sabrina 1's Journal
Member since: Sun Mar 30, 2008, 05:51 AM
Number of posts: 61,225
Number of posts: 61,225
- 2015 (240)
- 2014 (30)
- 2013 (21)
- 2012 (26)
- 2011 (1)
- December (1)
- Older Archives
Cross posted from GDP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251834793
Another great endorsement for Bernie as SEIU breaks with the National Leaders to help Benrie win the nomination!
Posted by sabrina 1 | Sat Nov 21, 2015, 12:38 PM (1 replies)
Breaking with the National Leadership, New Hampshire's SEIU members have now endorsed Bernie. Good for them for backing the candidate who has been working for them for so long:
For Immediate Release: State’s Largest Public Labor Union Announces Primary Endorsement
For Immediate Release: State’s Largest Public Labor Union Announces Primary Endorsement Posted by andrewtoland on November 19, 2015
Concord, NH, November 19, 2015 – The Board of Directors of the State Employees’ Association/SEIU Local 1984 announced the union’s endorsement of Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary.
“Bernie Sanders has a long history of fighting for working people,” said Richard Gulla, President of SEA/SEIU Local 1984. “He shares many of our members’ goals and values. He is not afraid to take on Wall Street and will fight against corporate greed and corruption. Bernie supports every worker earning a livable wage allowing them to care for and support their families. He is also respectful and supportive of the collective bargaining process. He understands that many of our young people cannot afford to attend college so they can prepare for the jobs of this century; and that our senior citizens are not being afforded a dignified retirement.”
“We looked at the issues that mattered most to working people,” said John Hattan, SEA/SEIU Political Education Committee chair, “and most members supported today’s endorsement as the best decision.”
Earlier this week, SEIU, with which SEA/SEIU Local 1984 is affiliated, publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton as their presidential Primary pick. “While we differ in our endorsement, we share the same values, hopes and dreams for our country,” said Gulla.
SEA/SEIU Local 1984 and SEIU International will work together respectfully during the primary as they both work to move forward the interests of hard-working members who are part of the growing movement to raise wages and rebalance our economy.
“We look forward to supporting Senator Sanders throughout the primary race and will be prepared to support the most labor-friendly candidate post primary,” said Gulla.
SEA/SEIU 1984 followed its established candidate endorsement policy in arriving at today’s decision. Per policy, the organization’s Political Education Committee (Poli-Ed) polled all members about their support of the primary candidates, regardless of party affiliation. Of those who responded, the majority registered support of Sen. Sanders. The Committee then invited presidential candidates to the SEA/SEIU 1984 office in Concord to meet with them and answer members’ questions. The committee then discussed each of the candidates’ merits and qualifications and made a recommendation to the Board of the Directors. The Board then voted whether to approve the Poli-ed’s recommendation. The majority vote was with Sen. Sanders.
About The State Employees’ Association/ SEIU Local 1984
The State Employees’ Association of New Hampshire/SEIU Local 1984 represents about 11,500 public and private-sector employees across the Granite State. First formed in 1940 as a social organization, the SEA won passage of New Hampshire’s Public Employee Labor Relations Law in 1975. Since then, the union has negotiated hundreds of contracts with state, county, municipal and private-sector employers. The SEA affiliated with the Service Employees’ International Union in 1984. With two million members, SEIU is the fastest-growing union in the Americas.
Did you like this? Share it:
Posted by sabrina 1 | Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:47 AM (28 replies)
Cesar Vargas @DREAMerJ_D 2h2 hours ago
Bernie spoke today what it means to be a "socialist Democrat." His vision has been done before. And job is not done! pic.twitter.com/ewL9gfFdfj
Don't see any Republicans there. Too bad that now SOME members of the Party of FDR don't really like those 'Socialist' Programs that are still overwhelmingly popular with the American people.
Bernie = FDR!
HE will protect the signature policies of the Democratic Party!
Another reason why I support him!
Posted by sabrina 1 | Thu Nov 19, 2015, 05:39 PM (16 replies)
We KNOW that it is the Nurses Union that is funding Bernie's Supert Pac and we know HOW MUCH they are spending.
UNLIKE Hillary's Super Pacs!
How are they different?
We do not know WHO is pouring money into Hillary's Super Pacs, see David Brock's eg or HOW MUCH!
We DO however know what they are using that money for.
Brock was caught 'RED' HANDED trying to anonymously PLANT a 'commie' smear in the media about Bernie.
Fortunately he was exposed and the failed effort netted Bernie over $3 million dollars in tens of thousands of small donations.
But we won't catch all of these smear mongers at work. However it helps that there is a pattern to the smears so it's not difficult to recognize them when we see them.
The latest attempt to smear Sanders is that Bernie's Nurses Super Pac is any way similar to Hillary's!
It isn't! But the meme is already out there. And not surprisingly, the obviously false meme is getting the treatment it deserves which simply means, demolishing it with the FACTS!
Maybe it's time for another DONATION to Bernie's Campaign in response to this latest false meme?
Anyhow, back to the National Nurses Union endorsement of Bernie!
When Bernie got his first National Union Endorsement from Nurses, they had MONEY TO BERN For Bernie!
Nurses Endorse Bernie Sanders For President
Bernie Sanders, consistent as always, refusing to take Wall St money, SECRETLY through the BACK DOOR known as Super Pacs where they can hide their Identies AND the amount of money they are spending.
Bernie will not do that. That would make him BEHOLDEN TO WALL ST.
Sen. Sanders however IS Beholden to the People and THEY are working hard to get him elected because they know he will work for them, as he always has.
THANK YOU NATIONAL NURSES UNION for Bernie's Super Pac!
I want MY President to be beholden to the PEOPLE. NOT Wall Street! And that is why I support Bernie Sanders!
Posted by sabrina 1 | Thu Nov 19, 2015, 03:17 PM (80 replies)
Imagine you are the leadership of a Political Party.
You believe your candidate is a shoe-in.
You see no serious challenge to your candidate as you prepare to launch her/his campaign.
Mostly because NO ONE ELSE has the MONEY to launch a serious challenge to your incredibly well funded candidate!
And in YOUR world, MONEY TALKS!
With no serious challenge on the horizon you know your candidate can pretty much IGNORE what most polls show the PEOPLE WANT.
Things like a $15 minimum wage. Free college for students who are qualified. End student debt. Get rid of the draconian Bankruptcy laws, stop the Wars, cut the Pentagon budget, no TPP and the big one, GET THE MONEY OUT OF POLITICS etc etc
All s/he has to do is talk around the issues the people care about, sound better than the other guys, and the nomination is already in the bag.
You'll worry about the GE when you get there, move to the RIGHT if you have to, whatever it takes, but you will have the MONEY to put up a good fight against them. And the more of that MONEY you have, you think, the better the odds are you will win.
As everyone knows by now and YOU believe: MONEY TALKS! That's what it takes to win elections in the US now!
But then something you never anticipated happens!
Someone with virtually no name recognition, no Corporate funding, someone with a long, long people-oriented anti-corporate takeover of our government record on the VERY ISSUES THAT MATTER TO THE PEOPLE steps forward!
MOST OF ALL! He is running AGAINST CITIZENS UNITED. Not just TALKING about it, but refusing to take that money!
At first you think 'well, fine, he isn't going anywhere so we don't have to worry, he has NO MONEY, no one even KNOWS WHO HE IS! We'll keep an eye on him, but he has FUNNY HAIR and no one is going to take him SERIOUSLY!'
But then amazing thing begins to happen.
The people rally around this guy, they don't care about his hair, they LIKE the 'Optics'. They LOVE what he is saying!
Huge crowds come out to hear him speak and keep on GROWING.
The impossible, or so you thought, happens. HE DEFEATS YOUR 'inevitable candidate' in the polls in NH!
What to do? This is just AWFUL!! Money isn't talking the way it used to. In fact the PEOPLE HATE THAT MONEY!
But inside your DC bubble this makes no SENSE.
But it is HAPPENING. Your candidate's numbers start trending downwards everywhere the PEOPLE get to KNOW this candidate, after they hear his message! His numbers, amazingly, start trending UPWARDS!
Something has to be done!
Bernie supporters, THIS is how we KNOW how successful the people have been.
We know because the Super Pacs have been called in to disseminate SMEARS against the People's Candidate.
They include all the same old 'TALKING POINTS' that have their roots in the kind of smear campaigns that money buys whenever the status quo feels threatened.
They don't seem to be having much effect this time though.
Maybe the New Media has something to do with that, the quick responses calling out the smears before they take hold, whatever, the People's Candidate keeps on drawing the crowds, gaining more and more supporters, his base GROWING not DIMINISHING.
THEY have the Corp Media, whose lobbyists are working for THEIR candidate.
THEY have the CU facilitated Money flowing into the Super Pacs.
THEY have the Party Machine capable of pressuring people into early endorsements.
Fine, that's how politics in this country has worked.
AND they have the POWER to LIMIT the DEBATES and they have used it.
The very fact that they are AFRAID to let the PEOPLE hear him SHOWS how successful he is.
So rather than get MAD about all the ways in which they are trying to STOP the People's Candidates, we should see that all of the ways in which they ARE TRYING, is absolute proof of just how SCARED of him they are.
So DESPITE all the MONEY and POWER there are MORE OF US than there ARE OF THEM.
And the ONLY thing people have to do is keep on doing what they have been doing.
Because it's working.
We have a great candidate, one who truly does and has represented a majority of the people.
And the Establishment is scared to death of him!
They wouldn't be wasting all that time, money and effort on him if they weren't.
Take it for what it is, a sign that Bernie is truly resonating with the people who count the most, VOTERS!
Bernie on fire at Cleveland Rally this Past Weekend!
What Bernie's campaign has accomplished so far is UNPRECEDENTED! I admit that I did not think it was possible for him to get anywhere near where he is. Sometimes it good to be proven wrong.
Now I KNOW he can go all the way!
Posted by sabrina 1 | Wed Nov 18, 2015, 11:48 AM (245 replies)
1) Her support for the disastrous Iraq War which has led to the current state of affairs in the ME which many ordinary people were able to predict back when the Cheney/Bush administration were obviously lying to the American people. Well it was obvious to many of us and to some good Reps like Bernie Sanders.
Iow, Hillary is a War Hawk and that is the last thing we need leading this country right now. We need to put an end to our Imperial Wars which have placed this country in MORE danger.
2) Her close ties to Wall St which go way back BEFORE 9/11. There is no way any politician can take the enormous amounts of money distributed into our elections by Wall St and other huge Corporations, and claim they are not influenced by that.
Anyone who doubts that, only has to look at Hillary's vote on the Bankruptcy Bill, a Bill she correctly opposed while she was First Lady.
Here Elizabeth Warren discusses that very vote and how and perhaps why, Hillary changed her mind when she became a Senator, AFTER receiving huge donations FROM Wall St:
3) Her support for the horrible Welfare Reform Bill which caused several people to quit her husband's administration in protest of his signing of the Bill and Hillary's work to 'get votes for it' as she has admitted. That Bill has created an even more dire situation for Poor, Single Mothers and their Children. One in Six American children go to bed hungry every day now, and that Bill took away a safety net very much needed for those families
It did, howeve, force mothers into the workforce to do menial jobs, benefiting Corporations with the prospect of cheap labor. So there is that.
4) While she SAYS she opposes Citizens United, she takes ADVANTAGE of it by accepting Super Pacs working for her campaign through which, thanks to CU, untold amounts of money can pour into campaigns through a back door and we the people cannot know who the donors are or how much they are donating.
5) Her record on major issues has constantly changed over the years. She has failed to be supportive of major policies that benefit minorities AT THE TIME she was asked to make those decisions.
But then, when the political winds have shifted, others have done the heavy lifting, she will claim to have 'evolved', too late!
6) On the TPP and other Trade Policies, she has been WRONG, over and over again. Again, seeing the political atmosphere she shifts her position during campaign season, leaving us to wonder, but 'what if she wins'? Will she change AGAIN?
7) The Keystone Pipeline. She refused to state her position on that awful, potential environmental disaster initially, telling us nothing about where SHE stood on the issue. Then again, changed her mind under pressure from many groups to get a definitive answer from someone who is asking the public to elect her.
8) One the biggest turnoffs for me in a politician is the USE OF RELIGION as a reason for denying Civil Rights to any candidate. When Hillary invoked the 'Sanctity of Marriage' argument just two years ago in opposing Marriage Equality, I found it to be most disturbing.
9) Her refusal to go with the $15 dollar minimum wage policy knowing that even that is hardly going to allow workers to live in any kind of luxury. I have a definite reaction to wealthy people deciding that the rest of us don't even deserve to be paid a fair wage for the work we do.
There are other reasons, but I cannot trust any politician who makes mistake after mistake on major issues because even if we accept they were all mistakes, what guarantee do we have that such a politician won't make more of them IF we give them the job they are asking for??
Sen. Sanders has been consistent throughout his long political career on the issues. While circumstances do change for a politician once the reach the WH, I trust him to do his very best, to FIGHT for what he has always believed in.
Those are some of the reasons why I trust Sanders rather than Hillary to be the next President of the US.
Posted by sabrina 1 | Mon Nov 16, 2015, 05:12 PM (179 replies)
For some people it is difficult to move away from the past even when progess and new technology demand it. Due to this phenomenon, people continue to place undue emphasis and trust in the old Political Polling Methodologies, despite pollsters themselves acknowledging that they have NOT kept up with new technology and its effects on their old Methodologies, which have been increasingly failing for a number of reasons.
It was inevitable therefore that studies would be forthcoming regarding the currently DISMISSED impact of online activity on various Social Media sites because not EVERYONE rejects NEW SCIENCE thankfully, when it comes along.
This is one study and I'm sure there will be more to determine what if any effect Social Media has on elections, among other things:
More Tweets More Votes! Social Media as a Quantitative Indicator of Political Behavior!
Joseph DiGrazia,1∗ Karissa McKelvey,2 Johan Bollen,2 Fabio Rojas 1
1Department of Sociology
2School of Informatics and Computing
Indiana University Bloomington, IN 47408, USA
∗To whom correspondence should be addressed; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
An increasingly important question is whether social media activity can be used to assess off-line political behavior. Online social networking environments present a tremendous scientific opportunity: they generate large scale data about the communication patterns and preferences of hundreds of millions of individuals
Here we show a statistically significant relationship between tweets and electoral outcomesthat persists after accounting for these potentially confounding variables. We compiled two large-scale datasets. First, we collected 2010 election outcomes and sociodemographic variables from all 435 U.S. House districts (18). Second, we retrieved a random sample of 537,231,508 tweets posted from August 1 and November 1, 2010. Then, we extracted 113,985 tweets that contained the name of the Republican or Democratic candidate for Congress.
First, the data do not include any information about the meaning or context ofa name mention (e.g., “I love Nancy Pelosi” vs. “Nancy Pelosi should be impeached”). The relative share of attention compared to the opponent is all that is needed.
This is evidence for the conventional wisdom that “all publicity is good publicity.”
Second, the models show that social media matters even when controlling for traditional television media, such as CNN, which many scholars have argued is important because it shapes political reality via agenda setting (27, 28), but does not seem to have a significant effect in our models.
Finally, this study adds to the mounting evidence that online social networks are not ephemeral, spam-infested
sources of information. Rather, social media may very well provide a valid indicator of the American electorate.
Acknowledgements We would like to thank Emily Winters and Matt Stephens for data collection as well as Clem Brooks, Elizabeth Pisares, and the Politics, Economy, and Culture Workshop at Indiana University for helpful discussions and contributions.
We gratefully acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation (grants SBE 0914939, CCF 1101743), the
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and the McDonnell Foundation
References and Notes
1. W. Bainbridge, Science 317, 4726 (2007).
2. D. Lazer, et al., Science 323, 7213 (2009).
3. A. Vespignani, Science 325, 4258 (2009).
4. M. Naaman, J. Boase, C.-H. Lai, Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer
supported cooperative work, CSCW ’10 (ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2010), pp. 189–192.
5. A. Java, X. Song, T. Finin, B. Tseng, Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD
2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis (ACM, 2007), pp. 56–65.
6. A. Mislove, S. Lehmann, Y.-Y. Ahn, J.-P. Onnela, J. N. Rosenquist, ICWSM ’11: 5th International
AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (Barcelona, Spain, 2011), pp.
7. M. D. Conover, B. Gonc, A. Flammini, F. Menczer, EPJ Data Science 1, 1 (2012).
8. E. Hargittai, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 276 (2007).
9. T. Correa, A. W. Hinsley, H. G. d. Ziga, Computers in Human Behavior 26 (2010).
10. S. Stephens-Davidowitz, Quarterly Journal of Economics (2011).
11. S. Asur, B. A. Huberman, Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference
on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 01, WI-IAT ’10 (IEEE
Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2010), pp. 492–499.
12. J. Bollen, H. Mao, X. Zeng, Journal of Computational Science 2, 1 (2011).
13. S. Golder, M. Macy, Science 333, 187881 (2011).
14. P. Dodds, K. Harris, I. Kloumann, C. Bliss, C. Danforth, PloS one 6, e26752 (2010).
15. A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, I. M. Welpe, Word Journal Of The International
Linguistic Association 280, 178 (2010).
16. B. OConnor, R. Balasubramanyan, B. R. Routledge, N. A. Smith, Proceedings of the International
AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (AAAI Press, 2010), vol. 5, p.
17. D. Gayo-avello, Arxiv preprint arXiv12046441 pp. 1–13 (2012).
18. U. S. FEC, Federal Elections 2010: Election Results for the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House
of Representatives (2010), pp. 39–150.
19. C. Klarner, PS: Political Science & Politics 41, 723728 (2008).
20. A. I. Abramowitz, The Western Political Quarterly 28 (1975).
21. H. Brady, S. Verba, K. Schlozman, American Political Science Review pp. 271–294 (1995).
22. K. Schlozman, N. Burns, S. Verba, Journal of Politics 56, 963 (1994).
23. S. Verba, K. Schlozman, H. Brady, N. Nie, British Journal of Political Science 23, 453
24. J. Boucher, C. E. Osgood, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8 (1969).
25. D. Garcia, A. Garas, F. Schweitzer, EPJ Data Science 1, 1 (2012).
26. P. Rozin, L. Berman, E. Royzman, Cognition & Emotion 24 (2010).
27. M. E. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, Public Opinion Quarterly 36, 176 (1972).
28. M. S. Roberts, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 69, 878 (1992)
Every time there is progress in human history, it is initially resisted by people who are more comfortable with the old ways. That is very natural because change can be scary.
Fortunately there are always, also, those who do not resist change but welcome it. And then there are those who want to know whether or not progress/change is good or bad for humanity.
Some things though simply cannot be denied, no matter how much resistance there may be.
Posted by sabrina 1 | Mon Nov 16, 2015, 01:41 PM (106 replies)
Editing to add this:
So once again, the Corporate Media ignoring its own viewers, decides who the winner is!
Editing to add this Straw Poll also:
Posted by sabrina 1 | Mon Nov 16, 2015, 11:05 AM (215 replies)
Posted by sabrina 1 | Sun Nov 15, 2015, 12:07 AM (19 replies)
But both Bernie and O'Malley put the Repubs to shame!
Posted by sabrina 1 | Sat Nov 14, 2015, 11:59 PM (0 replies)