During a Wednesday night appearance on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., poked fun at two of the Democrats during the first 2020 debate who broke into Spanish while answering questions — and shared her observations about the winners and losers of the night.
“I loved it, because I represent the Bronx. There was a lot of Spanglish in the building,” Ocasio-Cortez joked when discussing how Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas answered some of their questions in Spanish. “I thought it was humorous sometimes, at times. Especially because sometimes the content of the question, I thought people were just going to start saying — ”
At that point, Ocasio-Cortez said the Spanish sentence that translates to: “I will not give you an answer to your question.” She then added, “But it was good. I thought it was a good gesture to the fact that we are a diverse country — so that’s good.”
Of the sheer number of candidates on the debate stage — there will be ten in total on each of the two nights — Ocasio-Cortez said, “I think — sometimes with a debate stage this big, it can kind of seem like a high school classroom. And so there are some folks that didn’t seem like they read the book, and then they got called on.”
In terms of winners, the New York congresswoman identified the progressive senator from Massachusetts and former President Barack Obama’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
“I think Elizabeth Warren gets asked back . . . I think she knocked it out of the park,” Ocasio-Cortez told Colbert. “I think Julian Castro did a phenomenal job tonight . . . I think both of them were great.”
By contrast, she answered a question about Reps. John Delaney of Maryland and Tim Ryan of Ohio with facial expressions and mannerisms, which indicated she was less than impressed with their performances.
Instead, she focused on marginalized groups, which she felt received proper attention during the debate.
“I think there were communities that got centered tonight. The trans community got centered tonight. The immigrant community got centered tonight,” Ocasio-Cortez told Colbert. “And I think that that was an extraordinary moment as well, policy-wise.”
That being said, she criticized the moderators for not sufficiently focusing on man-made climate change.
“I don’t think that we are discussing climate change the way we need to be discussing climate change,” Ocasio-Cortex said. “It is such a huge, broad systemic issue. And you can’t just say, ‘Is Miami going to exist in 50 years?’ We need to say, ‘What are you going to do about this?'”
“And I know there’s a lot of folks — a lot of young people — that have been mobilizing for an entire climate debate in the Democratic caucus,” she continued. “I think it’s a good idea, because when it comes to climate change, climate change is an infrastructure issue. It’s a jobs issue. It’s an energy issue. It’s a foreign policy issue. And we can’t just talk about the Copacabana.”
Ocastio-Cortez also was restrained in her criticisms of former Vice President Joe Biden, the current frontrunner for the 2020 nomination, reiterating her thesis when she told “Vogue” earlier this week that Biden may not be “a pragmatic choice.”
During that interview she added, “That’s my frustration with politics today — that they’re willing to give up every single person in America just for that dude in a diner . . . Just so that you can get this very specific slice of Trump voters?”
You can watch the full segment below:
William Barr made it clear this week that he’d sign off on a sham investigation into the Dems’ 2020 nominee
Welcome to another edition of What Fresh Hell?, Raw Story’s roundup of news items that might have become controversies under another regime, but got buried – or were at least under-appreciated – due to the daily firehose of political pratfalls, unhinged tweet storms and other sundry embarrassments coming out of the current White House.
A perfect storm propelled New York's sleaziest real estate developer to an Electoral College victory in 2016 despite winning three million fewer votes than his opponent, but Nate Silver made a compelling argument that the letter James Comey sent to Congress just 11 days before Election Day announcing that the FBI was re-opening its probe into Hillary Clinton's emails was decisive.
Bill Barr is serving notice to DOJ officials that he’ll ruin them if they investigate Trump: MSNBC host
An MSNBC discussion about Bill Barr running interference within the Justice Department for Donald Trump ended with "AM Joy" host Joy Reid suggesting that the attorney general's very public "media blitz" over the so-called "Horowitz Report" is a warning shot to anyone in the DOJ who thinks about investigating the president.
As Reid explained it, "He did a whole TV blitz to basically say that his own agency, the FBI, was spying on the Trump campaign, something that the inspector general said did not happen."
Reid took that to its logical conclusion.
"Now he’s saying, ‘Well, I’ve got a different report that’s going to find the motivations’ that he’s basically saying are bad motivations by people in the FBI. And if you’re that FBI agent and then you hear that Donald Trump may be again looking for foreign help and maybe again getting help from Russia or forcing help from Ukraine, what do you do?" she asked. "Would you then not be concerned that, should you go ahead and investigate foreign interference in our election, that William Barr may come after you?"
Stefanik voters turning on GOP lawmaker after she threw away her credibility to defend Trump
Over the course of the impeachment hearings, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) has gone from a relative backbencher who sells herself as a moderate to voters in Upstate New York, to a theatrical partisan grandstanding for President Donald Trump and a top target of ire from Democrats.
But according to Politico, at least some of her voters appear turned off by her new stance.
"While Stefanik once able to strike a delicate balance between her Republican identity and her positions on issues like climate change, some think those earlier convictions are gone, like Phillip Paige, a former Stefanik backer and a member of SUNY Potsdam’s College Republicans," wrote Politico's Anna Gronewald. "A native of the 21st district’s Madrid, New York, Paige said he started to lose faith in Stefanik when she began supporting Trump as the party’s nominee in 2016. Paige supported John Kasich’s candidacy in that election. 'A lot of her boots-on-the-ground young Republican crowd has really become quite disillusioned,' he said. 'We saw her as what we thought the future of the Republican Party was and that really has been disproven. Unless, maybe the future of the Republican party is Donald Trump.'"