HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Vidal » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next »

Vidal

Profile Information

Member since: Sun Oct 29, 2017, 02:29 PM
Number of posts: 235

Journal Archives

About the Issues: Political positions of Joe Biden

This link discloses all of Biden's positions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Joe_Biden#Health

This is posted in the interest of having a dialogue about the issues.



How Bernie Sanders Got Rich Selling Books (just the facts)

OK, here is a chart from Forbes showing Sanders' income from book royalties.

https://twitter.com/CourseMiracle/status/1129764984207097858

Here's the link to Forbes:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2019/04/12/how-bernie-sanders-the-socialist-senator-amassed-a-25-million-fortune/#42f0e94236bf

Also, here's the link to FEC filings showing: Bernie spent $444,937.50 of his campaign dollars on his book "Our Revolution".

https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Sanders_Spam/comments/bfsebt/bernie_spent_44493750_of_campaign_dollars_on_his/


Sanders' book royalties included a $505,000 advance on his book “Where We Go From Here,” which was published in 2018, Newsweek reported.

This is why he has so much income even though this book sold only 26,000 copies.

The publisher figured that since his book "Our Revolution" was a bestseller, then his new book would be one also.

But "Our Revolution" was a bestseller only because he sold the books to himself, using money donated to his campaign.

Somehow all of this doesn't seem quite kosher. But it does explain how Bernie got rich by running for president.

Why 2020 Will Be Another Massive Blue Wave, and a GOP Bloodbath

Democrats won the 2018 midterm elections by 10 million votes, the largest margin in history.

And it was mostly because of women voters turning out to send a message to the GOP. According to Pew, nearly 60% of women voted for Democrats and just 40% voted for Republicans. (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/08/the-2018-midterm-vote-divisions-by-race-gender-education/)

Now, thanks to the anti-women actions being taken by Republicans at all levels of government, women are more angry than ever.

With new state laws making abortion illegal, the GOP has further awakened and angered the sleeping giant known as the female electorate. (53% of all votes cast are cast by women.)

This means that 2020 will probably be a Blue Tsunami unlike anything we've ever seen.

It will be helped by the ongoing hearings and investigations in the House which will let the American public know that Trump is indeed both a traitor and a criminal.

The best thing that could happen for Democrats is for Republicans in various states to continue to pass stupid anti-women laws. They'll all be thrown out in court anyway, but in the meantime they will serve the great purpose of activating and motivating tens of millions of women voters.

Maybe 2020 will be the year that a woman is elected as president after all.

Why we must start Trump impeachment proceedings to force the courts to end obstruction

On Saturday, CNN commentator Rachael Bade told Christi Paul on “New Day Weekend” that even if Democrats don’t ultimately vote to impeach President Donald Trump, just the act of opening impeachment proceedings would be an important step to holding the president accountable — and undermining his efforts to stonewall investigators.

“Investigators in particular who have seen subpoena deadlines come and go, multiple every week, people like [Rep.] Jamie Raskin [(D-MD)], these are the folks that are feeling the most frustrated,” said Bade. “Remember, Judiciary Committee has the authority to start impeachment proceedings. They have been talking about potentially trying to make that case.”

“So, what you’re going to see, is you’re going to see a lot of Democrats go public and say, ‘Listen, there’s a difference between voting to impeach Trump and just voting to start an inquiry,’ because once they open that investigation, investigators feel like the courts will fast-track everything to get them the information they need. That it will be very hard for the Trump Administration to keep them from getting these documents. That they’re keeping them from actually hearing from witnesses.”

Bade acknowledged that there many moderates in the party are not quite ready to take that leap. “So, these members are going to have to convince the public that this is a good idea. And they’re also going to have to convince their colleagues. But I think over the next week, you’re going to hear a lot more people like Jamie Raskin saying, ‘Listen, we need to consider impeachment inquiry, starting these proceedings. It doesn’t mean we have to vote to impeach him. We should start having these hearings.'”

Is this the Democrats' Dream Ticket?

I think it might be.

https://twitter.com/mmpadellan/status/1129222438305320960

Step by step: Democrats play the long game against Trump

"First came the sternly worded letters. Then the subpoenas. Now the votes to hold Trump administration officials in contempt of Congress.

As House Democrats plod ahead investigating President Donald Trump, against unprecedented stonewalling by the White House, they are pursuing a long-game strategy that’s playing out in the committee rooms, the courthouse and in the court of public opinion. And it’s going to take time.

Some Democrats say the administration’s blockade is leaving them almost no choice but to open an impeachment inquiry — not necessarily to impeach Trump, but as part of a legal strategy to force the administration to comply with their requests for documents and testimony.

“Things are coming to a tipping point,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a member of the Judiciary Committee. “We’re running out of options,” said another on the panel, Rep. Val Demings, D-Fla. “I think we’re on the road,” said Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif."

Read More: https://www.apnews.com/b1005ff321144a58856cd1d43937dc03

Joe Biden Has Trump Terrified And Reeling In Pennsylvania

"Trump is so terrified of Joe Biden winning Pennsylvania that he is overseeing his reelection campaign in the state."

The Los Angeles Times reported:
"Moving to get a grip on the situation, the Trump political team a few weeks ago traveled to Harrisburg, Pa., for a meeting with Republican National Committee and state GOP officials to address concerns over party infrastructure, organizational readiness and their string of losses, according to two officials with knowledge of the meeting."

"The Trump campaign officials — including David Urban, who oversaw Trump’s 2016 operation in Pennsylvania, and Trump 2020 political directors Bill Stepien and Chris Carr — “came to make it clear that they’ll be running the show,” one attendee said."

"Biden is leading Trump by 11 points in Pennsylvania. White voters in the state have fled Trump for Biden at this early stage. The problem isn’t state Republicans. The issue is Donald Trump. The president’s personality, conduct, and behavior have rubbed many Pennsylvania voters who supported Obama but flipped to Trump in 2016 the wrong way."

"Joe Biden has the perfect message and temperament for Pennsylvania, where voters love voting for moderates like Sen. Bob Casey and Gov. Tom Wolf. Pennsylvania isn’t a place where far left or far right play well. The left does better in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. The right does better in the rural areas of the state, but as a whole, moderation makes for a successful statewide candidate in Pennsylvania."

Link: https://www.politicususa.com/2019/05/17/joe-biden-has-trump-terrified-and-reeling-in-pennsylvania.html







Should We Choose a Candidate Based on Age, Race and Sex?

One of the other posts on this forum says, in arguing against Joe Biden:

"I don’t think the best alternative to Trump is another 70-something white man."

And a lot of people think it's OK to express these kinds of thoughts.

What if I said I was against someone because she was a young black woman? Would that be OK?

Is it OK to be against someone because he is an old white man?

Seems like a double standard and it could have some very negative consequences if people on this forum think it's OK.

I see a lot of this and I really think we should encourage people to stop expressing their candidate preferences based on age, race and sex.

What do you think?

AOC calls Alabama's abortion ban 'a brutal form of oppression'

"Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who has emerged as a leader among progressive Democrats, denounced Alabama’s abortion ban after it was signed into law on Wednesday night.

She was joined by most of the party’s presidential candidates.

“Abortion bans aren’t just about controlling women’s bodies,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. “They’re about controlling women’s sexuality. Owning women. From limiting birth control to banning comprehensive sex ed, U.S. religious fundamentalists are working hard to outlaw sex that falls outside their theology.

“Ultimately, this is about women’s power,” the freshman congresswoman continued. “When women are in control of their sexuality, it threatens a core element underpinning right-wing ideology: patriarchy. It’s a brutal form of oppression to seize control of the 1 essential thing a person should command: their own body.”

Read More: https://www.yahoo.com/news/aoc-calls-alabamas-abortion-ban-a-brutal-form-of-oppression-152137572.html

NEW: "Why did Kamala Harris let Herbalife off the hook?

Harris was a prosecutor in California, and many of her prosecutorial decisions are being examined -- and criticized.

New article: https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-herbalife-accused-of-exploiting-latinos-090000896.html

"As the attorney general of the nation’s largest state — and therefore one of the most powerful law enforcement officials in the nation — Harris declined to investigate Herbalife, the nutritional supplement company that has been accused of fraudulent marketing practices. Documents exclusively obtained by Yahoo News show that in 2015, prosecutors in the San Diego office of the California attorney general sent Harris a lengthy memorandum that argued for an investigation into Herbalife and requested resources in order to undertake such an investigation. Similar investigations into Herbalife were already taking place elsewhere."

"About three weeks after the San Diego letter was sent, Harris received the first of three donations to her campaign for the U.S. Senate from Heather Podesta, the powerful Washington lobbyist whose ex-husband Tony’s firm, then called the Podesta Group, had worked for Herbalife since 2013. Heather Podesta’s own lobbying firm, Heather Podesta and Partners, would soon be hired by Herbalife, too."

"Harris did not pursue an investigation, even as the Federal Trade Commission proceeded with an investigation of its own, which had been opened the previous March and which suggested that sufficient grounds for such scrutiny did exist. In fact, the San Diego letter had meticulously laid out those grounds, pointing out that Herbalife presented itself to the public as a lawful enterprise, but that it could nevertheless be “engaged in less obvious conduct” that potentially harmed both Herbalife distributors and Herbalife customers. Allegations of such conduct, by 2015, had become commonplace in media reports."
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next »