And today’s stories the Democrats are split. There was nothing like this when a lot of incumbents lost primaries in 1992.

You’d think this was a major senate seat or something. I think she will do well myself.

the media is starting to trot out their stale "Democrats are in trouble" narrative again.

yet we re-elect incumbents around 70% of the time.


Which really means we are really attached to our incumbents, hate the rest of them because it is easy....we can't really get rid of them.

None.

I would rate my congressperson favorably but would not do so for congress as a whole.

The metric you are using has zero to do with reelection. It's a bastardization of statistics.

Congressional favorability is linked in no way to individual elections.

That's why I asked. It's not possible to connect the two yet there they are. Didn't want to be reading you wrong.

Some are trying to outline her as if she is not a Democrat. As if this is some kind of defeat for us.

They are transparent in what they are promoting.

That said, it is a big deal in politics when a newcomer beats out a well established candidate.

The rift is being made up. Ocasio seem like she is going to be a great Democrat. That pisses off the HA Goodman crowd.

I'm with her! Stronger Together!

That is the main reason for her victory. The district is still solidly blue, so she should win. Crowley was professional about his loss.

Let's move on and cut the crap or we might risk this seat. I don't see anyone here crowing about this except the OR crowd. Get over yourselves and GOTV.

is not true of course...but the idea that a progressive winning in a deep blue state seems pretty run of the mill to me...I don't think it has all this meaning that press and others do.

And there was no talk then about party schisms.

... owing to his proximity to (or likelihood of) replacing Pelosi as House Minority Leader (or perhaps someday Speaker), and because supposedly "it's not your grandfather's" Democratic Party any more.

It's a certain segment that wants to attach themselves and their movement (it's a "movement" all right) or their "revolution" to a single victory. Their desire to attribute this victory to something OTHER than the changing demographics of that area... and to portray it as some seismic shift, or groundswell of America embracing "democratic socialism" is just absurd.

All I'm trying to say is that she'll be a fine representative... but it ain't "all that" and the disproportionate in-your-face and "take-that!" reactions simply don't match the reality of why she won.

He held tightly to the reigns as a big shot in DC as well as heading the Queens County Democrats, that's too much power and influence concentrated in one person. One who has had little to do with his constituency of late, and did not really represent one of the most racially diverse counties in the nation.