Dem Senator Says Party Needs to Stop Attacking ‘Oligarchy’ and Focus on Losing ‘Woke’ Reputation
Dem Senator Says Party Needs to Stop Attacking ‘Oligarchy’ and Focus on Losing ‘Woke’ Reputation
For those of you that can't be bothered to read more than a headline:
Dem Senator Says Party Needs to Stop Attacking ‘Oligarchy’ and Focus on Losing ‘Woke’ Reputation
AP Photo/Paul Sancya, Pool
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) has urged her Democratic colleagues to stop attacking the “oligarchy” on Thursday, arguing that the word did not resonate with most Americans and should be replaced with “kings.”
During an interview with Politico national politics correspondent Adam Wren, Slotkin spoke about her “war plan” to “contain and defeat” President Donald Trump.
Detailing her plan, Slotkin – a former analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) – argued that the Democratic Party needed to lose its “weak and woke” reputation and “fucking retake the flag,” adopting a “goddamn Alpha energy” inspired by Detroit Lions coach Dan Campbell.
“She said Democrats should stop using the term ‘oligarchy,’ a phrase she said doesn’t resonate beyond coastal institutions, and just say that the party opposes ‘kings,'” wrote Wren, who reported that Slotkin was planning to deliver a series of speeches in the coming months about her plan.
Slotkin told the news outlet, “Trump is doing a whole bunch of things that I think are a threat to our economy and a threat to our Democracy and I have a responsibility on behalf of my state to point that out and try to do something about that.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) – the most likely Democratic presidential nominee in 2028, according to analyst Nate Silver – recently commenced a “Fight Oligarchy” tour with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) across the United States.
Last month, after Slotkin was asked by a constituent how she would “step up for us now” like Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders, Slotkin threw shade at her progressive colleagues.
“Everyone you mentioned has a lot of words, but what have they actually done to change the situation with Donald Trump and the cuts and the attacks on our judiciary and the attacks on our Constitution?” asked Slotkin, who claimed her responsibilities fighting Trump’s government cuts forced her “to be more than just an AOC.”
“I can’t do what she does because we live in a purple state, and I’m a pragmatist,” she concluded.
Yeah, talking about "alpha energy" definitely doesn't make the speaker look sad and weak. /s
Even if pandering to the manosphere wasn't itself incredibly cringe, she's years out of date on their terminology. Truly this is a demonstration of how she's got her finger on the pulse of the people.
And "kings" is very much not a synonym for "oligarchy" and she's definitely purposefully choosing that rather than something that would continue to offend the uber-wealthy.
a phrase she said doesn’t resonate beyond coastal institutions
The crowds at the AOC rallies prove her wrong. It does resonate with people, just not for the pro-business, zionist, reach across the aisle industry-whore constituents Slotkin represents.
"Everyone you mentioned has a lot of words, but what have they actually done to change the situation with Donald Trump "
The anti oligarchy tour drew huge crowds and energized an angry base thats rapidly abandoning the democratic party. What has Slotkin done, besides uselessly infight with progressives, push lobbyist interests, and normalize a bunch of language the republicans use? Here she is denigrating "coastal institutions" as out of touch, and in her state of the union rebuttal she said Ronald reagan would be rolling over in his grave. Why is she talking about Ronald Reagan? i'd hope Reagan's coffin is 1000% full of democrats piss, so I'd be happy if he rotated in that piss all day every day. She sure talks like a republican.
Slotkin is a shining example of everything thats wrong about the DNC and the current democratic party.
I mean I can kinda see the point of using kings instead of oligarchy. But using oligarchy is a bigger stab at the billionaires in the room as well so I still think it captures a bigger part of the problem.
Otherwise I think I‘m down for her saying that she wants to get stuff done but I mean is she? I‘m totally uninformed but being highly ignorant it reads a bit like a whatever statement. Like you mentioning it is also just a performative act so yeah shrug
I do think the Dems have a problem in establishing words and totally losing the plot or narrative control over their words. Woke totally slipped into an insult and I don‘t think that was an unavoidable thing. I think if Dems would go for more public social policies they would get a lot of the votes back they have been shedding but I think their oligarchic interests are in their way. Like Harris could’ve just campaigned on getting SOME change done and I think more people could’ve warmed up to her but that particular ship has sailed.
Thanks for linking the article and centring the discussion.
For context, it was part of a speech to party volunteers , so it follows that it would be more "method" than "content". She also said that we should start picking the 2028 candidates and having that conversation now rather than waiting until 2027 since it will plainly be a very contested primary.
That part wasn't able to be construed in an unflattering way though, so it didn't make it into the headline or conversation.
I see yes. Thanks for giving more context.
I do think they should actively start talking about candidates for sure yes. So I very much agree with her on this.
