AOC speech at the 2024 Democratic National Convention

  • JonsJava@lemmy.world
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    News has in the past allowed videos that are relevant to the community topic - news. Allowing this to stay.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      OK thanks, 👍 😀
      I changed the title, but I think my original was more accurate apart from the (amazing) which is obviously subjective, and I did put in parenthesis for that reason.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yes, the rules say I MUST use the editorial by MSNBC instead of writing “AOC speech at 2024 democratic convention.”
          But at least the mods made an exception and allowed the video, despite rule #6.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I would have posted this to c/politics, because I found it weird it wasn’t already posted. But their rule #1 apparently only allows posting articles?
    But IMO this speech is absolutely worth seeing if you have ANY interest in American politics.

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The normal work around would be to find a news article that embedded the full speech but thanks for posting it here! I saw the Warnock speech but I missed catching AOC live.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I messaged one of the mods, asking why videos that are clearly relevant can’t be posted.
        If I post a link to an article with the video, the video becomes secondary to the article.
        The video represent what was actually said, not some interpretation of it.

        Seems to me a weird rule, excluding relevant quality content.
        So instead of working around the rule, I chose simply not to post there. As I suspect others have done too, despite the content is super relevant to the sub.

  • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    There’s nothing holding her back from being a great speaker like Obama. She needs more time and practice to develop her skills further to get to that next level. And maybe a better speechwriter.

    I’m definitely a fan of hers, but felt that this could have been executed better. She did not have a lot of vocal variation and came out blazing fairly early on in the speech. Not going to rewatch it, but that was my perspective from last night. At one point I was like whoa Kimberly Guilfoyle, take it down a notch.

    I do understand the need to be angry but it’s much more impactful when vocal variation, pitch, tone and volume are employed more effectively to build toward the anger.

    Response because I can’t post to thread?

    Yeah it was a solid debut but I’m excited for her to get better. Compare and contrast with Harris’ childhood friend and she obviously was better than that. It just doesn’t inspire me to make people watch it because I don’t think it was at that level.

    To be fair, the news showed people straight up crying at Clinton’s speech and I didn’t think that was amazing either.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      With respect I tend to disagree. I and many others felt she delivered one of the best speeches of the evening, both on substance and in delivery. She delivered fire and excitement, was one of the few speakers who actually kept their cadence on pace; her speech had a clear beginning, middle, and end, and she utilized body language effectively. For her sort of debut in the national spotlight, she knocked it out of the park.

      • SuperCub@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You mean her practiced body language? It was pretty unnatural and sometimes her timing was off which especially gave it away as a performative act.

        • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yes thank you. It didn’t read as natural - that’s the word.

          It’s disheartening that one can’t disagree on this topic without being eaten alive. I’m not saying elect Donald Trump and the couchfucker or anything ffs. Plus, I’m Canadian - so probably more left leaning than any US Dem - and as I’ve expressed, I really want the US to get their shit together.

          I’ve done Toastmasters. I’m a writer for a living. I know how to give feedback on speeches. I also acknowledged that not every speech is received the same way by every viewer.

          I’m not even saying she’s bad - I’m just saying she could be GREAT with more practice. I don’t understand why this is a shocking thing to say.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m Canadian - so probably more left leaning than any US Dem

            Do you think American Democrats are all just Joe Biden clones at various ages? Canada both isn’t an incredibly left-leaning country (we’re not talking about a European social democracy) and both the US and Canada are a political spectrum. Just being Canadian doesn’t mean you’re a super leftist in the context of the US.

            • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Our parties are more left leaning than US ones, yeah. So the left-most leaning party, the NDP is the Bernies and AOCs. Just slightly to the right of them but not by much are the centre-left (some could argue centre, for Canada) Liberals aka US Dems but these are still left of the US Dems. Then you have the Conservatives who used to be centre right but they’re really flirting with being firmly right which is STILL to the left of the US Repubs. So yeah, we’re pretty left.

              Here’s a good breakdown someone wrote on the other site:

              There’s a Daily Show from back in the Stewart days when Harper’s Conservatives won the federal election in Canada. The line went something like:

              “Right wing parties are winning everywhere! In Canada, the Conservative Party, or as we’d know it here, the Gay Rainbow Alliance, has won their election.”

              If that gives you any idea.

              The NDP are mostly in-line with the further left of the Dems, but realistically, the Liberals are only slightly more towards the centre than them. The Conservatives are historically right of centre, but still left of most of the American center. That was largely true before the Progressive Conservatives failed, merged with the Reform party, and became the Conservative Party of Canada.

              That said, the Conservative parties have been moving further right in recent years. Some of this was because their supporters were generally finance, oil, large corporations, etc., so the policies they pushed forward were usually beneficial to them. But more recently they’ve been pursuing a lighter version of US-style populism. Mostly though, their platform for the past 3 leaders seems to be “aren’t you sick of Trudeau yet?” because they don’t have much substance in anything else they claim to support.

    • r9seng@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      Deutsch
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It feels like there’s a bit of gender stereotyping going on here.

      Her speech was fine without your desire for her to be less intense.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes, and she seems very strongly motivated by her own experiences that are shared by many people, and everybody is at risk having to deal with.
      She truly is a voice of the people for the people.

  • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m just happy the party isn’t suppressing its stars because they’re progressive. A Big Tent party needs to recognize and use talent across its spectrum. Now get Ayanna Pressley up there.

    • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      They need to pay some lip service to progressives for now to get elected.

      AIPAC’s funding casts doubt on how progressive the Dems are allowed to be in the long term.