AOC: Why is this Republican, who's actually a Democrat, posing with a cardboard cut-out of me?

I realize she’s new to Congress but she’s surrounded by people who could have identified the guy pictured in the tweet below in four seconds. That’s John Yarmuth of Kentucky, Democrat. Member of the House since the Democratic wave election of 2006. Proponent of Medicare for All.

The tweet from the Kentucky GOP referred to Yarmuth as the lone Democrat still representing the state in Congress. The whole point is that he and all of the other “moderates” in the Democratic caucus are under the sway of progressive radicalism.

How the hell did she read that and come away thinking he was a Republican?

It’s not the mistake that’s irksome. Mistakes happen. It’s the endless g*ddamned whining all the time. She’s a political celebrity on par with Nancy Pelosi, certainly more recognizable than Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell, and instead of laughing off a light joke like this as one of the perks/pitfalls of celebrity she has to turn it into an assignment for gender studies class. It’s revealing too that she deleted the tweet and didn’t repost it with the correct party ID for Yarmuth. If it’s troubling for whatever weird reason to have Republican men posing with cut-outs of young women, why isn’t it troubling to have Democratic men posing with them?

Is AOC having trouble identifying sexist men in her own party? Plenty of righties would be happy to share a few names with her.

Maybe she didn’t bother correcting her tweet because she thought one “clarification” was enough this morning:

Conceivably the reason Republicans mistook her point about not jailing *all* nonviolent offenders is (a) between phasing out airplanes under the Green New Deal and her … interesting view of national borders, Ocasio-Cortez has already proved repeatedly that she’s willing to entertain policy ideas way the hell out in left field. And (b) it was Bernie Sanders, not some Republican caricaturing his position, who made the case for letting the Boston bomber vote on national television a few nights ago. That wasn’t some hypothetical righties coughed up to put him on the defensive after the fact; he endorsed an absolutist, maximalist position in which all felons, by dint of their citizenship, should remain eligible regardless of the severity of their offense, with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as an explicit example. If she thinks voting rights should be limited to nonviolent offenders, fair enough — although she never actually says that here, does she? She says nonviolent offenders are whom we should have in mind when debating the issue, not the most notorious killers among us. Does that mean she agrees with Bernie that everyone, including Tsarnaev, gets their rights back or is she willing to draw a line?