Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:

Recent Profile Visitors

1,771 profile views
  1. I said I would comment after digesting this data ^^^^ And this... (see below) After reading the above research, it only confirms my belief that the US is experiencing deepening political division. This division is particularly evident when viewed through the lens of organized political organizations like Republican / Democrat, or Conservative / Liberal identity. The trajectory is also very clear., and we are not the only country experiencing this upheaval. Is this Good, or Bad? It's probably Bad, because it's the stuff civil wars are made of. However, it raises the stakes for hard decisions to be made on issues where there is no 'middle path', or where compromise produces mediocrity. So it is no exaggeration that there are very few moderates voters left. There are very many reasons for this. Moderation is both a cure, and a disease. Extremism is both a cure, and a disease. Regardless, deep political division is the reality of the situation. One side must capitulate to make progress on any issue. Historically, this is not the first time the country has experienced these deep, widening divisions. It usually coincides with ideological 'peaks', such as the peak of pro business conservatism from 1920-1928, that resulted in economic depression. The early 1920's were very analogous to what we are seeing today, with deep economic, and political divisions. Twelve years later, the direction the country should be taking became painfully clear. The FDR won a landslide victory, and ushered in a long period of popular progressive policies that practically eliminated divisions. 1932 Election results: FDR - Blue, Hoover - Red I do not consider myself hyper-partisan. I used to be partisan Dem, but over the years they have drifted away from the party of the people. It's just a political organization, progress on the issues are far more important to me than party conscription, especially economic, and environmental issues. Hyper- political would better describe my activism.
  2. ExPDXer

    So Who Are We Going To Support In 2020?

    Updated list...... Avenetti, Clinton, Moulton, Patrick, Winfrey, Cuban, Cuomo off the list (for now) Added ideology (my best guess), and stance on M4A, & Corp Donations. Rank polling Age ideology healthcare Donors 1 26.2% Joe Biden (Delaware) 75 Centrist 2 18.8% Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) 77 Progressive M4A No Corp PAC $ 3 8.0% Rep. Beto O'Rourke (Tex.) 46 Progressive M4A No Corp PAC $ 4 5.3% Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) 69 Progressive M4A No Corp PAC $ 5 3.5% Sen. Kamala Harris (Calif.) 54 faux-progressive M4A No Corp PAC $ 6 3.3% Sen. Cory Booker (N.J.) 49 faux-progressive M4A No Corp PAC $ 7 2.0% Michael Bloomberg (NYC) 76 Centrist 8 1.5% Andrew Cuomo (NY) 60 9 1.0% Gov. Steve Bullock (Montana) 52 10 0.8% Julián Castro (Texas) 44 Centrist 11 0.8% Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) 58 Centrist 12 0.8% Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) 51 faux-progressive M4A No Corp PAC $ 13 0.7% Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio) 66 Progressive 14 0.5% CEO Howard Schultz 65 14 0.5% Myr. Eric Garcetti (Los Angeles) 47 15 0.4% Frmr AG Eric Holder 67 16 0.3% Deval Patrick (Mass) 62 16 0.3% Michael Avenatti (Calif.) 47 16 Rep. John Delaney (Md.)-Declared 55 Frmr Gov. Martin O'Malley (MD) 55 Gov. Jay Inslee (Wash.) 67 Gov. John Hickenlooper (Colo.) 66 Centrist Gov. Terry McAuliffe (Va) 61 Centrist Hillary Clinton (NYC) 76 Jason Kander (Missouri) 37 Mark Cuban (Tx) 60 Myr. Mitch Landrieu (New Orl.) 58 Myr. Pete Buttigieg (IN) 36 Oprah Winfrey 64 Rep. Eric Swalwell (Calif.) 37 Rep. Joe Kennedy (Mass.) 38 Rep. Seth Moulton (Mass) 40 Rep. Tim Ryan (Ohio) 45 Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii) 37 Progressive Richard Ojeda (WV)-Declared 48 Sen Mark Warner (Va.) 63 Sen. Chris Murphy (Conn.) 45 Sen. Jeff Merkley (Oregon) 62 Progressive M4A Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.) 60 Tom Steyer 61
  3. ExPDXer

    Trump is "super pissed"

    Oh, I thought republicans developed a new fetish. Maybe Steel dossier wass on to something.
  4. Source: Trump 'super pissed' by Ayers process Probably a poor choice of words. Nothing freudian about that. A friend says Trump was really 'pissed off' this weekend GOP Rep.: 'Deplorable' Trump 'pissed' on Republicans in WH remarks Graham flips Saudi Arabia vote: 'I'm pissed' What's with all the republicans being so pissed?
  5. Wow!. Great research paper. 'Just started going through it, but it it looks like top rate analysis by real scientists. I' ll re=post when I'm through reading.............
  6. Nice graph. We can only imagine what the division looks like today. What is difficult to discern is where the center line is/ was. I contend that the group of blue dots is not only separating from the group of red dots, but both groups have shifted to the right over the years. If I am interpreting this graph correctly (on the x axis), the leftmost blue dot would represent the votes on social democrat issues, whereas the rightmost dot would be a freedom caucus type issues. What the heck is the Y axis? Got more links? Anyway, this division apart, along with an overall drift to the right by both congressional groups, has driven voters to reflect the same division (via mainstream media). It should be voters that drive congressional representatives voting patterns, not the other way around. This illustrates why I believe there is no such thing as an 'undecided', or 'swing' voter anymore. Attempts by moderate, or centrist candidates to win over the mythical moderate voter, or to attract defectors from the other side will not be successful, IMHO. There are Independent voters. Independent, (or NPA voters) are not 'undecided', or 'swing' voters, or even 'moderate, centrist' voters. They are the most misunderstood voting bloc, (next to the 'not voting' bloc) . Many Bernie supporters are registered Independent, as well as young voters. I'm sure some right wingers, and neverTrumpers are registered Independent. It's a complete mixed bag. The only thing you can say for sure is that they feel alienated by both parties on 1 or more issues. I think the campaign (before the 1st primary vote) should be a long and gradual process to allow a little known candidate time to build grassroots momentum, and run a small donation campaign. Absolutely. For instance, we have 2 declared, (and many undeclared) candidates for 2020, almost 2 years before the 1st vote in Iowa. However, once the actual primary voting starts, it should be quick (maybe same day), and representative of the population. I think this addresses your concern. Why should Iowa, NH, and SC effectively decide the nominations before the rest of the country gets a chance? The down side, as Bludog points out, is a long campaign cost more money. There is a good argument for publicly funded campaigns, and taking as much money out of the process as possible. Until that happens, a even, level playing field for all primary candidates is all we can hope for. I haven't gone through Tom Perez's plan for hold debates yet, but I somehow get the feeling he's over his head, and possibly biased. Something about a mixing the adults in at the little kids table for debates. I don't know why an Independent debate organization can't be charged with the responsibility of managing, and arranging debate schedules. The DNC has a bad track record.
  7. I'm not disappointed at all. The amount of jail time is inversely proportion to the amount of evidence obtained.
  8. Like I said, No jail time is a sure indication Flynn was working undercover for CIA / FBI. When undercover agents are charged with crimes (to avoid blowing cover), they always get released when the judge finds out they're working for the good guys. Happens all the time in Mafia cases. You still think Flynn is on Team Trump? He never was. He is on Team 'Deep State'. You'll figure it out once they un-redact the sentencing document.
  9. I read the 1st word 'Breitbart'. Anything after that is just extreme right wing propaganda. Of course No Jail time. He is, and always has been CIA/ DIA undercover. No hints of Collusion. No Collusion, no collusion. Collusion is not a crime. Conspiracy against the United States, however is a crime. Ask Manafort.