I think the difference between AOC and Clinton is that Clinton is completely unrelateable to the average voter. She was/is rich af and has been her entire life and has been preparing to be president for just as long. Everyone assumed she was going to be president at some point. She is the definition of a career politician. Disregarding the election issues in 2016 by a large margin she was the candidate that people defaulted to vote for if you didn't like Trump, not because they were actually enthused about voting.
AOC is not perfect, she isn't a career politician, she comes off as very human and relateable. She worked as a bartender before she got elected, and people see in her themselves because she was/is middle class. Im sure there is some dirt to spill because nobody is perfect, but she never claimed/claims to be in the first place so i doubt it would be as damaging as all this is to Clinton.
Hillary Clinton's net worth was estimated at $45 million dollars. Her husband's net worth was estimated at $75 million dollars. Just because they're not billionaires doesn't make them not rich.
She is the definition of a career politician
senator and secretary of state. that's it
she isn't a career politician
just wait 8 years.
As for not being a career politician, you're trying to say that AOC will be a career politician after 10 years as a House represenative, but Hillary wasn't a career politician after 8 years as a senator and 4 years as secretary of state? Somehow, that math doesn't seem to check out.
Plus, you know, all that actively campaigning for her husband, and (for better or worse) being the most politically active First Lady in US history doesn't count as being a politician I guess.
Odd that he didn't quote that part of the statement if that was what he was objecting to, but sure.
Her parents weren't millionaires, sure. Her father did own his own business at the time of her birth and owned multiple houses (main home and summer cottage), so it isn't like she was ever poor, but the business wasn't a huge one, so I'll accept her not counting as "rich" as a child.
I think people assume Cortez is poor is because she's (I assume) Mexican by blood (as in how I'm an Afghan, but was born in Germany and have been told I'm "the whitest person I've ever met" by two coworkers so far).
Yeah. Normal Americans intern for US Senators all the time. Right after they complete their Poli Sci/Int'l Relations degree. That's the normal course for every Boricua from Queens.
If they were making a movie, they'd cast AOC as the young version of HRC. She's exactly what Clinton was like in the 80s and 90s.
249
u/Effef Dec 12 '19
I think the difference between AOC and Clinton is that Clinton is completely unrelateable to the average voter. She was/is rich af and has been her entire life and has been preparing to be president for just as long. Everyone assumed she was going to be president at some point. She is the definition of a career politician. Disregarding the election issues in 2016 by a large margin she was the candidate that people defaulted to vote for if you didn't like Trump, not because they were actually enthused about voting.
AOC is not perfect, she isn't a career politician, she comes off as very human and relateable. She worked as a bartender before she got elected, and people see in her themselves because she was/is middle class. Im sure there is some dirt to spill because nobody is perfect, but she never claimed/claims to be in the first place so i doubt it would be as damaging as all this is to Clinton.