coldjoint
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 05:12 pm
@edgarblythe,
on topic
Quote:
Progressive utopia update: Switching to renewable energy will end racism and ‘economic injustice, or something

Quote:
Anybody who actually chooses to pay attention knows that all the “climate change” doom and gloom talk is all a giant wealth grab (even the French are starting to figure it out). And where there’s a wealth grab, you’ll find social justice warriors clinging to the movement like lampreys on a shark. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hasn’t even been sworn into Congress yet and she’s already figured that out:

http://dougpowers.com/2018/12/04/progressive-utopia-update-switching-to-renewable-energy-will-end-racism-and-economic-injustice-or-something/
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  2  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 05:17 pm
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
...information style thing here.


Which is appreciated, on my part. Many times you've introduced persons I'd not read , or heard about prior.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 05:52 pm
@Sturgis,
I'm not about fighting. I just want the progressive point of view on display.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 05:53 pm
Bernie Sanders

Verified account

@SenSanders
21m21 minutes ago

Some argue that the US is not really engaged in hostilities in Yemen. But as these Yemeni human rights activists told me recently, when Yemenis see "Made in USA" on the bombs killing their children, it’s very clear that the US is part of this war. This must end.
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 06:01 pm
@edgarblythe,
Do the bombs actually say “Made in the USA” on them?

I mean literally.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 06:03 pm
A good but very long piece on geopolitics.
https://www.thenation.com/article/geopolitics-peter-navarro-china-trade-war/
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 06:19 pm
Verry insterding

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/house-democrats-could-refuse-to-seat-north-carolina-republican/

On election night, the race appeared settled. Republican Mark Harris eked out a 905-vote victory over Democrat Dan McCready to be the next representative of North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District. Then, the North Carolina Board of Elections declined to certify the results, citing irregularities with absentee ballots. Specifically, there was an unusually high rate of such ballots that were unreturned in two counties that, according to an analysis from The Charlotte News and Observer, were “disproportionately associated with minority voters.”

State election officials are now investigating whether a political operative Harris had hired illegally collected ballots so they would not be returned.

Even if Harris is certified by North Carolina, Democrats could decline to seat him when they become the majority in the House in January, according to current Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., The Washington Post reported Tuesday.

“If there is what appears to be a very substantial question on the integrity of the election, clearly we would oppose Mr. Harris being seated until that is resolved,” Hoyer told reporters. He plans to discuss the issue with Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., who will be chair of the Committee on House Administration. That committee can independently investigate the election, make decisions on its validity and even call a new election.


The panel, then called the Committee on House Oversight, completed an independent investigation into a similarly close 1996 race between then-Rep. Bob Dornan, R-Calif., and his challenger, Democrat Loretta Sanchez. Dornan claimed the election was stolen because of illegal voting, though Sanchez eventually won.

The investigation is centered on Leslie McCrae Dowless, a longtime North Carolina political operative, who, as The New York Times reports, is known for get-out-the-vote campaigns based on absentee ballots. He was previously convicted of felony perjury and insurance fraud.

Election officials are not only concerned about the unreturned ballots, but also about the possibility there was fraud involving absentee ballot signatures; North Carolina requires two witnesses for each ballot. Local news station WSOC found evidence of “a targeted effort to illegally pick up ballots, in which even the person picking them up had no idea whether those ballots were even delivered to the elections board. Consistently, Channel 9 found the same people signing as witnesses for the people voting, which is very rare.”

The Times points out that “it is not clear whether the ballots in question would change the result of the election,” though it is mathematically possible the race could swing toward McCready: “While the 679 absentee votes Mr. Harris received in Bladen and Robeson Counties are not enough on their own, there may have been as many as 3,400 absentee ballots requested but not returned in those counties.” In addition, the Board of Elections itself was supposed to be dissolved, the Times explains, as a “result of a court ruling that the board’s composition improperly limited Governor [Roy] Cooper’s power. Republican leaders asked the court for an extension while the Ninth District investigation plays out, and the judges granted one until Dec. 12.”

Despite this ruling, the next evidentiary hearing for the House race is scheduled for Dec. 21. The new Democratic-controlled house will be sworn in Jan. 3.

0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 07:18 pm
@edgarblythe,
Bernie Sanders wrote:
Some argue that the US is not really engaged in hostilities in Yemen. But as these Yemeni human rights activists told me recently, when Yemenis see "Made in USA" on the bombs killing their children, it’s very clear that the US is part of this war. This must end.
This Sanders character just wants to see more Americans die in another 9/11 attack.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 07:19 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:
Do the bombs actually say “Made in the USA” on them?
I mean literally.
Probably not. But they could very well have the name of the weapon manufacturer, name of the weapon, or clearly-identifiable part numbers.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2018 10:29 pm
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Verified account

@Ocasio2018
60m60 minutes ago
More Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Retweeted Jeff Stein
Time to walk the walk.

Very few members of Congress actually pay their interns. We will be one of them.Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez added,
Jeff Stein
Verified account

@JStein_WaPo
.@saikatc confirms @Ocasio2018 will pay her interns "at least" $15/hr

A 2017 study found that only 8% of House Republicans and 4% (!) of House Ds pay their interns…
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  4  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 01:11 am
Wary of repeating 2016 mistakes,

Democrats prepare to shake up 2020 presidential debate plan.



Published December 4, 2018
Quote:
The Democratic National Committee is close to finalizing a 2020 primary debate plan that would give lesser-known candidates a chance to share the same stage as the party’s front-runners, avoiding the two-tier “kiddie table” approach that divided the Republican field in the last presidential campaign.

Chairman Tom Perez and his team have been meeting for months with 2016 campaign advisers and other stakeholders to find a way to improve the debate process, while accommodating the unusually large class of credible potential candidates, which could number more than 20 by spring.

Perez has made clear to his staff that he would like the field to be presented in a way that initially mixes top-tier candidates with lesser known ones. The party’s proposed solution, which will be presented to Perez for approval later this month, also would allow for other factors beyond national polling, possibly including staffing, fundraising and number of office locations, to be considered in making a cutoff for debate participation.

“There are a lot of really good people running or considering running on our side,” said Mary Beth Cahill, a senior adviser with the DNC, who has led the debate planning process. “We want everyone to have an equal shot as we start this.”

The decision to democratize the debate stage early in the primary campaign could give lesser-known candidates a crucial platform, effectively helping to level the playing field for the most wide-open Democratic nomination fight in decades. In the 2016 cycle, Republican candidates with low poll numbers were grouped in earlier and lower-rated debates, where they were not able to engage directly with the party’s front-runners.

Democratic Party officials hope the plan will also alleviate lingering concerns from the 2016 election, when then-leaders consulted closely, and in some ways exclusively, with the campaign of Hillary Clinton on debate planning in a way that her rivals said gave her an unfair advantage and may have hurt the party in the general election.

This time, Perez has promised an election cycle that is “fair in fact and fair in perception.” To further that goal, he and Cahill have spoken privately with campaign advisers for the 2016 campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley, who had both complained about the debate schedule last time.

Party leaders say they have not yet consulted with potential 2020 candidates or their advisers about the debate plans, although some of the 2016 advisers are likely to be involved in the 2020 race. Sanders is considering another presidential run, and one of O’Malley’s former advisers, Lis Smith, is working with Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., who also is considering a run.

“The 2016 debate schedule was an unmitigated disaster for both the candidates and the voters,” Smith said about her talks with party leaders. “The DNC this year deserves credit for working to make this a more transparent and inclusive process.”

Sanders’s 2016 strategist, Tad Devine, and campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, applauded the new approach.

“They were genuinely interested in learning what went right, which was not much, and what went wrong, which was a lot,” said Weaver, who is likely to be involved if Sanders runs again. “I recommended starting the process earlier, so it is not right on top of the primaries and caucuses.”

Democratic staff members expect Perez to sign off on key elements of Cahill’s plan later this month, although the exact dates and broadcast partners may not be released until next year. The proposed rules will cover the initial number and rough timing of debates, including the starting point for the debate season. They also will set the qualifications for debates, and determine punishments for participating in forums not sanctioned by the party.

The debate plan also could lay out goals for partnerships with local and social media companies to broaden the debate audience beyond the viewers of traditional cable news. Some networks, including CNN, have begun contacting advisers to potential 2020 candidates in the hopes of securing participation in exclusive events, such as town hall meetings, according to aides to two potential candidates. (A spokeswoman for CNN declined to comment on the network’s planning.)

In the last presidential cycle, the Democratic Party initially sanctioned six debates starting in October 2015, including just four matchups before the Iowa caucuses, two of which were held on Saturday nights. Three debates were added later.

Candidates were allowed to participate in other forums and town hall events, but the party threatened to disinvite from the sanctioned events any candidates who took part in a formal debate outside the party system.

A study of television ratings by the NDN, a Democratic-leaning think tank, estimated that the 12 Republican primary debates in 2016 attracted 114 million more viewers than the nine Democratic debates, giving GOP nominee Donald Trump a potential advantage at the start of the general-election campaign.

The full extent of Clinton’s role in formulating the 2016 debate plan became clear after the primary. An April 2015 Clinton campaign email that WikiLeaks released in late 2016, which U.S. prosecutors say was stolen as part of an effort by Russia to influence the election, showed that her aides worked successfully with DNC advisers to limit the number of debates, delay the start of debate season and create a low bar for participation in the hopes of attracting more candidates to the stage.

In his conversations with Perez and Cahill, Devine suggested that the party adopt a broader method of qualifying for the debate stage than the one used in 2016, which required candidates to get at least 1 percent support in three national primary polls. An October poll this year by CNN found 14 potential candidates with support from 1 percent or more of the primary electorate, although not all of them are likely to run.

“My suggestion on that is that it not be one single standard,” Devine said. “Polling should be part of it. There are also resources, people who follow you on Facebook, or follow you on Twitter, fundraising.”

Democratic officials say they have been considering multiple benchmarks as well. “We have looked at a lot of different qualifications and different thresholds to come up with something that is more inclusive,” said a Democratic Party official involved in the process, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plan was not yet announced.

The number of debates is likely to exceed the 2016 level, but the team working at the DNC is trying to balance past campaign concerns about the disruptive effect debates can have on campaigning in the early states. In the 2008 primary, 16 Democratic debates were aired on major cable or broadcast networks, along with about 10 other less formal debates.

Party officials are also wary of starting too soon, given that some candidates are likely to wait until the late spring or even the summer of 2019 to announce their campaigns.

In all, Democratic officials say they have held more than 40 meetings to draft the 2020 plans, including information-gathering sessions with past co-sponsors, media partners and state party chairs.

There is broad agreement that this year’s field of credible Democratic candidates could set records.

“There are 47 members of the U.S. Senate and 23 governors. My assumption is that until they have declared they are not running, they are potential candidates,” said Donna Brazile, who served as an interim chairman of the DNC in the second half of 2016. “We should have lots of fun.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/wary-of-repeating-2016-mistakes-democrats-prepare-to-shake-up-2020-presidential-debate-plan/ar-BBQuKwc?ocid=UE13DHP
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 07:05 am
@Real Music,
They need to schedule these debates for times people will be able to pay attention and they need to have NEUTRAL questioners.
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 08:08 am
@edgarblythe,
What time of day is that? What day of week?

This isn’t 1970. People will watch the debates online, on YouTube, on DVR, via Facebook clips, or any way of hundreds.

If you think your ideas didn’t win the day because a debate happened on a Wednesday night instead of a Tuesday night then you’ve got bigger problems.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 08:29 am
WHAT DOES BETO O’ROURKE ACTUALLY STAND FOR?
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/12/what-does-beto-orourke-actually-stand-for

One recent national Politico poll named him as third among potential Democratic Party presidential nominees. A recent You Gov/U Mass 2020 poll found O’Rourke netting 10 percent of Massachussetts Democratic voters, just a single point behind the state’s own senator, the populist liberal Elizabeth Warren. These voters, many of them likely liberal in political orientation, are matched in their enthusiasm for O’Rourke by some of the party’s most reactionary elements.

“He’s game changing,” Robert Wolf, a former top executive at the UBS investment bank and Democratic mega-donor known to raise Wall Street cash for candidates, told Politico. “If he decides to run, he will be in the top five. You can’t deny the electricity and excitement around the guy.”

“We are big Beto fans,” the Clintonite think tank Third Way’s Matt Bennett told NBC during his Senate run. “He’s not with us on every single thing, but his main campaign themes have been very close to what we think a national narrative should be. And the happy warrior approach is just right for running against a horrible person like Cruz or Trump.”

Having spent nearly a decade reporting on American politics, I can say there is something very odd about “Beto-mania.” Typically, politicians have both elite friends and enemies, meaning donors, activist organizations, lawmakers, and pundits, within their own political party. O’Rourke has critics in the GOP—they successfully defeated him in Texas’s Senate race. But he should presumably also have critics within the elite functionaries in the Democratic Party as well. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders both have their elite critics across the political spectrum. The former is loathed by Wall Street, the latter is loathed by pretty much everyone who runs a Democratic-aligned think tank or has a rolodex of party mega-donors.

But O’Rourke, on the other hand, seems to have received nothing but praise from everyone from Wall Street donors like Wolf to Obama alumni like Pfeiffer to a large liberal following enamored by his skateboarding at Whataburger and his passionate defense of kneeling NFL players. He has become a uniting figure for Democrats, beloved by all and loathed by none. What kind of Democratic politician can be so adored?

Maybe one who rarely, if ever, challenged the powerful.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 08:33 am
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Verified account

More Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Retweeted Mieke Eoyang

This is true! The fund is $20,000 per member for interns (we can have 4 interns max at a time - DC & district).

That’s $20k for 4 people if you want full staff, anything more l requires MRA supplementation.Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez added,
Mieke Eoyang
Verified account

@MiekeEoyang
TBF, Congress just recently reinstated the funds to pay interns, so this should shift, culturally and more members should be paying their interns.

(I was a paid intern one summer for Rep. Pat Schroeder toward the end…
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 09:45 am
@edgarblythe,
I was with you wholeheartedly until the very end of the last sentence when it became obvious who the author was referring to. It is a misleading snide remark. If the author was referring Obama, if Obama had come off as an angry black man, he would not have been elected at all in the general election. There are hidden racist within the democratic party too; I know them personally in my own extended family. If he concentrated in public on mostly minority matters, he would have been clobbered. However, that did not stop his Justice Department from trying to correct some of injustice in the court system for minorities.

However, he did always have something to say when it mattered to him. He received criticism from the republican for "race baiting" plenty of times. He merely had a different point of view than some of the more leftist democrats. He was more left/center and always had been even in his campaigns. For some reason, people expected him to be more leftist than he was and was disappointed because he didn't live up their expectations. For example, on the matter of drones and security/spying. During his campaign I don't think he every came out and said he was against drones. On the matter of spying, he said it should follow the rule of law and get warrants from FISA Court.


I hope if Beto runs, the more leftist of the party are not going to keep trying trash Obama or other who come in more leftist center. We will end up with Trump again. It is what turned a lot of people off Bernie. It wasn't Bernie himself, but the more activist of the leftist of the party trashing everyone who didn't exactly agree with every single issue they believe in.
snood
 
  3  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 11:29 am
@revelette1,
Wholeheartedly agree
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 11:37 am
Keep pushing Wall Street politicians and Trump is going to win for sure.
maporsche
 
  2  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 11:40 am
@edgarblythe,
You don’t speak for a majority of Americans. You speak for 10% of them...and not even all 10% can figure out what they agree on.
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Dec, 2018 04:46 pm
Maybe I'll go full out Libertarian. (although I don't really understand them)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 03/05/2025 at 12:58:16