow dahlia]

15. I understand your point.

I do not disagree with the need to respond to this existential threat.

I am vocabulary obsessed. I would choose a better word.

I take issue with two aspects of the statement - the limitations of the word "brawler" and the limitations of the phrase "working class".

I will call em like I see em. (Not the way I usually speak.) I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[yellow dahlia]

27. Did you see my correction on my OP?

** I had to make an edit and correct the word "middle class". It was supposed to read "working class". I copied and pasted it from somewhere and didn't realize they had changed the quote. BIG MEA CULPA!
For clarification, my criticism was of the phrase "working class" and its limited meaning. That was indeed the phrase she used. I just found the article in which the phrase was used. Here it is. https://www.commondreams.org/news/aoc-democrat


Meanwhile, as you can see, I am indeed getting some flack, and I knew I would.

I made my OP because I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis. And I am concerned if they focus too much on identity politics.

Thank you for looking for agreement and understanding, rather than the usual politics.

[stopdiggin]

34. and I agree with about 95% of what you had to say

The idea that we should apologize (or deemphasize?) - education? - academics? - science? - intelligence? .... (global outlook?) In favor of some kind of striped down, dumbed down ... Lowest common denominator ... ?

Nope. I know there are people on this site that will argue (vociferously) for pretty much just that. But that's a hard pass for me.

[Frasier Balzov]

4. The word choice is probably intended to evoke commitment.

I'm sure she means brawling in an intellectual, rhetorical and principled sense.

Her appeal is to a sort of J6 spirit in our own hearts which doesn't depend on the literal breaking of skulls.

Rather, it means speaking truth.

Demanding disruptors justify what they're doing.

Not letting them get away with sneakily instituting harmful changes under a battle cry of reform.

[Phoenix61]

5. IMHO, you missed her point.

Dems are acting like the rules of decorum are in effect. Where are the fiery speeches telling how POS’s agenda aka Project 2025 will burn our country to the ground? Where are the speeches urging people to call their Congress critters and press them to stand up to POS? They come across as college professors discussing the merits of alternative policies not as leaders fighting for our lives.

[tableturner]

10. I agree...SCREW decorum! That's how the GOP kicks our asses!

[yellow dahlia]

16. I think the push back regarding the EO's in the past couple of days

show that using reason and many voices works.

There have been messages from all directions to contact one's reps in Congress and it is working.

And in the past couple of days the press has actually been on top of a lot of the chaos as well.

And there have been legal actions that have had immediate results.

Lots of voices matter.

I will continue to plead with the Democratic party to avoid making more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[yellow dahlia]

18. I needed to make a correction in my OP.

Here it is.

** I had to make an edit and correct the word "middle class". It was supposed to read "working class". I copied and pasted it from somewhere and didn't realize they had changed the quote. BIG MEA CULPA!
For clarification, my criticism was of the phrase "working class" and its limited meaning. That was indeed the phrase she used. I just found the article in which the phrase was used. Here it is. https://www.commondreams.org/news/aoc-democrat

[Think. Again.]

6. I believe you might be wrongly hung up on the "middle class" thing.

The financially-comfortable-but-not-excessively-rich status covers a huge portion of our population, including those that you point out in your post, -retired people (hippy or not) are mostly within the fiscal category of middle class, as are academics.

And AOC did not say "working class", which denotes a much smaller demographic which does exclude some of the groups you mention, but as you post says, she said "middle classv which is strictly a financial category.

As far as "brawler", I believe she just means someone who will fight hard and and long, and certainly not in the physical sense (because the Left doesn't do unnecessary violence).

[yellow dahlia]

8. "Ocasio-Cortez said, we need to be a party of brawlers for the working class."

[Think. Again.]

11. Cut and pasted from your OP above...

Apparently on an interview with Jon Stewart, AOC said: "We need to become BRAWLERS for the middle class”
This is how she sees that "democrats could win back messaging and make real progress for real people".

[Sailingfish]

14. Your OP states it differently.

"Apparently on an interview with Jon Stewart, AOC said: "We need to become BRAWLERS for the middle class”

Which one was it she actually said in her statement ? Middle class or working class ? It does make a difference in trying to respond from a leftist perspective at least.

[yellow dahlia]

20. I have since realized that it wa indeed the phrase - "working class".

My apologies for the confusion. I made a correction to my OP. Here is the correction/update I added to my OP.
** I had to make an edit and correct the word "middle class". It was supposed to read "working class". I copied and pasted it from somewhere and didn't realize they had changed the quote. BIG MEA CULPA!
For clarification, my criticism was of the phrase "working class" and its limited meaning. That was indeed the phrase she used. I just found the article in which the phrase was used. Here it is. https://www.commondreams.org/news/aoc-democrat

[Sailingfish]

25. Thanks. No apologies needed at all.

Kind of thought so, as the rest of your comment was saying working class. I was too damn lazy to look up the quote, so you probably deserve the actual apology for that. lol Now to try and respond with the less than full functioning braincells I have working right now. It will be highly unpopular and controversial anyway I'm sure. lol Good to see some activity in this new section though. It's more than needed despite any disagreements that arise. Hope it doesn't turn into a bust activity wise.

[yellow dahlia]

31. Thank you for your gracious reply.

[Sailingfish]

38. Cheers

I'm pissed off in that I have much to say on this but pretty much drawing blanks in making it into a comment. I don't have much other than I watched the clips and pretty much agree with AOC there though. The Democratic Party needs to get back to focusing on economic class as their foundation. There's "no dumbing down" in that as some have said. The number one priority of a human being regardless of race, creed, or gender is daily survival. Food, shelter, clothing etc. The means of life. Class warfare is real and in no way has society transcended that. The Democratic Party needs to put the priorities of workers over the priorities of the owners. They need to put the priorities of labor over the priorities of capital. And they need to put the priorities of Main Street over the priorities of Wall Street. There's nothing dumbed down about the Democratic Party planting their flag on that as the foundation of their political platform. Easier said than done when politics is dominated by ruling class money and donors of course.

[Think. Again.]

35. Thanks for clearing that up! Sorry about the confusion.

[yellow dahlia]

19. My apologies. There was a typo in my OP.

I wrote my OP to respond what I heard AOC say that referenced "working class". I then went and got a quote from someone else's share that mistakenly used the phrase "middle class" in quoting her. She did indeed say "working class". I have since clarified. Here is my update/correction for my OP.
** I had to make an edit and correct the word "middle class". It was supposed to read "working class". I copied and pasted it from somewhere and didn't realize they had changed the quote. BIG MEA CULPA!
For clarification, my criticism was of the phrase "working class" and its limited meaning. That was indeed the phrase she used. I just found the article in which the phrase was used. Here it is. https://www.commondreams.org/news/aoc-democrat

Again, my apologies for the gaff in my OP.

[SilasSouleII]

9. My take

The middle class made and maintain this country. They are trying to divide this country by class. The haves and the have nots. The class above the middle class and the class below the middle class but no more middle class. Brawlers, fighters, advocats, of the middle class is what is needed now. It means we don't back down by remaining silent or worse, by signing on to anything that weakens the middle class. This should also apply to intellectuals, pacifists, and any other group who can, by their own ways and means, help in the fight. The ship is on fire, all hands are needed on deck, now. Either the fire is contained and hopefully, extinguished or the middle class is gone forever.

[Deuxcents]

12. I'll agree. The word "brawlers" means a lot of things n I'm not getting hung up on a word. Her intent is more important

[yellow dahlia]

23. The phrase used by AOC was actually "working class.

My apologies for being confusing. I made a correction on my OP. Here it is.

** I had to make an edit and correct the word "middle class". It was supposed to read "working class". I copied and pasted it from somewhere and didn't realize they had changed the quote. BIG MEA CULPA!
For clarification, my criticism was of the phrase "working class" and its limited meaning. That was indeed the phrase she used. I just found the article in which the phrase was used. Here it is. https://www.commondreams.org/news/aoc-democrat[/b

I explained my disagreement with her limiting semantics.

I agree with what you say: "This should also apply to intellectuals, pacifists, and any other group who can, by their own ways and means, help in the fight. The ship is on fire, all hands are needed on deck, now."

I share my thoughts because I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[NoRethugFriends]

37. the middle class made this country? try again.

And we sure and how do need class warfare.

[Xoan]

17. The Revolutionary War ...

had mostly American brawlers.

[CoopersDad]

22. Freedom riders.

Basically brawlers.

[CoopersDad]

21. Here is a more full transcript of the exchange. Context matters.

I love her, not just like her, and find no fault with her comments in this context:

Exchange between John Steward and AOC:

AOC: I believe that we need to be a party of brawlers for the working class.

JS: There you go.

AOC: And we have turned into a party that caters to all those people who call themselves upper middle class, but they're actually like, kind of wealthy.

JS: You're talking about me now, aren't you?

No. No, you're not middle class at all!

JS: No, I meant wealthy, that's what I meant.

AOC: We've been chasing this affluent group and making all of these little concessions and hoping that working people don't notice.

JS: How does that manifest? If you could give us an example of what those concessions might look like, because in my mind, look one of the biggest. Issues in in my mind is over the last 40 or 50 years, labor has been devalued, and capital has been elevated. So investment and finance is king and labor is in many ways devalued. So in what way have you seen those kinds of moves made?

AOC: Yeah, I mean, I think the most famous one that comes to mind. Is Kirsten Synema doing her little curtsy when she voted down the $15 minimum wage? But it wasn't just her that was the most public expression of it, but there were a bunch of Democrats in the Senate behind her that also voted it down. People are struggling so much right now. 15 bucks an hour is nothing. The day that the news came out that I got assigned to Energy and Commerce, my staff's e-mail boxes blew up with lobbyists. Just tons of lobbyists just flooding our emails. And it is literally because of this assignment that I got.

JS: Was it like, hey, what's up, congresswoman? Just checking in.

AOC: It's very like, hello, fellow kids. Like, ohh, I was at, I was at the Bernie rally like back in the day, Like, I'd love to chat. I don't take a dime of lobbyist money. Because I am afforded that independence, because everyday people support me, I don't have to. I'm under no pressure or obligation to take a single one of these meetings, not one.

https://www.instagram.com/chantillysays/reel/DFNBlrhRXUg/

[yellow dahlia]

24. She used that phrase in more than one interview.

I had to update my OP with a correction. I included another article where she was quoted as saying the same thing.

Here it is: I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

And even with the context you provided, she make my point. She and other Dems are disparaging the intellectuals and upper middle class and upper class and elitists.

I think the Dems need to figure out how to be a "big tent' party. It should be about policies instead of identity politics.

I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[stopdiggin]

36. and that is actually WAY more disappointing

than what I had originally thought ...

Lots of Democratic votes (and supposedly backers?) against the minimum wage? Ummm ... Not really.
Sinema as an example of where the Party is at today .. ? Whaazaa !

[Lulu KC]

26. How I'm reading it

I'm taking "brawlers" figuratively, but I think she (and others) are mentioning specifically the working class as campaign audience targets because we have lost them, even though we are on their side. They will be hurt by DT but they either don't vote (for whatever reason) or think DT is their friend. This is a critical audience to lose and it's so unjustified.

OTOH, this is making me think what IS the working class now? It's a phrase we throw around, but at this point in time, what does it mean? It used to conjure up union members, but now many white collar workers have unions. (Teachers, many government employees, etc.) Does it mean "blue collar?" With the way manufacturing has changed in the global economy, not as many people who are working in the U.S. are working in factories, which is the source of the expression "blue collar," right? Does it mean the underpaid service workers who are certainly working--yes, that part I get.

Lots to think about, but I don't think she's saying to leave anybody out, just to regain a segment we have lost so very unfairly.

Thanks for sharing this. Good food for thought.

[yellow dahlia]

29. Thank you for your input and thoughts.

I believe one of the reasons we "lost" some of the "working class", and the American public as a whole, is misinformation and disinformation and propaganda and lies. I would like to see some emphasis on counter-narrative and fact checking. Yes it is hard because it requires diligence 24/7.

I do not want the Dems to make more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[gab13by13]

28. The notion that Democrats need to be brawlers is spot on,

no matter what context it is taken as.

Our democracy is under attack. trump is breaking the law with many of his EO's.

Saying Dems need to "fight" like hell is understood.

SMH if we are hung up on the word brawl.

Congressional Democrats need to hold town halls to explain what Trump is doing. Get the people fired up because that is what will stop Trump, not the courts. Trump is planning to defy the courts.

[yellow dahlia]

30. I think the push back regarding the EO's in the past couple of days

shows that using reason and many voices works.

There have been messages from all directions to contact one's reps in Congress and it is working.

And in the past couple of days the press has actually been on top of a lot of the chaos as well.

And there have been legal actions that have had immediate results.

Lots of voices matter.

I will continue to plead with the Democratic party to avoid making more mistakes. I do not want them to correct based on flawed analysis.

[Brogrizzly]

32. I like anyone that names themselves after a flower.

Realistically, can I just say it’s too early to say if you are correct or not, as far as it relates to the premise of what you wrote? Specifically I’m saying over time one can’t tell if she’s correct or not, especially if the current events amount to small beans over 20-30 years. Theoretically it’s possible orange shitgibbon gets away with his current tenure, but four-five years from now America is still inundated with climate change problems, and also! Russia is still positioning troops in Eukraine causing chaos in the EU. I think potentially she might be right but like I’m torn, 60/40 split: anyone want to bet me twenty bucks the Ukraine war is still going on 5 years from now? I think that’s the better question to address the current kind of politics we are expecting er…experiencing? But I get it, trying to wrap your head around what’s currently happening, especially in congressional house politics….shoot me now. I can not logically come to point to argue one way or the other.

[yellow dahlia]

33. Thank you.

[betsuni]

39. Working class for populists means rural white men in swing states who used to have good union manufacturing jobs

until jobs started going overseas in the '70s and the U.S. economy shifted to a service/technology economy, and automation.

But they decided to blame Democrats for everything, claiming NAFTA trade deals started the whole thing (Bill Clinton's neoliberal plot) and the party became corrupt immoral elites beholden to Wall Street and corporations (dumbing it down to everything's about money (status quo) and everyone except the populist saviors are corrupt) with the same economic policies as Republicans, and despise and ignore the working class. They think Democrats fool voters by pandering with "identity politics" and the nice white Republican working class is mocked and made to suffer economic anxiety. Polarization with establishment vs anti-establishment, demonizing Democrats, usual Us vs Them populist style. They want people to hate Democrats as the true roadblock to progress. Zero evidence for any of these supposed Democratic crimes, of course.

Majority of Trump votes in the general and many for Sanders in the primary were voting against Hillary. Left populists confused this with support for them (why the Democratic-establishment-rigs-primaries conspiracy theories). Americans are not secretly progressives yearning for economic revolution but somehow thwarted by cartoonishly evil Democrats.

Majority of the working class are not white rural men. The working class votes Democratic, lower the income the more likely to vote Democratic. Why would anyone think the Biden administration ignores the working class (examples of policies - what's the evidence both sides are the same?), that Kamala would ignore them, that Democrats aren't from working or middle class backgrounds? Clinton, Obama, Biden, Harris were 1% elites who don't know what inequality is and have no idea what's going on in the U.S.? When they mock Democrats as elites, are they thinking FDR? The one who saved capitalism: "Roosevelt took the status quo in our economic system as much for granted as his family."

Bernie Sanders: "It's not just Kamala. It's a Democratic Party which increasingly has become a party of identity politics, rather than understanding that the vast majority of people in this country are working class."

I've never seen an explanation of this ideology.

[Elessar Zappa]

40. I don't know.

Obviously Dems should represent everybody, but I wouldn’t mind a focus on the working class and poor. It’s they who have been ignored for the past 45 years. Politicians are always bragging about helping the middle class but much of the citizens aren’t middle class. It’s their time to have representation.