Admiral Loinpresser
Admiral Loinpresser's JournalAn Open Letter to the Democratic Party: (part three)
What’s my point? Defense is pathetic and hopeless as demonstrated by the last 34 years of losing politically why the suffering of people at home and abroad grows due to American oligarchy. It is time to go on offense.
What does that mean specifically? How about starting by supporting Bernie Sanders? He is the only uncorrupted politician in the race, the only one refusing to have a Super Pac funded by our billionaire and corporate masters. He is the only one advocating a foreign policy based on using war as a last resort. He is the only one telling the people the truth: it is time for another American revolution, a revolution based on the interests of the people instead of a handful of traitorous, tax dodging billionaires.
How about responding to the greatest popular response in modern history, in small-donor fundraising, in rally attendance and volunteerism? How about aligning with it?
How about organizing to take our country back from the treasonous Koch brothers and their rat bastard cronies, one school board, one statehouse seat, one governorship at a time? How about organizing a movement to re-shape and restore democracy for decades to come? How about saving our planet from ecological catastrophe?
In other words, esteemed Democratic leadership, please pull your collective heads out of your collective asses. Otherwise, the Democratic Party will continue to decline and be perceived as the sell-out shell of what used to be a great party, that fought for the poor, for working and middle class people. A party which had a vision to make America free and great for all.
Strong message to follow.
End of part three
H.A. Goodman deconstructs bogus poll results.
As for how these polls are conducted, they'd be very relevant in the 1970's. First, the majority of these polls call primarily landline telephones. Sorry, but the latest poll with Clinton 30 points ahead of Sanders states the respondents were "1,000 Adults, including 350 respondents with a cell phone only." Also, the Iowa poll with Clinton up by 41 points asked 300 (out of only 400 people) respondents via landline telephone.
The biggest issue here is that almost half of Americans don't use a landline telephone; especially Americans under 45 years old. A Time article titled Landline Phones Are Getting Closer to Extinction highlights why landline surveys could be skewed towards Clinton's favor:
41% of U.S. households were wireless-only by of the end of 2013, according to new data from the National Center for Health Statistics.
Young adults are unsurprisingly the cohort the most likely to live in wireless-only homes, with 66% of people between 25 and 29 using cellphones exclusively. Americans between 30 and 34 were the next largest group of cord-cutters, with 60% of them living in wireless-only homes. 53% of people between 18 and 24 are now cellphone-only, while 48% of people aged 35 to 44 and 31% of people aged 45 to 64 have made the jump.
Just 14% of adults over 65 have dumped their landlines, though. Overall, more than half of wireless-only adults are now 35 or older, up from 47.6% in the second half of 2010.
Since the demographic groups most likely to use cell phones are likely to vote for Bernie Sanders, it's logical that polls show Clinton ahead when primarily landlines are surveyed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/landline-telephones-moral-tone_b_8470102.html
Bernie explains why we can't trust HRC.
"Given the nature of class politics in America. Given the fact that we have a corrupt campaign finance system," Sanders said. "Given that we have an economy that is rigged. The major point that I am making is that establishment politicians cannot make the kind of changes we need. You can't run a Super PAC and take money from Wall Street and say 'I'm going to take on Wall Street.'"
This is an obvious reference to Clinton's Super PAC war chest and her close ties to Wall Street. Sanders, famously, is the only major candidate refusing to use Super PACs, the fundraising entity that allows unlimited corporate and union money in the wake of Citizens United.
http://www.alternet.org/media/sanders-rips-clintons-wall-st-ties-establishment-politicians-cant-make-changes-we-need-video
And still a further Republican for Bernie.
I also know most Republicans consider a minimum wage raise a “freebie”. How is THAT a freebie? People WORK for it! Some are even working HARDER than those making more, and they are STILL living below the poverty line. Bernie Sanders supports a raise in the minimum wage so that people that work full-time do not live in POVERTY. This will start a chain reaction. If more people have more disposable income, every economist in the world knows that means economic growth. So what are we going to do with the working poor? Do we raise wages or do we provide them with social welfare? You can’t possibly reject both. Please, tell us YOUR solution, and WE will be the judges.
If Bernie’s policies are a DANGER to freedom…then how can you explain that out of the TOP 12 MOST FREE countries in the world, 10 of them consider healthcare as a RIGHT of all citizens and give everyone free healthcare? Do you believe it is a coincidence MOST of them are also considered the HAPPIEST? Is it a coincidence most of them have strong economies? Why don’t you call THEM socialist? I bet it would not be a good idea, because if THAT is what socialism is then we should try that, right? Obviously, they are not socialist. They are SOCIAL DEMOCRACIES.
Tell us why you believe raising the minimum wage is a bad idea. Tell us why you think free education should stop at the high school level. Tell us why you believe we should not consider healthcare as a right of all citizens. Tell us why you believe we should not make cuts on the outrageous corporate welfare tax we pay. Tell us why Bernie’s ideas (and those of social democratic countries) don’t work. DON’T tell us why LENIN’s or KIM JONG-UN’s ideas don’t work.
I am sick and tired of seeing Republicans call Bernie Sanders a socialist/communist. I am sick and tired of the corporate media lying to everybody about what Bernie really stands for. We, unfortunately, can’t have an educated conversation or discussion in America today because there is people like you that do not allow FREE THINKING to happen.
http://firebrandleft.com/evolved-ron-paul-supporter-bernie-sanders-supporter/
Let me say what I believe.
Especially since the 1960s, and particularly since the emergence of the Nixon "Southern Strategy," the GOP has used race as a "wedge" issue, i.e. to divide Americans in an ugly way. That is how they achieved the complete re-alignment of the South, so that it has become predominantly Republican. They continue to do that to this day, although now much of that focus is on demonizing Latino immigrants.
In the '80s, Reagan became particularly overt in using race as a wedge issue, by demonizing black people and creating the myth of the "welfare queen." That is a major reason why I consider Reagan one of the most despicable presidents in US history.
In the '90s, as part of his Third Way/DLC strategy, Bill Clinton made the "Southern Strategy" bi-partisan:
In her seminal book “The New Jim Crow,” Michelle Alexander writes that “[President Bill] Clinton escalated the drug war far beyond what conservatives had imagined possible a decade earlier.” He scored a victory for Reaganite politics by “ending welfare as we know it” with the 1996 welfare reform law. “In so doing,” writes Alexander, “Clinton–more than any other president–created the current racial undercaste.” The Southern Strategy had become bipartisan orthodoxy.
To be outside of that bipartisan establishment doctrine was to reject a Washington-wide consensus that black Americans could be used — or exploited, rather — to achieve political success. The DLC continued the long tradition of profiting from black powerlessness. It was white privilege begetting more white privilege, the way it has always been maintained.
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/07/the_truth_about_bernie_sanders_race_why_his_biggest_weakness_could_become_his_greatest_strength/
In 2008, when Hillary lost the majority of AA voters, she used race as a wedge issue to divide us, imo. There are numerous stories on that. Here is one:
http://www.politico.com/story/2008/01/racial-tensions-roil-democratic-race-007845
In this cycle, when BLM activists made social justice an issue by disrupting campaign events, I applauded their actions and said and felt it was (and is) an important opportunity for real dialogue, but more importantly a chance to begin a real overhaul of law enforcement and the criminal justice system so that black, Latino and native people can start to enjoy some modicum of justice in this country, something they have never had.
Unfortunately some of my fellow Bernie backers engaged in some ugly statements and behavior in response to the BLM activist actions, including conspiracy theories and attacking people on this board. I decried that and took some heat for going on the Bernie Group and asking people to quit talking past people who disagreed with them, especially POC. Some of that BLM emergence episode got ugly and I hope people can look inside themselves and try to grow from that, especially Bernie people who were way off base.
I also decried the purging of people on this site, and particularly supported Bravenak when that despicable stalking event occurred.
I believe after this campaign is over we need to open an honest dialogue on this board between all people of good faith and try to have some honesty and real healing about race.
I believe we need to open a pathway to citizenship for people living in the shadows.
I also believe we need a national commission on truth and reconciliation regarding the historic treatment of AA people, including some form of reparations. We also need a similar commission regarding native people to finally honor treaties in every practical way.
Having said all that, I stand by my OP. I believe HRC's record includes shameful institutional racism in the '90s and her rhetoric in a given campaign is based on which way the wind is blowing. Bernie has a lifelong record of fighting for everyone but the billionaires. That is why I support him and will never support her.
What are the two common denominators of the 2008 and 2016 Democratic primaries?
1) Wedge issues (unusual for a Democratic primary); and 2) Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Endorsements, genitals and polls, oh my!
Endorsements, genitals and polls, oh my! Endorsements, genitals and polls, oh my! Endorsements, genitals and polls, oh my!
That's what they're touting. Endorsements for the Clintons are often made out of fear. Fear of retribution, for which the Clintons are famous. True, there are some highly respected Dems who have endorsed her, such as John Lewis, Al Franken and Sherrod Brown. All we have is the most progressive members in the Progressive Caucus. This is the so-called "invisible primary." That is so 20th century. If we are to break up this oligarchy which once was America, it will be because of the liberating influence of social media and some new media. As our culture changes I believe the "invisible primary" will become primarily invisible.
Genitals? Should Republicans vote for Fiorina? Let's vote based on candidates' records and the issues. Bernie wins that way hands down. And crying wolf on sexism? Absolutely pathetic and disingenuous.
But what about those dreaded polls? You know, the ones Bernie doesn't win (unlike the focus groups, fundraising and Internet polls where he wins). There may well be some Establishment polls done to reflect reality, I just haven't seen one yet. Dewey defeats Truman!
Has any poll been conducted to realistically capture the broad appeal of Bernie? I haven't seen one yet. How many polls ask self-identified Republicans whether they will be voting for Bernie? I don't know of any. How many polls consider independents and Millenials who will be voting for the first time? One of Bernie's strongest demographics is previously unlikely voters.
Polls are much more accurate with respect to Hillary than Bernie. She will get nothing from the GOP and much less than Bernie among independents. Polls show her losing to Trump. If Hillary is nominated, there is a good chance that a total boob like Trump or Carson could be the next president. Bernie is a unique candidate who can't be gauged by 20th century thinking or polling. That is part of why he can win the GE, while HRC is unlikely.
+ One googool! n/t
Two more Republicans for Bernie.
I guess I'll just start collecting these and post when I have five or ten at a time:
“ Have been living in Vermont for many years, have voted for Bernie every time, very proud of him, he tells us what’s wrong, and how to fix it, never ran a dirty campaign, so as a Republican, Marine vet, and Minister, I’m voting for Bernie Sanders.”
Clifford isn’t the only Republican taking notice, Hertz tells of another staunch member of the GOP who is abandoning the party in favor of Sanders. This “Reagan” Republican wrote a lengthy comment on another of the writer’s posts and explained why he likes the Vermont Senator. Part of his reason is that Bernie Sanders is a crusader of the middle class:
“Everything he did was for the American worker, from protecting them from outsourcing and cheap foreign labor, to fixing the budget deficit by hiking taxes on the rich, to boosting the minimum wage. He’d be considered a centrist back in the 80s, which is why he has my vote.”
It’s HUGE that Bernie Sanders is stealing not just a religious veteran away from the GOP, but also a Reagan Republican. Those are two of their ideal voters. When you think of Republican voters, your mind probably immediately lands on someone who is religious, a veteran or someone who believes Reagan was a super hero. So to lose those types of voters, the ones they don’t even think they have to work to keep is almost unheard of and it’s not just these two voters.
http://www.occupydemocrats.com/why-this-lifelong-republican-veteran-and-minister-is-voting-for-bernie-sanders-2/
Kudos to the KC Royals and Bernie:
doin' it old school, on a low budget and kickin' New York ass!
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 3,859
