Is Ocasio the Dumbest Congressional Candidate? [VIDEO]

Is Ocasio the Dumbest Congressional Candidate? [VIDEO]

Is Ocasio the Dumbest Congressional Candidate? [VIDEO]

If not, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez should be in the team photo. The Democratic Socialist darling, who sports two Bachelors degrees from Boston University – one in economics, and one in international relations – but continues to display staggering ignorance about both, has stuck her dainty Mahnolo Blahnik-clad shoe in her maw once again (figuratively speaking) with her latest Twitterderp showing her abject ignorance about many things, including Puerto Rico’s status as a US territory.

Let’s remember that this is the woman who claimed in an interview that unemployment is low because people are being forced to work two jobs.

“Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family.”

This was a claim so stupid, even PolitiFact, which generally tends to lean left, couldn’t defend.

In our review, we found many reasons why unemployment is low, and not for the overwork that Ocasio-Cortez cited. The biggest factors include strong economic confidence and the long-running economic recovery. (Her campaign did not respond to an inquiry.)

Then, in the same interview, dullwit tried to sound educated (and failed) about the issue of the Palestinian Territories. Ummmm…. ¡OCCUPATION! Ummmm… ¡HUMANITARIAN CRISIS! Ummmmmm… ¡INCREASING SETTLEMENTS! Ummmmmm… I don’t know much about geopolitics anyway.

Nawwww! FERREALS?

But Ocasio wasn’t satisfied with the peals of laughter her statements evoked. Early on, she showed her arse in a tweet in which she attempted to call out her supposed future colleagues while bragging about her economics credentials. Yes, boys and girls, Ocasio was bragging about having a Bachelors degree.

If you’re wondering what the daft bint is going on about, let me ‘splain.

See, the Gini Coefficient generally measures income inequality. A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where all values are the same (for example, where everyone has the same income). A Gini coefficient of 1 (or 100%) expresses maximal inequality among values (e.g., for a large number of people, where only one person has all the income or consumption, and all others have none, the Gini coefficient will be very nearly one).

Had Ocasio used her economics degree for something other than election bragging rights, or read any actual economic policy papers, she would see that the Gini Index means very little in terms of actual inequality, especially when taken completely out of context with other factors that affect inequality. At the same time, inequality isn’t necessarily a bad thing despite what the socialists might tell you. Skills differ, achievements differ, drives to succeed differ, and yes, opportunities differ as well. And yet, one might think – if one listens to Crazy Eyes – that inequality means that the “rich” hoard all the wealth, while everyone else suffers.

How much were her Manolos and that snazzy suit, again?

A CATO Institute economic policy paper by Michael Tanner demolishes some of the economic myths Ocasio peddles, including the Gini Index derp that she uses to denigrate the filthy rich.

Comparing the Gini coefficient, the official poverty measure, and two additional poverty measures (one based on income and accounting for taxes and transfers, and one based on consumption) developed by economists Bruce D. Meyer of the University of Chicago and James X. Sullivan of Notre Dame reveals no clear relationship between poverty and inequality.

While the Gini coefficient has increased almost without interruption, the official poverty rate has fluctuated mostly in the 13–15 percent range and the two measures from Meyer and Sullivan have both decreased markedly since 1980.

Again, the mid-1990s was an interesting period because the inequality was markedly higher than previously, but both the supplemental poverty measure (SPM) and the official rate saw significant decreases. Comparison with the consumption-based poverty measure is especially interesting, with poverty showing a substantial decline despite rising inequality. Since many observers believe that consumption is the best measure of the poor’s actual standard of living, this suggests that not only does rising inequality not correlate with greater poverty, but a rising tide may truly lift all boats.

So why did Ocasio even bring up the Gini Coefficient? Probably for two reasons: to show herself to be some kind of economic wizard and to promote the socialists’ claim that the “rich” are unfairly keeping the poor down.

Judging from the continued complaints about income inequality, these shrieks are nothing but envy—efforts by the left to exploit jealousy of those who have more, while ignoring the fact that the living conditions of the poor are on the rise.

Now, with all that said, let’s get back to Ocasio’s ignorance on all things political and international.

The tweet from a few days ago that I cited in my opening salvo says the following:

Today marks 1 year since Hurricane María. A year later, Puerto Rico is still in shambles. Some things to advocate today: 1. PR is still a colony of the United States. The island deserves real self-determination. We must say that to fix it.

She got the first two things right. Yes, Maria hit a year ago, and yes, Puerto Rico is still in shambles—mostly because of its inept, corrupt bureaucracy, as I wrote previously, including its corrupt, bankrupt Electric Power Authority (PREPA) that failed to maintain the island’s electrical infrastructure.

But then, Ocasio derps off the rails.

Puerto Rico is still a colony? Errrrr…..

The island was a Spanish colony before becoming a territory of the United States. The UN removed the island from its list of non-self governing countries in the 1950s. Puerto Ricans are US citizens. They voted in the US Presidential primaries in 2016. They don’t pay income taxes, although they do pay payroll taxes, and they receive buttloads in federal tax dollars and would receive even more if the island actually becomes a state. In 2014, the GAO did an analysis to estimate the economic impact of Puerto Rico’s statehood, the Wall Street Journal reported last year.

Overall, it found that as a state, Puerto Rico would have received $8.8 billion to $12.5 billion from the four largest federal programs, instead of $7.1 billion. Its corporations would have paid $5 billion to $9.3 billion in taxes instead of $1.4 billion, assuming none relocated. And its residents would have paid $2.2 billion to $2.3 billion in individual income tax.

So no, they don’t enjoy the same rights as US citizens, but they certainly get some pretty good benefits.

The island receives more than US$20 billion a year in federal funds, with the largest portion of that going toward payments and services for individuals like Nutritional Assistance, Social Security, and housing.

In February, Trump signed a $16 billion federal disaster aid package for Puerto Rico, and that’s on top of $36.6 billion Trump signed for emergency aid to bail out the federal flood insurance program and provide a cash infusion to the island.

The island deserves self-determination, Ocasio says.

OK—cut them loose. No more billions of federal bennies to people who don’t even pay an income tax. No more US citizenship, so no more primary elections for US President. Go for it. See how that works out.

But apparently, Ocasio doesn’t understand what self-determination means, either, because in her very next two tweets she claims hurricanes are a social justice issue, because ¡GLOBAL WARMING! and ¡INCOME INEQUALITY! and demands that the US rebuild the infrastructure in Puerto Rico.

Which one is it, princess? Do you want independence for Puerto Rico, or do you want the US to continue pouring money into its corrupt bureaucracy? Because you can’t have both.

So is Ocasio the dumbest Congressional candidate this year?

I mean, we have Leslie Cockburn (I saw a sign that said KAINE/COCKBURN in one of Virginia’s voting districts recently and giggled like a 12-year-old boy) who tried to attack her political opponent Denver Riggleman by claiming he was into “bigfoot erotica.” Riggleman, an Air Force vet, apparently is writing a satirical book with a bunch of friends titled “The Mating Habits of Bigfoot and Why Women Want Him,” the cover of which he posted on Instagram, and which sent Cockburn (in a futile effort to distract from her unfortunate last name) into attack mode.

“This is not what we need on Capitol Hill,” Cockburn said in a tweet Sunday. Her posts included pictures from Riggleman’s Instagram account showing nude drawings of Bigfoot with his – assuming that the made-up creature is male – genitalia covered with a black rectangle.

I think that qualifies as the most idiotic political attack ad in history, but Ocasio, with her claims of economic expertise and attempts to use liberal code words to make herself seem more intelligent and informed, as well as tickling the taints of her socialist supporters, has got to be the least informed, dumbest candidate on the ballot!

And if that’s the case, what does that say about the turnips who elected her?

Featured Image courtesy of: DonkeyHotey on Flickr.

Written by

Marta Hernandez is an immigrant, writer, editor, science fiction fan (especially military sci-fi), and a lover of freedom, her children, her husband and her pets. She loves to shoot, and range time is sacred, as is her hiking obsession, especially if we’re talking the European Alps. She is an avid caffeine and TWD addict, and wants to own otters, sloths, wallabies, koalas, and wombats when she grows up.

5 Comments
  • Wfjag says:

    Maybe she is on to something. All Democrats in Congress and all of their staffs should have as their incomes (from all sources)the median per captia income for the U.S. Their spouses and significant others would have the same income. That amount would be guaranteed. Right now, that amount is about $57,600 per annum, pre-tax.

    It’s only a virtuous life if you live it.

  • Kate says:

    Another “duh” moment.

  • Jim says:

    She reminds me of the receptionist character [Linda] in the TV series ”Becker”.

  • GWB says:

    Because you can’t have both.
    Why the heck not?!? There’s plenty of places where we pay their bills and they tell us to go pound sand.
    But, you know what she is missing, when she mentions “self-determination”? They already did that, and voted to stay a colony territory.

    her political Denver Riggleman
    Huh?

    But honestly, what do you expect from a socialist? Especially one who took economics?
    Oy vey. *smh*

  • […] Ain’t Hell: I Am Tired Of The Fraud, also, When Killing The Enemy Is A Crime Victory Girls: Is Ocasio-Cortez The Dumbest Congressional Candidate? Volokh Conspiracy: Why We Shouldn’t “Just Enforce The Law” Weasel Zippers: Yale […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram