HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » BeyondGeography » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 48 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: NY
Member since: Tue Dec 30, 2003, 12:41 AM
Number of posts: 35,967

Journal Archives

Tucson Mayor Regina Romero endorses Elizabeth Warren for president

Tucson Mayor Regina Romero has thrown her support into the democratic presidential primary, announcing Monday that she's following the path of several Southern Arizona politicians and endorsing Elizabeth Warren for president.

“Elizabeth Warren is the fighter we need to act boldly on climate change, create economic opportunity for all, and bring big, structural change to our government,” Romero said in a prepared statement provided to the Arizona Daily Star. “She has proven herself to be a champion for women’s rights, and understands the institutional barriers that communities of color face in participating in our economy and democracy. For these reasons and many more, I’m proud to endorse Elizabeth Warren for president.”

In a press release announcing the endorsement, the Warren campaign referred to Romero as a "tireless champion for working families," "a strong advocate for environmental justice," and said she won a "historic election" as Tucson's first female and first Latina to serve as Tucson's mayor. She is one of 100 Latinx community leaders who have endorsed Warren since January, according to the release...

Posted by BeyondGeography | Mon Feb 17, 2020, 02:36 PM (3 replies)

Q: Who will be your Mike Pence? Warren: I already have a dog.

Posted by BeyondGeography | Sun Feb 9, 2020, 09:41 PM (70 replies)

Warren: This is about fighting to build the kind of America we want to see

Excellent WMUR interview from today at the link:

Posted by BeyondGeography | Sun Feb 9, 2020, 02:30 PM (0 replies)

NYT comment from Iowa precinct worker illustrates the depth of caucus count issues

This is a top reader-rated comment from
Iowa Caucus Results Riddled With Errors and Inconsistencies


I was in charge of doing the calculations in one precinct. I am not surprised at all that inconsistencies were common.

I did not go through any training; I relied on the manual, which I found straightforward, although I can imagine it could get complicated for folks who are not mathematically inclined.

I was designated to download and use the app for my precinct, and in spite of registering to receive the app the day I got the instructions on how to do it, I never received an invitation to download it. A well-intentioned local volunteer shared a spreadsheet in my county as a backup to manual calculations, except the day of the caucus as I was testing it I found it had errors. So did others and an email went out a few hours before the caucus with an updated version that avoided some of the more complicated cases. I don't know how widely the spreadsheet was shared and if everyone who received it got the corrected version.

During the caucus, the number of voters that was used to calculate viability didn't match the number of preference cards we got in the end, which was actually higher (about 2% off). One group that was counted as viable in the 1st round wouldn't have been if we had the right number.

The bottom line is that the process is not accurate, in particular in the allocation of delegates. The best you can do is follow the vote counts, for which at least there's a paper trail. Next time, the way to go is a primary, even better if voters can rank candidates.

Another caucus worker responded with the following:

Twice I added up the numbers in the First Alignment and Final Alignment columns. The totals were 199 and 190 respectively. The numbers should have been equal, according to the rules, but nine people did not realign after the First Alignment and did not participate in the Final Alignment.

This suggests that Iowa caucus attendees didn't understand what to do, or that they chose not to follow the rules.

Posted by BeyondGeography | Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:14 PM (23 replies)

EW in Iowa tonight: We are just getting started and we are built for the long haul. (full speech)

Posted by BeyondGeography | Tue Feb 4, 2020, 01:37 AM (4 replies)

Anti-Warren nemesis Tommy Christopher admires her callout/question of CJ Roberts

Was Elizabeth Warren’s Call-Out of Chief Justice John Roberts ‘Brilliant’ or a ‘Dick Move’…or a Brilliant Dick Move?

...Readers of this site know that I’ve made plenty of fair and factual criticisms of Senator Warren, but one of several areas in which she has shown near-perfect instincts is the issue of impeaching Trump. When most Democrats were still getting their shit together on impeachment, Warren was crystal clear and nearly alone in daring Republicans to acquit Trump in the face of the Mueller report, an absolute moral and political imperative.

Since them, she’s been ahead of the curve on pressuring Republicans every step of the way. She was the only candidate to accuse Trump of factoring impeachment into his decision to strike Qasem Soleimani, five days before The Wall Street Journal published a report that Trump factored impeachment into his decision to strike Qasem Soleimani.

Having observed Warren closely on this issue, the question threw me at first, because her political instincts on this issue are too good for her to have not seen that Schiff would have to defend Roberts, and there are a million different ways to have phrased that question for similar sham-exposing effect. But Warren gave a very clarifying interview this week — on SiriusXM’s Signal Boost, hosted by former Hillary Clinton senior staffers Jess McIntosh and Zerlina Maxwell — in which she spent the better part of the twenty minutes talking about impeachment in a way that demonstrated a deep understanding of the stakes involved, and of Roberts’ role in the trial.

Based on everything I know about Senator Warren, I don’t believe this question had anything to do with politics, with shaming Roberts and the Republicans in the eyes of Democratic and independent voters, with creating a viral moment that would benefit her politically. On the subject of how women are perceived and treated when they make strong moves like this, Warren is an expert. No, I believe Senator Warren’s question was directed at an audience of one, with the purpose of shocking the conscience of Chief Justice Roberts, of bringing to vivid life the consequences of his inaction. If nothing else, if Republican Senate rules strip him of every power normally accorded a presiding judge, he has the power to open his goddamn mouth.

Warren’s application of defibrillator paddles to Roberts’ soul is unlikely to succeed, and as the reactions have shown, are unlikely to help her politically, but it was a risk that she found worth taking, and I’m glad she did.

Posted by BeyondGeography | Fri Jan 31, 2020, 12:24 PM (4 replies)

Jerry West will move you

Posted by BeyondGeography | Wed Jan 29, 2020, 10:21 AM (0 replies)

Bruckner Symphony No. 4 - Celibidache

Posted by BeyondGeography | Tue Jan 28, 2020, 11:38 PM (0 replies)

Warren's allies push to include Bloomberg in upcoming debates

Progressive allies of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren have approached the DNC to lobby for an unusual cause: including billionaire Mike Bloomberg in upcoming presidential primary debates.

The move, described to POLITICO by a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, reflects the desire of liberal activists to pin down the former New York mayor, who has avoided verbal combat with his opponents by waging a self-funded campaign that plays by its own rules. But the entreaty also speaks to progressives' growing unease with Bloomberg's relative success: After spending hundreds of millions of dollars, he has vaulted into double digits in national polls and amassed a giant staff of A-level operatives.

... Adam Green, of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said he approached the DNC last month to talk about including Bloomberg in future debates. Bloomberg’s polling meets the party’s criteria for inclusion, but his refusal to raise money from outside donors — even in minuscule increments — means he can’t meet the qualifying threshold. Green proposed altering the rules so that Bloomberg would be included. “Imagine a hypothetical world where Bloomberg bought himself 30 percent and he’s the frontrunner in the polls. Would you really not think voters would want to hear what he has to say and see him get some scrutiny on the debate stage?” Green asked.

... Monica Klein, a progressive consultant in New York who is unaffiliated with a presidential campaign, cautioned against the focus on the novelty of his campaign. “As mayor, Mike Bloomberg spent years keeping Republicans in power in New York — yet most voters just know him as this bizarre billionaire who gives out iPhones like candy," she said, in response to a story last week about his lavish campaign spending...Klein thinks it’s time to engage before it’s too late. “Last election, voters and pundits alike treated Trump with kid gloves because he was seen as an unelectable amusement,” she said. “There’s a word for people who keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Posted by BeyondGeography | Tue Jan 28, 2020, 08:28 AM (3 replies)

Sanders supporters have weaponized Facebook to spread angry memes about his Democratic rivals

A Democrat in Michigan scrolled through a surge of nasty Facebook memes about Sen. Elizabeth Warren last week before fixing on one that captured his growing dislike of the candidate. It depicted her smiling face as a mask. Behind it was Hillary Clinton. Matt Walters, 64, a retired factory worker and supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), shared the image onward to eight Facebook groups and tens of thousands of potential eyeballs with a few taps on his smartphone — using a popular new mass-posting technique that allows ordinary Americans to operate with rapid-fire speed reminiscent of Russian bots and trolls in 2016.

In that small way, Walters contributed to a massive wave of hostile memes about Sanders’s Democratic rivals that both reflects the rising divisiveness in the party’s nominating contest and, in the view of social media experts, exacerbates it.

... The volume and viciousness of the memes — portraying Warren (D-Mass.) as a snake, a backstabber and a liar — reflect how Facebook identifies and rewards emotionally charged content to generate reactions from its billions of users. That serves the company’s ad-driven business model, which equates engagement with profit. But it also, in the view of experts who study Facebook’s effect on political speech, distorts democratic debate by confirming biases, sharpening divisions and elevating the glib visual logic of memes over reasoned discussion.

...The rising popularity of the tactic among Sanders supporters may help explain the scores of images bashing Sanders’s opponents that have appeared in nearly simultaneous bursts in recent weeks, pushed out by highly networked clusters of Facebook users, according to Davis’s analysis. He did not find evidence that the campaign itself was involved in this activity, focusing instead on the informal Facebook activity by supporters.

... No other Democrat’s supporters are engaged in behavior on a similar scale, which is more characteristic of the online movement galvanized by Trump. The president’s campaign aides have credited Facebook with his victory in 2016, when he poured money into advertising on the platform while also using organic posts on social media to speak directly to his followers, who responded with a torrent of posts backing him and lacerating his opponents...


Posted by BeyondGeography | Sat Jan 25, 2020, 09:40 PM (34 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 48 Next »