HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » yallerdawg » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

yallerdawg

Profile Information

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

Journal Archives

Didn't presidential candidate Bernie Sanders promise this?

Sanders said, "All the way to Philadelphia!"

He didn't concede.

He didn't congratulate his opponent for her historic primary victory.

He didn't suspend his candidacy.

He didn't release his delegates.

He didn't stop the roll call of every state.

What he did was keep campaigning, rallying, criticizing, taking contributions, asking for contributions.

Why are we so surprised and dismayed that his supporters and delegates act up at the Democratic Convention?

This is what he promised!

Nancy Pelosi says white men don't like Clinton because of guns, because of gays, and because of God

First, identify the problem!

Source: The Week, Bonnie Kristian

Republican Donald Trump leads Democrat Hillary Clinton 56 percent to 25 percent among white men, according to a recent survey — and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) believes she knows why.

"So many times, white — non-college-educated — white males have voted Republican," she said in an interview with PBS on Tuesday. "They voted against their own economic interests because of guns, because of gays, and because of God, the three G's — God being the woman's right to choose."

Pelosi advised Clinton to attract more white male voters to her campaign "with an economic agenda to create jobs" because, for this demographic, "it's about the economy."

A New York Times report last week suggested the Clinton camp is already worried about its deficit with white men and picked Sen. Tim Kaine for the VP slot in an effort to address that problem.

http://theweek.com/speedreads/639195/nancy-pelosi-says-white-men-dont-like-clinton-because-guns-because-gays-because-god

George Soros rises again

Fight fire with fire...until we end Citizens United!

The billionaire, who had dialed back his giving, has committed more than $25 million to supporting Hillary Clinton and other Democratic candidates and causes.

Source: Politico, by Kenneth P. Vogel

Soros has donated or committed more than $25 million to boost Hillary Clinton and other Democratic candidates and causes, according to Federal Election Commission records and interviews with his associates and Democratic fundraising operatives. And some of his associates say they expect Soros, who amassed a fortune estimated at $24.9 billion through risky currency trades, to give even more as Election Day nears.

To be sure, other elite liberal donors are also stroking big checks, including San Francisco environmentalist Tom Steyer (who has donated $31 million in 2016, albeit almost entirely to a super PAC he controls), New York hedge funder Don Sussman ($13.2 million to various campaigns and committees) and media moguls Haim Saban and Fred Eychaner ($11.1 million each). But few have the bellwether effect of Soros.

The cumulative effect of the mobilization of the left’s richest benefactors has helped Clinton’s campaign and its allied outside groups mount a massive financial advantage over committees backing Trump, who is regarded with suspicion at best by the GOP donor class. That’s allowed Clinton and her allies to build a humming campaign machine that dwarfs Trump’s.

Soros had dialed back after 2004.

Instead, he focused his philanthropic attention on his international foundations, which have donated more than $13 billion over the past three decades to non-profits that aim to defend human rights, shape the democratic process in Eastern Europe and expand access to healthcare and education in the U.S. and around the world.

Much more at: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/george-soros-democratic-convention-226267

CNN's David Gregory on Trump

Hillary Clinton clinched a historic nomination. So why does her husband get the front page photo?

Fusion, by Kelsey McKinney

Last night, Hillary Rodham Clinton made American history by becoming the first woman nominated by a major political party for president of the United States. In celebration and recognition of this great achievement, major newspapers around the world splashed their front pages with big banner headlines—and then placed a giant photo of her husband underneath.

















http://fusion.net/story/330575/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-newspaper-covers/

Why ‘woman’ isn’t Hillary Clinton’s trump card

Source: The Conversation, by Cecilia Hyunjung Mo

According to some polls, parents can already tell their daughters that people will vote for a female president, and gender should not factor into Secretary Clinton’s candidacy for the highest office in this country. While America has not ever had a woman president, polls have documented that the majority of Americans have been ready to vote for a woman for president for several decades.

It’s also possible that that many voters are not even aware of their gender bias. I call such individuals “aversive sexists” – individuals who avoid acting in a sexist manner and genuinely regard themselves as gender-equitable. And yet, they unintentionally possess negative feelings and beliefs about women as leaders. In other words, the sexist attitudes of aversive sexists are buried in their subconscious.

Most of us are aversive sexists to some degree because the implicit associations we possess in our subconscious develop over the course of a lifetime beginning at an early age. Exposure to direct and indirect messages from your family, friends, the media, schools, books and society at large affect these associations. Because of the prominence of male leaders in powerful roles, perceptions that social roles differ for men and women, traditional social roles for men versus women, and pervasive gender stereotypes, if you do not slow down and think about a decision at hand carefully, gender bias can influence your decision.

Examples of women in power can also go a long way. It will help when parents can actually point to a real life example of a female U.S. president when they tell their daughter “you can be anything you want to be, even president of the United States.” And not simply because children benefit from role models. Given that exposure is an important determinant of implicit associations, hidden bias will increasingly become an artifact of the past if there are simply more images of women in positions of leadership.

Much more at: http://theconversation.com/why-woman-isnt-hillary-clintons-trump-card-60498

Mass Killings May Have Created Contagion, Feeding on Itself

It's not always Islam! That's Trump and the 'other team'!

Source: New York Times, by Benedict Carey

The horrifying rash of massacres during this violent summer suggests that public, widely covered rampage killings have led to a kind of contagion, prompting a small number of people with strong personal grievances and scant political ideology to mine previous attacks for both methods and potential targets to express their lethal anger and despair.

Some of the attacks are ideological, some are not and some fall into a gray area. But the highly publicized attacks in a nightclub and restaurants in Paris, at airports in Brussels and Istanbul, and in public spaces in Mumbai may be providing troubled people already contemplating violence a spur to act, experts said, in the same way that many school shootings and other violent rampages follow close on the heels of similar incidents in the news.

The vast majority of people who take their lives kill only themselves, leaving no evidence that they wanted to kill others. But experts suspect that murder-suicides are subject to contagion effects from high-profile cases, though the numbers are too small to establish that statistically. Only about 1 to 2 percent of murder-suicides target random people outside immediate family or friends, said Matthew Nock, a psychologist at Harvard.

“These events seem more homicide related, with suicide as part of the process, including suicide by police,” Dr. Nock said. “But you can see, with a confluence of factors, including readily available high-capacity firearms, continuous media reporting of mass killings and terror attacks, that there’s certainly fuel for contagion.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/science/mass-killings-contagion-copycat.html?hpw&rref=science&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region®ion=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&_r=0

Thank You, Hillary Haters, Thank You

From our friend at BNR, Peter Daou!

Hillary is living proof that love and kindness are stronger than hate and division.

Witnessing that principle in action means everything to me; it gives me hope. I thank you for giving Hillary the opportunity to show my kids that positive energy triumphs over negative. There are few greater lessons in life.

I watch my former boss endure, and endure, and endure. And I watch you stew, and stew, and stew.

I watch you bash her, screech at her, slime and smear her. She just smiles, shrugs it off, and moves forward. Doing, while you’re yelling. Accomplishing, while you’re screaming. Living, while your rage eats you alive.

You get louder, angrier — and still she’s calm. Still she laughs and smiles.

That destroys you.

The rest at: http://bluenationreview.com/thank-you-hillary-haters/

Is Trump right that the TPP will destroy millions of jobs and cede US sovereignty?

"A well-informed electorate is a prerequisite for democracy."

Source: The Conversation, by Greg Wright - Assistant Professor of Economics, University of California, Merced and Emily J. Blanchard - Associate Professor, Dartmouth College

Both of Trump’s claims seem overblown.

First, while there is quite a bit of uncertainty associated with the TPP projections, it is difficult to support the claim that millions of U.S. jobs will be lost. The TPP will increase competition among the signatories in economic areas (for instance, finance and technology) in which the United States is a dominant player – and that should be on the whole a good thing for the U.S.

The simple truth is that trade agreements change the composition of jobs in the economy. Some workers will be happier with their new jobs, and others will not. Whatever the job losses from the TPP, a roughly equal number will be created.

Second, in theory the ISDS could be a disaster for governments that seek to enact or enforce laws and regulations that they believe are in the public interest but conflict with corporate interests. However, the TPP seemingly addresses these concerns, and the White House has detailed the many specific ways in which the TPP will go beyond previous agreements in order to protect against frivolous claims and threats to signatories’ sovereignty.

Claims about the impact of trade, and especially trade agreements, will continue to animate the ongoing presidential campaign. Given the importance of the topic, it is essential that claims be weighed against the evidence and that voters understand what trade can and cannot do.

Much more at: http://theconversation.com/is-trump-right-that-the-tpp-will-destroy-millions-of-jobs-and-cede-us-sovereignty-62085

What the Blue State Democrats do for the Red State Democrats!

Source: al.com, by Brit Blalock

A female presidential candidate offers encouragement to little girls with big dreams

Back in 2008, I graduated from college and moved into my first "grown up" apartment with a few friends. The complex we settled on was in a suburb just south of Birmingham and not far from the university we'd attended. That year, my roommate Caroline and I followed the presidential election very closely—holding debate watching parties, making T-shirts and doing our very best to stay informed. The financial crisis had begun, and we were desperate to be involved in its resolution as brand-new members of the American workforce.

On the night that Barack Obama won the presidency, we heard loud cheering coming from outside in the parking lot. We poked our heads out the door of our first floor unit and realized that a large group of our black neighbors had started celebrating the victory in the central area of the complex. We were desperate to join in on the festivities, feeling like it had been a true triumph for the country.

As we walked out of our apartment and into the open space, I felt a distinct communal pause from our neighbors. In that pause, I sensed a horrible weight. I felt the fear that some of them might have had—that maybe these two white women were coming to quiet them or to complain about the noise. I didn't know many of them well; I'd mostly just greeted them in passing throughout my handful of months living in the complex. I stopped momentarily to consider if joining in with their revelry was appropriate. I was worried that my presence could be viewed as intrusive. But I thought of my own personal joy at the outcome of the election, and I couldn't help but step forward into the gathering with arms held high and voice raised in jubilation.

The group took Caroline and I in both graciously and enthusiastically. Although we couldn't comprehend what that win felt like as black Americans, we understood the weight of the moment in history, and we were one in spirit with their excitement. I think about that night in November often. I consider how fortunate I was to have lived in that very instant and to have been a part of such joy with near strangers.

Why have I written to tell you this story today? Because, like many women in this country, I spent a girlhood dreaming of becoming the president of the United States. When people asked me what I wanted to be "when I grew up," the answer came easily. I dreamed of naive but heartfelt ways that I could help people and make America a better place for everyone. My parents fostered these aspirations and never insinuated that future obstacles would be insurmountable.

Somewhere along the line of my adolescence, though, I stopped believing. I looked at how difficult it was for women around me to rise to the top—my talented mother included—and I felt deeply discouraged. Even though enormous advances in equality had been made, it seemed like the odds were still stacked against me and the other women I knew and loved.

Now the possibility of having a female president is real. Very real. And in my opinion, she's also the most prepared person to lead our nation, regardless of her sex/gender. Let me be clear by saying that I don't think people should vote for Hillary just because she's a woman, nor am I saying the election of the first black American and the election of the first female American are the same experience.

What I am saying is this: If I am fortunate enough to witness the day that Hillary Clinton is victorious, I will once again run into the streets with my hands in the air. I will cheer and likely weep. And I will feel, once again, like this country has been made better.

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/07/a_female_presidential_candidat.html#incart_most-comments

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »