HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » yallerdawg » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 Next »

yallerdawg

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Fri Apr 4, 2014, 04:21 PM
Number of posts: 16,104

Journal Archives

Working people of America!

Working People of the AFL-CIO Endorse Hillary Clinton for President

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said:

Hillary Clinton is a proven leader who shares our values. Throughout the campaign, she has demonstrated a strong commitment to the issues that matter to working people, and our members have taken notice. The activism of working people has already been a major force in this election and is now poised to elect Hillary Clinton and move America forward.

Sen. Bernie Sanders has brought an important voice to this election and has elevated critical issues and strengthened the foundation of our movement. His impact on American politics cannot be overstated.

We are ready to fight hard to restore faith in America and improve the lives of all working people. Hillary Clinton has proven herself as a champion of the labor movement, and we will be the driving force to elect her president of the United States.


http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Working-People-of-the-AFL-CIO-Endorse-Hillary-Clinton-for-President

Warren Is Top V.P. Pick for Clinton Supporters, Gingrich for Trump

From: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-15/national-poll-part-2-vps

More than a third of likely voters backing Democrat Hillary Clinton in the latest Bloomberg Politics national poll say she should pick Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a darling of the party’s liberal wing, as her running mate.

*****

Warren received support from 35 percent of Clinton’s supporters in the poll. Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro are the only two other Democratic names to break into double-digits among six tested.

*****

Men and women look at the question differently, and not in a way that might be expected, the poll shows. A majority of men, 55 percent, say the nation is ready to elect two women to the nation’s top jobs. It’s women who are skeptical, with a majority of 59 percent saying that the nation isn’t ready.



For the record - President Obama on the Tragic Shooting in Orlando

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/06/12/president-obama-tragic-shooting-orlando?utm_medium=email&utm_content=email609-text2&utm_campaign=orlando

*****

This is an especially heartbreaking day for all our friends -- our fellow Americans -- who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. The shooter targeted a nightclub where people came together to be with friends, to dance and to sing, and to live. The place where they were attacked is more than a nightclub -- it is a place of solidarity and empowerment where people have come together to raise awareness, to speak their minds, and to advocate for their civil rights.

So this is a sobering reminder that attacks on any American -- regardless of race, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation -- is an attack on all of us and on the fundamental values of equality and dignity that define us as a country. And no act of hate or terror will ever change who we are or the values that make us Americans.

Today marks the most deadly shooting in American history. The shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle. This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub. And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.

In the coming hours and days, we’ll learn about the victims of this tragedy. Their names. Their faces. Who they were. The joy that they brought to families and to friends, and the difference that they made in this world. Say a prayer for them and say a prayer for their families -- that God give them the strength to bear the unbearable. And that He give us all the strength to be there for them, and the strength and courage to change. We need to demonstrate that we are defined more -- as a country -- by the way they lived their lives than by the hate of the man who took them from us.

As we go together, we will draw inspiration from heroic and selfless acts -- friends who helped friends, took care of each other and saved lives. In the face of hate and violence, we will love one another. We will not give in to fear or turn against each other. Instead, we will stand united, as Americans, to protect our people, and defend our nation, and to take action against those who threaten us.

*****

More than 900,000 Alabamians live in poverty

al.com

Alabama, the heart of Red State America!

The 2016 Data Sheet reveals that 19.2 percent of Alabamians, or more than 900,000 people, live below the federal poverty line. Alabama’s poverty rate is higher than the national average of 15.5 percent.

Alabama is the fourth poorest state in the U.S., and 19.2 percent of Alabamians live below the federal poverty line, a noticeably larger percentage than the national average of 15.5 percent. The federal poverty line is $24,300 for a family of four.

19 of Alabama’s 67 counties have a poverty rate higher than 25 percent.

Alabama has the fourth highest rate of child poverty in the country, and more than 300,000 Alabama children live in poverty. This is especially true among minorities, as African American children are twice as likely to live in poverty as white children, and Hispanic or Latino children are three times more likely to live in poverty as white children.

More - and 2016 Data Sheet - at: http://alabamapossible.org/2016/06/13/more-than-900000-alabamians-live-in-poverty/


American democracy is hurtling toward an apocalyptic showdown about legitimacy

From an opinion piece by David Faris, The Week.

While the gist of this article reflects on the "anti-system" Republican Party, we have sideshow carnival barkers in our Big Tent who loudly proclaim the de-legitimization of Democratic Party political power as "rigged" and "corrupt."

It wasn't always this way. Even while seeing their party captured by obstructionist ideologues, Republican voters continued to forward reasonable-seeming candidates as their presidential nominees. John McCain and Mitt Romney, despite being force-marched rightward by their own voters, were longstanding public servants, and even the manifestly incapable George W. Bush was a two-term governor with a narrow streak of tolerance that he maintained while his party went nativist. The willingness to place enormous power in the hands of Donald Trump, a hateful political neophyte with no grasp of policy and an unprecedented disregard for the norms of democracy, signals a new phase in the Republican Party's descent into madness.

Political scientists actually have a name for what the GOP has become: an anti-system party. The term was coined to describe parties — largely fascists on the right and communists on the left — that participated in European parliamentary democracies in order to annihilate them after attaining power.

Why do we have such disdain for the American political system - which is based on democratic principles - and who benefits from this institutional contempt?

"Little known in America, the Italian political scientist Giovanni Sartori's seminal 1976 book, Parties and Party Systems, is still considered the best guide to understanding the dynamics of multiparty politics. In it he defined an anti-system party as one that seeks "not just to change the government, but the very system of government itself."

Sartori's theory has two dimensions. The first is ideological — the party's stance vis-à-vis democracy. But we must also consider a party in terms of "relational anti-systemness" — the ideological distance between the party and other political actors in the system. As Sartori argued, "An anti-system opposition abides by a belief system that does not share the values of the political order within which it operates." A party, therefore, could still support democracy but careen so far ideologically from the other parties that it could be considered anti-system. Such anti-system parties are dangerous because of what Sartori called their "delegitimizing" impact on the system as a whole, which can be seen very clearly in the American public's sharp decline in trust and approval of our political institutions during the Obama presidency.

As we hear the 'demands' of factions within the Democratic Party insisting that certain policies and platforms be adopted by the winning majority - in the face of the rejection by the primary voter - we are again confronted with a portion of our Big Tent stridently demanding that the system was designed to preclude a fair outcome.

"Only the ignorant and corrupted would support that victorious candidate," they say. That even though the Party has spoken, those votes don't indicate a legitimate win.

In conclusion, replace GOP and Republican with Democratic Party and see if it fits.

If one acknowledges that consensus and compromise ought to be baked into American democracy, then the contemporary GOP — or at least a large contingent of it — is an anti-system party. So many members of the GOP do not believe in the consensus norms and patterns of cooperative behavior that structure the system that they have brought national governance itself to a calamitous halt. Even Republican voters increasingly prefer to elect politicians who refuse to entertain accommodation.

Read it at: http://theweek.com/articles/627994/american-democracy-hurtling-toward-apocalyptic-showdown-about-legitimacy

Why Hillary Clinton really might tap Elizabeth Warren for VP

A steady drumbeat of inevitability?

The Week, Paul Waldman

*****

For a long time, those in the know would tell you that as much as liberal Democrats would love to have Warren on the ticket in November, it just wasn't in the cards (I made the argument myself). The cautious Clinton wouldn't risk an all-female ticket, the two don't have much of a personal relationship, and Warren doesn't have foreign policy or national security experience, among other reasons. But the clamor for Warren is rising, and it's still possible Clinton just might pick her.

The truth is that in some liberal circles, Warren never ceased to be anything but the first choice for vice president — once it was clear she wasn't running for the top job herself. There are a substantial number of Democrats who absolutely worship Warren, not just for her policy positions (there are plenty of other Democrats who share them) or even for her effectiveness in actually getting some things done on finance issues (she's responsible for the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), but mostly because of her effectiveness as an advocate for liberal causes. Warren has a folksy charisma that few politicians can match; on TV she comes across as friendly, smart, and cheerful all at the same time. She has an ability to present complex ideas in understandable ways, connect policy questions to people's actual lives, and infuse dry issues with emotion and passion.

Which may be why Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is apparently pushing for Clinton to name Warren to the ticket. And depending on how you look at it, Warren is either a skillful manager of the media, or a press darling; either way, she gets plenty of attention when she wants it, and it's usually positive.

*****

Even if it's not critical that Clinton take concrete steps to win over Bernie Sanders' supporters (despite what some of the more vocal ones are saying now, the overwhelming majority will be with her), there's little doubt that naming Warren as her running mate would make most Democrats beside themselves with glee. She's one of the most effective advocates for progressive ideas in politics today, and she would make a historic campaign even more so, even if we have no idea whether an all-female ticket would lose additional votes because of sexism over and above what would be lost by having Clinton as the nominee.

http://theweek.com/articles/629083/why-hillary-clinton-really-might-tap-elizabeth-warren-vp

Thanks To Elizabeth Warren, Rachel Maddow Beats Every Show On Fox News

The Democratic nominee needs the youth vote? Here is one answer...

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-MA) endorsement of Hillary Clinton made Rachel Maddow the number one show on cable news with viewers age 25-54.

Politicus, Jason Easley

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) endorsement of Hillary Clinton made Rachel Maddow the number one show on cable news with viewers age 25-54.

Maddow’s interview with Warren drew 448,000 viewers age 25-54, which was 28,000 more viewers than ratings king Bill O’Reilly. In fact, Maddow beat every show on Fox News that aired from 4-11 PM ET. The Rachel Maddow Show came within 233,000 viewers of being the most watched overall show at 9 PM. Rachel Maddow finished second to Megyn Kelly’s The Kelly File on Fox News, but she more than doubled CNN’s viewership for the 9 PM hour.

The Maddow/Warren interview showed that Sen. Warren is a legitimate political star who can bring eyeballs to television screens and that The Rachel Maddow Show is the only primetime program on cable news that is capable of challenging Fox News for the ratings crown.

Donald Trump’s head will probably explode when he sees the ratings that Warren can draw. Sen. Warren has already gotten under Trump’s thin skin, and the idea that Warren may be as big or a bigger draw than Trump will likely inspire a new Twitter tirade shortly.

Warren’s performance on Maddow did nothing to slow the speculation that she could potentially be chosen to be Hillary Clinton’s running mate. If anything, the ratings for The Rachel Maddow Show interview may add fuel to the Clinton/Warren 2016 fire.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/06/10/elizabeth-warren-rachel-maddow-beats-show-fox-news.html


Elizabeth Warren Just Gave the BEST EVER Endorsement of Hillary

http://bluenationreview.com/warren-just-gave-the-best-ever-endorsement-of-hillary/

What she said!

"Hillary Clinton won. And she won because she’s a fighter, she’s out there, she’s tough. And I think this is what we need. Look at who she is: For 25 years, she’s been taking the incoming. The right wing has thrown everything they possibly can at her. And what does she do? A lot of people would just hang up their spurs, say you know, I’ve had enough of this. And she doesn’t. What she’s done is she gets back up and she gets back in the fight. As a Democrat, one of the things that frustrates me the most is there are a lot of times we don’t get in the fight. …You ought to be willing to throw a punch. And there are a lot of things that people say about Hillary Clinton. But nobody says that she doesn’t know how to throw a punch."

Warren: I'm ready to be commander in chief

Be still my heart!

Source: Politico, Cristiano Lima

Appearing on "The Rachel Maddow Show," Warren was pointedly asked about the mounting speculation over whether Clinton would choose her as her running mate. Warren said she hadn't spoken with Clinton about the job.

Maddow went a step further, however, asking the Massachusetts senator if she felt she'd be capable of stepping in to fill in the role of commander in chief.

"If you were asked to be Secretary Clinton's running mate, do you believe you could do it? And by that I mean the most important job of being a vice president is to be ready to be president if, God forbid, something happened to the commander in chief. I know you don't want the job, but do you believe you would be capable of stepping into that job and doing that job if you were ever called to do it?" Maddow asked.

"Yes, I do," Warren confidently replied.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/elizabeth-warren-commander-in-chief-224165



Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 Next »