HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » imagine2015 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Home country: USA
Current location: Merica!
Member since: Wed Sep 16, 2015, 02:36 PM
Number of posts: 2,054

Journal Archives

Bernie may pick Elizabeth Warren for Vice-President or appoint her Treasury Secretary

If Warren is the Vice-President that would set her up to run for President in 2020.

She would become the first woman President of the United States and one progressive women and men could be proud of.

I'm not predicting but either move makes sense.

"Clinton's Superdelegates won’t switch too soon, for fear of retribution, but it’s coming"

Bernie Sanders Will Become Democratic Nominee Even If Clinton Leads in Delegates
H. A. Goodman
Columnist published in The Cleveland Plain Dealer, The Baltimore Sun, The Hill, Salon, The Jerusalem Post
April 11, 2016

As for a general election, it’s obvious to anyone paying attention that Sanders is the best chance to defeat a Republican.

When discussing the issue of why Bernie Sanders will still become Democratic nominee, even if Clinton receives more delegates by late June, let’s take things into context. Bernie Sanders was recently invited to the Vatican by Pope Francis to speak, while Hillary Clinton will be interviewed soon by the FBI. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have attended events to hear Bernie Sanders speak (100,000 people had attended by August of 2015), while Hillary Clinton can’t fathom releasing transcripts of paid Wall Street speeches. Bernie supporters recently rallied outside his childhood apartment in Brooklyn and Sanders delivered an electrifying speech at Bronx Community College. Hillary Clinton recently used a static noise machine to prevent the press from listening to her words at a Denver fundraiser, and this was after roping off reporters last year.

One candidate is admired by millions, as illustrated by Sanders being the only leading candidate in 2016 with positive favorability ratings. The other candidate holds negative favorability ratings in every major national poll; in 6 out of 10 major polls, Hillary Clinton is viewed unfavorably by 15 points or more.

For superdelegates and Democratic Party bosses, it’s power that drives their votes, not principle, and Bernie Sanders is quickly becoming the most pragmatic choice in 2016. In an average of national polls, Bernie Sanders is now only about 2 points behind Hillary Clinton. With Sanders defeating Clinton in two national polls and close in every other national poll, my views on polling trajectory last September were more accurate than any other prognostication regarding Bernie Sanders and poll numbers. Bernie Sanders just won his seventh straight contest heading into New York. Aside from H. A. Goodman, nobody predicted the following Guardian headline at this point in the election season: Bernie Sanders just won his seventh straight victory. Is he unstoppable?

Superdelegates won’t switch too soon, for fear of retribution from Clinton, but it’s coming, and Sanders will become Democratic nominee regardless of delegate count. Lee Fang of The Intercept and several other journalists have documented superdelegate ties to Clinton and lobbying, and if Clinton becomes nominee, these ties will be magnified by a disenchanted progressive base. The party bosses are loyal, but they’re not stupid.

An iceberg named Hillary Clinton threatens the system of honest graft that provides political power to so many establishment Democrats. Superdelegates and the DNC know that an irreparable fracture within the Democratic Party awaits, if Bernie Sanders isn’t the nominee. They’ll wait until the last second, especially until after the FBI’s decision, to side with Vermont’s Senator. Bernie Sanders will win the Democratic nomination, not only because of a progressive political revolution, but also because it’s in the political interest of Democratic Party bosses.


A Contested Democratic Convention Is Now a Near Statistical Certainty

A Contested Democratic Convention Is Now a Near Statistical Certainty
by Seth Abramson
Assistant Professor of English at University of New Hampshire; Series Co-Editor, Best American Experimental Writer
April 12, 2016

Hillary Clinton needs to win 65.3 percent of the remaining pledged delegates to avoid a contested Democratic convention at which she and Bernie Sanders separately plead their cases to the Party’s 714 unpledged “super-delegates.”

Democratic candidates in 2016 need 2,383 pledged delegates to win the Party’s nomination via pledged delegates alone. Barring Senator Sanders dropping out of the Democratic race prior to the New York primary, it is virtually impossible for Secretary Clinton to hit that mark.

The question, given the above data, is not what percentage Sanders or Clinton will win by in upcoming states, but rather how strong a case each candidate will be able to make to super-delegates, who don’t cast any votes until the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia — the media’s decision to pretend that they do, against the express direction of the Democratic National Committee, notwithstanding.

Right now here’s Senator Sanders’ case to super-delegates, which the media has routinely described as weak:

•He beats every remaining GOP candidate by more than Clinton, per head-to-head national polling.

•His +5.3 national favorable/unfavorable ratings are approximately twenty points better than Clinton’s (-14).

•He currently beats Clinton in national polls of Democrats.

•Counting Arizona, where Sanders won Election Day voting 50.0 percent to 46.5 percent, Sanders has won eight elections in a row. The most losses in a row President Obama ever suffered in 2008 was two.

•He is not under federal investigation. While the current FBI investigation into Clinton’s private email server is unlikely to result in an indictment, it could damage her standing among independent voters in the general election. Thus far this election cycle, Sanders has generally beaten Clinton among the independent voters who often decide general elections by between 25 and 35 points.

•National and battleground-state polling show that Sanders would win the nonwhite vote by almost exactly the same margin as Clinton — and in many cases an identical margin — were he the Democratic nominee instead of her.

•Clinton won 60% of the delegates in February, 51% in March, and so far 45% in April, suggesting a campaign that is (and dramatically) losing steam rather than gaining it. Clinton is on pace to either win her home state’s primary by much less than she did in 2008 — when she beat President Obama in New York by 17.1 percent — or even lose the state outright.

•Sanders is a “movement” candidate in the mold of the last two successful Democratic campaigns for President (Obama, Bill Clinton) whereas Clinton is a policy wonk for whom few Democrats have personal affection, much like Al Gore and John Kerry were.

•Because Trump (-35) and Cruz (-21) have favorability ratings so historically underwater the Republican establishment can’t let either of them be the GOP nominee, looking at how the Democratic candidates match up against John Kasich — the most popular politician, by far, now running for President in either party — is worthwhile. Clinton has never beaten Kasich in a head-to-head poll in 2016; Sanders has beaten Kasich in five of the nine head-to-head polls taken in 2016, and averages a 2.7 percent victory over Kasich across all 2016 head-to-head polling.

•Clinton’s favorability rating among Republicans (7 percent) is so low that if she is nominated she will re-unify the Republican Party following a divisive and possibly self-destructive Republican National Convention. Sanders’ favorability among Republicans is twice as high, with ten times as many Republicans saying they don’t know enough about him to form an opinion (suggesting his favorability among registered Republicans could rise to more than twice Clinton’s total). There is no indication of an institutionalized hatred among Republicans for Bernie Sanders, whereas GOP hatred for Clinton — justified or not — goes back twenty-five years.

•Sanders is consistently rated by voters as being more “honest and trustworthy” than Secretary Clinton, almost always by double-digit margins, and this is a critical measure of a candidate’s viability.

Clinton’s case to super-delegates can be summed up as follows:

•She is exceedingly well-qualified for the position, though Senator Sanders is also qualified.

•She has raised substantially more money for individual super-delegates and state Democratic parties than has Senator Sanders, suggesting that she is owed loyalty and electoral fealty by these individuals and Party institutions.

•She would be the first female President, whereas Sanders would only be the first non-Christian, political Independent, or social democrat elected President.

•She will win the popular vote this primary cycle, though much of this popular-vote lead came in non-competitive general-election states (so-called “deep red states”), and in the last primary season super-delegates voted against the popular vote winner — as it turned out, her.

•She is likely (if not certain) to win a majority of pledged delegates, though not enough to clinch the nomination. In blue and battleground states, she will be tied with Sanders in delegates or 1 to 2 percent ahead.

•She’s a neo-liberal rather than a social democrat.

•She’s from a known brand (“Clinton”) in the Democratic Party.

There are likely other arguments for both candidates, but these appear to be the predominant ones.

The full article can be read at:

They Should Get A Room!

Time for a little humor.

Four Myths That Are Keeping Hillary Clinton Afloat In The Democratic Race

Four Myths Keeping Clinton Afloat
by John Atcheson
April 12, 2016

Myth # 1 – Hillary is more likely to beat Republicans in the general election

For months now, polls show that Sanders has done better against Republican opponents than Hillary. In fact, he wins against opponents she loses to. In the latest polling, for example, she beats Trump by only 9 points, ties Cruz, and loses to Kasich. Meanwhile, Sanders beats Trump by 20 points, Cruz by 12 and Kasich by 11. And Republicans are plotting on ways to select a more electable candidate if the convention is deadlocked, so running Hillary is risky for Democrats.

Bottom line: not only does Hillary do worse against Republicans than Sanders, she has unique vulnerabilities that make her a risky candidate for Democrats to run. Indeed, running Hillary may be the only way the Democrats could lose the Whitehouse.

Myth #2 – Hillary knows how to get things done

This is one of her favorite lines and it gets picked up by her many surrogates in the press. The fact is, it doesn’t bear scrutiny. For example, she only sponsored 3 Bills that became law during her 8 year tenure. One established an historic site in New York, another renamed a Post Office, and the third named a portion of a highway in New York after Timothy J. Russert.

Myth #3 – Sander’s isn’t a real Democrat and he isn’t doing anything to help the Party’s downballot candidates

Where you stand on this depends upon how you define a Democrat. If it’s merely a label that can be worn by anyone regardless of their positions, then Sanders is guilty as charged. And certainly Hillary has offered financial and other help to Democrats that Sanders has not.

But if you believe that being a Democrat is about values, not labels, then Sanders is doing a tremendous amount to help the Democratic Party at all levels of government.

The fact of the matter is, the Democratic Party left the people behind decades ago, when they embraced the pay-to-play political model that now dominates our elections and our governance.

Finally, Sanders is attracting new voters to the Party, and these voters will ultimately help elect more progressives at every level of government – something Democrats desperately need if they are to avoid the disastrous low turnout that crippled the Party in 2014, when a mere 36.4 per cent of eligible voters showed up -- the lowest voter turnout in 72 years – and Republicans won big at all levels of government.

Bottom line: Sanders has made it safe to be a real Democrat again and he’s attracting much needed new voters, and is likely to have the coattails to help Democrats in Congressional and state races. Hillary is busy propping up the status quo, which will limit turnout.

Myth #4 – Her experience gives her an edge

Hillary is pretty much batting zero on all counts. Her foreign policy is basically the same as the neocons. She voted for the Iraq war, then compounded the error by supporting regime change in Libya and Syria. Her economic policies are soft on Wall Street and she’s refused to back the $15 minimum wage. Finally, all this experience seems not to have given her a consistent view of policy. She’s flip-flopped on energy policy, trade agreements, crime issues, tax policy, regulation of the big banks … on and on it goes.

Bottom line: Ms. Clinton has loads of experience but she’s demonstrated poor judgment.

Experience without judgment merely allows her the opportunity to make the same mistakes over and over again. Experience without independence assures that she will. And taking money from Wall Street, fossil fuel interests, the pharmaceutical industry and other fat-cats assures that she has no independence.

The full article is at:

From Bernie Sanders Campaign: Hillary Clinton's Credibility Gap

Press Release
Clinton’s Credibility Gap
April 12, 2016

ROCHESTER, N.Y. – U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday contrasted his record to Hillary Clinton’s stands on Wall Street reform, fracking, a corrupt campaign funding system and job-killing trade deals.

Meanwhile, Clinton’s credibility was questioned after she blamed Vermont for gun violence in New York. The charge backfired when The Washington Post called her assertion “significantly misleading.” Even Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin, a Clinton backer, said she was wrong. “It is campaign season, therefore, things are sometimes said by all the candidates that sometimes aren’t entirely accurate,” Shumlin told Vermont reporters.

On a host of other issues, Sanders detailed differences with Clinton during a rally here at Monroe Community College.

Sanders faulted Clinton’s reliance on Priorities USA, one of her super PACs, which took $15 million in the last half of last year from Wall Street sources. That haul was part of $25 million showered on her by special interests. “Our job is to stand up to these powerful special interests, not to take their money,” Sanders said.

He doubled down on his call for Clinton to make public the transcripts of closed-door speeches on Wall Street that netted her millions of dollars in speakers’ fees after she stepped down as secretary of state. The payments include $675,000 for three paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, which on Monday agreed to pay a $5 billion fine for marketing shady mortgage-backed securities before the housing bubble collapsed.

Renewing his call for a nationwide ban on fracking, Sanders said Clinton has tried to masquerade her shifting stand on the extreme and risky method of drilling for oil and gas. “When she was secretary of state she pushed fracking in countries all over the world,” Sanders said. “And she still has refused to come out firmly for a national ban on fracking.” Sanders has launched a new television advertising campaign on fracking calling him the only candidate for president who would ban fracking everywhere.

On trade policy, Sanders said job-killing international trade deals backed by Clinton have shut down manufacturing plants across New York and thrown workers out of jobs that were shifted to Mexico, China and other low-wage countries. Sanders was a leader in the fight against the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994. Hillary Clinton supported it. He later opposed normalized trade with China and other international trade pacts that she supported. “I opposed every one of these disastrous trade agreements. Secretary Clinton supported virtually every one. If corporate America wants us to buy their products they damn well better start investing in America,” Sanders told more than 6,400 supporters at the community college.


Sanders Is for Schmucks: When will young voters come to their senses?

Sanders Is for Schmucks
When will young voters come to their senses?
By Tom Tomorrow

Audience at campaign event welcomed Hillary with the chant "It's! My! Turn! It's! My Turn!" Wow!

Quote of the Day: Seth Meyers On Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Slogan
April 7, 2016 — Ron Chusid

“An opening speaker at a campaign event for Hillary Clinton yesterday asked the attendees in the audience to welcome Clinton by chanting her campaign slogan with enthusiasm. And the crowd immediately started chanting, ‘It’s! My! Turn! It’s! My! Turn!'” –Seth Meyers

Ivanka Trump’s Chinese-Made Scarves Are Recalled By Consumer Product Safety Commission

Ivanka Trump’s Chinese-Made Scarves Are Recalled
By Alan Rappeport
April 6, 20016

Donald J. Trump often opines on the economic risks of manufacturing American products overseas. Now he can add his daughter’s line of Chinese-made scarves to his list of concerns.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission announced on Wednesday that 20,000 Ivanka Trump-branded scarves are being recalled for violating the U.S. Federal Flammability Standard. The scarves, which are manufactured in China and made entirely of rayon, are considered a safety risk.

“This is a dangerous product,” said Scott Wolfson, a spokesman for the C.P.S.C.

Mr. Trump also sells an extensive collection of clothing that is made in China even though he frequently rails against outsourcing and threatens to tax companies that move production to other countries. The safety commission said the majority of its recalls are associated with products that come from China.


"the Clinton campaign is collapsing" The Democrats Are Headed for a Contested Convention Too

The Democrats Are Headed for a Contested Convention Too
by Seth Abramson
Assistant Professor of English at University of New Hampshire; Series Co-Editor, Best American Experimental Writing
April 6, 2016

So while the media continued saying, “It’s all about the math, stupid,” a small cadre of political observers — along with the almost 50 percent of Democrats who now support Senator Sanders — began to see the obvious: the math wasn’t going to get Clinton to a point where she could clinch the Democratic nomination with just pledged delegates.

That’s worth repeating: Hillary Clinton will not clinch the nomination through primaries and caucuses.

Observers, this writer included, began to understand what the Sanders campaign had long understood, which is (a) the model for this primary race is “Collapse of the Favorite,” and (b) with no clinched nomination prior to the Democratic National Convention, a contested convention in which both of two candidates make their case directly to super-delegates is inevitable.

This is the slow-motion collapse of a front-runner’s campaign.

So here’s what the Sanders campaign and certain commentators have been trying to tell us about “the math”: the math shows that the Clinton campaign is collapsing. The math shows that super-delegates backed Clinton before any votes had been cast and before her campaign had imploded — an implosion that was not so much caused by unforced errors but by the historic strength of the Sanders campaign, as evidenced by its mobilization of young voters, record-breaking fundraising, and, most importantly, upward trajectory in the actual voting across the course of a five-month presidential primary season. And the math will show that Bernie Sanders polls much better than Clinton against every possible Republican candidate both nationally and in every battleground state.

And that calculus is leading the Democratic Party straight to a contested convention in Philadelphia this summer.

The full article is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/the-democrats-are-headed-for-a-contested-convention-too_b_9620362.html



Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »