HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » imagine2015 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 48 Next »

imagine2015

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 Sanders attends Warriors’ game with actor Danny Glover. Big question. Who bought the tickets?

That's what everyone is asking! Could it have been Danny Glover? He has money, much more than Bernie I'm sure. Perhaps some Wall Street tycoon or billionaire corporate CEO? mmmmmm big mystery. Needs to be solved.
In any case, it looks like Bernie had some badly needed fun and down time if only for an hour or so. Imagine 2015


Bernie Sanders attends Warriors’ game with actor Danny Glover
By Emily Kirschenheuter, KRON
May 31, 2016


OAKLAND (KRON) — The Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders caught the last half of Game 7 of the NBA Western Conference finals on Monday night in Oakland.

Sanders snuck in during half time and sat with actor and Bay Area resident Danny Glover as the Golden State Warriors battled Oklahoma City Thunder for the Western Conference title.

Accompanied by Secret Service, Sanders sat in row 15 of section 108 as the Warriors beat the Thunder to advance to the NBA Finals.

After the game, Sanders told CNN reporters that that game was “a very good omen for our campaign.” He is referring to the Warriors making a comeback from being 3-1 against the Thunder in the series.

http://kron4.com/2016/05/31/bernie-sanders-attends-warriors-game-with-actor-danny-glover/

?









Bernie Sanders Says: Clinton Cannot Clinch Nomination before Convention



Press Release

Clinton Cannot Clinch Nomination before Convention, Sanders Says
May 31, 2016

MONTEREY, Calif. – Campaigning Tuesday along California’s Pacific Coast, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders said neither he nor Hillary Clinton will win enough pledged delegates on June 7 to secure the Democratic Party presidential nomination.

A total of 694 delegates are at stake in six states with contests next Tuesday. “No candidate will end up with the number of pledged delegates needed to win the nomination,” Sanders told 7,800 supporters at an outdoor rally here.

The close contest will mean that the selection of a nominee will fall to superdelegates. Those elected officials and other party power brokers won’t cast their votes until July at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

He aims to persuade superdelegates that it is in their own self-interest and the best interests of their party that Democrats nominate the candidate best able to defeat Donald Trump.

LATEST POLL JUNE 1 Clinton 40% Trump 38% Johnson 5% Stein 3%

USA TODAY
Poll: Clinton barely ahead of Trump nationally
BY Eliza Collins
June 1, 2016


Hillary Clinton holds just a slight advantage over Donald Trump nationally, but her lead grew tighter when third-party candidates are added into the race.

A Quinnipiac University Poll out Wednesday found that when Clinton and Trump were one-on-one in a national general election matchup, she held a 4-point lead over the billionaire, 45% to 41%.

That number tightens even more when Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein were added. When all four candidates were factored in, the former secretary of State had 40%, Trump had 38%, Johnson had 5% and Stein got 3%.

The Trump-Clinton matchup had a noticeable gender gap. Fifty-one percent of men went Republican, while 35% of men went Democratic. Meanwhile, 54% of women surveyed backed Clinton, while 30% supported Trump.

There is some good news for Bernie Sanders in the survey. The Vermont senator led Trump in a general election matchup 48% to 39%.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/poll-clinton-barely-ahead-of-trump-nationally/ar-BBtJspi?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp



Wednesday, June 1

General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Quinnipiac Clinton 45, Trump 41 Clinton +4

General Election: Trump vs. Sanders Quinnipiac Sanders 48, Trump 39 Sanders +9

General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Quinnipiac Clinton 40, Trump 38, Johnson (L) 5, Stein (G) 3

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

CNN Poll of Polls: Two points separate Clinton and Trump Clinton 45% Trump 43%

CNN Poll of Polls: Two points separate Clinton and Trump
By Jennifer Agiesta, CNN Polling Director
June 1, 2016

Washington (CNN) — With the final primaries of the 2016 nomination season approaching, a new CNN Poll of Polls finds the candidates most likely to lead their parties into the general election are locked in a tight contest. Hillary Clinton holds an average of 45% support while 43% back Donald Trump across five recent nationwide polls of registered voters.

The Poll of Polls suggests a vastly different race than many anticipated.

Throughout March and April, public polling on the presidential race found Clinton well ahead of Trump, with the former secretary of state holding double-digit leads over the businessman in 10 out of the 14 polls that met CNN's standards for reporting in those months.

The CNN Poll of Polls is an average of the results of the five most recent nationwide polls of presidential preference among registered voters. The Poll of Polls includes: The CBS News/New York Times poll conducted May 13-17, the Fox News poll conducted May 14-17, the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted May 15-19, the ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted May 16-19, and the Quinnipiac University Poll conducted May 24-30. The poll of polls does not have a margin of sampling error.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/01/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-poll-2016/index.html

Skinner: "No, we're not going to prohibit pro-Bernie Sanders posts. (nt)"

Pro-Bernie Sanders posts to be banned on DU before Democratic Party has a candidate for President? imagine2015

imagine2015 (1,694 posts)

Pro-Bernie Sanders posts to be banned on DU before Democratic Party has a candidate for President?


Star Member Skinner (61,734 posts)

1. No, we're not going to prohibit pro-Bernie Sanders posts. (nt)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910516#post2

Bernie Sanders Fights On: The Rolling Stone Interview

ROLLING STONE

Bernie Sanders Fights On: The Rolling Stone Interview
A defiant candidate on what he's trying to achieve
By Tim Dickinson
May 31, 2016


Even at this late date, with the threat of a Donald Trump presidency looming, Sanders pulls no punches against Hillary Clinton. His stump speech links her to a "rigged economy" – highlighting "hundreds of thousands of dollars" in contributions to the Clinton campaign by a member of the Walton family, whose Wal-Mart fortune, Sanders says, is richer than the combined wealth of the "bottom 40 percent" of the American people. Transforming jeers into cheers, Sanders demands of the billionaire clan, "Instead of making large campaign contributions to Secretary Clinton, pay your workers a living wage!"

Offstage, out of the spotlight, there's little glamour to a grassroots presidential campaign. Late in the evening following the Salem rally, Rolling Stone met up with Sanders at his hotel – a no-frills La Quinta behind a Costco near the municipal airport, where rooms start at $89 a night. Pulling up a chair near the make-your-own-waffle station of the hotel's breakfast bar, Sanders is dressed in a rumpled blue dress shirt and gray slacks. The senator is plainly worn down from the grind of the day: At times during the interview he seems to rest his chin against his chest, as he peers intently over the top of his wire-rimmed glasses.

His body may be out of gas, but Sanders' mind is fiery and cantankerous. In the course of our 45-minute conversation, he blasts Trump as a "phony" and a "dangerous man." He also details his long-shot paths to the nomination, which he still believes he can win; his ambitious agenda to transform the Democratic Party into a people-funded movement for the working class; the challenges of having had to run a campaign "by the seat of our pants"; and why he feels sorry for Hillary Clinton – almost.

Read the Rolling Stone interview at:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/bernie-sanders-fights-on-the-rolling-stone-interview-20160531?page=2

Pro-Bernie Sanders posts to be banned on DU before Democratic Party has a candidate for President?

I hope not.

So is June 16th the "magical date" when pro-Bernie Sanders democrats and independents will be prohibited from presenting their views and news on Democratic Underground? That's what Hillary Clinton DU supporters have been joyfully claiming and gloating about for weeks now! How do they know in advance what DU administrators have planned? Maybe they had a look at some e-mails not shared with most DU members. I don't know.

So I have to ask, is the June 7th cutoff date based on e-mails received from top Democratic Party officials such as Debbie Wasserman Schultz or something else such as political opposition to Bernie Sanders or personal political support for Hillary Clinton's nomination by DU administrators?

In any case, everyone knows the General Election doesn't really begin until the two major party candidates have been decided at their respective conventions.

Hillary Clinton simply does not and can not have a sufficient number of pledged delegates to secure the nomination before the convention takes place. And secondly over 160 unpledged superdelegates have not indicated a preference for the nomination and the balance of superdelegates remain unpledged and they are free to vote for a candidate other than the one they have indicated a preference for. They are "free agents" at the national convention. And there is a very good chance that collectively the convention delegates won't elect Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders as their presidential candidate. Serious talk is beginning to surface among Democratic Party leaders on selecting Joseph Biden and others for the Democratic Party presidential ticket.

Only one thing can be accomplished by prohibiting pro-Bernie Sanders posts on DU before the convention. And that is to make DU a Hillary Clinton convention tool that will only serve to weaken Bernie Sanders and his supporters at the convention.

If that's what DU adminstrators want, they have a right to turn DU into an anti-Bernie Sanders discussion board.

That would mean that most posters will have to organize or find a democratic discussion board to permits free debate and discussion before the candidates have been selected for the General Election.

I urge DU Administrators to not ban posts by supporters of Bernie Sanders that criticize Hillary Clinton's policies until after the Democratic Party has selected their presidential candidate.

That seems like a completely fair and democratic proposal to me.

Isn't it?

I look forward to receiving a frank and positive response to my proposal


Pro-Bernie Sanders posts to be banned on DU before Democratic Party has a candidate for President?

I hope not.

So is June 16th the "magical date" when pro-Bernie Sanders democrats and independents will be prohibited from presenting their views and news on Democratic Underground? That's what Hillary Clinton DU supporters have been joyfully claiming and gloating about for weeks now! How do they know in advance what DU administrators have planned? Maybe they had a look at some e-mails not shared with most DU members. I don't know.

So I have to ask, is the June 16th cutoff date based on e-mails received from top Democratic Party officials such as Debbie Wasserman Schultz or something else such as political opposition to Bernie Sanders or personal political support for Hillary Clinton's nomination by DU administrators?

In any case, everyone knows the General Election doesn't really begin until the two major party candidates have been decided at their respective conventions.

Hillary Clinton simply does not and can not have a sufficient number of pledged delegates to secure the nomination before the convention takes place. And secondly over 160 unpledged superdelegates have not indicated a preference for the nomination and the balance of superdelegates remain unpledged and they are free to vote for a candidate other than the one they have indicated a preference for. They are "free agents" at the national convention. And there is a very good chance that collectively the convention delegates won't elect Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders as their presidential candidate. Serious talk is beginning to surface among Democratic Party leaders on selecting Joseph Biden and others for the Democratic Party presidential ticket.

Only one thing can be accomplished by prohibiting pro-Bernie Sanders posts on DU before the convention. And that is to make DU a Hillary Clinton convention tool that will only serve to weaken Bernie Sanders and his supporters at the convention.

If that's what DU adminstrators want, they have a right to turn DU into an anti-Bernie Sanders discussion board.

That would mean that most posters will have to organize or find a democratic discussion board to permits free debate and discussion before the candidates have been selected for the General Election.

I urge DU Administrators to not ban posts by supporters of Bernie Sanders that criticize Hillary Clinton's policies until after the Democratic Party has selected their presidential candidate.

That seems like a completely fair and democratic proposal to me.

Isn't it?

I look forward to receiving a frank and positive response to my proposal



With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Needs to Demand Answers



With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Needs to Demand Answers
Key issue not being addressed is secret financial deals
by: Dave Lindorff
May 26, 2016


Hillary Clinton is a lawyer, and while she’s slippery, she’s no dummy. She may have played dumb when asked earlier by reporters about her server’s hard drive being wiped clean of data before she turned it over to the FBI, saying, “What, like with a cloth or something? I don’t know how it works at all,” but she surely was involved in the deletion of her private emails -- over 30,000 of which were reportedly erased.

The power couple’s two foundations, the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, now together reportedly worth more than $2 billion, both function effectively as money-laundering operations providing salaries to Clinton family members and friends. And Hillary Clinton, particularly while serving as President Obama’s secretary of state, was in a perfect position to do favors for unsavory foreign leaders seeking to have their countries kept off of State Department lists of human rights violators, and for US businesses seeking lucrative business deals abroad. It’s those kinds of email conversations that would have benefitted from a private server, since US State Department official computers have dedicated back-up systems that would be hard or impossible to wipe, and are also by law subject to Freedom of Information inquiries from journalists and the public.

This scandal is not about someone simply ignoring some arcane rules. As Secretary of State, Clinton had a legal obligation to operate in an above-board, legal and transparent manner in conducting the business of government. Instead, for our years in office, she conducted that business in a manner that can only be called Nixonian, opting to openly violate the rules, to hide her communications from government oversight and public review, to dissemble about her allegedly having received clearance to do so, and even to attempt to erase records from her server when ordered to turn them over. Furthermore, suspicions have to be raised because if Clinton’s concerns were about people accessing her genuinely personal emails, she had only to set up a State Department email address and obtain a State Department secure Blackberry phone, and limit her personal server and personal Blackberry to genuinely personal emails and calls, conducting all State Department business on State Department systems. According to the IGO report, she studiously avoided doing that kind of segregation for four years despite frequent instructions and advice to do so.

Bernie Sanders so far has declined to make an issue of Clinton’s email scandal, but as more information comes out from the Inspector General’s Office, from a FOIA lawsuit currently in the deposition stage in federal court, and ultimately from the ongoing FBI investigation reportedly nearing its conclusion, and with even the New York Times, a long-time Clinton backer, condemning her lying about the email server, it is becoming obvious that Sanders is being far too kind to her. When he pooh-poohed the scandal in response to a debate moderator’s question during the first televised public debate he had with Clinton, the scandal was still fairly new. Today, with release of the IGO report, it has become much more serious.

Sanders should start pointing out the obvious reality that should Clinton not come clean, and should she become the Democratic nominee for president this July, she faces the possibility of an embarrassing and damaging final report from the FBI during the election campaign, or perhaps even an indictment, and the certainty of five-months of hammering on the issue by her Republican opponent. Furthermore, if somehow elected, there will follow an inevitable and interminable campaign by Republicans in Congress to try and impeach her for her “high crimes and misdemeanors” committed while serving as Secretary of State in the prior administration. That would make a joke of her campaign slogan: “A president who gets things done.”



Read the full article at:
http://thiscantbehappening.net/node/3177



USA TODAY - EDITORIAL BOARD: "Hillary Clinton broke the rules: Our view"



Hillary Clinton broke the rules: Our view
The Editorial Board
May 31,2016


As secretary of State, she ignored repeated warnings about email security.

Warning No. 1:
The report, released last week, reveals that in January 2011, hackers were attacking her private server. Twice, the Hillary and Bill Clinton staffer responsible for maintaining the server had to shut it off to protect data held by America's top diplomat and the former president. The staffer notified State Department officials of the attempted hack, and Clinton’s top aides there emailed each other to say that “sensitive” matters should not be discussed with Clinton over email.

Warning No. 2:
Two months later, the assistant secretary for diplomatic security sent a memorandum on cybersecurity threats directly to Clinton, warning of a dramatic increase in efforts "to compromise the private home email accounts of senior department officials" in a likely attempt to "gain access to policy documents and personal information that could enable technical surveillance and possible blackmail.” The memo to Clinton warned her that some personal email accounts had already been compromised and had “been reconfigured … to automatically forward copies of all composed emails” to the hackers.

Warning No. 3:
That May, Clinton herself suspected that there might have been another hacking incident when she "received an email with a suspicious link." Hours after her aides discussed the issue over email, Clinton received another email with a suspect link, this time from the personal account of the "under secretary of State for political affairs."

Warning No. 4:
A month later, the State Department sent a cable to “all diplomatic and consular posts” about the dangers of unsecured personal email accounts. Staffers were ordered to “avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts.” Who signed that cable? Hillary Clinton.

If Clinton wants to become the president of the United States, she needs to explain how she could make such a reckless decision. She had a chance to answer questions when the Obama administration-appointed inspector general contacted her about the investigation that was released last week. Among five recent secretaries of State, only Clinton refused.

While Clinton is under potential criminal investigation by the FBI for the mishandling of classified material sent through her email, remaining silent might be in her best interests and it is certainly her right. But to be president, she is going to have to convince voters that she can put the national security of the United States above her own short-term self-interest.

It's already clear that, in using the private email server, Clinton broke the rules. Now it remains to be seen whether she also broke the law.

Full editorial at:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/05/30/hillary-clinton-email-server-inspector-general-editorials-debates/85159948/
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 48 Next »