HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Fast Walker 52 » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 Next »

Fast Walker 52

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Southern California
Home country: USA
Current location: Indiana
Member since: Thu May 14, 2015, 06:31 AM
Number of posts: 7,723

Journal Archives

what's the best case scenario for Bernie getting the nomination, and then what are

the odds of that?

Is it more likely that he'll get in from winning the last few primaries, or that Hillary will get indicted? Or will there be something dramatic at the convention?

I still have great hopes he will pull it out somehow, but wondering what others here think.
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Tue May 31, 2016, 11:21 AM (16 replies)

Carl Bernstein-- It's devastating for Hillary Clinton "it's a time bomb that has been ticking"

https://twitter.com/NewDay/status/735816904724647936

He says he talked to several Democratic leaders recently who are horrified about what she's done to herself with the email scandal.

Will any super-delegates start to get nervous? Seriously!

Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Sat May 28, 2016, 12:55 PM (97 replies)

I'm glad the Dems have a very popular second place candidate

in case Hillary goes down, as seems increasingly likely.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/clintons-inexcusable-willful-disregard-for-the-rules/2016/05/25/0089e942-22ae-11e6-9e7f-57890b612299_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop_b

I am not gloating over this. I really wish she hadn't done this. The ONLY thing that saves her is that I don't think there was malicious intent, just arrogance. But if it can be shown there was some intent to circumvent security for the benefit of the Clinton Foundation or some such, she is rightly screwed.
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Fri May 27, 2016, 11:15 AM (19 replies)

I've stopped getting emails for donations from Bernie.

I haven't gotten one for a couple of weeks. Why is this, if he is running out of money? Or is it because he knows his campaign is basically over?

Oddly I did get an indirect request today for donations to Bernie, via Jeff Merkley, as part of an email to support their "keep it in the ground act" (which I strongly support).
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Wed May 25, 2016, 03:07 PM (10 replies)

Policy-wise, would President Hillary Clinton actually be a significant difference from Obama?

for all the sturm and drang about Hillary, wouldn't she basically be status quo to what we have now?

Or do a lot of people feel she is worse than Obama?

I'm honestly curious.
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Mon May 23, 2016, 07:16 AM (46 replies)

Vote fraud, black box voting, electoral shenanigans this primary

So I finally found someone who studied this carefully:
https://medium.com/@spencergundert/hillary-clinton-and-electoral-fraud-992ad9e080f6#.4pt8efrq8

I haven't gone over it with a fine-tooth comb, but it does indicate prima facie shenanigans.

So why hasn't this gotten more attention?
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Sat May 21, 2016, 11:35 AM (36 replies)

I know we are in the final frenzied stages of a passionate primary campaign, but

can everyone please calm down?

Hillary is not the devil. She's a standard centrist Democrat. She even has a number of positive attributes.

Please stop acting outraged about Hillary's emails and rooting for the FBI investigation.

Bernie has been a great Democrat and has revitalized the roots of the party.

Don't let a few passionate, overly zealous supporters and the media define what Bernie's campaign is about.

Ultimately what happened in Nevada is not going to change the outcome of the primary.

Both Bernie and Hillary have run really good campaigns. Neither have really gone particularly negative on each other-- certainly not as much as they could have.

The primary is not yet over but chances are high that Hillary will be the nominee.

Bernie has earned a seat at the Dem table should be allowed to influence the party platform.

The Dem party will come together at the convention.

Trump is the freaking enemy, and would be an outright disaster for the WORLD, not just the US.

In terms of basic human rights (for women, minority, LGBTQ, elderly) and the environment (clean water, clean air, climate change) both Sanders or Hillary will strongly defend them.

The GOP will not.

Let's take the opportunity of a Trump candidacy to rout the GOP, as they deserve so badly.

Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Fri May 20, 2016, 09:42 AM (41 replies)

Why is the Obama administration doing these cruel deportations?

So sick and wrong and needless.

http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2016/05/19/3779332/central-american-families-raids/

WASHINGTON D.C. — Maryora Nicole Urbina is an effusive 15-year-old in her freshman year at a Chicago, Illinois- area high school. She enjoys her science classes and dreams about becoming a pediatrician one day. But there’s something that sets Maryora apart from her classmates: She spent two months last year traveling to the United States from Honduras after a gang member tried to kill her.

When she arrived at the U.S. border, Maryora sought asylum, a form of humanitarian relief that allows certain immigrants to stay in the country permanently. But her asylum case was denied — and she may soon be deported back to the same horrific conditions from which she fled.

The Obama administration recently announced that it will begin a series of deportation raids to target Central American women and children who crossed the southern U.S. border over the past two years. Obama officials say these immigration operations are in the interest of public safety and border security.

“We stress that these operations are limited to those who were apprehended at the border after January 1, 2014, have been ordered removed by an immigration court, and have no pending appeal or pending claim for asylum or other humanitarian relief under our laws,” Sarah Rodriguez, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spokesperson, told ThinkProgress in an email.
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Thu May 19, 2016, 09:44 AM (6 replies)

New Evidence About the Dangers of Monsanto’s Roundup

https://theintercept.com/2016/05/17/new-evidence-about-the-dangers-of-monsantos-roundup/

Until recently, the fight over Roundup has mostly focused on its active ingredient, glyphosate. But mounting evidence, including one study published in February, shows it’s not only glyphosate that’s dangerous, but also chemicals listed as “inert ingredients” in some formulations of Roundup and other glyphosate-based weed killers. Though they have been in herbicides — and our environment — for decades, these chemicals have evaded scientific scrutiny and regulation in large part because the companies that make and use them have concealed their identity as trade secrets.

Now, as environmental scientists have begun to puzzle out the mysterious chemicals sold along with glyphosate, evidence that these so-called inert ingredients are harmful has begun to hit U.S. courts. In addition to Sanders and Tanner, at least four people who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after using Roundup have sued Monsanto in recent months, citing the dangers of both glyphosate and the co-formulants sold with it. As Tanner and Sanders’s complaint puts it: Monsanto “knew or should have known that Roundup is more toxic than glyphosate alone and that safety studies of Roundup, Roundup’s adjuvants and ‘inert’ ingredients” were necessary.

Research on these chemicals seems to have played a role in the stark disagreement over glyphosate’s safety that has played out on the international stage over the last year. In March 2015, using research on both glyphosate alone and the complete formulations of Roundup and other herbicides, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared glyphosate a probable human carcinogen. The IARC report noted an association between non-Hodgkin lymphoma and glyphosate, significant evidence that the chemical caused cancer in lab animals, and strong evidence that it damaged human DNA.

Meanwhile, in November the European Food Safety Authority issued a report concluding that the active ingredient in Roundup was “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans.” The discrepancy might be explained by the fact that the EFSA report included only studies looking at the effects of glyphosate alone. Another reason the agencies may have differed, according to 94 environmental health experts from around the world, is that IARC considered only independent studies, while the EFSA report included data from unpublished industry-submitted studies, which were cited with redacted footnotes.
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Tue May 17, 2016, 03:21 PM (5 replies)

There are two types of Bernie Sanders supporters

Regular Dems who strongly prefer his proposals to Hillary's and are excited about Bernie and the chance to move the Dem party in a new direction, but will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.


Disaffected liberal Dems who are often independents-- they love Bernie's progressivism and the chance to move the Dem party in a new direction. These are the types of people who often complain that both parties are the same, and no amount of arguing can ever convince them otherwise. They were never going to vote for Hillary, they seriously think she is evil. For some reason at least half of my liberal friends on FB are like this. These types of people drive me crazy.

Edited to add:

1) Importantly, I meant the people who say both parties are the same drive me crazy.

2) A third important class of Bernie supporters would be young people who just got involved in politics for the first time.

3) In no way did I mean to disrespect Bernie supporters here. What I was trying to get at was that I thought that a lot of people who support Bernie were not regular Dems and were never going to seriously consider voting for Hillary.

4) I am of the opinion that voting Dem at this point in time, no matter the candidate, is still better than letting any Republican into office.
Posted by Fast Walker 52 | Sun May 15, 2016, 06:36 AM (65 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 Next »