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

pnwmom

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Jan 30, 2006, 06:07 PM
Number of posts: 103,148

Journal Archives

In Wyoming Bernie has failed to meet 538's delegate target; Hillary has exceeded hers.

538 has calculated delegate targets for each state, based on demographics. The target delegate count is how many delegates each candidate would have to obtain to maintain their relative position in the race. Candidates must exceed their targets to improve their relative position.

Bernie needed to do better than his target, which was 9. Instead he got 7.

Hillary needed 5 delegates to meet her target. She also got 7.

So they tied -- and this isn't good enough for Bernie.

(This doesn't count the super delegates, who have endorsed Hillary.)

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/democrats/

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/primaries/2016-04-09

I guess Hillary doesn't have to worry about Brooklyn. The new largely Russian residents

don't much care for Bernie -- or socialism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/09/nyregion/bernie-sanders-back-in-the-old-neighborhood-to-make-his-case.html?action=click&contentCollection=Europe&module=Trending&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article

Her unit, where she has lived for three years, is two floors above Apartment 2C, where Mr. Sanders grew up. When he lived there, the area was predominantly Jewish. Today, the building’s buzzer panel for its 85 units could be mistaken for the intercom of an apartment building in Russia.

Asked what she thought of him, Ms. Lazareva laughed with delight. “Oh, I hate him!” she said.

Ms. Lazareva, who hails from Moscow, recalled waiting in line for three hours each morning to get a jug of milk as a little girl living under communism. “If you lived under socialists, you’d hate them too,” she said. “They make everyone poor.”

SNIP

Inside the Dokvtovich family’s apartment a few days before Mr. Sanders’s visit, Oleg, 9, and Sergei, 7, ran around the house in their superhero underwear. Oleg was impressed that a presidential candidate grew up in his apartment building. But standing in the kitchen, holding his 9-month-old sister, Elizabeth, he said he had no plans to follow suit: too much stress.

His mother, Oxana, 38, interjected. Her boys, she said, were born in Russia, and thus were out of the running. Only Elizabeth had a shot at the White House.

“Yes!” said Oleg, squeezing the baby in his arms. She would be a great president, he said, “because she’s a girl!”

Here is the "major conference" Bernie announced he'd scored an invite to,

along with 28 other attendees. Twenty three are listed as "participants," but he's not among them. He's one of the 6 in a second list called "other participants."

The agenda does not show him having any of the speaker spots.

The Pope will not be attending.

http://www.pass.va/content/dam/scienzesociali/booklet/centesimus_annus.pdf

A clueless Vatican chancellor didn't mean to step into US politics and

still doesn't understand why inviting Bernie to this small, dry academic gathering would be a problem.

OTOH, the British President of the Academy understands the politics much better and this is why she feels used.

http://ncronline.org/news/politics/bernie-sanders-set-attend-vatican-conference-john-paul-ii-encyclical

The chancellor told CNN that Sanders' attendance "does not signify any support for the campaign," and that the academy sought to establish a dialogue between North and South America by inviting a U.S. politician.

"I don't know what is the problem," he told NCR. "We have two presidents from Latin America, and we don't have a problem. And we have a problem because we invited one candidate to the White House of your country? It's a little impossible to understand."

SNIP

At least one conference attendee who spoke on background said they anticipated a "generic academic conference" but are now "queasy" how Sanders' presence, and the political overtones accompanying him, might distort a more academic reflection on the interrelationships between markets and morality.

"It's just tricky to navigate those issues, and I don't know that a politician -- any politician, not Sanders in particular -- is well equipped to navigate them in a subtle and nuanced way," the attendee said.

Sanchez told NCR that "the real consideration here is not the question of the political effect," but rather to follow the task of the academy, to give deep consideration of social and political realities in light of the magisterium of the pope.

Researchers: Tiger mom's wrong about her theory that character/culture determine success

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/opinion/sunday/how-not-to-explain-success.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

The theory:

DO you remember the controversy two years ago, when the Yale law professors Amy Chua (author of “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”) and Jed Rubenfeld published “The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America”?

We sure do. As psychologists, we found the book intriguing, because its topic — why some people succeed and others don’t — has long been a basic research question in social science, and its authors were advancing a novel argument. They contended that certain ethnic and religious minority groups (among them, Cubans, Jews and Indians) had achieved disproportionate success in America because their individual members possessed a combination of three specific traits: a belief that their group was inherently superior to others; a sense of personal insecurity; and a high degree of impulse control.


What the research showed:

In this case, our studies affirmed that a person’s intelligence and socioeconomic background were the most powerful factors in explaining his or her success, and that the triple package was not — even when we carefully measured every element of it and considered all of the factors simultaneously.

Professors Chua and Rubenfeld created a provocative theory, and they spun around it an intricate web of circumstantial evidence, but it did not stand up to direct empirical tests. Our conclusion regarding “The Triple Package” is expressed by the saying, “What is new is not correct, and what is correct is not new.”

How come Bernie Sanders never said John Kerry was unqualified to be President?

Kerry voted for the IWR, and he's voted for trade agreements, and he used super pacs.

Or Biden, when he ran in 2008? Biden also voted for the IWR, has supported Trade agreements and used super pacs.

So what's different about Hillary, other than the fact that women are never qualified enough to suit some men?

And no, the answer is NOT some version of "Hillary said it first." Hillary REFUSED to say Bernie was unqualified, despite being pressed three times by a reporter to say it.


From Mediaite:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/bernie-lied-hillary-clinton-actually-refused-to-call-him-unqualified-three-times/

Mediaite: Bernie lied! Hillary actually refused to call him unqualified – three times.

Democratic presidential candidate and independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has initiated a mass fainting spell among the political media by rattling off a list of reasons why he considers rival candidate and current frontrunner Hillary Clinton “not qualified to be president.” The attack has also galvanized Hillary’s supporters, who have responded with the trending hashtag #HillarySoQualified. Unlike a lot of pundits, I’m not that bothered by the charge, I love a smash-mouth campaign, and if it is indeed to be on like Donkey Kong, Hillary Clinton can handle herself.

What is a problem, though, is that Bernie Sanders launched his attack by first telling a big, fat, insane lie about Hillary. Here’s the full context of Bernie’s remarks, but pay close attention to the first part:

As Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon noted on Twitter, Hillary never said that, but it’s actually worse than that. Hillary Clinton not only never said that, she actually was aggressively pressed to say that exact thing, three different times in a row, and like some kind of reverse-Apostle Peter, refused each time:

Now, there are actually some Sanders supporters pointing out, with a straight face, that she also didn’t say he is qualified, or that what she did say wasn’t exactly a compliment, but I’ve got news for you guys: Hillary Clinton is Bernie’s political opponent, it is not her job to compliment him. It also doesn’t change the fact that she did not say what he directly quoted her as saying.



Has a Senator from a large, diverse state ever gone on to become Secretary of State?

Or a Senator from any state? Has any Senator gone on to become Secretary of State?

And then been deemed "unqualified" by a primary opponent?

Of course it's only a coincidence that the person whose qualifications are denigrated is a woman.



And no, Bernie, she didn't say it first. Listen to the video. She said you WERE qualified. But you couldn't wait to go on the attack.

So what's the deal with the Bernie campaign's $10.5 million accounting discrepancy?

The discrepancy in numbers that the FEC is asking him to explain?

$10.5 is kind of a big number to mess up on.

Is there some explanation that he's put out there somewhere? And, no, this has nothing to do with Act Blue. That's on another line of the forms.



http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/542/201603300300040542/201603300300040542.pdf

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463
SUSAN JACKSON, TREASURER BERNIE 2016
PO BOX 905
BURLINGTON, VT 05402
IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: C00577130
REFERENCE: JULY QUARTERLY REPORT (04/01/2015 - 06/30/2015)

Dear Treasurer:
RQ-2
March 30, 2016
Response Due Date 05/04/2016

This letter is prompted by the Commission's preliminary review of the report referenced above. This notice requests information essential to full public disclosure of your federal election campaign finances. Failure to adequately respond by the response date noted above could result in an audit or enforcement action. Additional information is needed for the following 1 item(s):

- Line 17(a)(i) of the Detailed Summary Page of your report discloses a total of $3,279,505.25in contributions from individuals. The sum of the entries itemized on Schedule A-P, however, indicates the total to be $13,745,417.64. These amounts should be the same. Please amend your report to clarify the discrepancy. (11 CFR § 104.3(a) and (b))

Good news for WI Dems: more than 7/10 voters say they're excited or optimistic about BOTH Dems.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/both-frontrunners-are-playing-defense-in-tuesdays-wisconsin-primary/2016/04/04/b30999de-fac0-11e5-80e4-c381214de1a3_story.html

More than 7 in 10 Democrats said they are “excited” or at least “optimistic” about Clinton and Sanders alike. No Republican candidate got such widespread positive reviews: The best was for Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.), about whom 6 in 10 Wisconsin voters said they were excited or optimistic.

Barely 4 in 10 were excited about billionaire Donald Trump.

2 Key differences between Wisconsin and New York

which explain why Bernie's expected win today is likely to have little impact in NY.

NY has three times as many black voters as in Wisconsin, and Wisconsin exit polls show -- once again -- Hillary's support is very strong among African American voters.

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/RHI125214/00,36,55

The Wisconsin primary is open to anyone, including Independents. To vote in the NY primary, new voters had to register a month in advance (no same-day registration). And previously registered voters had to be registered Democrat as of October 2015. So there will be no last minute switch from Independents to Democrats.

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