#if the democrats win I think it’s 110% | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bountyofbeads · 5 years

Text

Excerpts and Analysis From 2 Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts https://nyti.ms/2WRfgCB

🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷

Excerpts and Analysis From 2 Impeachment Inquiry Transcripts

House Democrats released the first two transcripts of their closed-door impeachment testimonies.

Published Nov. 4, 2019 Updated 4:43 PM ET | New York Times | Posted November 4, 2019 |

WASHINGTON — The House committees leading the impeachment inquiry on Monday moved to open their proceedings to the public, releasing the first two transcripts of hours of testimony they have taken behind closed doors.

The transcripts were the leading edge of a series of expected releases this week, and include witness testimony from two diplomats — Marie L. Yovanovitch, the former United States ambassador to Ukraine, and Michael McKinley, a former top adviser to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. New York Times reporters combed through the transcripts, identified key excerpts and added context and analysis.

THE INQUIRY

Read the transcript of Michael McKinley’s interview and of Marie L. Yovanovitch’s interview, or read the latest from Capitol Hill.

The president’s private lawyer tried to meddle in State Department consular affairs to advance his shadow campaign.

Yovanovitch transcript, Page 264: “And the next thing we knew, Mayor Giuliani was calling the White House as well as the assistant secretary for consular affairs, saying that I was blocking the visa for Mr. Shokin, and that Mr. Shokin was coming to meet him and provide information about corruption at the embassy, including my corruption.”

Much has been reported about the efforts of the president’s private lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani — both public and behind the scenes — to court Ukrainian officials who would help in his bid to ultimately damage the reputations of Mr. Trump’s political opponents. Ms. Yovanovitch’s account of Mr. Giuliani’s attempts to interfere in the State Department decision provides additional details about just how open he was about his campaign to enlist Ukraine to help Mr. Trump win re-election.

Viktor Shokin, the former top prosecutor in Ukraine who was ousted in March 2016, applied to the State Department in early 2019 for a visa, stating that he wanted to travel to the United States to visit family. Following longstanding policy, an American consular officer denied the visa application because of Mr. Shokin’s corrupt dealings.

When Mr. Giuliani pushed to get Mr. Shokin’s visa application approved, he said the purpose of the trip was for a meeting, creating a new reason for the State Department to deny Mr. Shokin a visa — he lied on his application.

— Eileen Sullivan

As Yovanovitch fought for her job, allies turned to two Trump standbys: Hannity and Twitter.

Yovanovitch transcript, Page 117: “The secretary or perhaps somebody around him was going to place a call to Mr. Hannity on Fox News to say, ‘You know, what is going on? I mean, do you have proof of these kinds of allegations or not? And if you have proof, you know, tell me, and if not, stop.’”

Ms. Yovanovitch testified that she was pushed out of her post after Mr. Giuliani and others waged a smear campaign against her. She said that near the end of March, she was told Mr. Pompeo or someone close to him would be calling Sean Hannity, the conservative Fox News host, to complain about the allegations he had been broadcasting against her.

Ms. Yovanovitch said she did not know what was said on that call. A spokeswoman for Mr. Hannity did not respond to a request for comment.

Ms. Yovanovitch said that while the State Department was mostly silent in the face of the public attacks on her, she received one piece of advice from Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union and a key loyalist to Mr. Trump: Tweet something nice about the president.

Asked why she didn’t take the advice, she noted that the State Department had been largely silent about the criticism of her: “I just didn’t see that there would be any advantage to publicly taking on a fight with those who were criticizing me in the United States.”

— Michael D. Shear

State Department officials knew about Giuliani’s activities in Ukraine but did not feel they could do anything about it.

Yovanovitch transcript, Page 270: “It’s not like I sent in a formal cable outlining everything. It felt very, very — very sensitive and very political.”

Impeachment investigators have been hammering witnesses on what they knew about Mr. Giuliani’s and Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine and what they did about it. According to Ms. Yovanovitch, their activities were widely known in Ukraine foreign policy circles, and many believed it was not typical, appropriate government conduct. But it was the politically-sensitive nature of what was going on that worried officials about formally raising concerns.

— Eileen Sullivan

Yovanovitch learned in late 2018 from Ukrainian officials that Giuliani and a Ukrainian ally were targeting her.

Yovanovitch transcript, Page 27: “Basically, it was people in the Ukrainian government who said that Mr. Lutsenko, the former prosecutor general, was in communication with Mayor Giuliani, and that they had plans, and that they were going to, you know, do things, including to me.”

As she recounts it, the story of Ms. Yovanovitch’s removal from her posting in Kiev began as abruptly as it ended. In November or December 2018, Ms. Yovanovitch learned from Ukrainian government officials, not Americans, that the president’s personal lawyer was working with Yuriy Lutsenko, the prosecutor general in Ukraine, in some shadowy way as both men sought to investigate the Bidens and other issues connected to Democrats.

It would become clearer over time that their goal was to remove her, she said. Democratic investigators do not view this chain of events as a side show. They are preparing to present the two men and others as working to oust Ms. Yovanovitch, who was championing anticorruption initiatives in Ukraine, to clear the decks for investigations that would benefit Mr. Trump politically. Whatever their intention, they succeeded months later, when Mr. Trump recalled Ms. Yovanovitch.

— Nicholas Fandos

McKinley resigned because he felt the president was using the State Department for political gain.

McKinley transcript, Page 112: “In 37 years in the Foreign Service and different parts of the globe and working on many controversial issues, working 10 years back in Washington, I had never seen that.”

Mr. McKinley told investigators that his resignation was prompted by his belief that the State Department was being used to dig up dirt on the president’s political opponent, something he characterized as unprecedented.

— Michael D. Shear

A State Department official described internal bullying to prevent people from speaking out.

Mr. McKinley recounted a conversation he had with George P. Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia, who described internal bullying by State Department officials who were trying to mute his concerns. Mr. Kent also worried that the State Department had given inaccurate information to Congress, Mr. McKinley said.

McKinley transcript, Page 110: “THE CHAIRMAN [Representative Adam B. Schiff of California]: But let me ask you about this because you mentioned that he was concerned about bullying. One of the representations apparently made in that letter from the State Department was that State Department witnesses like Mr. Kent or perhaps yourself or others were being bullied, not by the State Department but by Congress. But what Mr. Kent was raising with you was his concern that he was being bullied by the State Department. Is that correct?

MR. MCKINLEY: That’s correct.

THE CHAIRMAN: And he felt that what the State Department had represented to Congress included something that he thought was a lie.

MR. MCKINLEY: ‘Inaccurate’ is the term I’ll use because, again, without looking back at the memo word for word, I do want to be, on a subject like that, as accurate as possible. He did question the way it was being presented, absolutely.

THE CHAIRMAN: And I think you said he conveyed to you that he thought that the State Department lawyer, perhaps among others, was trying to shut him up. Is that right?

MR. MCKINLEY: He did, and he focused specifically on the lawyer.”

— Lara Jakes

Yovanovitch was shocked to see that Trump brought her up in a conversation with the president of Ukraine.

Yovanovitch transcript, Page 193: “I was very surprised that President Trump would — first of all, that I would feature repeatedly in a presidential phone call — but secondly, that the president would speak about me or any ambassador in that way to a foreign counterpart.”

During his conversation with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, Mr. Trump raised Ms. Yovanovitch’s ouster and said she was “bad news.” He also stated, “Well, she’s going to go through some things.”

To many who read the transcript released by the White House, including Ms. Yovanovitch, it sounded like an ominous threat. At the time of her testimony, she still did not know what the president meant by it.

— Eileen Sullivan

McKinley said he had pushed for the department to issue a statement of support for Yovanovitch.

McKinley transcript, Page 38: “My reaction was, well, there’s a simple solution for this. We think she’s a strong, professional career diplomat who’s still on the rolls, who’s still a full-time department employee. It shouldn’t be difficult to put out a short statement that’s not political, stating clearly that we respect the professionalism, the tenure of Ambassador Yovanovitch in the Ukraine.”

Mr. McKinley said that he pressed Mr. Pompeo three times to come to the defense of Ms. Yovanovitch and received no response, after it was revealed publicly that Mr. Trump had disparaged her during his July 25 call with the president of Ukraine. Mr. McKinley said his third attempt to do so came as he tendered his resignation. “I was pretty direct. I said, you know, this situation isn’t acceptable,” Mr. McKinley told House investigators.

— Michael D. Shear

🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷

House Impeachment Investigators Release Transcripts of Closed-Door Testimony

The release came as the White House’s top national security lawyer declined to appear for a scheduled deposition.

By Nicholas Fandos and Michael S. Schmidt | Published Nov. 4, 2019 Updated 4:53 PM ET | New York Times | Posted November 4, 2019 |

WASHINGTON — The former United States ambassador to Ukraine told impeachment investigators last month that she felt “threatened” by President Trump after it emerged that he told the Ukrainian president she would “go through some things,” adding that she is concerned to this day that she will be retaliated against based on a smear campaign against her by Mr. Trump’s allies.

The details from testimony by Marie L. Yovanovitch, who was abruptly recalled in May, emerged on Monday as House committees began making public witness interviews, releasing transcripts of private questioning taken last month with both her and a top diplomat who advised Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Ms. Yovanovitch told Democrats and Republicans during her deposition last month that she believed she was the victim of a conservative smear campaign that sought, incorrectly, to portray her as disloyal to President Trump and prompted him to remove her. The transcript shows that she also detailed what she knew of attempts by Mr. Trump’s private lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and his allies to work with the former Ukrainian prosecutor general to “do things, including to me.”

The diplomat, Michael McKinley, described to investigators how he pressed top State Department officials to publicly support Ms. Yovanovitch as she was dragged through the news. According to the transcript, Mr. McKinley spoke directly with Mr. Pompeo and other senior officials this fall about issuing a public statement about Ms. Yovanovitch’s professionalism, but was eventually told by a department representative that they did not want to “draw undue attention” to Ms. Yovanovitch.

THE INQUIRY

Read key excerpts from the depositions or read the full transcripts of Michael McKinley’s interview and of Marie L. Yovanovitch’s interview.

The House voted on a resolution last week that directed the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform Committees to release the transcripts with necessary redactions and begin to move other findings into public view. Democrats are expected to publicize transcripts of additional depositions, including with witnesses more central to their case, this week. They could begin public hearings with some of the witnesses as soon as next week.

“As we move toward this new public phase of the impeachment inquiry, the American public will begin to see for themselves the evidence that the committees have collected,” the three Democratic committee leaders involved in the inquiry said in a statement accompanying the transcripts. “With each new interview, we learn more about the president’s attempt to manipulate the levers of power to his personal political benefit.”

Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the Intelligence Committee chairman who is leading the inquiry, told reporters Monday afternoon that the committee would release two more transcripts on Tuesday of interviews with two key figures in the inquiry. Those figures are Kurt D. Volker, who served as special envoy to Ukraine, and Gordon D. Sondland, the ambassador to the European Union.

Republicans involved in the inquiry did not immediately comment. Mr. Trump sought to undermine the transcripts before they were released by charging, without evidence, that Mr. Schiff would “change the words that were said to suit the Dems purposes.” The transcripts were reviewed by Republicans in the House and by the witnesses themselves, and there is no independent reason to believe they are not faithful accounts of the Democratic and Republican questioning that occurred behind closed doors.

The transcript release came as a new batch of witnesses were refusing on Monday to sit with investigators. The White House’s top national security lawyer declined to appear for a scheduled deposition Monday morning, saying he would wait until a federal judge rules on whether Mr. Trump’s closest advisers have to answer questions from congressional investigators.

The lawyer, John A. Eisenberg, played a central role in dealing with the fallout at the White House from a July call between Mr. Trump and the Ukrainian president, in which Mr. Trump asked the Ukrainians to conduct investigations that could benefit him politically.

The committee subpoenaed Mr. Eisenberg to appear for questioning, but the White House informed Mr. Eisenberg’s lawyer on Sunday that Mr. Trump was directing him not to testify. The White House invoked absolute immunity, a sweeping and contested form of executive privilege that holds the president’s closest advisers are not obligated to cooperate with Congress.

“Under these circumstances, Mr. Eisenberg has no other option that is consistent with his legal and ethical obligations except to follow the direction of his client and employer, the president of the United States,” William A. Burck, a lawyer for Mr. Eisenberg, wrote to House leaders Monday morning. “Accordingly, Mr. Eisenberg will not be appearing for a deposition at this time.”

Mr. Eisenberg was not the only witness defying House investigators on Monday. Robert Blair, the national security adviser to the acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney; Michael Ellis, Mr. Eisenberg’s deputy; and Brian McCormack, the former chief of staff to the energy secretary, Rick Perry, were all expected to skip scheduled depositions, despite receiving subpoenas.

The objections were not unexpected, but nonetheless showed the limits House Democrats face as their fact finding tries to edge closer into Mr. Trump’s inner circle. Additional witnesses scheduled to testify this week are likely to follow suit, either out of loyalty to Mr. Trump or because of complicated legal issues posed by their proximity to the president.

With their inquiry moving at a rapid pace, Democrats have made clear they do not intend to wait around for the courts to settle the legal issues raised by Mr. Eisenberg and others to secure their testimony. Investigators are trying to complete most private witness depositions this week, before beginning to make the case in public next week that Mr. Trump used the levers of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating Democratic rivals for his own political gain.

“We are not going to delay our work,” Mr. Schiff said. “That would merely allow these witnesses and the White House to succeed in their goals, which are delay, deny and obstruct.”

Mr. Schiff indicated he was cataloging defiance of subpoenas as further evidence of Mr. Trump obstructing Congress, an offense they view as potentially impeachable itself. And they plan to assume that any witness the White House blocks would have confirmed details of the emerging case against Mr. Trump.

Mr. Eisenberg’s decision heightens the importance of an unusual lawsuit filed by Mr. Trump’s former deputy national security adviser, Charles M. Kupperman, who faced the same situation as Mr. Eisenberg: a subpoena from the House and an instruction from Mr. Trump not to comply with it. Last month, Mr. Kupperman sued, asking a judge to determine whether he had to testify. Oral arguments could be heard in that case on Dec. 10.

The suit will have implications that go beyond Mr. Kupperman and Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Kupperman’s lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, also represents another highly sought-after witness, the former national security adviser, John R. Bolton. If House investigators subpoena Mr. Bolton, Mr. Cooper is likely to also ask a judge to determine whether he has to testify.

Mr. Blair, who listened in on the July 25 call, is likely to have been privy to key details about the president’s direction to Mr. Mulvaney to freeze $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine this summer. His lawyer indicated over the weekend he would not cooperate.

Mr. Ellis could offer a direct account of the decision to lock down a reconstructed transcript of the call, and possibly of how the White House legal team handled reports made by national security officials alarmed by what they saw transpiring with Ukraine. A lawyer for Mr. Ellis said Monday morning that he had been directed by the White House not to cooperate and would not appear for an afternoon deposition.

And as Mr. Perry’s chief of staff, Mr. McCormack is said to have been involved in key events under scrutiny. He is now working at the Office of Management and Budget. An administration official indicated on Monday that neither he, nor other White House budget office appointees, would speak with investigators this week.

The White House did not appear to try to assert that any of the three, who are further removed from Mr. Trump, were absolutely immune from testimony. But correspondence released by the House Intelligence Committee indicated that Mr. Blair and Mr. Ellis had been directed not to appear because investigators would not allow a Trump administration lawyer to participate in the depositions in the hearing room.

Other witnesses have ignored or defied similar instructions. Democrats told lawyers for Mr. Blair and Mr. Ellis that they viewed it as just one of several “baseless procedural challenges” to the House by the White House. They pointed out that when Republicans were in charge, the House had set identical rules.

Charlie Savage contributed reporting.

🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷

In impeachment testimony, U.S. diplomat says she was told to tweet support for Trump

By Susan Cornwell, Patricia Zengerle, Arshad Mohammed | Published November 4, 2019, 12:03 PM ET | Reuters | Posted November 4, 2019 |

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two U.S. diplomats told lawmakers the State Department was being used for domestic political purposes under President Donald Trump and warned that would hurt American interests, according to transcripts released on Monday from Congress’ impeachment investigation.

Michael McKinley, a former top adviser to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, told U.S. House of Representatives committees that injecting domestic politics weakened diplomacy.

“I feel that this is not the way we maintain the integrity of the work we do beyond our borders. We’re meant to project nonpartisanship overseas,” he said.

The transcripts were the first released by the closed-door inquiry by the House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence and Oversight panels. They painted a detailed picture of the distress felt by top U.S. diplomats as Trump allies tried to pressure Ukraine to launch investigations into the Republican president’s political rivals.

McKinley said he quit his post after the State Department opted not to defend then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch from attacks by Trump and his political allies.

He also cited his concern over “what appears to be the utilization of our ambassadors overseas to advance domestic political objectives,” McKinley told lawmakers.

Yovanovitch was abruptly recalled as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine after a smear campaign by Trump allies. In her testimony, also released on Monday, she said the State Department was being “attacked and hollowed out from within” and that not rebuilding it would harm the United States.

“The harm will come when private interests circumvent professional diplomats for their own gain,” she said. “The harm will come when bad actors and countries beyond Ukraine see how easy it is to use fiction and innuendo to manipulate our system.”

The Democratic-led House investigation is focused on a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, a leading Democratic rival as Trump seeks re-election in November 2020.

The committees began releasing interview transcripts as they prepare for public hearings this month.

Republicans have complained that the inquiry is insufficiently transparent, one of the main arguments of Trump’s backers. Democrats say they are following House rules on investigations.

Yovanovitch, who was abruptly removed as ambassador in May, testified on Oct. 11 that she felt threatened by Trump telling Zelenskiy on the call that she was going to “go through some things.”

“I didn’t know what it meant. I was very concerned,” she said. “I still am.”

She said she was shocked she would be repeatedly featured in a presidential phone call and that Trump would speak about her “or any ambassador in that way to a foreign counterpart.”

Trump has denied wrongdoing and accused Democrats of unfairly targeting him to reverse his surprise election victory in 2016.

GIULIANI CONNECTIONS

Showing that concerns about the administration’s Ukraine activities arose long before the July call, Yovanovitch said she first learned in late 2018 that Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, had been involved with Ukraine when Ukrainian officials alerted her to the former New York mayor’s communications with a former Ukrainian prosecutor general.

Yovanovitch also said Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, had urged her to use Twitter to express support for Trump in order to save her job. “He said, you know, you need to go big or go home. You need to, you know, tweet out there that you support the president,” she said.

Several witnesses have said Sondland played a major role in Ukraine policy, despite the country not being part of the European Union. Sondland also testified in the House probe, and his transcript is expected on Tuesday.

Four U.S. officials called to testify by Democrats did not show up as requested on Monday, lawmakers said, and the president pressed his demand for a whistleblower to appear.

Some Democrats say Trump, who has ordered administration officials not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry, should face an obstruction of Congress charge among the counts they plan to consider.

The testimony of the four witnesses - from the White House budget office and National Security Council - would have been important to determining whether Trump used foreign aid to Ukraine as leverage to secure a political favor.

Lawmakers were especially interested in questioning the lawyer, John Eisenberg, who took the unusual step of moving a transcript of the call into the White House’s most classified computer system, according to a person familiar with last week’s testimony by Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, an NSC official who listened in on the call.

“There is no reason to call witnesses to analyze my words and meaning,” Trump tweeted on Monday.

If the House votes to approve articles of impeachment, the Republican-controlled Senate would then hold a trial on whether to remove the president from office.

______

Reporting by Arshad Mohammed and Patricia Zengerle; additional reporting by Susan Cornwall, Mark Hosenball; David Morgan; Jonathan Landay, Steve Holland, Jan Wolfe and Susan Heavey in Washington, and Karen Freifeld in New York; Writing by Grant McCool; Editing by Alistair Bell and Peter Cooney

🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷

Exclusive: Giuliani associate now willing to comply with Trump impeachment inquiry - lawyer

By Aram Roston | Published November 4, 2019, 5:03 PM ET | Reuters | Posted November 4, 2019 |

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lev Parnas, an indicted Ukrainian-American businessman who has ties to President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, is now prepared to comply with requests for records and testimony from congressional impeachment investigators, his lawyer told Reuters on Monday.

Parnas, who helped Giuliani look for dirt on Trump’s political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, is a key figure in the impeachment inquiry that is examining whether Trump abused his office for personal political gain.

His apparent decision to now work with the congressional committees represents a change of heart. Parnas rebuffed a request from three House of Representatives committees last month to provide documents and testimony.

“We will honor and not avoid the committee’s requests to the extent they are legally proper, while scrupulously protecting Mr Parnas’ privileges including that of the Fifth Amendment,” said the lawyer, Joseph Bondy, referring to his client’s constitutional right to avoid self-incrimination.

His previous lawyer, John Dowd, wrote to the committees in early October complaining that their requests for documents were “overly broad and unduly burdensome.”

Parnas pleaded not guilty in Manhattan federal court last month to being part of a scheme that used a shell company to donate money to a pro-Trump election committee and illegally raise money for a former congressman as part of an effort to have the president remove the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

The indictment does not address the issues involved in the impeachment inquiry.

Parnas would be a crucial witness if he were to cooperate. He has said he played a key role in connecting Giuliani to Ukrainian officials during Giuliani’s investigation into Biden and his son Hunter.

Trump’s request to Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in a July 25 phone call to investigate the Bidens was at the heart of a whistleblower complaint by an intelligence officer that sparked the Democratic-led impeachment inquiry on Sept. 24.

🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷🍂🍕🍁🍷

1 note · View note

thecinephale · 6 years

Text

Super Girl: The Effort to Look Female

Harrisonburg is not rural Virginia. It’s a city. It inhabits over 50,000 people, includes James Madison University, and has gone Democrat every presidential election since 2008. Still, I spent the last few weeks with my stomach in knots, working out a strategy for my weekend there. While the wedding I was attending was right on the JMU campus, our Airbnb was deeper into Rockingham County, my girlfriend’s grandma lives in Stuart’s Draft, and we had to drive through all sorts of places to get there and back from Brooklyn.

And as my friend Kelly said, “It’s a college town, sure, but there IS a Cracker Barrel.”

***

Next week marks my one year on hormones. Some trans people call this a second birthday, but for me that date is too nebulous. Do I claim the doctor’s appointment that acted as a first consultation? Or the first time I let a green oval of estrogen slowly dissolve under my tongue? Maybe it’s a month further when my bloodwork came back normal and I began taking a proper dosage?

I prefer to think of transitioning as a process with many beginnings. If I had to pick a date, it would be May 12, 2017, when I fully came out to myself. But even this erases the person I was at 16 who dressed in drag for the first time.

A year on hormones doesn’t feel like a landmark. It feels like I’m running out of time. Everyone is different, but I know generally there’s a timeline of when changes occur and when they stop. Some people claim it’s a four year process, but most people see the majority of changes in the first two years. I’m halfway there.

***

Sunday night the first trans superhero appeared in mainstream media. Nicole Maines portrayed the character of Nia Nal on The CW’s Supergirl in its fourth season premiere. Like hormone birthdays, this monumental event can’t be reduced to a single day. Nia isn’t a superhero yet, for now just a reporter working under Kara/Supergirl. And her transness has not been discussed. Both are known because they were announced at Comic Con back in July. The first trans superhero in mainstream media, played by a trans actress.

Nicole Maines knew she was trans when she was 3 years old. By the time she was able to vote, Maines had successfully sued her school district, ensuring basic human rights for all transgender students in her home state of Maine. The CW’s marketing team has played up the “real life hero plays on-screen hero” angle and they’re not wrong.

I knew I was trans 20 years later in my life, after I’d finished my first puberty and voted in two presidential elections. Maines and I have drastically different experiences of transness, and yet I spent the last several months watching 65 episodes of Supergirl (plus crossovers!) to prepare for her debut this week. Sure, most trans women don’t look like Nicole Maines. Most cis women don’t look like Melissa Benoist. This is how this works.

***

Once I decided to go on this trip to Virginia, I also had to decide how I was going to present. I’ve been, as they say, full-time since February. Some days I just wear jeans and a t-shirt, like most women, but it’s been a long time since I’ve actively pretended to be a man. It always made me feel awful and as my breasts grew (now at a C cup!) it became more and more difficult. My girlfriend’s extended family knew she was dating a woman, but didn’t know I was trans. I felt up to the challenge. This weekend I was just a woman. Period.

It’s been my experience that the most mindlessly validating individuals are those I’d least expect: catcallers and the elderly. My guess is they have limited knowledge of transness and classically feminine signifiers like a skirt or long hair makes their animal brain think woman. Of course, if they notice their “mistake” the catcallers will be especially cruel. Still, these experiences factored into my expectation that a high femme presentation would get me through this weekend.

I have no idea what I look like. I’m not sure I ever will. Intellectually I know my face has feminized, but I don’t know how much. I don’t know why sometimes I get correctly gendered, but mostly not. I don’t know if people are just humoring me or saying what they’re supposed to or being kind when they say “Miss.”

I appreciate this effort, but it’s not what I want. I want to look in the mirror and see a woman, I want the people in my life to look at me and see a woman, and I want strangers to look at me and see a woman.

In Virginia, nobody saw a woman.

***

The most trans-related scene in Nicole Maines’ first episode didn’t feature her at all. Martian J’onn J’onzz (David Harewood), recently retired, has joined an alien support group. While Supergirl has previously leaned hard on the alien as immigrant analogy, this scene isn’t the first time the show has equated alien status with queerness. Season two introduced an underground alien bar that was obviously meant to evoke the historic haven of the gay bar.

An alien that looks human begins by saying he’s at the group to share his happiness. “For the first time since I’ve been on this planet I feel like I fit in,” he says with a smile. “And it’s because of this.” He taps a device on the side of his head that reveals his true alien form, before switching back to the human veneer.

An older alien who looks human but has pointed ears and tusks on his forearms pushes back. “Who decides what’s normal? Why should we have to wear these devices that change our appearance so we can be tolerated?”

The first alien responds with the obvious: “Well, that’s easy for you to say. You just look like a Tolkien fan.”

***

Whether we want to look cis and whether we have the ability to look cis is certain to be a heated topic between trans people, because it’s often a heated topic within ourselves. Everyone is taking stock of what they have and what they want. And sometimes it’s impossible to distinguish what we truly need to feel okay and what society tells us we need. I identify as a binary trans woman, not because I believe in the gender binary, but because I’m close enough that I can live (for now) with that conformity. The more gender non-conforming you naturally are and the more gender non-conforming you desire to be the more external pressure you’ll receive.

I’m 5’5 and 110 pounds and within my first three months on hormones I’d developed breasts. These are my natural privileges. My body hair, facial hair, and Adam’s apple are my negatives. The curly hair on my head and my masculine but not that masculine face are up for debate. Every week I get an hour of electrolysis done on my face, which is the process of hot needles and tweezers manually killing every hair follicle. It’s more painful than it sounds. I’m one year into this process and have at least another year left. It costs $75 per session and my ability to afford that at all is another privilege, while the huge chunk of my income that takes up is another negative.

My facial hair is my biggest insecurity and whenever I get misgendered I assume that’s the reason. My mom regularly insists it’s my Adam’s apple and if I would just get that surgically reduced I’d be able to “pass.” The truth is probably more complex. A mix between stubble, the Adam’s apple, and the small characteristics that are targeted in a comprehensive surgical process known as Facial Feminization Surgery.

I’ve never wanted FFS. I can’t even decide if I want the Adam’s apple surgery. Going on hormones was such an easy, obvious choice for me, but these surgeries can feel like a betrayal of my transness. I don’t want to look cis. But I do want to look like a woman. I’ve started to worry that for the rest of the world those will always be the same thing.

Due to my size I thought I would be like the alien who looks pretty normal but just has tusks on his arms. I could proudly be like, “Look at my tusks/Adam’s apple! I’m an alien/trans. Deal with it.” Maybe I’m really the other alien, whose life is consumed by their alien status unless they change themselves. Or maybe we’re all both aliens and the support group is our minds. Two sides debating, one that looks in the mirror and sees a woman with some unique qualities, another that looks in the mirror and sees a man who needs to change.

***

I wasn’t misgendered until halfway through the wedding reception. I certainly got stares, but it was unclear whether those were lesbian couple stares or transgender stares. I chose to think lesbian couple. Last week my electrologist worked under my jaw so I could wear a full face of makeup. I wore a blue and white Kate Spade dress that was conservative yet flattering. I had on heels and my hair was up. It was the most femme I’ve ever looked. If a random catcaller correctly gendered me the week before when I was wearing a sweatshirt and no makeup, then surely my gender had registered now.

Again, the goal is not that no one knows I’m trans. The goal is for people, without thinking, to say “she.” If afterwards they go “Hmm is this one of those transgendereds I’ve read about?” then fine. But I want to win over the gut instinct. I know this is wrong. Our identities shouldn’t require any external validation. But they do.

Once I began interacting with people and there was cause to gender me, I did about 50/50. But even when correct there was a pause. I suddenly felt very foolish. This idea I had that I was my harshest critic, that the man I saw in the mirror would look like a woman to these Virginians, was painfully misguided. I look how I look. It will continue to change gradually as I continue hormones and electrolysis, and this may or may not change how others perceive me. I can then choose to alter my appearance further with surgeries or, simply, accept the way I look.

***

“There’s nothing slight about fashion,” Nia says pitching a story. “It’s one of the most visceral forms of art. What we choose to wear tells a story about who we are.” A trans woman believing in the power of presentation is not exactly groundbreaking. But the show has always been filled with clichés that work because they’re true.

What struck me most watching Maines’ debut was the immediate fondness I had for her. This, of course, has as much to do with talent and charisma as it does transness. Maines injects Nia with an immediate likability, an awkwardness that recalls season one Kara, but with an added vulnerability. I’d framed this character as a necessary first step. Sure, she looks like Nicole Maines… still a trans superhero! But watching her on screen I became very aware that I don’t know Nicole’s insecurities and I don’t know Nia’s. I don’t know anybody’s experience of transness except my own. I don’t even know what gender is or what it means to be trans. Nobody does. We may craft personal narratives to decipher our wants and needs. Cis society may craft narratives to understand, or, more commonly, to erase. But we don’t know. I don’t know why sometimes I look one way to some people and a different way to other people. I don’t know why I have some insecurities and not others. I don’t know why some clothes feel good. Or why some do not.

What I do know is that it felt good to see Nicole Maines on screen. I know that when Kara looked at her and said, “Oh my God. You’re me,” I thought, no. She’s me.

#Supergirl #trans #transgender #Nicole Maines #Melissa Benoist #Nia Nal #Kara Danvers #LGBTQIA #The CW #CWOpentoAll #weddings #cisnormativity #gender nonconformity #trans woman #trans women #gender dysphoria

114 notes · View notes

phroyd · 6 years

Link

But a New York Times article published this weekend told a totally different story, one of a broader House map where, bolstered by their unprecedented fundraising advantage, Democrats had Republicans on the defensive in “more conservative, exurban areas” in addition to the suburbs, as the “field of competition” had grown “well beyond 40 seats.” Recent Republican ad buys in deeply Republican districts such as South Carolina 1 would also seem to support the map-is-broadening hypothesis.

So which case is right? Is the House playing field getting bigger or smaller? The answer is … a bit complicated. In fact, the different versions ofFiveThirtyEight’s House model tell somewhat different stories about it.

The Times’s article is more recent, however, and therefore probably closer to the mark. In early October, in the aftermath of the Kavanaugh hearings, you could make a good case that the map was contracting. But after those stellar Democratic fundraising numbers were reported earlier this month, and after Democrats continued to poll well in generic ballot and district-level polls, the map now appears about as broad as ever, with at least twice as many seats “in play” as in the last midterm, 2014.

As I mentioned, this is one of those times when the different versions of our model — Lite, Classic and Deluxe — show different trajectories. And I think they can help explain why reasonable observers might come to different conclusions about the state of play in the House. But first, let me just show you what they say. The chart below tracks the number of competitive races for each day since Aug. 1 according to the three forecasts, where a competitive race is defined as one in which each party has at least a 5 percent chance of winning.

In the Lite model, which is based on district-level and generic-ballot polling only — and which uses an algorithm we call CANTOR to impute polling in districts that don’t have much of it — the number of competitive districts has gradually been decreasing over time, from about 140 (!) in August to a still-very-high 130 or so today. But that mostly reflects the increasing abundance and availability of district-level polling. Initially, Lite starts with a long list of districts that just might be competitive — races it would place in the “likely Republican” or “likely Democratic” categories (as opposed to “solid Republican” and “solid Democratic”). As polling comes in, some of these districts can be eliminated from being considered competitive, while others get promoted into the more intensely competitive categories (“lean Republican,” “lean Democratic” or “toss-up”).

There’s a big fluctuation in the Lite forecast in late September and early October, however. That reflects a period of comparatively weaker polling for Democrats in both the generic ballot and in district-level polls, which coincides with the apex of the Kavanaugh hearings. However, the Democrats pulled out of that polling slump a couple of weeks ago, with the generic ballot now back to showing an advantage for them of 8.5 percentage pointsand district polls showing vulnerable Republican incumbents in many different kinds of districts.

Democrats’ ceiling is sensitive to these minor changes in the political environment because there are a glut of districts that are somewhere between 10 and 20 percentage points more Republican-leaning than the country as a whole. Many of these districts were gerrymandered to be “safe” for Republican candidates. And in a medium-sized wave — say, one that featured a Democratic lead on the generic ballot of 6 to 7 percentage points — they probably would be safe. But once Democrats get up to about an 8- or 9-point lead instead, they’re really bumping up against the walls of these gerrymandered districts, and they may encounter incumbents who are underfunded and otherwise not-well-prepared for the challenge. In that sense, The Washington Post’s analysis was right: A relatively minor shift back toward Republicans, especially in conservative areas, could have really limited the Democrats’ upside potential. It was just mistimed; the shift that occurred toward Republicans in early October is no longer really evident in the polls now.1 Instead, Democratic candidates for Congress continue to poll well in some Trump-friendly districts as well as those that voted for Hillary Clinton for president.

Our Classic model incorporates “fundamentals” in addition to the polls — most importantly, including fundraising. And it shows the number of competitive districts generally having increased over time as Democrats’ fundraising numbers get better and better, especially in Republican-leaning areas where you’d ordinarily expect the incumbent to have a heavy fundraising advantage. In particular, there’s a spike in the number of competitive districts in the Classic forecast on or about Oct. 15, when third-quarter fundraising totals were reported to the FEC and incorporated into the model. The Classic model now shows around 110 competitive districts, the vast majority of which are currently held by Republicans. Since Democrats only need to win 23 of these to win the House — potentially plus a few extra to cover a couple of districts of their own they might lose — you can see why it’s become pretty bullish on Democrats’ chances.

Finally, there’s the Deluxe version of the model, which incorporates expert ratings such as those published by the Cook Political Report. That version shows the number of competitive districts as having been steady, at around 100, throughout the election cycle. Our model has its disputes with the expert ratings; in particular, based in part on Democrats’ fundraising prowess, it thinks the set of districts that Cook et al. rate as “likely Republican” are liable to be more competitive than they are ordinarily. But one thing that’s historically very rare for the expert ratings are false negatives — districts they rate as “solid” or “safe” are almost never won by the underdog. Instead, they tend to put any district where an upset is even thinkable into the “likely Republican” or “likely Democratic” categories. In general, these expert raters have shifted districts that were already deemed to be competitive leftward (e.g., from “lean Republican” to “toss-up”) over the course of the election. But they haven’t added to or subtracted much from the list of potentially competitive districts. Thus, the number of districts deemed to be competitive by Deluxe has held pretty steady.

But if the Deluxe forecast is right and “only” 100 districts are competitive, that’s still an awfully high number as compared to recent years. Just 38 House districts would have been classified as competitive by the Deluxe model at the end of the 2016 campaign, for example, or 44 of them in 2014.

The number of competitive districts in 2010 was also around 100, by comparison, according to the House model that we published at the time.2It was easy to see why so many districts were competitive that year, however. Democrats had pushed very deep into red territory after 2006 and 2008 and started out the 2010 midterm with a 256-179 advantage in the House. (By comparison, Republicans have “only” a 240-195 advantage now.) The shift against President Obama and the Democrats was very strong: Democrats went from winning the popular vote for the House by 11 percentage points in 2008 to losing it by 7 points in 2010. And districts back then were slightly less polarized and slightly less gerrymandered (although, there was still plenty of gerrymandering) than they are now. Republicans were reclaiming a lot of naturally red territory.

The 2018 House election is also being fought in red territory — only, it’s Democrats who have an opportunity to make big gains there. And it’s taken a whole assortment of factors to make the map as competitive as it is, somewhat despite the odds:

The large number of Republican retirements.

The massive Democratic cash advantage.

Democrats nominating competent candidates in almost every district.

The declining incumbency advantage. It used to be that all but the worst incumbents would outperform a hypothetical open-seat race in their districts. Now, that isn’t so clear, as the incumbency advantage is only about half as large as it was a couple of decades ago.

We’re now eight years removed from when maps were redrawn, and some districts (especially in the Sun Belt) have become more competitive over that period.

As mentioned, Republican gerrymanders do have a breaking point, and some of the more optimistic polling for Democrats puts them close to that breaking point.

Finally, redistricting in Pennsylvania and Republican scandals add a few additional competitive seats to the list.

All of this sets up what could be a feast-or-famine evening for Democrats next Tuesday. They have a huge number of opportunities to win Republican seats — around 100 of them! And yet, it would be hard to circle more than about 12 or 15 of these districts that can safely be predicted to wind up in Democrats’ hands. If things go roughly to form nationwide, Democrats almost certainly will get there. But even a modest pro-GOP polling error — if Republicans were to beat their polls by 2 or 3 points across the board — would revert the overall race to being a toss-up. Conversely, even a modest, pro-Democratic polling error could send their number of pickups careening into the 50s, or higher. The wide ranges in our forecast reflect the uncertain conditions on the ground.

Nate Silver is the founder and editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight. @natesilver538

Phroyd

#nate silver #house races

11 notes · View notes

kindabraveandlittlestupid · 6 years

Photo

So the midterm elections are almost over save a few races where things are still to close to call. The emotions this morning are a mixed bag, to say the least, and now we get to read the tea leaves to figure out what this means and what will likely happen next. I will try and break this post up into a couple different subjects so it's easier to digest with your eye holes.

Rise of the Matriarchy

The first and major take away is the fact that woman just took a big bite out of male power structure in this country. And while I advocated in the past of electing the most qualified/best responsible options for office regardless of gender and orientation, most of the competitions this year were superior female candidates to their lesser male candidates and they (women) crushed it. This is good. This is progress. And the sooner we can balance out Congress and the Senate with 49% Men and 51% Women or something close to that, the less likely you will have Conservative Men dictating/controlling women’s issues/rights behind closed doors.

I hope this trend continues into 2020 with another wave of pink and woman stepping up to fill the role of governing and taking away from those men who have been taking advantage of their position for so long. Keep up the good work ladies, I will vote for your best female candidates here in California when they make it onto the ballet.

UPDATE: Woman took over 110 political positions of power across the US.

Reverse Trump Effect

Historically the Republicans dominate the Midterms mostly because of the fact Democrats don’t show up as much as we should. Yesterday, however, the very presence of Trump has energized the Democratic voters in a big way and we showed up in record numbers. Was it a blue tsunami like we hoped? Not really but Democrats are usually on the defense in Midterm elections in regards to Senate Seats and while we lost some there, the big turn out changed Congress which opens some options to slowing the role of the Bigot in Chief.

Give Trump some credit he got us liberals to the polls and we took the power back from. Thanks, Dumbass!

Red State Blues

A few strong Progressive Candidates ran in the south such as Beto O'Rourke (Senate), Andrew Gillum (Governor), and Stacey Abrams (Governor). The results weren’t unexpected simply because in 2010 the GOP made a huge effort to gerrymander the hell out of various states and have been working on a long-term strategy of suppressing votes for years.

In the case of Beto O’Rourke, he was operating in a deeply red state and most Texans would vote for the fire burning down their house because the color of it was red, they proved that by once again voting for the insanely unpopular Ted Cruz. Beto losing wasn't desired but I was kind of expecting it.

Andrew Gillum happened to be running in a state where felons couldn't vote and the courts in the state favor charging Black Men for crimes far more than White Men for the same crimes which despite Andrew Gillum’s loss is a policy that will no longer be there in 4 years. In 2022, Andrew Gillum could/should run again and capitalize on the vote liberated by this racially motivated voter suppression and you know what... he would win.

Stacey Abrams is the last woman standing but she operates from a position of weakness as the tally is against her AND the person assigned to oversee the election is the man she is running against (how fucking insane is that). Just to make it even more insane, there were 70,000 registrations held up by the state which 70% are African American! Want to know by how much Brian Kemp leads? 63,000 votes! Let's say this again the man holding up 70,000 registrations which are mostly black against his black opponent gives him a lead of 63,000 votes to help him get elected into office. Why there isn't rioting in Georgia I don’t know but this is pretty much textbook suppression. I am happy Stacey Abrams is refusing to concede until a Runoff is completed.

Open Investigations

On the bright side with Congress now being in the hands of Democrats new investigations into Trump can begin. In the coming weeks, we will see them looking his taxes and his dealings to line his pocket with money. Can anyone say Mar-a-Lago? This provides Progressives some much-needed wiggle room to dig into the Trumps accounts and FINALLY pull his skeletons from the closet. Don’t hold your breath for impeachment but this will provide lots of ammunition to fucking destroy this 2020 election bid and that's a win for me.

Conservative Courts

Where we might suffer in all this is the Senate remaining in the GOP’s small hands. This will allow them to continue to stack the courts with hyper-conservative judges. It’s a disappointing revelation as a partisan branch/party is basically assigning partisan judges to a branch that is supposed to be NON-PARTISAN. There is no easy or quick way to pluck these Heritage Foundation ticks from the courts and effects of their Judicial Nominees can last for literally decades.

A Scapegoat Named Sessions

The kind of empty win of Jeff Sessions being forced to resign. On one hand, the racist elf with extremist Christian values is out but Trump NEVER disappoints to find an even more conservative candidate to fill the last guy's shoes.

Call this a prediction but I suspect the coming weeks Trump will say the reason why Democrats took Congress is because of the Mueller Investigation was hanging over his head. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is to fall on his sword (whether he wants too or not) and take the blame for the Conservatives losing ground and LASTLY, I would expect Trump to try and cut Mueller out considering his investigation is technically under the executive branch. Honestly, I think he will try and do it because his voters have already signaled to him (Trump) they will stick with him after mass shootings, parent/child separation, and telling our various allies to fuck off. Him shutting down an investigation into his collusion would not motivate them to abandon their dear dictator and Trump knows that.

The Wrap Up

We should feel good to some degree. Yeah, we have 1/6th of the power of the three branches of Government but progress is a pendulum and anyone who knows their history understands this. People need to be reminded why Republicans suck so much and this four year period hopefully will remind the voters (oh yeah that's why we don't vote for these people because they’re horrible human beings). We are today better off then we were in two days ago and we now have some oversite. To top it all off, women took some power from those shitty male candidates. We need to keep up the momentum and close this chapter on Donald Trump as another moment of history were America made a mistake and we need to move beyond it. Keep your heads up and keep your passion burning... this fight is not over and dare I say, so long as Trumpublicans exist it may last for a while.

Regards, Michael California

#Midterms #2018 Elections #2018 Midterms #Election Day #Vote #Voting #Midterm Elections #Elections #US Politics #Vote 2018

6 notes · View notes

michaelamcneeceaugie-blog · 6 years

Text

Gender and Sexuality Portfolio Post One: Introduction to Special Interest Topic

In striving for political rights, governmental status, and overall representation, women often find themselves with limited, inadequate opportunities. Despite advances in women’s rights, political representation for women is poor compared to men. As we have seen with recent elections, heads of state still have the tendency to choose male representation over women, and while many countries are exploring measures to change this, the United States has put in generally no effort to increase the governmental status for women. As I will discuss in this essay, there is little research on why this (under-representation) is occurring.

The topic I selected for my special interest topic is women in politics in the United States. I selected this topic because it not only affects me, it also affects our local and national government. I want answers on why women aren’t being represented in office, despite the fact that women make up 50% of the population. Is it simply that women aren’t running for political positions, or is it something a little more complicated? In our recent presidential election, the nation saw Hillary Clinton lose the presidential election despite her winning the popular vote, and with Trump’s cabinet being almost all men, it leads me to believe that there is a serious issue not just with our society, but deep within our political system. I hypothesize that sexism and prejudice are to blame for women’s under-representation, and I believe that the reason for women’s lack of political participation also has to do with this atmosphere of inferiority.

As personally expected, there was not a lot of search results on women in politics, especially in regards to the United States. At first, I only researched women in politics, and although this is a very broad topic I was interested in seeing the types of articles that would appear. Interestingly enough, the journals were almost always about other countries. A large amount of attention was particularly paid to smaller countries and countries with poor (general) women’s rights - such as India and countries in the Middle East. Finally, when I decided to focus my topic on the United States, there was little to no adequate research articles. While this made finding lengthy, decent articles very difficult, I was determined to stick to my topic. I came to the conclusion that my topic was extremely important, not just to me but to everyone in general. The good articles deserved recognition and the lack of articles needed to be discovered. After rewording my topic over and over again - from women in politics, to women in politics in the United States, to United States politics, to women’s representation in government - the most articles I could find was 140 articles (which was about 5 pages of search results); however a big reason why this occurred was due to there being little recent research from 2016 - 2018 (if you did not put a restriction on the publication of the articles there were over a thousand search results). At first, I was very discouraged and disappointed with my findings, but after thinking about it I realized that this was something I really needed to see. It is important to recognize what we are failing to discuss, and the reasons behind this inadequacy. I found it a little ironic that there was both little women representation in government and on Ebsco search results. Yet, I was still able to find very interesting and helpful articles that aided in my search for answers.

With every article I choose they all aimed to understand the reasons behind the underrepresentation of women in elected offices in the United States. They all acknowledge that there is little data behind this reality. Due to this, almost all of the authors reference past elections and review the general public opinion on women in the government. Hanson and Dolan use data from a 2014 CCES (Cooperative Congressional Election Study) survey, Angevine uses a dataset of three Congresses (2005-2010), and two other articles reflect on the election between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (West), and Clinton and Trump (Parikh). The other articles tended to focus on books and other types of data collection. All of their data ultimately leads to the ideas that the reasons behind underrepresentation for women are: voter percentages, media framework of women in office, individual factors, the environment in government, and deeply ingrained sociological ideas on women in politics (Funk, Coker). There are a lot of different ideas for future studies as we cannot generalize certain findings across past studies. A lot of the authors of the articles suggest watching the results of future political processes and environments surrounding women. Others suggest that we need to continue to find the differences and similarities in how men and women connect with voters and conduct themselves in office. The Parikh article discusses the election between Trump and Hillary Clinton, which is the most recent article I could find. For future studies, it will be important to write articles on their run for president. Finally, other articles suggest that instead of studying voters, that we should study Democrats and Republicans and how they view women in politics, which can have great influence on the general population when voting (Butler).

In the modern era, women continue to have great influence within governmental systems; however, equal representation is still lacking. Women make up an equal portion of the population so why aren’t we equally represented? The articles that I looked over attempted to answer this question through studies, interviews, data collection, and comparative analysis. Altogether, most agree that the problem lies with the general population and the government as a whole (including political parties) (Butler). Over time women are continuing to overcome these challenges, but as most of the articles state, we need to continue to collect data and observe the issues lying with women in politics.

Reference

Parikh, C. (2017). On the Road Again with the American Girl. College Literature 44(4), 491-497. Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved September 6, 2018, from Project MUSE database.

Bucchianeri, P. (2018). Is Running Enough? Reconsidering the Conventional Wisdom about Women Candidates. Political Behavior, 40(2), 435-466. doi:10.1007/s11109-017-9407-7

Crowley, J. E. (2016). Women in Politics in the American City. Political Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell), 131(1), 206-208. doi:10.1002/polq.12456

Carroll, S. .., & Walters, S. D. (2017). Ask a Feminist: A Conversation with Susan J. Carroll on Gender and Electoral Politics. Signs: Journal Of Women In Culture & Society, 42(3), 771-783.

FINNEMAN, T. (2018). "The Greatest of Its Kind Ever Witnessed in America": The Press and the 1913 Women's March on Washington. Journalism History, 44(2), 109-116.

West, E. A. (2017). Descriptive Representation and Political Efficacy: Evidence from Obama and Clinton. Journal Of Politics, 79(1), 351-355. doi:10.1086/688888

Butler, D. M., & Preece, J. R. (2016). Recruitment and Perceptions of Gender Bias in Party Leader Support. Political Research Quarterly, 69(4), 842-851. doi:10.1177/1065912916668412

When Women Win: EMILY’S LIST and the Rise of Women in American Politics. (2016). Pennsylvania Literary Journal (2151-3066), 8(2), 41-45.

Funk, M. E., & Coker, C. R. (2016). She's Hot, for a Politician: The Impact of Objectifying Commentary on Perceived Credibility of Female Candidates. Communication Studies, 67(4), 455-473. doi:10.1080/10510974.2016.1196380

Winslow, B. (2017). The Highest Glass Ceiling: Women's Quest for the American Presidency. Journal Of American History, 103(4), 1115. doi:10.1093/jahist/jaw619

Angevine, S. (2017). Representing All Women: An Analysis of Congress, Foreign Policy, and the Boundaries of Women's Surrogate Representation. Political Research Quarterly, 70(1), 98-110. doi:10.1177/1065912916675737

Burden, B. C., Yoshikuni, O., & Masahiro, Y. (2017). Reassessing Public Support for a Female President. Journal Of Politics, 79(3), 1073-1078. doi:10.1086/691799

Dolan, K., & Hansen, M. (2018). Blaming Women or Blaming the System? Public Perceptions of Women's Underrepresentation in Elected Office. Political Research Quarterly, 71(3), 668-680. doi:10.1177/1065912918755972

LEVITOV, D. (2017). Using the Women's March to Examine Freedom of Speech, Social Justice, and Social Action through Information Literacy. Teacher Librarian, 44(4), 12-15.

McCall, L., & Orloff, A. S. (2017). The multidimensional politics of inequality: taking stock of identity politics in the U.S. Presidential election of 2016. British Journal Of Sociology, 68S34-S56. doi:10.1111/1468-4446.12316.

2 notes · View notes

statetalks · 3 years

Text

Who’s Right Democrats Or Republicans

Views Of The Democratic And Republican Parties

youtube

Just under half of Americans have a favorable view of the Democratic Party, while a slightly larger share have an unfavorable view.

The GOP is viewed more negatively 38% say they have a positive view of the Republican Party, while 60% rate it unfavorably. These views are modestly changed since last summer, with the share of Americans rating the GOP unfavorably slightly higher than it was in August and the share of Americans with a negative view of the Democratic Party down slightly .

About three-quarters of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents view the GOP favorably, while 81% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents view the Democratic Party positively.

Nearly all Republicans who say they strongly identify with the Republican Party express a favorable opinion of the GOP. Among Republicans who say they not so strongly identify with the party, 77% say have a favorable view, while 56% of independents who lean toward the Republican Party say the same.

Democrats who very strongly identify with the Democratic Party nearly universally view their party favorably, as do 87% of Democrats who describe themselves as not-so-strong Democrats. About six-in-ten Democratic leaners have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party.

Within both partisan groups, views of the opposing party are overwhelmingly unfavorable across-the-board, with more than eight-in-ten strong partisans, not so strong partisans and leaners alike saying this.

Why Are An Elephant And A Donkey The Party Symbols

The Democratic party is often associated with the colour blue and the donkey mascot.

That dates back to Democratic candidate Andrew Jackson’s 1828 presidential campaign, when opponents called him a “jackass” for his stubbornness.

Instead of taking the nickname as an insult, Jackson embraced it and used the donkey image on his election posters.

It was then quickly adopted by newspapers and political cartoonists.

The Republican’s elephant symbol came along years later.

Many believe it came about, in part, due to a widely used expression during the Civil War led by Republican president Abraham Lincoln.

Soldiers entering battle were said to be “seeing the elephant” a phrase that means learning a hard lesson, often with a profound cost.

The symbol was then popularised by political cartoonist Thomas Nast; an early rendition featured in the 1879 edition of Harper’s Weekly.

Both symbols are still largely used for political campaigns.

Democrats Tend To Have A Lot More Anger And Negativity In Their Rhetoric According To Them If You Support President Trump Well Then You Are A Racist And A Nazi

They generally seem to be out to get someone making things more personal. Why are they so afraid to use the facts to reinforce what they want to do? Its agenda first then find or make up facts to support the rhetoric.

If they cant beat you at the polling booth, they try and beat you in court and thats just a great example of something thats not a pleasant experience. And not quite working in the long run. They keep getting overturned.

Crime And Capital Punishment

Republicans generally believe in harsher penalties when someone has committed a crime, including for selling illegal drugs. They also generally favor capital punishment and back a system with many layers to ensure the proper punishment has been meted out. Democrats are more progressive in their views, believing that crimes do not involve violence, such as selling drugs, should have lighter penalties and rehabilitation. They are also against capital punishment in any form.

Conservative Endorsements Of Democratic Candidates

During the 2004 election, several high-profile conservative writers endorsed the Presidential campaign of John Kerry, arguing that the Bush administration was pursuing policies which were anything but conservative. Among the most notable of these endorsements came from Andrew Sullivan and Paul Craig Roberts, while a series of editorials in Pat Buchanan‘s The American Conservative magazine made a conservative case for several candidates, with Scott McConnell formally endorsing Kerry, and Justin Raimondo giving the nod to Ralph Nader.

In South Carolina in , the Democratic candidate for United States Senator was Bob Conley, a traditional Catholic, and a former activist for the presidential candidacy of Ron Paul. Conley failed in his bid to defeat Lindsey Graham, receiving 42.4 percent of the vote.

In his campaign for reelection, Walter Minnick, U.S. Representative for Idaho’s 1st congressional district, was endorsed by Tea Party Express, an extremely rare occurrence for a Democrat. Minnick was the only Democrat to receive a 100% rating from the Club for Growth, an organization that typically supports conservative Republicans. Minnick lost to RaÃºl Labrador, a conservative Republican, in the general election.

Think Republicans Are Disconnected From Reality It’s Even Worse Among Liberals

Arlie Hochschild

A new survey found Democrats live with less political diversity despite being more tolerant of it with startling results

In a surprising new national survey, members of each major American political party were what they imagined to be the beliefs held by members of the other. The survey asked Democrats: How many Republicans believe that racism is still a problem in America today? Democrats guessed 50%. Its actually 79%. The survey asked Republicans how many Democrats believe most police are bad people. Republicans estimated half; its really 15%.

The survey, published by the thinktank More in Common as part of its Hidden Tribes of America project, was based on a sample of more than 2,000 people. One of the studys findings: the wilder a persons guess as to what the other party is thinking, the more likely they are to also personally disparage members of the opposite party as mean, selfish or bad. Not only do the two parties diverge on a great many issues, they also disagree on what they disagree on.

This effect, the report says, is so strong that without a high school diploma are three times more accurate than those with a postgraduate degree. And the more politically engaged a person is, the greater the distortion.

Should the US participate in the Paris climate accord and reduce greenhouse gas emissions regardless of what other countries do? A majority of voters in both parties said yes.

Yes Dictators Sometimes Cloak Themselves In Socialism But Tyranny Here And Elsewhere Is Always Right

Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Kim Jong-Un and Donald Trump

The meaning today of the Big Lie almost always refers to the false claim by Donald Trump and his right-wing cronies that the 2020 presidential election was somehow stolen by the left and Joe Biden, with the help of foreign agents.

Not only is this claim false, it is absurdly false.

This is hardly the first Big Lie from the right. Not even close. The right has been promulgating Big Lies for decades.

In fact, lying is the only way the right wing can win elections. After all, its policies are profoundly unpopular with ordinary people because the right-wing favors the 1% rich over the 99% working and middle classes.

How in the world could 1% of the population ever win elections over the 99%? Simple. The 1% bamboozles the 99%. To win elections, the right must conceal its true intentions from the voters and instead engage in manipulative tactics, like lying and fearmongering.

The lies are not just little lies.They are whoppers. They are the complete opposite of the truth. They are 180 degrees from the truth. They are the polar opposite of the truth, like from the North Pole all the way to the South Pole. Hence the term Big Lie.

Yet, shockingly, many of these egregious lies actually work. They take hold. They create a false impression in the mind of the public.

Once again, this is the exact opposite of the truth. Dictatorships and fascism are right-wing, not left-wing.

Shockingly, this nonsense actually works.

Who’s Right Democrats Or Republicans

Thanked 13,175x in 9,530 Posts

Mentioned

Tagged

0 Thread

Neither, that is shy you discuss and debate and come to an agreement. It is time that the people make them sit back in their seats in the house and Senate, give the a bucket to go to the bathroom and PBJ’s for breakfast lunch and DinnerWhen the come to an agreement, then they can go home for a good night sleep and we will pick another issue and lock them in their chambers the next day and have them work that one out.Bet it would not take long for these idiots on both sides of the aisle to get the picture

Thanked 4,273x in 3,200 Posts

Mentioned

Tagged

0 Thread

They are both wrong, but I think the Democrat senate is more wrong because they are trying to force an agreement using police stationed at national parks and monuments to make life hell for everyone. Also earlier last week the senate rejected a bill from house Republicans that would have delayed the shutdown for awhile./Edit:give the a bucket to go to the bathroom and PBJ’s for breakfast lunch and DinnerNo no no, PBJs are too tasty. Give them bread and butter.

Last edited by GrassrootsConservative; 10-06-2013 at 03:35 AM.

Thanked 38x in 29 Posts

Mentioned

0 Thread

Liars are the worst kind of thieves-Only trust Hell No Kitty

Thanked 144x in 110 Posts

Mentioned

0 Thread

Thanked 319x in 264 Posts

Mentioned

Tagged

0 Thread

Thanked 6,437x in 4,426 Posts

Mentioned

0 Thread

What Does Left Mean

youtube

In politics, left refers to people and groups that have views. That generally means they support reforms, especially those seeking greater social and economic equality.

The farleft is often used for what is considered more extreme, views, such as and . Collectively, people and groups, as well as the positions they hold, are referred to as theLeft or the left wing.

Trump Supporters The Exception

Despite political rhetoric that places them at opposite ends of the spectrum, Republican and Democratic voters appear to be similarly compassionate.

Democrats view compassion as a political value while Republicans will integrate compassion into their politics when their leaders make it part of an explicit message.

There is a caveat to this: I asked these survey questions about personal feelings of compassion in a 2016 online survey that also asked about choice of president.

The survey was conducted a few days after Republican presidential primary candidates Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Gov. John Kasich of Ohio had dropped out of the race, making Donald Trump the only viable Republican candidate for the nomination.

In their responses to the survey, a large percentage of Republican voters said they would rather vote for someone other than Trump, even though he was the unofficial nominee at that point.

The Republican voters who didnt support Trump were similar to Democrats on the survey with respect to their answers about compassion. Their average scores on the compassion items were the same. This is in line with the other survey data showing that liberals and conservatives, and Republicans and Democrats, are largely similar in these personality measures of compassion.

But Trump supporters answers were not in line with these findings.

The research indicates that appeals to compassion if made by trusted leaders should work for voters of both parties.

Republicans And Democrats After The Civil War

Its true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. Its also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But theres more to it.

The Civil War-era GOP wasnt that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding, and monopolizing the new black vote.

In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.

Taking The Perspective Of Others Proved To Be Really Hard

The divide in the United States is wide, and one indication of that is how difficult our question proved for many thoughtful citizens. A 77-year-old Republican woman from Pennsylvania was typical of the voters who struggled with this question, telling us, This is really hard for me to even try to think like a devilcrat!, I am sorry but I in all honesty cannot answer this question. I cannot even wrap my mind around any reason they would be good for this country.

Similarly, a 53-year-old Republican from Virginia said, I honestly cannot even pretend to be a Democrat and try to come up with anything positive at all, but, I guess they would vote Democrat because they are illegal immigrants and they are promised many benefits to voting for that party. Also, just to follow what others are doing. And third would be just because they hate Trump so much. The picture she paints of the typical Democratic voter being an immigrant, who goes along with their party or simply hates Trump will seem like a strange caricature to most Democratic voters. But her answer seems to lack the animus of many.

Democrats struggled just as much as Republicans. A 33-year-old woman from California told said, i really am going to have a hard time doing this but then offered that Republicans are morally right as in values, going to protect us from terrorest and immigrants, going to create jobs.

The Democratic Party General Policy And Political Values

The Democratic Party generally represents left-leaning, liberal and progressive ideological values, thus advocating for a strong government to regulate business and support for the citizens of the United States. Thus, one of the key values emphasized by Democrats is social responsibility. Overall, Democrats believe that a prominent and powerful government can ensure welfare and equality for all. Much like the Republican Party, political opinions within the Democratic Party stretch across a wide spectrum, as both parties are, to a large degree, decentralized. However, from a general point of view, Democrats tend to support heavy taxation of high-income households. In comparison to Denmark, where taxes are generally high, the Democratic taxation policy may not seem excessive, but on a U.S. taxation scale these tax percentages are in the heavy end.

Left Wing And Right Wing Politics

Politics is said to be split in half and you either have left or right political views. Left-wing politics is typically associated with progressive ideas and equality. Democrats are viewed as left-wingers. Right-wing politics values tradition, equity, and survival of the fittest. Republicans are viewed as right-wingers.

Left-Wing

Left-wing beliefs are liberal in that they believe society is best served with an expanded role of the government. Examples of an expanded role for the government include entitlement programs such as social security and Medicare, Medicaid, universal healthcare, food stamps, free public education, unemployment benefits, strong environmental laws, and other regulations on industries.

Right Wing

Right-wingers believe that the best outcome for society is achieved when individual rights and civil liberties are paramount and the role and especially the power of the government is minimized. Right-wing ideology would favor market-based solutions to the issues that these government programs aim to tackle. For example, encouraging a freer marketplace for healthcare, driven by consumer choice to drive down costs. Or privately held retirement accounts like 401 plans instead of government-guaranteed Social Security.

Democrats V Republicans On Jim Crow

Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.

During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies it wasnt worth their while.

Photo Credit

Democrats dominated Southern politics throughout the Jim Crow Era. Its fair to say that Democratic governors and legislatures are responsible for creating and upholding white supremacist policies.

Southern Democrats were truly awful.

Where Do Trump And Biden Stand On Key Issues

Reuters: Brian Snyder/AP: Julio Cortez

The key issues grappling the country can be broken down into five main categories: coronavirus, health care, foreign policy, immigration and criminal justice.

This year, a big focus of the election has been the coronavirus pandemic, which could be a deciding factor in how people vote, as the country’s contentious healthcare system struggles to cope.

The average healthcare costs for COVID-19 treatment is up to $US30,000 , an Americas Health Insurance Plans 2020 study has found.

Todays Republicans Really Hate Democrats And Democracy

youtube

1) Trumps supporters have embraced anti-democratic ideas

This chart shows results from a two-part survey, conducted in late 2020 and early 2021, of hardcore Trump supporters. The political scientists behind the survey, Rachel Blum and Christian Parker, identified so-called MAGA voters by their activity on pro-Trump Facebook pages. Their subjects are engaged and committed Republican partisans, disproportionately likely to influence conflicts within the party like primary elections.

These voters, according to Blum and Parker, are hostile to bedrock democratic principles.

Is God A Democrat Or A Republican

The Democratic Party and the Republican Party of the United States are political parties. God is so much bigger than any political party. He is bigger than the United States of America or any other country. He is bigger than the world we live in.

Psalm 8:3 says God created the stars with His fingers. Considering that our local star, the sun, is 70 times the size of the Earth, that would make God very big. Human issues are very small to Him but we will be judged by what we do.

We as believers need to keep our political party in check and be praying for the leadership of our nations. In the United States, historically parties or groups of organized political interests came later. The majority of the early settlers were true Christians fleeing persecution and the government trying to control them through a political church. The Democrats have been considered the party of the people or working class and the Republicans the party of business professionals for decades. In actuality, that is not true.

Abraham Lincoln was the US President who fought to hold the United States together when division arose about whether African slaves were people or just property of their owners. It was the Republican party that won the right of the slaves to have true freedom not the Democrats.

Vice Presidents Of The United States

John C. Breckinridge, 14th Vice President of the United States , United States Senator from Kentucky , Member, United States House of Representatives from Kentucky’s 8th District , Member, Kentucky House of Representatives from Fayette County . He was presidential nominee of the southern Democratic Party in 1860.

John C. Calhoun, 7th Vice President of the United States , United States Senator from South Carolina , 16th United States Secretary of State , 10th Secretary of War , Member, United States House of Representatives from South Carolina’s 6th District . He was a supporter of slavery, state sovereignty and a proponent of the theory of nullification.

John Nance Garner, 32nd Vice President of the United States , Member, United States House of Representatives from 15th District of Texas , 39th Speaker of the House of Representatives , House Minority Leader , Leader, House Democratic Caucus , Member, Texas House of Representatives from Texas 91st District , County Judge, Uvalde County Texas . He supported the poll tax. Although he served as vice president under Franklin D. Roosevelt, he turned against Roosevelt during his second term, taking a more conservative stance on several issues.

Thomas A. Hendricks, 21st Vice President of the United States , 16th Governor of Indiana , United States Senator from , and member of the United States House of Representatives from Indiana’s 6th congressional district and Indiana’s 5th congressional district .

What Is Happening To The Republicans

In becoming the party of Trump, the G.O.P. confronts the kind of existential crisis that has destroyed American parties in the past.

Save this story for later.

Content

But, for all the anxiety among Republican leaders, Goldwater prevailed, securing the nomination at the Partys convention, in San Francisco. In his speech to the delegates, he made no pretense of his ideological intent. Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, he said. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. Goldwaters crusade failed in November of 1964, when the incumbent, Lyndon Johnson, who had become President a year earlier, after Kennedys assassination, won in a landslide: four hundred and eighty-six to fifty-two votes in the Electoral College. Nevertheless, Goldwaters ascent was a harbinger of the future shape of the Republican Party. He represented an emerging nexus between white conservatives in the West and in the South, where five states voted for him over Johnson.

agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.

History Of The Republican Party

The Republican Party came into existence just prior to the Civil War due to their long-time stance in favor of abolition of slavery. They were a small third-party who nominated John C. Freemont for President in 1856. In 1860 they became an established political party when their nominee Abraham Lincoln was elected as President of the United States. Lincolns Presidency throughout the war, including his policies to end slavery for good helped solidify the Republican Party as a major force in American politics. The elephant was chosen as their symbol in 1874 based on a cartoon in Harpers Weekly that depicted the new party as an elephant.

Democratic Candidate Joe Biden

Reuters: Carlos Barria

The Democrats are the liberal political party and their candidate is Joe Biden, who has run for president twice before.

A former senator for Delaware who served six terms, Biden is best known as Barack Obama’s vice-president.

He held that role for eight years, and it has helped make him a major contender for many Democrat supporters.

Earlier this year, Biden chose California Senator Kamala Harris as his vice-presidential running mate.

The 77-year-old has built his campaign on the Obama legacy, and tackling the country’s staggering health care issues.

He is known for his down-to-earth personality and his ability to connect with working-class voters. He would be the oldest first-term president in history if elected.

According to 2017 Pew Research Centre data, a vast majority of the African American population supports the Democratic party, with 88 per cent voting for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential elections.

The Philosophy Behind Republican Economic Policy

Republicans advocate supply-side economics that primarily benefits businesses and investors. This theory states that tax cuts on businesses allow them to hire more workers, in turn increasing demand and growth. In theory, the increased revenue from a stronger economy offsets the initial revenue loss over time.

Republicans advocate the right to pursue prosperity without government interference. They argue this is achieved by self-discipline, enterprise, saving, and investing.

Republicans business-friendly approach leads most people to believe that they are better for the economy. A closer look reveals that Democrats are, in many respects, actually better.

A Record Number Of Americans Say Democrats And Republicans Are Doing Such A Poor Job That A Third Party Is Needed Polling Shows

Dissatisfaction with two-party politics is at an all-time high, new Gallup polling shows, with 62 percent of Americans saying Democrats and Republicans are doing such a poor job of representing their constituents that a third party is needed.

But the zero-sum, winner-take-all dynamics of U.S. elections make it nearly impossible for third parties to gain electoral traction, despite survey data that shows fully half of Americans do not identify with any party and label themselves independents. This was underscored this past weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference, when former president Donald Trump ruled out creating a third political party to promote his brand of nationalist conservatism.

To hear those calling for change including many scholars and some lawmakers the inherent problem with our current system is that it shoehorns the into just two parties. Warnings that the nation has backslid toward autocracy driven in large part by the Republican Partys shift away from democratic norms bring added urgency, they say, and reversing that Trump-era trend will require something radical: breaking up the Democratic and Republican parties.

source https://www.patriotsnet.com/whos-right-democrats-or-republicans/

1 note · View note

theliberaltony · 7 years

Link

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

micah (Micah Cohen, politics editor): HEYO! When this chat publishes, we’ll be about 36 hours removed from the special election in Pennsylvania’s 18th Congressional District (apparently won by Democrat Conor Lamb). That’s been more than enough time for narratives and lessons and takeaways to take hold. I’ve chosen what seem to be the most ubiquitous or interesting ones, we’re going to play a game of buy/sell/hold with PA 18

takes.

Buy = “I mostly agree with that.”

Sell = “I mostly disagree with that.”

Hold = ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You all good to go?

clare.malone (Clare Malone, senior political writer): Yeah.

perry (Perry Bacon Jr., senior writer): Yes.

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): Sure.

micah: OK, Take No. 1, from Vox: The Pennsylvania special election shows the 2018 House battleground is enormous — by one calculation, more than 110 seats could theoretically be in play.

Buy, sell or hold?

natesilver: Buy.

perry: Hold. I could have said “buy,” though — the range of seats that Democrats could win is fairly broad.

clare.malone: I’m a hold on this because I think not every district that President Trump won by 20 points or more (as he did Pennsylvania’s 18th District) is quite the same, and I don’t think Democrats can find a plausible candidate for every one of them. But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t or won’t make a play for them.

natesilver: I would point out that it feels like buy/sell/hold is the wrong idiom here, but Micah might get mad if I said that. I think the Vox take is right, though. It’s a very, very broad playing field, and both Democrats and Republicans would be dumb as hell to ignore any of those ~110 seats.

micah: Yeah, I’ve seen this take bleed a bit into more like, “Democrats can win something on the order of 110 seats,” and that seems way out there. But if we stick to “in play,” then I’m on board.

clare.malone: Right. It’s really easily misconstrued.

micah: Yeah.

OK, Take No. 2, from Huffington Post: GOP blames “lackluster” candidate and his “porn stache” for Pennsylvania setback

(And yes, I just wanted to get “porn stache” into the chat.)

To summarize this one a bit — maybe we can’t read that much into the Pennsylvania 18 result because the GOP candidate was bad.

clare.malone: First off, LOL.

But crass wording aside, there was something of a Kennedy/Nixon thing going on here with the contrast of young, dewy Lamb to older, mustachioed Rick Saccone. That’s not to say it was a big factor, though.

So, sell, but I see what they’re going for.

“They” being Republicans.

natesilver: SELLLOLOLOLOLOL

perry: Sell. Saccone was a fairly standard Republican on positions. He won a primary, has been a state senator, didn’t have a big scandal break during the general election. In other words, he was no Roy Moore. Or Christine O’Donnell.

clare.malone: Yeah the blame-it-on-Saccone spin is more a testament to how well Lamb played the role he needed to play in that district.

natesilver: It’s not totally wrong to say the candidates played a role, but that’s missing the forest for the trees. The national environment does most of the work here. Democrats are outperforming the districts’ partisan baselines by an average of 16 or 17 points in special elections for the U.S. House and Senate so far. They did so by 22 points in Pennsylvania’s 18th. So maybe the candidates’ individual qualities got Lamb over the top, but it was the national environment that created the opportunity.

Also, Lamb and Saccone are well within the normal range of goodness/badness as candidates. There will be plenty of candidates like them on the ballot in November 2018. They’re not the second coming of Jesus Christ and Roy Moore, respectively.

micah: So I guess it’s fair to say this result shows the importance of the national environment and candidate quality — but that order (environment first) is important.

Take No. 3, from The Guardian: Why it’s time for Democrats to ditch Nancy Pelosi.

Lamb seems to have won, and he distanced himself from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

clare.malone: Buy.

I generally think there’s a solid argument for Democrats to do a little bit of a leadership purge.

natesilver: Hold.

clare.malone: It’s a take I agree with separate from this election, though. It’s not just Tuesday’s result.

natesilver: I mean, I think if we’re being really Machiavellian, Democrats would probably up their chances of taking the House majority in 2018 if they ditched Pelosi. But it’s like the eighth-most-important factor.

perry: Sell. The polling in this district found that most people neither knew nor cared about the anti-Pelosi pledge. There is a fine argument that Democrats need new leaders, but I don’t think this race tells much.

natesilver: Republicans can just demonize Hillary Clinton instead.

micah: That is sooooo true.

Can and will.

clare.malone: And she’s happily providing new tape for them:

perry: I would say, though, that — regardless of whether this made a difference or not in the 18th District — if 20 Democrats running in key races make the kind of anti-Pelosi pledge that Lamb did, then that becomes an issue for her.

If Democrats win the House majority in 2018 and have, say, 230 seats, but 15 people have pledged not to vote for Pelosi for speaker, that’s significant. And if they don’t win the majority, I think she will be out.

micah: Speaking of …

Take No. 4, from the NTK Network: Bad night for Pelosi, good night for Moulton and Biden.

That’s Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts and former Vice President Joe Biden, both of whom campaigned for Lamb and both of whom are rumored to be potential presidential candidates in 2020.

clare.malone: It’s a good way to shoehorn in other white, male candidates, who Democrats are hoping will swing suburban Republican-leaning voters.

natesilver: Hold. The arguments about whether Democrats need progressives who excite the base or moderates who woo swing voters are pretty overdone in both directions — and it depends a lot on the districts.

clare.malone: I’ll buy.

perry: Buy. I don’t think anyone cares about Moulton. Even if Pelosi didn’t matter to voters, it’s a bad sign for her that Lamb won in a high-profile race while distancing himself from his party’s leader in the House. Every high-profile surrogate (Barack Obama, Biden, Bill Clinton) campaigns for some people who win and some who lose. But I think Biden is being brought into more conservative-leaning areas. (He appeared with Montana Sen. Jon Tester recently.) If some of those candidates win, and he is the top surrogate, that does help Biden with the case that he can appeal to Obama-Trump voters.

clare.malone: I mean, right, Biden’s whole presidential pitch is gonna be just that: I’ll win back the fabled “working-class white voter.”

micah: Take No. 5, from Greg Sargent at The Washington Post: The Trump/GOP agenda may be a big albatross for Republicans.

perry: Sell. I don’t think the GOP policy agenda is mattering that much. The tax cut doesn’t seem to be helping the GOP in these special elections, but I think that’s different from saying it it’s hurting the party. Trump is a big albatross himself, but I’m not sure it’s the policy stuff.

Like, the tariffs didn’t help Saccone is my guess. I’m not sure they hurt him, though.

natesilver: I’m a buy.

I think health care hurts Republicans, and taxes are probably a wash.

clare.malone: Hmmm. I guess buy? The economy is good, so the Democrats would be left with running on health care and Trump’s ineffectuality.

natesilver: And tariffs were probably a wash in this district but are hurtful overall.

micah: So I’m gonna fold another take into this one — a sub-take, from ThinkProgress: Pennsylvania voters say the GOP’s health care antics cost Saccone their vote.

It sounds like Nate is buying that.

I might be a weak sell on this — I think it’s Trump more than his agenda, per se.

natesilver: That’s not what the question asked, though.

It didn’t ask whether Trump was more important — it asked whether the Republican agenda is harming the GOP.

perry: Do I think congressional Republicans would have been better off overall with either a popular Obamacare replacement plan or just not doing the repeal? Yes. I think Nate is correct about this.

micah: Well, I guess I’m quibbling with the “big” in “big albatross.”

perry: The gap between “Trump alone” and “Trump and the GOP’s agenda” is perhaps not the biggest distinction. I’m not sure it totally makes sense.

If Trump was tweeting about a health care plan people liked, that would be different than what he is tweeting about now.

micah: That’s a good point.

Trump sorta is the Trump/GOP agenda, and vice versa.

clare.malone: What happens if the economy tanks in the next eight months?

Does that mean a sure Democratic wave?

micah: The GOP ceases to exist.

natesilver: It’s worth pointing out that Trump’s approval rating declined by several points while health care was being debated.

clare.malone: Right. The GOP is basically basing their campaign on the good economy and the promises of the tax bill.

natesilver: I’m not sure that the rest of the stuff matters, but I think health care moves the needle a bit.

micah: Seriously, though, the GOP is in really bad shape with a pretty-good-to-great economy. If that went south, they’d be toast.

Though maybe there are diminishing returns for Democrats. Republicans can do only so bad.

natesilver: #Actually, Micah, there might be accelerating returns for Democrats because of the way that districts are structured.

There’s a huge glut of (mostly gerrymandered) districts that are somewhere between like 10 and 20 points more Republican-leaning than the country as a whole. So if the wave gets really big and Democrats begin to tap into those, their gains just get larger and larger.

micah: OK, last one, Take No. 6, from CNN: “Donald Trump can’t save you.”

Buy, sell or hold?

perry: Buy. Trump is not going to help a lot of Republicans win key races in close states/districts. I suspect he will be like Obama in 2014: Candidates in close races may want to duck association with him. Although maybe in Missouri, Indiana, West Virginia — the big Senate races in fairly red states — he might help.

clare.malone: I’ll second that buy.

natesilver: Buy — except the premise is backward. Who’s saying that Trump can save Republicans? He’s the main reason they’re in so much trouble this year in the first place.

micah: I mean, I buy this too as it’s meant. But he could save Republicans somewhat, right? If he stopped doing a lot of Trump-y things.

natesilver: Yeah by staying off Twitter and going golfing for the rest of the year.

clare.malone: “Fox & Friends” is saying that Trump saves Republicans, to be clear.

They were saying this morning that Trump’s trip to Pennsylvania actually saved Saccone from a more embarrassing loss.

natesilver: THIS TALKING POINT IS SO DUMB.

micah: Wait a sec!

natesilver: IT’S SO FUCKING DUMB.

AND IT SHOWS THAT PEOPLE ARE IDIOTS ABOUT INTERPRETING POLLS.

micah: You have caps lock on, I think.

natesilver: I’ve seen multiple people making claims that “Lamb was up 6 points in the polls until Trump came in.” This is backwards in like two ways.

First, Lamb was leading by 6 points in only one poll, from Monmouth. Not “the polls”.

He was up by 2 points in the polling average, and the final result is going to come very, very close to that.

If you think the polls were off in this race, you’re a fucking idiot, full stop.

The same would have been true if Saccone had won by 1 point or something also.

micah: Is rant over?

natesilver: Second, the Monmouth poll was actually conducted AFTER TRUMP VISITED, or at least partially after it.

The polls BEFORE Trump visited showed a TIE, on average.

Then the Monmouth poll came out AFTERWARD.

micah: Is rant over?

natesilver: If anything, the Monmouth poll suggested that Trump made matters worse for Saccone, although it did overshoot the mark a bit.

I’m sorry to rant about this, I’m just really, really tired of people substituting saying “the polls” when they really mean “idiotic media narratives based on cherry-picked misinterpretations of the polls.”

Even on CNN last night, there was this notion that Lamb was a big favorite based on the polls. That’s absolutely false. He was a modest favorite, at best. It shows that people have learned nothing since 2016.

micah: Is rant over?

natesilver: It’s going to continue for the next three years, Micah.

micah: lol

Wait, though, on the podcast, Nate, you said something along the lines of, “We know Democratic turnout is going to be good in 2018. Republicans should be looking for ways to increase turnout among their base.”

Can’t Trump help do that?

natesilver: Maybe. I mean, it would certainly be valuable for Republicans to have high turnout among their base — they’re going to need it because the Democratic base’s turnout is almost surely going to be high.

But is Trump actually helping with that?

The base is not that enthused, at least not in a way that’s translating to them turning out in the elections. Trump riles up the Democratic base and turns off moderates.

micah: OK, closing thoughts go to Clare and Perry.

clare.malone: I guess just to the point above, I don’t think you could really win the midterm with just Trump’s base, no matter how energized it is, right?

You would still need to build a GOP coalition to counterbalance the Democratic enthusiasm.

micah: That’s a really good point. It’s likely true that as long as Democrats are motivated, Trump’s base is not enough.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #A FiveThirtyEight Chat

15 notes · View notes

timomaraus · 4 years

Text

November 9, 2020

Washington Post It began on a gold escalator. It may have ended at Four Seasons Total Landscaping. (Editor’s Note: Hard to think of anything more fitting than this presidency ending near a giant pile of, um, fertilizer.)

Washington Post Joe Biden had quite the week. So did Japanese mayor Jo Baiden. (Editor’s Note: Wonder if OANN called the election for Baiden?)

The Week Transition Trump is going to be a problem (Editor’s Note: Are you sure? I mean, President Trump has been such a joy to have around.)

CNN Carrier pigeon message turns up 110 years later (Editor’s Note: Ironically, the pigeon was named Newman.)

CNN US surpasses 10 million coronavirus cases (Editor’s Note: It seems we all misunderstood the President. When we heard “It will all just go away,” what he actually must have said was “It will all go a way up.”)

CNN Biden wins Pennsylvania, becoming 46th president of the United States (Editor’s Note: One of the first calls he took was from former President Obama, who said, “Hey Joe, this is a big fucking deal!”)

Washington Post Arkansas police chief resigns after demanding ‘death’ for Democrats: ‘Leave no survivors’ (Editor’s Note: This yahoo, plus Sen. Graham—“African American people can go anywhere in South Carolina, you just need to be conservative, not liberal” and Steve Bannon—let’s put Anthony Fauci’s head on a pike…these are representatives of the party that thinks we should all be for “unity” now that Biden has won?)

Washington Post Trump’s campaign posted a ‘President Gore’ headline to question the election. The image was fake. (Editor’s Note: Consistent to the bitter end.)

NBC News People close to Trump fear he’s spiraling into rage and hurting his legacy, as well as the Republican Party (Editor’s Note: Yeah, being a graceless loser could really ruin that legacy of bankruptcy, fraud, corruption and sexual assault.)

Washington Post Norm Crosby, comedian who mangled words with great extinction, dies at 93 (Editor’s Note: Fine tribute headline there WaPo. Well-played.)

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Who's Right Democrats Or Republicans

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/whos-right-democrats-or-republicans/

Who's Right Democrats Or Republicans

Views Of The Democratic And Republican Parties

Just under half of Americans have a favorable view of the Democratic Party, while a slightly larger share have an unfavorable view.

About three-quarters of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents view the GOP favorably, while 81% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents view the Democratic Party positively.

Why Are An Elephant And A Donkey The Party Symbols

The Democratic party is often associated with the colour blue and the donkey mascot.

That dates back to Democratic candidate Andrew Jackson’s 1828 presidential campaign, when opponents called him a “jackass” for his stubbornness.

Instead of taking the nickname as an insult, Jackson embraced it and used the donkey image on his election posters.

It was then quickly adopted by newspapers and political cartoonists.

The Republican’s elephant symbol came along years later.

Many believe it came about, in part, due to a widely used expression during the Civil War led by Republican president Abraham Lincoln.

Soldiers entering battle were said to be “seeing the elephant” a phrase that means learning a hard lesson, often with a profound cost.

The symbol was then popularised by political cartoonist Thomas Nast; an early rendition featured in the 1879 edition of Harper’s Weekly.

Both symbols are still largely used for political campaigns.

Democrats Tend To Have A Lot More Anger And Negativity In Their Rhetoric According To Them If You Support President Trump Well Then You Are A Racist And A Nazi

Crime And Capital Punishment

Conservative Endorsements Of Democratic Candidates

Think Republicans Are Disconnected From Reality It’s Even Worse Among Liberals

Arlie Hochschild

A new survey found Democrats live with less political diversity despite being more tolerant of it with startling results

Should the US participate in the Paris climate accord and reduce greenhouse gas emissions regardless of what other countries do? A majority of voters in both parties said yes.

Yes Dictators Sometimes Cloak Themselves In Socialism But Tyranny Here And Elsewhere Is Always Right

Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Kim Jong-Un and Donald Trump

Not only is this claim false, it is absurdly false.

This is hardly the first Big Lie from the right. Not even close. The right has been promulgating Big Lies for decades.

Yet, shockingly, many of these egregious lies actually work. They take hold. They create a false impression in the mind of the public.

Once again, this is the exact opposite of the truth. Dictatorships and fascism are right-wing, not left-wing.

Shockingly, this nonsense actually works.

Who’s Right Democrats Or Republicans

Thanked 13,175x in 9,530 Posts

Mentioned

Tagged

0 Thread

Thanked 4,273x in 3,200 Posts

Mentioned

Tagged

0 Thread

Last edited by GrassrootsConservative; 10-06-2013 at 03:35 AM.

Thanked 38x in 29 Posts

Mentioned

0 Thread

Liars are the worst kind of thieves-Only trust Hell No Kitty

Thanked 144x in 110 Posts

Mentioned

0 Thread

Thanked 319x in 264 Posts

Mentioned

Tagged

0 Thread

Thanked 6,437x in 4,426 Posts

Mentioned

0 Thread

What Does Left Mean

In politics, left refers to people and groups that have views. That generally means they support reforms, especially those seeking greater social and economic equality.

The farleft is often used for what is considered more extreme, views, such as and . Collectively, people and groups, as well as the positions they hold, are referred to as theLeft or the left wing.

Trump Supporters The Exception

Despite political rhetoric that places them at opposite ends of the spectrum, Republican and Democratic voters appear to be similarly compassionate.

Democrats view compassion as a political value while Republicans will integrate compassion into their politics when their leaders make it part of an explicit message.

There is a caveat to this: I asked these survey questions about personal feelings of compassion in a 2016 online survey that also asked about choice of president.

In their responses to the survey, a large percentage of Republican voters said they would rather vote for someone other than Trump, even though he was the unofficial nominee at that point.

But Trump supporters answers were not in line with these findings.

The research indicates that appeals to compassion if made by trusted leaders should work for voters of both parties.

Republicans And Democrats After The Civil War

Its true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. Its also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But theres more to it.

The Civil War-era GOP wasnt that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding, and monopolizing the new black vote.

In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.

Taking The Perspective Of Others Proved To Be Really Hard

The Democratic Party General Policy And Political Values

Left Wing And Right Wing Politics

Left-Wing

Right Wing

Democrats V Republicans On Jim Crow

Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.

During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies it wasnt worth their while.

Photo Credit

Democrats dominated Southern politics throughout the Jim Crow Era. Its fair to say that Democratic governors and legislatures are responsible for creating and upholding white supremacist policies.

Southern Democrats were truly awful.

Where Do Trump And Biden Stand On Key Issues

Reuters: Brian Snyder/AP: Julio Cortez

The key issues grappling the country can be broken down into five main categories: coronavirus, health care, foreign policy, immigration and criminal justice.

This year, a big focus of the election has been the coronavirus pandemic, which could be a deciding factor in how people vote, as the country’s contentious healthcare system struggles to cope.

The average healthcare costs for COVID-19 treatment is up to $US30,000 , an Americas Health Insurance Plans 2020 study has found.

Todays Republicans Really Hate Democrats And Democracy

1) Trumps supporters have embraced anti-democratic ideas

These voters, according to Blum and Parker, are hostile to bedrock democratic principles.

Is God A Democrat Or A Republican

Vice Presidents Of The United States

What Is Happening To The Republicans

In becoming the party of Trump, the G.O.P. confronts the kind of existential crisis that has destroyed American parties in the past.

Save this story for later.

Content

History Of The Republican Party

Democratic Candidate Joe Biden

Reuters: Carlos Barria

The Democrats are the liberal political party and their candidate is Joe Biden, who has run for president twice before.

A former senator for Delaware who served six terms, Biden is best known as Barack Obama’s vice-president.

He held that role for eight years, and it has helped make him a major contender for many Democrat supporters.

Earlier this year, Biden chose California Senator Kamala Harris as his vice-presidential running mate.

The 77-year-old has built his campaign on the Obama legacy, and tackling the country’s staggering health care issues.

He is known for his down-to-earth personality and his ability to connect with working-class voters. He would be the oldest first-term president in history if elected.

The Philosophy Behind Republican Economic Policy

Republicans advocate the right to pursue prosperity without government interference. They argue this is achieved by self-discipline, enterprise, saving, and investing.

Republicans business-friendly approach leads most people to believe that they are better for the economy. A closer look reveals that Democrats are, in many respects, actually better.

A Record Number Of Americans Say Democrats And Republicans Are Doing Such A Poor Job That A Third Party Is Needed Polling Shows

0 notes

westboast · 4 years

Text

Homecoming

Chicago, Illinois

This city is not the epicenter of the virus. The epicenter is, according to the news, the Midwest at large, particularly Wisconsin, though boundaries between states are imaginary and movement is freely allowed across state lines. The virus is everywhere. The American “strategy” is no strategy. It is liberty to decide whether you want to catch the virus or not. Some people wear masks diligently, wash their hands, etc. Some do not. Restaurants are open not because it is safe for them to be open, but because their employees are desperate. The right has decided that masks are effeminate, gay.

We are apparently in the “third wave” of the virus. Cases are up thirty percent from what they were fourteen days ago. And yet businesses remain open. The Biden campaign is slamming Trump for his mishandling of the virus, but at this point it is hard to imagine what can be done to make things better. The opportunity for slowing it down came and went in January. Now we are all coming to terms with the aftermath. That is, the present.

The streets are empty and yet not. Grocery stores are abandoned and yet not. Bars are closed and yet not. There is doublethink everywhere, contradiction everywhere. There is no coherence. There is no plan. There is no voice of authority. There is no trust, no sense of direction. There is a black hole and at the center is the virus, determining everything. The escape is referenced as “the vaccine” or “the cure.” When it comes everything will change, maybe.

“The Bubble” is how Americans think they control the virus. Everyone inhabits a “bubble,” and who is in it determines what we can do, who we can see, where we can go. We can hang out with people if they are in our “bubble” and known to be Covid-negative. But the nature of the virus, a highly contagious airborne respiratory infection, makes “the bubble” illusory. The disease is so out of control that we must monitor our own behavior, because the government is too hobbled and incompetent to do it for us. But even this conception of control is delusional.

Politics everywhere. Biden flags everywhere. Circuitous, self-affirming conversations everywhere. “We have to vote.” “Things will get better with Biden.” “If you don’t vote, you don’t have the right to criticize.” The same pattern that has always been followed is now being followed again. “The left,” with Bernie on one side and Warren somewhere closer to the middle, has been neutralized. Now the election has been reduced to a simple binary, Trump vs. Biden. “He’s not perfect but he’s the best we’ve got.” “Are you saying we shouldn’t vote for Biden?” Think piece: the lesser of two evils. Meme: salvation from evil. Overlooked: Senator Joseph R. Biden, of Delaware, was a chief architect of the 1994 crime bill, the primary catalyst of the mass incarceration of Black men following its passage. Senator Joseph R. Biden, of Delaware, voted in favor of the ruinous Iraq War. The protests which swept America in 2020 are largely attributable to the 1994 bill. And yet its author has been offered to us as the country’s salvation. Coronavirus infects over seven million and kills over two hundred thousand Americans, and yet single-payer healthcare is still off the table.

“I am the Democratic Party right now,” said Biden in his debate with President Trump.

My friend in Korea swiveled toward me in her office chair and said: “We weren’t in America for the lockdown, so we didn’t experience the collective trauma. We missed something that is going to be a part of American identity.”

Others: “Why did you leave Korea? It’s safe there.” But it isn’t my home. Living abroad creates a feeling of perpetual anxiety. This does not make sense to me; I do not belong here.

Chinatown, Chicago, 11 PM. Dim sum restaurant, mirrored walls, sets of fine china, plexiglass, hand sanitizer. One circular table near ours, four people, early thirties, an Asian couple and a white couple, predictable racism. “I don’t like [redacted], it’s not like a hamburger.” “It looks [redacted], like a [redacted].” Camera, close-up, pivots to the other side of the table. “It’s pork and vegetables with a gravy over it.” “Gravy? What kind of gravy?” “Gravy!” Bystander training literature indicates that one should signal their presence but not escalate. Minutes later the restaurant has been overwhelmed by police, ostensibly here to enforce social distancing. The waiters spread the patrons as far apart as possible. Bathroom: three police officers. Two at urinals, one behind them. “Don’t worry, the toilets don’t [redacted].” “Can you stop looking at my ass?” “Never.”

Everything is so sickeningly predictable. I can guess what will be said to me during most conversations. Most people communicate in political and cultural sound bites. Not everyone, of course.

Benito Skinner, crying: “Sorry, y’all, I was just readin’ my own poetry.”

Me, reading Donatella’s romance novel: “Vanity was the sin for which Alek condemned Kenji, but in the bubbling, mirrored pool, he looked as much upon himself, all of those reflections.”

K, in Chicago, texted me the day after we met. He presents as confident but is actually insecure: “How did I look in person?” he said.

Me: “You looked great, very classic and handsome.”

K: “You looked good too.”

I’ll probably never see him again.

Donatella: “I’m beautiful, he thought. He wanted to touch Kenji. He wanted to be touched by Kenji. He wanted to be wanted by Kenji. He had never met Kenji.”

A bouquet of silk hydrangeas, covered in dust.

A concrete staircase in Seoul at 4 AM.

A folding metal chair surrounded by orange tape.

Donatella: “There were missions before this one and there would be missions after it. There were loves before this one and there would be loves after it.”

Korean Air flight KE037 lifts off.

The water bearer Aquarius and her pitchers.

Libra and her scales. Call her.

Man: “I call it an accident, but it was a suicide attempt.”

Humboldt Park: a gust of wind, a thousand dried leaves thrown into the air.

Woman: “I was pretty blindsided.”

Bank billboard: “At Fifth Third, racial discrimination is not tolerated in any form.”

Oversharing, honesty, vulnerability. At some point we sedated ourselves with images. “It looks like you were having so much fun.” Productivity: the internalized logic of neoliberalism— “a productive day,” “I’ve been so unproductive.” Production, branding, grinding, hustling, pedal on the floor, speeding into oblivion. Desperation, alienation, lies.

Issa: “I don’t cancel [redacted] left and right like you.”

Alternatively: “I want to be a ghost.” I want to be invisible. Secrets, the last real currency.

A stranger on the street: “A Black man has approached you, but don’t be alarmed. I want to tell you a joke. What do a dead cop and a live Klansman have in common? They’re both pigs in a blanket.”

New acquaintance: “The committee is just an extension of the marketing department.”

Foot Locker advertisement: “There is no us without you.”

North Korean patriotic song: “Without You, There Is No Us.” [See: Kim, Suki, Without You, There Is No Us, Broadway Books, 2015].

I check the Korea coronavirus stats against the United States stats every day. On October 15, the New York Times reported 59,751 new cases of Covid-19 within the United States. Meanwhile, 110 new cases were reported in Korea. When I was in Seoul these numbers infuriated me. Now I am submerged in the sensory deprivation tank of my own country. The line between hope and inevitability has blurred. I am still not afraid of this virus. I am still terrified of this virus. I am attempting to be less afraid of solitude. The vaccine will come one day. I am with C, my best friend, who understands me.

Issa: “I’m an American.”

R called me from California and said: “I just want to be American.”

Billboard on Armitage Avenue: “VOTE.”

C looked out the car window and said: “The system is working exactly how it is meant to work.”

Seoul, spring: I am sitting in a sterile, sealed room. Before me is a pair of large plastic gloves attached to a plexiglass wall. A doctor enters on the other side of the pane and slides his arms into the gloves. He is giving me instructions that I do not understand. He gestures for me to come closer. I take the swab out of the plastic and put it into his hand. I lean my head back. He shoves the swab down my throat and I gag. He takes it out and in a swift motion shoves it up my nose. I gasp and grab the edge of the seat. My eyes expand and begin to water. It feels like getting fucked, but it’s inside my head. I exit the room and drink Coca-Cola. I wait. “What did it feel like?” my coworker asks. But he wouldn’t know that feeling.

K: “Maybe Biden will win.”

C: “I’m so glad you’re here.”

There are heaps of fruit at the Puerto Rican grocery store near my new apartment. I gather peaches, come home, and bake them into a pie for my roommates. This, at least, is straightforward. Now, at least, there are no conditions. Cut, measure, bake, eat, sleep.

“Two things can be true at once,” I keep telling C.

I feel so much better.

I hadn’t seen H since January. I needed to see him before I left Korea. I ran to him on Sunday, the day before my flight. We spent the whole day together on his campus, under the trees. I held him and cried. “I can feel how much you love me,” he said. My sweatshirt is covered in dust from the door I was leaned against when he kissed me. I still haven’t washed it. I’ll probably never see him again.

Seattle, Japan, Korea, Chicago.

Peach, momo, bogsunga, durazno.

Resist. Accept. Go out. Stay home. Comply. Thrive. Die.

0 notes

kansascityhappenings · 5 years

Text

Watch Live: Biden picks up third Super Tuesday win in Alabama

WASHINGTON (NEXSTAR) — The latest on Super Tuesday and the Democratic presidential primary from Nexstar Media Group stations and the Associated Press. We’re tracking results from the 14 states voting today in the livestream above (all times eastern):

8:15 p.m.

While four states have already been decided on Super Tuesday, three states remain “up for grabs” at this point in the evening.

Here’s a breakdown of current leaders per state via CNN:

Massachusetts (91 Delegates): Biden, Sanders and Warren

Oklahoma (37 Delegates): Biden and Sanders

Maine (24 Delegates): Biden and Sanders

8:02 p.m.

Joe Biden has won Alabama’s Democratic presidential primary. The state has 52 delegates at stake.

Black voters hold sway in the state’s Democratic electorate, and Biden and Mike Bloomberg split the endorsements of the state’s largest black political coalitions. The Alabama New South Coalition backed Biden, and the Alabama Democratic Conference supported Bloomberg.

Biden has also won Virginia and North Carolina, while Bernie Sanders has won the primary in his home state, Vermont. Voting is still underway elsewhere in the country, including California, the night’s biggest prize.

7:50 p.m.

An upbeat Elizabeth Warren is urging Democratic voters to cast ballots that will make them “proud” instead of listening to political pundits.

At a rally in Detroit on Tuesday night, the Massachusetts senator says “prediction has been a terrible business” and is encouraging people to vote with their “heart.” Warren has had poor showings in recent contests dominated by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Vice President Joe Biden.

People are still voting in many Super Tuesday states across the country. Michigan’s primary is next week, and Warren has scheduled a return trip for Friday.

An undeterred Warren says she will defeat President Donald Trump and is still running because she believes she will make the best president. She says: “You don’t get what you don’t fight for. I am in this fight.”

7:40 p.m.

According to CNN, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg won American Samoa. They have 6 delegates at stake.

The Bloomberg campaign told CNN it has seven full-time staff located in American Samoa.

7:33 p.m.

Joe Biden has won North Carolina’s Democratic presidential primary.

The state has 110 delegates at stake and is one of the swing states for the 2020 election.

Biden has also won Virginia’s primary, while Bernie Sanders has won the primary in his home state, Vermont.

Voting is still underway elsewhere in the country, including California, the night’s biggest prize.

You can track results in North Carolina from our sister station in Raleigh.

7:02 p.m.

The night begins with a projected win for Bernie Sanders in his home state of Vermont, according to multiple outlets.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden has won Virginia’s Democratic presidential primary, according to the Associated Press. His victory comes as polls began to close in some states on Super Tuesday. Voting is underway elsewhere in the country, including California, the night’s biggest prize.

LISTEN—Joe Biden supporters react to initial reports of a win in Virginia’s primary. 99 delegates up for grabs in Virginia, and we’re still awaiting HOW MANY delegates he and other candidates may take. Stay with @8NEWS and https://t.co/wDbR8GrPhu. #RVA https://t.co/pgAsdd9BlS pic.twitter.com/QiJxvgOJXd

— Ben Dennis 8News (@broadcastben_) March 4, 2020

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Virginia has 99 delegates at stake. It has been considered a tossup state that is increasingly moving to the left.

The results of the Democratic primary in Virginia, with its diverse electoral terrain of rural, urban, and suburban voters, could be a key indicator of which Democrat will be chosen to face President Donald Trump in the general election.

6:55 p.m.

The first results will be available minutes from now in both Vermont and Virginia. Bernie Sanders is expected to win his home state of Vermont. Sanders’ first test of the night comes in Virginia where Joe Biden is expected to have a strong showing.

6:30 p.m.

Many Democratic voters in Super Tuesday’s presidential primaries made up their minds just before casting a ballot — a sign of fluidity in a race recently upended by Joe Biden’s blowout in South Carolina. The share of late deciders ranged from about a quarter of voters in Texas to roughly half in Minnesota, according to AP VoteCast surveys of voters in several Super Tuesday contests.

Moderate and conservative voters in each state were slightly more likely than their liberal counterparts to delay a decision to the last minute. The indecision shows voters grappling with their choices in a race that is changing quickly.

6:20 p.m.

A state Democratic Party spokeswoman says a judge has extended voting hours in Tennessee’s second-largest county after four Democratic presidential candidates sued to keep Super Tuesday polls open after tornado damage in the Nashville-area county. The severe weather damaged more than a dozen voting locations in Davidson County earlier Tuesday.

Tennessee Democratic Party spokeswoman Emily Cupples said a judge in the county ruled that polling locations in the county must be kept open until 8 p.m. local time. Five so-called megasites where anyone in the tornado-stricken county can vote will be open until 10 p.m. under the judge’s ruling.

3:40 p.m.

Bernie Sanders and his wife, Jane, have returned home to Vermont to vote in Super Tuesday’s presidential primary, with the senator telling reporters he is looking forward to doing well.

As he arrived at the polling place in Burlington Tuesday morning, Sanders told a crowd of reporters that his campaign is about defeating President Donald Trump, whom he called “the most dangerous president in the modern history of our country.”

Sanders says his campaign is also about creating an economy and government “that works for all and not just the few.”

He says, “We are putting together a multi-generational, multi-racial movement of people who are standing up for justice, and to beat Donald Trump, we are going to need to have the largest voter turnout in the history of this country.”

Sanders adds: “We need energy. We need excitement. I think our campaign is that campaign.”

3:10 p.m.

President Donald Trump predicts the super Tuesday contests will make for an “interesting evening of television” as his Democratic rivals compete for the largest chunk of delegates to be awarded in the race to run against him this November.

“I think it’s going to be a very interesting evening of television and I will be watching,” Trump told reporters Tuesday as he visited the National Institutes of Health.

Trump acknowledges that Joe Biden has “come up a little bit” as moderates coalesced around his campaign. And he is repeating his allegations that the Democratic establishment is “trying to take it away” from Bernie Sanders, the progressive Vermont senator leading who holds a narrow delegate count lead.

Trump says he doesn’t have a favorite to run against this fall, adding, “I’ll take anybody I have to.”

WASHINGTON, DC – MARCH 03: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters on the South Lawn of the White House as he returns on March 3, 2020 in Washington, DC. The president was returning from a trip to the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland where he visited the vaccine research center there as the global threat from the coronavirus looms large. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

1:45 p.m.

One of Joe Biden’s presidential campaign co-chairs says billionaire Mike Bloomberg will owe voters an explanation if he doesn’t do well across 14 Super Tuesday primary states.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti stopped just short of saying Bloomberg should drop out if he doesn’t overtake Biden to finish the night second nationally in delegates behind current leader Bernie Sanders.

“If your thesis is Joe Biden’s not viable and he suddenly becomes viable, I think you have to explain to people what’s your new working theory,” Garcetti told The Associated Press. “Or, God bless you, help us win the Senate, keep the House and defeat Donald Trump.”

Bloomberg got in the race last fall amid signs that Biden was a weak national front-runner headed to bad finishes in the early primary states. Biden tanked in Iowa and New Hampshire, but rebounded to a distant second in Nevada and crushed the field in the South Carolina primary. That narrowed Sanders’ delegate lead to single digits heading into Tuesday’s primaries.

Garcetti says Sanders will lead voting in California, but says Biden has momentum to narrow Sanders’ gap and end the night in a strong position moving forward into additional March primaries.

___

1:30 p.m.

Former FBI Director James Comey is throwing his support behind Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Comey tweeted Tuesday that he had voted in his first Democratic primary and that he believes the country needs a candidate “who cares about all Americans and will restore decency, dignity to the office.”

Comey says “there’s a reason Trump fears” Biden and “roots” for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Trump frequently targets Biden on Twitter, calling him “Sleep Joe Biden” and recently mocking his debate performance. The president also tweets about Sanders, saying the Democrats are “staging a coup against Bernie!”

Comey has served in both Republican and Democratic administrations. He was fired as FBI director by Trump in May 2017 and has been a chief antagonist of the president’s since then.

___

11:15 a.m.

Mike Bloomberg is acknowledging that his only path to the nomination is through a convention fight and suggested he may not win any states on Super Tuesday.

Speaking to reporters at a field office in Miami, the businessman said, “I don’t know whether you’re gonna win any” when he was asked which of the 14 states voting Tuesday he believed he could win.

Bloomberg added, “You don’t have to win states, you have to win delegates.” He suggested that no one will get a majority of delegates and “then you go to a convention, and we’ll see what happens.”

Bloomberg was then asked if he wanted a contested convention and he said, “I don’t think that I can win any other way.”

The billionaire is appearing on the ballot for the first time in the presidential race on Tuesday.

Democratic presidential candidate former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg speaks during a news conference on Tuesday, March 3, 2020, in Little Havana, a neighborhood in Miami. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)

___

9:10 a.m.

Deadly tornadoes have affected Super Tuesday voting in two southern states.

The Tennessee Democratic Party is moving some polling places damaged by deadly tornadoes that rolled through the Nashville area Monday night. The party on twitter says that voters assigned to 18 polling locations can vote at a designated high school, church and community center.

Tornadoes ripped across Tennessee early Tuesday, shredding at least 40 buildings and killing at least seven people. One of the twisters caused severe damage in downtown Nashville. Police said officers and fire crews were responding to about 40 building collapses around the city.

In Alabama, seven poll workers were getting ready to open the doors to voters at the Lawley Senior Activity Center southwest of Birmingham when cellphone alerts began going off with a tornado warning about 6:45 a.m. Tuesday, said volunteer Gwen Thompson.

She said they went into the bathroom and were OK, but trees were down. The storm knocked out electricity, Thompson said, but the precinct’s two electronic voting machines had battery backups and a few people had cast ballots less than an hour later.

“We’ve voting by flashlight,” Thompson said. (edited)

The early-morning storms in Alabama damaged homes and toppled trees. Winds as strong as 60 mph (97 kph) were reported by the National Weather Service. Tornado warnings issued in at least five counties.

8 a.m.

A super PAC supporting Joe Biden‘s presidential bid is running a robocall in some Super Tuesday states featuring positive words about Biden from former President Barack Obama.

Amanda Loveday of Unite the Country PAC says the call is running through Tuesday in Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

The call features audio from a speech in which Obama calls Biden “a statesman, leader who sees clearly the challenges facing America in a changing world.”

A spokeswoman for Obama said the robocall from Biden’s super PAC did not amount to an endorsement and the former president’s office was not aware that the group planned to use the old audio.

Several candidates in the race have run television ads featuring positive sentiments from Obama, although he has endorsed no one.

Fourteen states vote in Tuesday’s primary. Loveday said the call also ran in South Carolina before its primary last Saturday and could be used in other states that vote in the future.

(The Associated Press contributed to this report)

from FOX 4 Kansas City WDAF-TV | News, Weather, Sports https://fox4kc.com/news/live-blog-poll-shows-many-democratic-voters-made-last-minute-super-tuesday-picks/

from Kansas City Happenings https://kansascityhappenings.wordpress.com/2020/03/04/watch-live-biden-picks-up-third-super-tuesday-win-in-alabama/

0 notes