srobertss
srobertss's JournalI'm so happy to be wrong, plus two questions about voting rules and legislation
It’s been almost a year since I disengaged after my melodramatic disappointment in the primaries. I was so discouraged that Bernie didn’t make it and now I’m laughing at myself because I love our new president. I think he’s the perfect president for these insane times. I love his wife, his grandchildren, his bomber jacket, his dogs, and when they get a cat, I will love their cat too. I think he’s doing a wonderful job of threading the crazy needle of Washington politics and restoring our position globally. I still prefer Bernie’s politics, but he would have made too much of a target for the GQP.
Anyway, I think I have post trump stress syndrome, because I’m already fretting about 2024. I wondered what it would take to change the rules Congress put in place in 1876 for presidential elections. Instead of throwing the decision to state legislatures in case they couldn’t certify their vote, why not just tally whatever votes are certified and let the popular vote decide. That would have short circuited the shenanigans we saw in January. Would ending the filibuster allow this Congress to change the rules? Has anyone read about whether there is an effort to revamp these rules? It just feels like a failed coup waiting to be tried again.
Also, I read somewhere that the Senate could decide to eliminate the filibuster on just legislation that deals with the 15th amendment, specifically the bill that is being considered to preserve voting rights. That bill would also short circuit a lot of the legislation that is coming at the state level from the GQP. But I can’t remember where I read this now. Does anyone have information on the validity of this idea? I wrote to my senators to support the elimination of the filibuster for this type of legislation, thinking they might be able to move Manchin et al more easily up this hill, rather than eliminating the filibuster altogether. But I’m not even sure this is a legitimate idea.
I'm full of grief for their future
For a brief moment when Bernie was the front runner, I thought maybe we will manage to steer the Titanic away from the iceberg (not a great analogy for global warming). Then came South Carolina and my heart fell. I have had to be very careful about my exposure to the news, because I am so disappointed, so full of grief. Bernie’s climate plan offers hope. He won majorities with under 40 voters. Why is that? Maybe because they know what they will be left with because of “incremental change”? I’m a boomer. I only have a few years left. But these young people, I am full of grief for their futures. I have a really hard time being tolerant of the Bernie bro jokes because of this. How is it so easy to dismiss the concerns of the coming generation? Doesn’t this pandemic show how fragile this reality is? Of course I will vote for the Democratic nominee. Two things: DACA and judges. But I am full of grief for their future.
Navajos, Apaches Working to Deny Trump Electoral College Victory
This was posted on Daily Kos. I have contributed. It seems like a very strategic effort with small contributions yielding big results.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/11/7/1897855/-Navajos-Apaches-Working-to-Deny-Trump-Electoral-College-Victory
Native American organizers are spreading out through the sprawling Navajo and Apache Reservations of Arizona to find the votes needed to thwart President Trump’s Electoral College hopes and return the U.S. Senate to Democratic control.
The Navajo Reservation is the size of West Virginia and the two major Apache Reservations have an area the size of Connecticut. Though hard to reach, their population of approximately 200,000 in Arizona can provide the votes needed to swing Arizona’s crucial 11 electoral votes to the Democratic candidate. Trump has no path to victory if he loses Arizona. Also, Mark Kelly, former astronaut and husband of former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, will be elected to the U.S. Senate with a strong Reservation vote.
With the help of 1,900 individual small donors from throughout the U.S., organizers are now on the ground in Tuba City and Window Rock on the Navajo Reservation and Whiteriver and Cibecue in Apache country. Rollouts this year will bring additional Native organizers to the Navajo communities of Chinle and Kayenta.
Early in 2020, organizers will be added to Cameron, Dilkon, Pinon and the Four Corners region on the Navajo Reservation and an additional campaign worker on the San Carlos Apache Reservation.
Participation in U.S. elections is relatively new to Arizona Native Americans. Though the 14th Amendment after the Civil War made everyone born in the U.S. a citizen, Arizona conservatives denied Natives the right to vote by telling them, “You are not people.”
That blatantly racist view was overturned when Natives returning from World War II service sued. Sen. Tom Udall’s grandfather, an Arizona Supreme Court judge, ruled that Natives could vote. But it is often still a struggle for Natives to vote. Some, living on the land as much as 40 miles from a paved road, have no convenient way to register or vote. Others face language barriers and other hurdles to getting their votes counted.
However, Native communities in Arizona vote as much as 98% in favor of Democrats.
Could you please help us get this job done. Small contributions are very helpful.
https://secure.actblue.com/donate/navajoncof#
Arizona is widely believed to be trending blue, largely because Maricopa County (Phoenix) is polling Democratic. Pima County (Tucson) has long been a Democratic stronghold. So the work remaining to do is to overcome the Republican advantage in a few rural towns like Prescott and Kingman. The Navajos and Apaches have enough votes to do that, especially if they are registered and organized.
We have raised enough grassroots money to fund the program through March 2020, and are now working on $52,800 to fund the program for April, May and June 2020. Thank you for your help.
In a prelude of what is to come, Navajos won an important election in San Juan County Utah on Tuesday. After a long struggle put two Navajos on the three-member county commission, the county decided to hold a referendum on a “study” to change the county’s form of government to deny Navajos control.
With the help of the Navajo Nation leadership, Utah Democrats, Arizona Democrats and local Navajo leaders, the measure was defeated with an election night vote total of 1614 Yes, 1735 No. There are votes remaining to be counted, but mostly from Navajo precincts.
This recent experience shows that organized Navajos can win hard-fought elections.
Woman who accused Trump of sexual assault replies to woman who accused Bill Clinton of rape
Source: Raw Story
Maybe it was Bill Clinton in that dressing room with E.Jean Carroll…. and he was trying on the lingerie. pic.twitter.com/DKMHkQL11P
— Juanita Broaddrick (@atensnut) August 15, 2019
Carroll responded on Thursday.
I know what it’s like to not be believed Juanita,” Carroll noted.
“I’d never make a joke about your story — and I would hope you’d show me the same courtesy and respect our strange sisterhood,” she explained.
Read more: https://www.rawstory.com/2019/08/woman-who-accused-trump-of-sexual-assault-replies-to-woman-who-accused-bill-clinton-of-rape/
I checked Twitter to see if Broaddrick responded to Carroll’s reprimand. She did. She said Carroll was absolutely right and deleted the tweet.
So that’s something. But Broaddrick seems to have become a Trump supporter. Criminey.
Interesting election advice from Tim Wise
Don’t be afraid to call him an aberrant racist, basically. Wise was involved in the elections against David Duke in California in the 90’s and saw how the racism really appealed to people. Not policies that would improve their lives. So you don’t waste time talking to those people. You energize the people who don’t like it but might not feel like their vote matters, by labeling him what he is.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1152930670093787141.html
“If the Dems blow this election it will not be because they were "too far left on policy" or because they "weren't left enough." It will have little to do with policy at all. They are making a mistake caused by traditional consultant theory that does not apply here...
2/ And by listening to influential pundits in liberal media who also don't get the unique nature of Trumpism, relative to normal political movements & campaigns...this election is NOT going to be won by talking about all your "great plans" for health care, jobs, education, etc..”
There are 34 tweets in this thread.
Immigration sanity
One of my go to sources for sanity in the immigration debate is a podcast by Stephen Robbins, Redirect. His latest episode has a clip of Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush speaking so humanely on the immigration issue and offering solutions that I would love to have on the table right now. If you’re into podcasts and simply reading about the immigration insanity just frays your nerves further, Robbins manages to inform but reassure at the same time.
Here’s the latest episode: https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/redirect/redirect-youre-doing-it-wrong-dlfItBgKJ1o/
And here’s his Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/redirect/overview
Im settling down on the impeachment question
after listening to this podcast from Skullduggery: https://www.yahoo.com/news/skullduggery-tv-sex-spies-bank-210648992.html
Their point of view is that Mueller probably wasn’t making an impeachment referral, he was simply wrapping up his work and wanted to clarify what is in the report. He certainly didn’t rebuke Barr. Then they delve into what the Deutsche Bank records are likely to reveal. They interview the NYT reporter, David Enrich, who did the story on suspicious transactions that weren’t reported, and he said that a month ago he would have guessed there was a 15% chance that the bank records would reveal criminal money laundering and that it’s up to about 30% since his story on the unreported suspicious transactions.
That really lowered my expectations for a big reveal. What we have is obstruction and emoluments, which it seems like most people don’t seem to care about anymore. We need to have lots of investigations of his criminality, for sure, and I’m hoping we’ll discover something shameful in his tax returns, but I’m starting to understand Nancy Pelosi’s caution. I would like to first see an underlying crime that he was trying to cover up. When you compare this to Nixon’s impeachment, he was caught covering up a burglary. Everyone knows that burglary is wrong. What do we have so far in Trumps case? Violating the checks and balances of a very delicate democracy. A huge chunk of the public don’t even understand what that means.
When I think of the financial powers and what they want, they love those tax cuts, but must know they’re not sustainable unless Republicans can gain enough sway, perhaps retake the House, to begin whittling away at government spending that helps people. These financial powers have a huge control of the narrative. Until they start to feel that Trump is impinging on their world, it’s going to be really hard to shift the narrative. But in the meantime they’re betting on this rogue, messianic clown who keeps a steady portion of the electorate under his control.
DOJ, special counsel say there is 'no conflict' on Mueller, Barr statements about obstruction inquir
Source: The Hill
The Justice Department and special counsel's office say there is “no conflict” between statements made by Attorney General William Barr and special counsel Robert Mueller about the role that Justice Department guidelines stating not to indict a sitting president played in Mueller’s obstruction inquiry.
“The Attorney General has previously stated that the Special Counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying that, but for the [Office of Legal Counsel] opinion, he would have found the President obstructed justice,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec and special counsel spokesman Peter Carr in a statement issued Wednesday evening.
Read more: https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/446077-doj-special-counsel-say-there-is-no-conflict-on-mueller-barr
Oh my. This is how they’re spinning it. And I notice that Peter Carr is identified as Special Counsel spokesman. He’s the same person who denied Michael Wolf’s allegation that there were draft indictments of Trump on Muellers desk.
Voldemort vs Trump
Rowling compared the two and I remembered scoffing a bit. But I just rewatched Deathly Hallows and the first scene with Voldemort with his “cabinet” taking away Malloy’s wand felt resonant. My goodness, he is a clown version of Voldemort!
Interesting how little coverage of Trumps rally in PA focused on treason accusations
I don’t watch news, I get most of it online, so I may be missing something. I saw a lot about getting the crowd to boo Fox News, and people fainting, and Trump saying that he doesn’t like losing. But very little on Trump calling FBI and Democrats treasonous for investigating him and the audience chanting, “Lock them up”. Vox covered it here
https://www.vox.com/2019/5/21/18633879/trump-montoursville-pennsylvania-rally-lock-them-up-bill-barr
But an article from CNN on my Apple news feed listed 40 eye popping moments and it didn’t include this. I went to the network news sites and couldn’t find it either.
I know we’re very jaded, but doesn’t this seem a little strange? Are they clinging to a notion of normalcy? Are they as sick of it as we are? Or is there a propping up of a Republican narrative that he behaves badly, but ignore that so we can keep going in this corporate friendly direction?
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Feb 28, 2006, 06:22 PMNumber of posts: 261
