Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


pnwmom's Journal
pnwmom's Journal
December 29, 2015

Data breach: NGP VAN "played no part in the October data issue that has been mentioned"

That statement is from NGP VAN's website.

Has anyone heard what other system was involved?


For clarification, NGP VAN played no part in the October data issue that has been mentioned.


Second, there has been independent confirmation that NGP VAN has not received previous notice of a data breach regarding NGP VAN. Josh Uretsky, the former National Data Director for the Sanders campaign confirmed on MSNBC (at 5:47), and also on CNN, regarding the previous incident: “it wasn’t actually within the VAN VoteBuilder system, it was another system.”

December 28, 2015

Another "be careful" here -- don't make my mistake.

Just got a 3rd hide, 4 - 3. This time for saying, to someone who posted lies about Hillary and Rose Hill, that the Rethugs will attack Jane Sanders if Bernie's the nominee, and explaining her history w/Burlington college without links.

The fourth vote to hide says it was because I didn't include them. But three others voted to hide anyway.

So maybe I would have gotten a 4th hide anyway. But it appears that non-Bernie fans should always post links.

December 28, 2015

Iowa: 92% white. N.H.: 94%. Why do we Dems frontload 2 of our whitest states

into our primary/caucus schedule? (On Feb. 1 and Feb. 9th)

And why is the District of Columbia’s primary (with the highest percentage of minority voters in the US) in the last spot overall, on June 14th?

It couldn’t be that pesky old institutional racism, could it? Not in the Democratic party!

But just for comparison, some other statistics:

Percent “white alone” in the US: 77%.

Percent “white alone,” in various states, followed by date of primary or caucus:

New York: 70% April 19th
Maryland : 60% April 26th
Delaware: 71% April 26th
Puerto Rico: (not listed) June 5th
New Jersey: 73% June 7th
California: 73% June 7th

District of Columbia : 44% June 14

“A quick guide to Iowa and New Hampshire”

From the US census, percent “white alone” in 2014.


Democratic primary/caucus schedule


December 28, 2015

New national poll: Hillary 52%. Bernie 12%.

By the same group, overtime politics, whose poll is currently being touted here because of the 47-42 Arkansas results (Hillary's lead is within the MoE.)

I have never heard of overtime politics before, and do not recommend them as a pollster. But if you want to get excited about their Arkansas results, then you need to understand that their national results don't favor your side. By a lot.


This will be the last Presidential Percentages ranking of 2015, the next one will be January 1st. As far as movements go, Marco Rubio lost a percentage point, mainly due to Donald Trump’s surging national poll numbers. The fact that Trump looks more like the Republican nominee also helps Hillary Clinton, who matches up well against Trump in head to head polling.

Hillary Clinton – 52.3% (+.5%)
Donald Trump – 16.8% (+1.7%)
Marco Rubio – 14.2% (-1%)
Bernie Sanders – 12.1% (-.8%)
Ted Cruz – 3.7% (+.4%)
Others – .9% (Carson added)


December 27, 2015

If Trump is a serious candidate, why does he want his civil trial in August, during general

election season?

If he wins the primaries, wouldn't he expect to be kind of busy by then?


SAN DIEGO — As Donald Trump continues his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, two class-action lawsuits have been slowly moving through San Diego federal court for the last five years against the tycoon and his so-called real estate university and are inching closer to trial.


The unlicensed online institution has come under fire in New York as well, with the state attorney general filing a similar suit that prompted the school to drop the “university” label from its name and proceed as the Trump Entrepreneur Initiative. In Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s $40 million lawsuit, he claims many students expected to meet Trump but instead got a picture with a life-size cardboard cutout instead.


Trump’s presidential campaign was considered somewhat during the Dec. 4 hearing as the judge and lawyers grappled with setting future court dates to move toward trial. One of Trump’s lawyers, Daniel Petrocelli, asked the judge if postponing a trial until after July would be possible, to accommodate the intensified campaigning leading up to the Republican National Convention, set for that month.

The judge suggested aiming for an August trial date, giving lawyers enough time to sort out the myriad legal issues the complex case presents. No trial date has been officially set.

December 26, 2015

"Why This Socialist Feminist is for Hillary"

The reason that electing someone like Fiorina wouldn't further feminist causes -- unlike Hillary -- is simple. Fiorina isn't a feminist. Hillary is and always has been.


At first glance, you’d likely guess that I would proudly don a “Feel the Bern” T-shirt and make a generous donation to the democratic socialist firing up the Democratic Party. Born to leftists themselves born to leftists, I am what is known in some circles as a “red-diaper baby”: progeny of left-wing activists, often but not always members of the Communist Party. I was raised by a mother deeply committed to social justice, an activist first and foremost in the civil-rights movement but later engaged with feminism, anti-war activism, and the vast panoply of progressive issues that ebbed and flowed through our national politics of the past half-century. My mother’s immigrant Jewish parents met in the Lower East Side of New York City, at a meeting of the Young People’s Socialist League (we called it YPSL) and I grew up more familiar with the words to labor anthems than “The Star-Spangled Banner.”


Shattering glass ceilings can have broad and rippling consequences. The election of Obama did not usher in an era of “post-racial” accord. However, it brought to the surface the enduring power of racial animus and the equally enduring struggles against it. The Black Lives Matter movement, for example, may have come into being without his presidency, but surely the very fact of this man, with this history, with this body, with this skin in the (very, very) White House opens up space for discussions, debates, movements that are critically important. Obama took it upon himself to explicitly defend the work of Black Lives Matter and school the nation on police violence during an October White House forum on criminal justice where he insisted that “it’s real and there’s a history behind it and we have to take it seriously.” His earlier comments, after the murder of Trayvon Martin, that “this could have been me 35 years ago,” may not have sparked the growing movement against racist police violence, but it surely did give it legitimacy and official voice.

This could happen with Hillary. No, the stalled revolution for gender equity won’t be won by simply installing a woman in the White House. But it may help animate conversation, instill fierce female pride, and inspire young girls the world over. With our campuses roiled in debates about how to address rampant sexual assault and our reproductive lives seemingly constantly in need of controlling by over-reaching politicians; with our wages still unequal, our domestic labor undervalued and childcare still too expensive; and with our political representation still woefully disproportionate to our population, the effects of having a woman in that very male White House may just trigger some needed discussion and stir social movements.

Hillary may not be the (radical, intersectional) feminist that activists fantasize about seeing in power, but she’s some kind of a feminist for sure and would no doubt foreground the centrality of gender equity to social justice in ways we have not seen at a national level. While Bernie’s redistributive economic policies might—in the long run—aid women more than Hillary’s more conservative ones, it is unlikely that most of them would ever make their way through a Congress beholden to Wall Street and corporate interests. And it is not at all clear to me that a gridlocked leftist vision would be better for women than the value-added of actually having a woman (with an agenda that shares much in common with this vision)—after all these years—in the Oval Office. Hillary in office will not usher in some profound realignment of US priorities and politics. But no mainstream, electable candidate is likely to do that in any case (see Obama’s legacy on that if you have any doubts). But she just might help us remember that “feminist” is not an epithet but a badge of honor.

December 25, 2015

My DU Christmas present I guess -- another hide.

This time, I should have said a CHART containing numerous errors was "worthless."

Except, oops, I actually used the word "poster" instead of "chart."

So I got hidden for making a personal attack. The word "poster" was interpreted as "OP."

I've never deliberately made a personal attack on another DUer, and this certainly wasn't one.

Anyway, I wish you all Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays and all the best for the coming year!


Bernie voted for the Libyan attacks, Hillary has called for the end of private prisons,


This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.


"This poster is WORTHLESS." It's one thing to criticize a post but calling another human being worthless is oot.


A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Dec 24, 2015, 10:42 PM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I could have lived with it without the personal attack on the poster
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I took it to mean "poster" = meme in OP, not the poster as in person.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: And so because it is too close to Christmas I find it far too difficult to see my though to a hide for one poster calling anothers posting worthless. Furthermore, on the benefit of the doubt to justify my decision I will see (poster) as a typo, I therefore think what was meant is- "this post is worthless"- leaning to the opinion it is misleading. Like it or love it that is the way I see it. Merry Christmas all.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I wish the nasty lying Sanders trolls would scurry off to JPR. This isn't good for our mental health.

December 25, 2015

A hide due to utter confusion.

I said the "poster" -- with so much inaccurate info -- was worthless , NOT the OP.

"Poster," meaning the screen shot of the CHART or POSTER.

Is there anything that can be done when there was no intention to attack the OP -- it was a pure misunderstanding?


December 24, 2015

Donald Trump, shemen zich in dein veiten haldz

My grandmother, were she alive, would have had a choice phrase for such a vulgarian: Shemen zich in dein veiten haldz. Literally, this translates as “you should be ashamed in your far neck,” but that doesn’t quite convey the deep contempt the speaker has for the schmuck who committed such a shandeh un a charpeh (shame and disgrace). Alternatively, my bubbe might have opted to give Trump some classic and colorful Yiddish advice: “Gai kaken oifen yam” — go defecate in the ocean.

Covering the insult-o-rama that is the Trump campaign is a soul-draining undertaking, calling to mind another Yiddishism: “Darf min gehn in kolledg?” (For this I went to college?)

But since Trump has started us on this tour of Yiddishkeit, it’s worth noting that Yiddish insults are custom-tailored for the overbearing and boorish gantseh macher that Trump has made of himself. He’s a shmegegi and a mamzer, a fabrecher and a nudnik with a lot of chutzpah (and a tuches un a halb). Sorry, you’ll have to look those up.


December 24, 2015

Pope Francis sounds like he wants to blow things wide open.

Merry Christmas!

The Pope was asked about the Church's prohibition against birth control, including condoms, given HIV and other problems. His answer is unlike anything we've heard a Pope say.


The question seems too small to me,” Francis responded. “It seems to me also like a partial question.”

“The morality of the church is found on this point, I think, in front of a perplexity,” he said. “Fifth or Sixth commandment? Defend life, or that sexual relations be open to life? This is not the problem. The problem is bigger.”

I found the response stunning, in a very good way. A pope admitting that the church’s view of morality finds itself “in front of a perplexity,” caught between commandments, as it were, and the questions of whether life is to be defended or the requirement that sexual relations be open to life in every circumstance upheld without exception.

That alone would have made it, in my estimation, a papal response unique in my lifetime, a papal response, in a conversational circumstance, admitting that the church might be caught in a difficult situation, that absolute certitude about a sexual issue might not provide the unassailable answer.

However, he went well beyond that admission, essentially climbing inside one of those parables that demonstrate what Jesus meant when he said he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it.

“This question makes me think of what they asked Jesus one time: ‘Tell me, master, is it licit to heal on the Sabbath?’“ Francis continued.

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Jan 30, 2006, 05:07 PM
Number of posts: 108,872

Journal Entries

Latest Discussions»pnwmom's Journal