HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » StarfishSaver » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72 Next »

StarfishSaver

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Apr 22, 2019, 03:26 PM
Number of posts: 9,421

Journal Archives

White America needs to thank the universe that people of color are so patient

I swear to God, if we were even a fraction as fragile and prone to anger and hostility as the people who keep coming at us. just for minding our own business, there wouldn't be much of a country left.




UPDATE: The ranting woman was arrested last week for earlier assaulting a custodian at a local mall.
Woman Who Went on Racist Rants in Torrance Arrested by Torrance Police

A woman who made a pair of racist rants aimed at Asian Americans at a Torrance park in June was wanted for an alleged battery charge, and arrested Friday.

The charge stems from an October incident at Del Amo Mall in Torrance.

Lena Hernandez, 56, identified as a retired social worker, allegedly verbally assaulted a custodian at the mall, then physically attacked a female bystander who tried to intervene.
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/woman-who-went-on-racist-rants-in-torrance-arrested-by-torrance-police/2390718/
Posted by StarfishSaver | Mon Jul 6, 2020, 04:32 PM (6 replies)

"Park Ranger Karen' tells Asian-American family they can't be in her country breaking laws"

sigh ...
Posted by StarfishSaver | Mon Jul 6, 2020, 02:33 PM (44 replies)

It's a facemask, not a Star of David, you idiots

Posted by StarfishSaver | Sun Jul 5, 2020, 02:07 PM (17 replies)

CBS's Nancy Giles on the "Karen" poutrage: "Stop whining ... and try listening"

The last few weeks have felt like one gut punch after another, from the murders of Ahmaud Arbery and George Floyd, to that crazed 911 call by Amy Cooper. And all three events were (thankfully!) captured on cellphone video for millions of people to see – undeniable proof of the racist acts that some of us have lived with for a long time.

So last week, when our broadcast aired an opinion essay on the term "Karen" and Karen-shaming, I thought … really?!?

Here's the thing: When it comes to the Karens (Beckys, even Kens) of the world who don't like being called out for their gross behavior, always privileged and sometimes incendiary, you know what? TOUGH! There's something called "consequences," and they need to face theirs. The social media shaming is not more important than the horrific behavior itself. Calling someone a "Karen" isn't about sexism; it has to do with specific behavior and actions – a person who weaponizes their privilege.

And by the way, calling someone a "Karen" is not the worst thing you can say. People of color in this country have been called a lot worse, for a lot less. They are the real victims here.
...
Now, my white friends are finally seeing it for themselves, on video, and they're starting to understand that they can never understand what it's like to be on the receiving end of this insanity. Black people have lived with this for 400 years, so it's white people's turn to deal with themselves. Time for the Karens, Beckys, and even the Kens to stop whining, take a beat ... and try listening.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/opinion-nancy-giles-7-5-2020/


Posted by StarfishSaver | Sun Jul 5, 2020, 01:20 PM (63 replies)

Another white woman goes wild in her driveway ...

Enjoy
https://twitter.com/Tammy59039968/status/1279401381816946688
I don't know where Tammy lives, but I want to move in next door to her.
Posted by StarfishSaver | Sat Jul 4, 2020, 04:20 PM (40 replies)

Earlier today, I posted a Newsweek story with a doomsday scenario about the election. Taking it back

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213692442

After reading some posts here and doing more research, I think the authors' premise is flawed. Here's what they said:

Newsweek: How Trump Could Lose the Election--And Still Remain President

For Trump, there are two broad pathways to maintaining power. First, we can already see very clearly a strategy designed to suppress voter turnout with the purging of registration rolls of large numbers of mostly urban voters; efforts to suppress mail-in ballots, which are more necessary than ever, given COVID-19; a re-election apparatus that is training 50,000 poll watchers for the purpose of challenging citizens' right to vote on Election Day; and significant efforts to make in-person voting in urban areas as cumbersome as possible in order to have long lines that discourage people from exercising their voting rights.

The second pathway to subverting the election is even more ominous—but we must be cognizant of it because Trump is already laying the groundwork for how he can lose the popular vote, and even lose in the key swing states necessary for an Electoral College victory, but still remain president.

Something like the following scenario is not just possible but increasingly probable because it is clear Trump will do anything to avoid the moniker he hates more than any other: "loser."

Trump actually tweeted on June 22: "Rigged 2020 election: millions of mail-in ballots will be printed by foreign countries, and others. It will be the scandal of our times!" With this, Trump has begun to lay the groundwork for the step-by-step process by which he holds on to the presidency after he has clearly lost the election:

Biden wins the popular vote, and carries the key swing states of Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania by decent but not overwhelming margins.

Trump immediately declares that the voting was rigged, that there was mail-in ballot fraud and that the Chinese were behind a plan to provide fraudulent mail-in ballots and other "election hacking" throughout the four key swing states that gave Biden his victory.

...

Trump indicates this is a major national security issue, and he invokes emergency powers, directing the Justice Department to investigate the alleged activity in the swing states. The legal justification for the presidential powers he invokes has already been developed and issued by Barr.

The investigation is intended to tick down the clock toward December 14, the deadline when each state's Electoral College electors must be appointed. This is the very issue that the Supreme Court harped on in Bush v. Gore in ruling that the election process had to be brought to a close, thus forbidding the further counting of Florida ballots.

All four swing states have Republican control of both their upper and lower houses of their state legislatures. Those state legislatures refuse to allow any Electoral College slate to be certified until the "national security" investigation is complete.

The Democrats will have begun a legal action to certify the results in those four states, and the appointment of the Biden slate of electors, arguing that Trump has manufactured a national security emergency in order to create the ensuing chaos.


The issue goes up to the Supreme Court, which unlike the 2000 election does not decide the election in favor of the Republicans. However, it indicates again that the December 14 Electoral College deadline must be met; that the president's national security powers legally authorize him to investigate potential foreign country intrusion into the national election; and if no Electoral College slate can be certified by any state by December 14, the Electoral College must meet anyway and cast its votes.

The Electoral College meets, and without the electors from those four states being represented, neither Biden nor Trump has sufficient votes to get an Electoral College majority.

The election is thrown into the House of Representatives, pursuant to the Constitution. Under the relevant constitutional process, the vote in the House is by state delegation, where each delegation casts one vote, which is determined by the majority of the representatives in that state.

Currently, there are 26 states that have a majority Republican House delegation. 23 states have a majority Democratic delegation. There is one state, Pennsylvania, that has an evenly split delegation. Even if the Democrats were to pick up seats in Pennsylvania and hold all their 2018 House gains, the Republicans would have a 26 to 24 delegation majority.

This vote would enable Trump to retain the presidency.

https://www.newsweek.com/how-trump-could-lose-election-still-remain-president-opinion-1513975


Here, in my opinion, is the flaw in the premise: "The Democrats will have begun a legal action to certify the results in those four states, and the appointment of the Biden slate of electors, arguing that Trump has manufactured a national security emergency in order to create the ensuing chaos."

However, I don't believe it's necessary for the Democrats to have to try to force any state to certify the results in order for the Electoral College to elect a president.

The Constitution, as amended by the 12th Amendment provides:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed ...

... and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.


According to my reading of this clause, it is the majority of the electors actually appointed and certified - not the number of electors overall - that determines the winner. So, if one or more states refuses to certify electors, for whatever reason, they're just left out and the other states who have appointed electors move forward with the vote and the majority of THOSE states determine who will be president.

Not only would the election not be thrown to the House of Representatives, but in all likelihood, Biden would get a larger majority as a percentage since states that Trump won would be left out of the equation.

For example, assuming 539 electoral votes total, suppose Biden wins states with 300 electoral votes and Trump wins states with 239 electoral votes. Under normal circumstances, Biden would win the election with 56% of the Electoral College. Now assume that four of Trump's states representing 40 electoral votes refuse to certify their electors. The Electoral College would still meet, just without those 40 electors. Biden would still get 300 electoral votes while Trump would get 199 - meaning Biden would win with 60% of the vote.

The only way this would ever even get to the House of Representatives would be if the Electoral College vote ended up in a tie. In that case, each state would be given one vote and the doomsday scenario the authors pose would kick in with the House of Representatives voting for the winner, with one vote per state. But even then, there would have to be a 2/3 quorum in the House and as a DUer pointed out in a different thread, the Democrats could force the absence of a quorum.

But this is all highly unlikely since it's improbable that the Electoral College will end up in a tie and there is nothing that Trump or Barr could do to force that to happen.

So, unless my analysis is off, I think the Newsweek piece is not cause for tremendous alarm - although it IS an important reminder that we have to watch these people like hawks and be ready to push back hard if it even looks like they're up to no good. Because the fact that this particular avenue might not work doesn't meant they're not coming up with all sorts of other ways to steal the election.

Thoughts?

ON EDIT: I assumed that the states withholding their electors voted for Trump, but Elad pointed out below that the Newsweek scenario assumed that Biden won four swing states controlled by Republicans - Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania - and that those states refused to seat their electors. In that case, if the election were close and Biden received fewer than 297 electoral votes, taking away those states' 56 votes could give the election to Trump.
Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jul 3, 2020, 07:01 PM (18 replies)

WATCH: White man corners and interrogates Black woman who was driving in her own neighborhood


A Black Massachusetts woman posted a video to social media showing a white man following her in his car in her own neighborhood, ultimately interrogating her as to what she was doing there.

“I just got Karen’d? Julia Santos tweeted. “This man followed me home because I went to pick up DOG FOOD at somebody’s house!”

In the video, the driver of a convertible BMW corners Santos on a street and begins firing questions at her, asking who she is. According to the Boston Globe, Santos has lived in the neighborhood her entire life.

“So what are you driving up Juniper Terrace for?” the man asks.

Santos explained that she had just picked up the dog food after seeing a post online.

“I don’t feel safe right now,” she then says.

“You don’t feel safe? I don’t feel safe with you driving around in my neighborhood,” he replies.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/watch-white-man-corners-and-interrogates-black-woman-who-was-driving-in-her-own-neighborhood/


This sounds so familiar. I can't count how many times I've been accosted by white people demanding that I prove my right to be in the space we are both occupying.
Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jul 3, 2020, 08:47 AM (30 replies)

Newsweek: How Trump Could Lose the Election--And Still Remain President

For Trump, there are two broad pathways to maintaining power. First, we can already see very clearly a strategy designed to suppress voter turnout with the purging of registration rolls of large numbers of mostly urban voters; efforts to suppress mail-in ballots, which are more necessary than ever, given COVID-19; a re-election apparatus that is training 50,000 poll watchers for the purpose of challenging citizens' right to vote on Election Day; and significant efforts to make in-person voting in urban areas as cumbersome as possible in order to have long lines that discourage people from exercising their voting rights.

The second pathway to subverting the election is even more ominous—but we must be cognizant of it because Trump is already laying the groundwork for how he can lose the popular vote, and even lose in the key swing states necessary for an Electoral College victory, but still remain president.

Something like the following scenario is not just possible but increasingly probable because it is clear Trump will do anything to avoid the moniker he hates more than any other: "loser."

Trump actually tweeted on June 22: "Rigged 2020 election: millions of mail-in ballots will be printed by foreign countries, and others. It will be the scandal of our times!" With this, Trump has begun to lay the groundwork for the step-by-step process by which he holds on to the presidency after he has clearly lost the election:

Biden wins the popular vote, and carries the key swing states of Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania by decent but not overwhelming margins.

Trump immediately declares that the voting was rigged, that there was mail-in ballot fraud and that the Chinese were behind a plan to provide fraudulent mail-in ballots and other "election hacking" throughout the four key swing states that gave Biden his victory.

...

Trump indicates this is a major national security issue, and he invokes emergency powers, directing the Justice Department to investigate the alleged activity in the swing states. The legal justification for the presidential powers he invokes has already been developed and issued by Barr.

The investigation is intended to tick down the clock toward December 14, the deadline when each state's Electoral College electors must be appointed. This is the very issue that the Supreme Court harped on in Bush v. Gore in ruling that the election process had to be brought to a close, thus forbidding the further counting of Florida ballots.

All four swing states have Republican control of both their upper and lower houses of their state legislatures. Those state legislatures refuse to allow any Electoral College slate to be certified until the "national security" investigation is complete.

The Democrats will have begun a legal action to certify the results in those four states, and the appointment of the Biden slate of electors, arguing that Trump has manufactured a national security emergency in order to create the ensuing chaos.

The issue goes up to the Supreme Court, which unlike the 2000 election does not decide the election in favor of the Republicans. However, it indicates again that the December 14 Electoral College deadline must be met; that the president's national security powers legally authorize him to investigate potential foreign country intrusion into the national election; and if no Electoral College slate can be certified by any state by December 14, the Electoral College must meet anyway and cast its votes.

The Electoral College meets, and without the electors from those four states being represented, neither Biden nor Trump has sufficient votes to get an Electoral College majority.

The election is thrown into the House of Representatives, pursuant to the Constitution. Under the relevant constitutional process, the vote in the House is by state delegation, where each delegation casts one vote, which is determined by the majority of the representatives in that state.

Currently, there are 26 states that have a majority Republican House delegation. 23 states have a majority Democratic delegation. There is one state, Pennsylvania, that has an evenly split delegation. Even if the Democrats were to pick up seats in Pennsylvania and hold all their 2018 House gains, the Republicans would have a 26 to 24 delegation majority.

This vote would enable Trump to retain the presidency.

https://www.newsweek.com/how-trump-could-lose-election-still-remain-president-opinion-1513975
Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jul 3, 2020, 07:45 AM (28 replies)

If the white woman in the MI parking lot had shot and killed the black woman she aimed her gun at,

would the people defending her because both women "were in the wrong" still think she should not be charged with a crime?

&feature=youtu.be
Posted by StarfishSaver | Thu Jul 2, 2020, 08:29 PM (21 replies)

Would Trump and his followers be more responsive to COVID if whites were the hardest hit group?

Posted by StarfishSaver | Thu Jul 2, 2020, 05:57 PM (20 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72 Next »