Summary

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez denied claims that she is secretly wealthy, stating she is worth less than $500,000 and doesn’t trade stocks or take corporate money.

Her financial disclosures show modest savings and student debt.

Some conservatives on X, despite opposing her politics, praised her perceived integrity.

Accusations of political corruption have surged online, partly fueled by Elon Musk.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Ladies and gentlemen, this is the internet manifest:

    1- blame her for having millions due to kickbacks

    2- when she proves that her net worth is less than 500K make fun of her for having too little money

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      6 days ago

      There’s many things that expose the Right Wing Grift.

      When AOC was first elected they mocked her for being a Bartender who “rose above her station”

      What more proof do you need that the American Dream is bullshit

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        When it’s a teacher - she reminds me of that mean lady who failed me

        When it’s a doctor - they’re pushing a vaxxer agenda

        When it’s an engineer - he’ll be a bad negotiator

        When it’s a scientist - we’ve gotta do what? No thanks.

        When it’s a lawyer - ah perfect they make everything better

    • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      I mean if you take the internet as a monolith, you’ll find contradictions every where. Some people will hate A because of B, some people will hate A because of C, but either way A is getting hate for both B and C.

      So either there are millions of people online with different opinions but the crowd looks the same, or there is one very, very busy troll who is running all the accounts.

      ~help I’m so tired they won’t give me a break to pee~

    • ZK686@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 days ago

      Because it’s ONE SIDED around here, just like Reddit… if a Republican said this EXACT same thing, they’d be crucified.

  • Xanza@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    6 days ago

    Median property value in DC is $705,000.

    She’s likely living paycheck to paycheck as a sitting member of Congress. I like it.

  • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    I love AOC. I’d vote for her in a heartbeat in primary and general elections. Now, whether she makes it to the general depends on the DNC, and I have no faith that the political consultant/establishment class will let anything remotely progressive through. No money to be made.

    I guess the only way forward would be to vote for her in the primaries to such a degree that the Dems have not choice but to confirm her through.

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Dems have no choice but to confirm her through.

      That was the Bernie plan in 2016 & 2020 during the primaries. Clinton had the support of the established Democratic party and with superdelegates Clinton took a commanding lead. Similar situation with Biden, most dropped out before Super Tuesday and endorsed him.

      Now both of these instances could be considered “smart politics”. If you’ve got the political maneuvering to win the primary, then maybe you’ve got the same maneuvering to win the general.

      It didn’t work out for Clinton. It did work out for Biden.

      When we look at our most recent election, it’s clear there was a little bit more of a rift, but Harris was chosen and there was no primary.

      Now, some of this is simplified and there is plenty to argue. But suffice to say we can’t just vote for AOC “so much” that she’ll win. I don’t see the Democratic party supporting her.

      Now it’s too early to talk about 2028 realistically and a lot can change between now and then, but if she were running today she’d have my vote.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      Or, get so much grassroots activism going that you can start a new party for her.

      You might go a round of everyone flaming, “nooo! You have to support Dems or Repbs will win!!1!” But if enough people try a vote for your new party, next time it might have a chance.

      • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        6 days ago

        She doesn’t have to start a new party. The left side of the dems should just use The Tea Party and MAGA playbook. They co-opted the GOP by pushing out Republican incumbents in local elections first. A shitton of money from the far-right went to these smaller elections. Then they moved on up and replaced Republican state senators. They created enough momentum that Trump became a viable candidate.

        Push enough incumbents out and the Democrats have to take the left seriously. Plus it will normalize left wing rhetoric and policies among the populace. Screaming “cOmmUniSm” won’t work anymore when the people have seen these policies being implemented in their own communities.

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          Maybe my experience is biased but I don’t think shouting communism works as well as it used to anyways. Plenty of young people will hear “Communist? Then I’ll vote for her!” And the old people are getting exhausted with political hyperbole - “Communist? Yeah like every liberal what else is new.”

          • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            The tea party did it in two Obama terms. And the money has to come from the public. Starting a viable third party isn’t going to be easier or cheaper.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 days ago

              Taking over an existing party would probably be easier.

              The green party is currently a shell designed to launder foreign influence in US elections. But there ain’t a lot of green party members, and fewer still vote in their party’s primaries. Compared to getting the Democratic party to move in a direction other than right or starting an entire new party from scratch, stealing the green party might be doable. Time it right and you can even make russia waste time, money, and effort trying to keep it.

              And it’s not like Democrats are ever going to hold honest primaries again.

              • candybrie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                You could steal the green party but it’s not going to get you anything. You’d have to do the exact same thing of building up the party from local, to state, to federal offices. And you don’t get to drag along the people who are lifelong Democrats. You’d have to build up the green party and then take on both the Democrats and Republicans.

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  You could steal the green party but it’s not going to get you anything. You’d have to do the exact same thing of building up the party from local, to state, to federal offices.

                  Without the full might of the Democratic Party stopping you from winning primaries.

                  You’d have to build up the green party and then take on both the Democrats and Republicans.

                  As opposed to having no party and having to take on both Democrats and Republicans.

                  Democrats can’t put their putrid ancient mummy thumbs on the scale for general elections, unlike primaries, if we ever have any of those ever again.

    • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      She needs to win a senate seat first. I think schumer should retire, and she should run for the seat. If she can win, we can see how many red districts went for her.

  • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    6 days ago

    There is one group of people who both share the ire of most people and deserve it: The ultra rich.

    I’ve had rednecks tell me they disagreed with Bernie on a lot but they liked how he hated billionaires. Ben Shapiro’s gaggle of yes-men gave him grief for criticizing Luigi.

    If votes count for anything anymore a smart, effective political party would be able to capitalize on this universal hatred.

    Sadly, we have the Democrats.

    • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      70
      ·
      6 days ago

      Well obviously you do. Or she isnt trying to help people. She admitted to having hundreds of thousands of dollars

      • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        6 days ago

        You have no idea what you’re talking about. 500k in assets is like a decent house that you’re still making payments on, a couple cars, and some 401k savings. People like that are not the problem. That lifestyle should be the base level for every single American, imo.

          • ContriteErudite@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            6 days ago

            It seems like you may be conflating having ~$500k net worth with being rich, which may not have been your intent, but it seemed that way based on context. I think what the other responder is getting at is that AOC is not rich. She may have a house, a car, and some retirement saved up. All of those are assets, but they do not translate into the kind of liquidity that many other American politicians have.

            She was working class before she entered into politics, and some would argue that she still is based on her work and advocacy. I don’t want to sound like I’m accusing your of anything, or putting words in your mouth, because that’s not my intent; I just want to point out a common belief held by a lot of Americans. Lumping someone in with the rich and then holding them in contempt merely because that person is richer than you is exactly the kind of us-versus-them mentality the ruling class wants us to have.

            • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              6 days ago

              She is rich. There is nothing inherently wrong with being rich. There is something wrong with being a lawmaker who is so out of touch with poor people that you dont realize your own privileges

              • null@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                6 days ago

                There is something wrong with being a lawmaker who is so out of touch with poor people that you dont realize your own privileges

                What are you basing this on? Did you personally speak with AOC?

                • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  In the article she said she has hundreds of thousands of dollars and also said she’s not rich

                  Edit: she didn’t say she’s not rich. She said she’s not a millionaire

              • ContriteErudite@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                6 days ago

                Can you explain why you think she is out of touch with poor people? I’m genuinely curious, because you may know something about her that I don’t, and if she’s as secretly two-faced as Sinema and Manchin, or has done something to actively denigrate or undermine the working class, I want to be informed.

                I understand that most poor people feel overlooked, ignored, and exploited by the rich, and that’s because that is exactly what they do–but their greatest trick is to make us think that it’s not their fault that we are poor. Please look again to the last sentence of my reply: Holding someone in contempt merely because they are richer than you is exactly what the billionaires want you to do, because it distracts and redirects anger away from them, and is just another tool they use to make the working class fight amongst themselves.

                • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  She isnt richer than me. I have more money than she does.

                  I dont care if someone has money. That doesn’t make you a bad person. The issue is that she isnt aware how rich she is. That’s out of touch with reality.

          • t_chalco@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            6 days ago

            Sure, but your claim rests on a specific definition of what rich is. The notion that her gross assets, not liquidity, are such that she is in not of the working class (her assets produce enough wealth to live upon) glosses over the obscene wealth, corruption, and hoarding that the purpose of the conversation is trying to convey. “Yeah, but other Americans are poorer” is whataboutism in the face of someone interested in adresssing wealth disparity.

            • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              20
              ·
              6 days ago

              If you’re surrounded by people who are millionaires and that becomes your definition of “rich” then you’ve become so out of touch with reality.

              There is a difference between someone with hundreds of thousands of dollars of net worth and someone with billions. Both are fucking rich.

      • ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Where are you from that you think hundreds of thousands of dollars in the US is “wealth”?

        Do you know that 500k in the US doesn’t even get you a nice house? You need literally around 2 mil saved up JUST TO RETIRE BEFORE 70.

        She is helping people in that she serves her constituency, she is a representative, nobody expects her to donate her money to anyone, but she does raise money in fundraisers all the time. She helps more people than most of her peers in congress. These fundraisers do NOT make you money, you may have some very backwards ideas about how money works in politics. Even the right respects AOC to an unusual degree, like they do Bernie Sanders. At least about policy and messaging. They care more about people than party.

        • wellheh@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 days ago

          It’s clear he didn’t read the article, but it’s necessary to point out she doesn’t even 500k- it is assets, which means she’s as far down the hole as the rest of us.

        • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          I mean… 200K-300K-ish can get you a livable survivable place in an okay part of Philly… like there is no “drug dealers” in my area, its not lile “the wire”, its not Baltimore, it just… “Okay” not good, not bad.(15 years ago it was like 100K to 200K). I’ve never heard a gunshot in 15 years living here (or maybe I did and though it was fireworks, who knows). My mom got robbed once. That’s it. Its not a terrible place to live. I mean, I haven’t died, so… 🤷‍♂️

          But yea, there are places (like NYC) that’s unlivable, housing in NYC is just insane, its why we had to move out of NYC. (Brooklyn btw)

      • Garland@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 days ago

        With that amount of money she could not stop working now and live comfortably off of her funds for the rest of her life in the US. She is not rich.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 days ago

        Americans are obligated to save individually for retirement and tax-incentivized to stockpile appreciating assets in personal trusts, in anticipation of becoming too old to work.

        It is not that unusual at all for a 30-something professional earning a six-figure salary to set aside 10-20% of that in savings. I suppose you can argue Congresscritters are overpaid and therefore anyone in a federally elected office is de facto not trying to help people. But then you’ve got a problem with how we handle retirement, not with how AOC handles her politics.

        • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          6 days ago

          Obligated? Most people have to wipe out their retirement funds when they get sick or have to bury their parents

          • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            6 days ago

            Yes, that’s what they meant by “obligated.”

            Our system as it currently exists forces, or “obligates,” people to have large rainy day funds.

              • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                6 days ago

                The trick is taking them away slowly enough that every new generation of workers doesn’t even know what they’re missing.

                Line must go up, after all.

                What’s that, we’re being outpaced on a global scale such that our under-educated workers will soon no longer be able to rely on “We speak English without an accent?”

                That’s a problem for after I’m dead, so I’m not worried about it!

                • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  Yeah, I really hope the younger generation gets their shit together and do what my generation couldn’t.

                  Man tried once at my software/engineering place, did not get very far at all unfortunately.

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        Too bad she doesn’t have hundreds of thousands of MILLIONS of dollars or she could really help the little guy like Musk and his administration.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Honestly this is comedy gold,

        The politician you are most interested in talking about in this moment, right now with this future quickly unfolding, with respect to scamming the american people… is AOC???

        ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha I hope I choke on my popcorn while laughing bitterly so I don’t have to live through the stupidest possible future for my country

            • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              wow bro, just because you think women are objects doesn’t mean you hate them.

              like by that logic are you saying I hate my car?

              (i mean I do hate owning a car, seperate discussion tho)

              I objectify women because I love them why can’t all the women making fun of me respect that.

              ...

              /s

              oh look there is a tiny little violin in here for jd too!

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      6 days ago

      AOC is a prodigious fundraiser with a significant national following. She might only have a half-million in the bank, but her name and her reputation are worth orders of magnitude more.

      Conservatives have a hard time believing someone like that isn’t getting rich quick on $AOCCoin or LeftyBear merch offerings.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        25
        ·
        6 days ago

        Conservatives have a hard time believing someone like that isn’t getting rich quick on $AOCCoin or LeftyBear merch offerings.

        Being dishonest you have a bigger selection of instruments to gain power. So politicians are more likely to be dishonest than the average person. And then a dishonest person would use the opportunity.

        Anyway, cool for AOC to be honest, but unfortunately her views (specifically support of MMT) are a certain way to nuke the economy of the USA.

        If we detach ourselves from the emotional part (suicides, hunger deaths), it may even be liberating, if USD as a currency takes a 10000x inflation in a year or so, while big businesses reliant on American system of connections grown by decades of stability die. US main capital is still human capital, competent people and their knowledge. No hyperinflation will kill that, if recovery is quick enough.

        Except that’s not the way people like AOC promise.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          6 days ago

          Anyway, cool for AOC to be honest, but unfortunately her views (specifically support of MMT) are a certain way to nuke the economy of the USA.

          The US economy gets nuked every 8-12 years thanks to private equity and boom-bust capital trends. MMT just moves the ball out of the hands of a cartel of hedge funds and into the hands of the US Treasury. I’ll happily agree that its not sufficient to solving the problem of malinvestment and industrial waste. But that’s precisely because its an extension of Keynesian-cum-Friedmanite monetary theory of economics. At some point, you have to take account of real assets, not just float around fictitious capital.

          if USD as a currency takes a 10000x inflation in a year

          You don’t get inflation like that under Eisenhower/Carter era tax laws. MMT, in practice, is still predicated on some degree of currency recapture. You’re just replacing credit elasticity through private lenders with spending elasticity through public spenders. “Here’s a $500k loan, build a house and pay me back at 6% APY” isn’t meaningfully different than “Here’s a $500k grant, built a house and your builders are going to pay me back 6% VAT”.

          Except that’s not the way people like AOC promise.

          AOC promises a large public investment in value-adding infrastructure. She’s just proposing direct payment rather than tax-incentivized private investment.

          • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            6 days ago

            She’s just proposing direct payment actually investing in Americans rather than tax-incentivized private investment taking bribes to give all the public coffers to corpo goons.

            ftfy

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            The US economy gets nuked every 8-12 years

            Reminds me of that Hashek quote about “sir, you’ve taken the pollen of my innocence” from a girl whose shoulder a boy touched.

            Anyway, maybe you’re right.

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Anyway, cool for AOC to be honest, but unfortunately her views (specifically support of MMT) are a certain way to nuke the economy of the USA.

          I didn’t realize it was that part of the circus where conservative centrists clowns do a bit for us to laugh at them for.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            6 days ago

            Neither did I, turns out that yes and you are the clown. Why - because you’ve used a long comment for the sole purpose of “friend-or-foe” determination. I dunno how to call people doing that. If all this was incomprehensible for you - I’m not a conservative.

            • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              Im not the clown wasting their breath attacking one of the only politicians who is actually resisting the fascist takeover and destruction of the US government literally happening as you rant emptily about “inveitable” eventualities of AOC’s policies.

              You could not pick a better moment to demonstrate how fundamentally unserious your politics are in this context.

              Wake the fuck up and realize who your actual enemies are, you dangerous fool.

              • Saryn@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 days ago

                It feels like all the people here criticizing her for fantastical or illogical reasons (usually a mixture of both) are just envious of her.

                • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  They would all also get hilariously demolished by her on a debate about policy and political strategy.

                  …which honestly it never gets old for me watching progressive leaders like her dress down people like this to their face.

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          The economy is getting nuked right now. The tariff dump and pump is just the beginning.

          Trump coin is already a thing, and his minions now run the SEC. By the time Trump leaves office, the monetary theory we’re operating under won’t even be in President AOC’s hands anymore. The full faith and credit of the US government will be gone.

  • SabinStargem@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I hope that AOC has a security detail, a go bag and plan, and an ideal state to reside in. It is my expectation for Yarvin’s Cabel to try to capture or assasinate her at some point, since she is one of the few major lightning rods to be the president of a Free America. We will need great people to organize the defense of our people against the fascist agenda.

    Bernie, AOC, others, stay safe and strong. 🖖

  • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    7 days ago

    Accusations of political corruption have surged online, partly fueled by Elon Musk.

    Lol, says the guy who’s currently at the top of corrupting world-politics…

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s pretty absurd that y’all qaeda bitch about all the money that (insert lib politician) makes while throwing money or votes at billionaires who then turn around and accuse lib politicians like AOC or Sanders of being rich.

  • qevlarr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 days ago

    Can we all please notice how under capitalism, you can refer to people being ‘worth’ a dollar amount? Money is something you have, it says nothing about who you are. I’m fine with having an amount of wealth, but your worth is not measured in dollars, that’s fucked

    • NoEsReal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I get what you’re saying. But the term is generally used to clarify that the amount quoted reflects the person’s assets and their value, and not just their liquid cash. Which a lot of people in this thread seem to not understand. I agree we should probably use a different term for that, but for now it works as easy short hand for “this is is how much this person owns in assets and liquid cash combined.”

      I might be wrong on this, but I think the term also includes income into the account, like how much someone brings in per year. And it might also subtract debt, though I’m not sure of either of those.

      • beepbeeplettuce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        Just in case anyone is curious- It’s assets minus liabilities, so income is not directly included, but debt does get subtracted.

        I can agree with both comments here. It can be a useful to talk about, but the name of it is icky, especially if you’re tying your worth as a person to it (which definitely happens).

      • qevlarr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        I agree we should probably use a different term for that,

        That’s literally all I said. I know what it means

  • Snowclone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 days ago

    They’re so concerned about profittering they support a guy that was giving millions directly from China, took millions in goverment funds by making secret service stay in his hotels and charging them 1000x the rate of any other guest. This guy’s will pay their life down for the biggest kleptocrat in US history, but yeah AOC needs to be monitored.