What exactly does "demographically out of touch" mean?

“Justice Democrat” Alexandra Ocascio-Cortez is leading a charge to mount primary challenges against Democrat incumbents who are “demographically and ideologically out-of-touch with their districts.”

Can someone provide a translation for this phrase?

Does it mean “white males need not apply”? If it does, then is it racist?

Was President Obama “demographically out of touch” with a country where only 12.6% of the US population is African American?

It means whatever you want it to mean. Glad I could help.


Sort of like the Supreme Court’s view of the constitution . . .

If you say so. Anything else?


Are employers and landlords free to refuse applicants who are “demographically out of touch” with the local community?

I assume it means “white makes need not apply” if the majority of the constituents are not white.

No, but you’re still free to vote for whomever you choose.

I don’t know. What does it say in your link?

From the article:

“Justice Democrats’ inclusion of demographic criteria likely means that even some reliably progressive white Democrats who represent more diverse districts won’t be safe from such challenges in 2020.”

HuffPo obviously considers it to mean no whites in districts that are not predominantly white. Racist? Would it be considered racist to say a black candidate should not represent a state that is not predominantly black?

This statement reminds me of Jimmy Carter’s support for “ethnic purity” of neighborhoods back in the 1976 campaign.

Can states make “demographic in-touchness” a criterion for getting on the ballot?

Consider the case of a white Republican candidate in a majority white district claiming that his non-white opponent is “demographically out of touch” and therefore is not fit to represent the district. Would that be racist?

Nope but you can pretty much assume they typically dont. Take the governor race in Georgia for example. Or Florida. Hell it only took us near 3 centuries to elect the first black president, and even then his blackness was questioned.

I shouldnt have to explain this but it would seem some people have taken the word demographic and automatically assumed that meant mutually exclusive to race.

Anyone with half a brain would know in this context, it’s not just race. Its age, ideology, gender, etc. Meaning an old white Male who happens to be a conservative would be demographically out of touch in a district whose population is predominantly younger, minority, females.

Come on this isnt rocket science.

Need an example. Take Alexandrias district she just won in. Represented by Joe Crowley forever, but primaried in a district represented by just an 18% white population. Mostly 44 years and younger, roughly equal in gender numbers. Nearly all households grossing less than 150k a year. About 27% educated to bachelor or higher. It’s not difficult to see why she won here.

It’s challenging the status quo of the establishment, something a certain reality-TV celebrity claimed he wanted to do when he announced his candidacy in 2016.

Wait - if he was challenging a largely white establishment, does that in fact mean Donald hates his own race? INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW


Well in his particular case he really only did it for the attention, something hes craved his whole life.

It means that their constituents demographics do not even come close to those of the representative.

She is exploiting not the old rich white guy…but the whole of congress for not looking like the people they represent. It’s a ploy to bring in more progressives…i.e. Socialist’s.

You can’t be racist against white people especially a white man, duh.

Some on the left claim the need for safe spaces from white people:

Of course the Democratic Party had all-white primaries until the mid-1960s:

Were all-white primaries “safe spaces” too?

Are you scared that the white race is under attack?

I see similar racist policies from the same political party.

The only changes is the complexion of the racists.