Jump to content

ExPDXer

Member
  • Content count

    747
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ExPDXer

  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. 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?
  3. 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
  4. ExPDXer

    Trump is "super pissed"

    Oh, I thought republicans developed a new fetish. Maybe Steel dossier wass on to something.
  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.
  10. Flynn IS the Deep State. After Obama ‘fired’ him from DIA, he worked as a double agent to spy on Putin. Then, Putin used him as a double agent to recruit Trump during campaign. Obama ‘warned’ Trump not to hire Flynn as National Security Chief. Of course, he knew Trump would do the opposite. Mueller ‘caught’ Flynn lying about Russia contacts, and informed Yates. Trump claims the ‘deep state’ wiretapped the Trump tower, but Flynn was right there beside him. Yates warned Trump that Flynn lied on his application. Trump keeps him as NSA chief for 3 more weeks. Mueller ‘indicts’ Flynn, and Flynn immediately ‘flips’. Flynn does a data dump on the record for Mueller. Flynn gets no jail time, and is profusely praised by Mueller for his cooperation. Flynn probably has been working for CIA / FBI for the last three years, wearing a wire for most of that time. Flynn IS the Deep State. Trump is toast.
  11. Good list. I agree. A couple small comments on: "~ Reduce campaign duration to six weeks" Why? Is there an official start date for primary campaigns? , Or are you referring to start of 1st Primary to convention (nomination)? I would like to see Iowa, NH, and South Carolina primaries held the same time as a big states like CA, FL, NY, or Ohio. Having a couple big states vote earlier in the cycle will weed out the primary field very quickly. Or- Have a National Primary Election day for all parties, and all candidates. "~ Make election day a public holiday. Legislate nationwide mail-in ballots for those so-inclined." I would lean toward mandatory 2-3 week in-person early voting period instead of, or in addition to a public holiday. Although I loved mail-in voting in Oregon, in-person voting is the most tamper proof method in ethically challenged states like NC, GA,& FL. A bracket system???, like March Madness? That would be crazy.
  12. ExPDXer

    Deval Patrick-2020

    Another Third Way Corporate Democrat. Today, he will drop out of the 2020 race. Deval Patrick to Announce He Will Not Run for President in 2020 Good riddance. Hidden junket funds: How Deval Patrick secretly diverted millions to off-budget accounts <snip> Former Gov. Deval Patrick’s administration secretly diverted nearly $27 million in public money to off-budget accounts that paid for a $1.35 million trade junket tab, bloated advertising contracts, and a deal with a federally subsidized tourism ventuRE (Brand USA), backed by U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, a Herald investigation has found. Brand USA has been criticized for being a haven for Democratic cronies and a benefit for Las Vegas casinos in Reid’s home state.
  13. ExPDXer

    WTF is Schumer doing?

    Who's gonna pay for the wall? Chuck Schumer. From ThinkProgress: WTF is Schumer doing? <snip> Democratic House candidates received a historic amount of votes across the country and broke the unified Republican control of U.S. government under President Donald Trump. Enter Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The New York Democrat, who has made a series of pointless deals allowing confirmations of dozens of Trump judicial nominees, said on Tuesday that he’s willing to offer Trump $1.6 billion for border security. (The Wall)
  14. irt: ".....the same people responsible for getting Spanky Trump elected......" Votes (by voters) are the metric used to determine election results. It is the responsibility of the candidates to earn enough votes to win elections. blaming voters is a futile act of deflecting away from the losing candidate's inability to measure up. even HRC does not blame voters for 2016. There is a list in her book of excuses, but voters are not on the list as far as I remember.
  15. Blaming voters for the results of elections is like blaming the ruler for not being 6'8".
  16. Yes, I have to admire her ability to herd cats, which is a very important requirement for Speaker position. My view is she sometimes has difficulty deciding what direction to lead the disparate animals, by taking 'neutral', or unknown positions on issues. With the ACA, Obama set the tone, and provided the direction. Pelosi then herded the cats through the ACA door very effectively. Being ‘all things to all people’ has limits. Sooner or later the long-term direction of the Democratic party has to be decided, or we’re all effectively herded together, but not going anywhere. Are we being herded into the corporate centrist door, towards the progressive door, or just standing still? The very thing that makes her an excellent shepherd, also impedes progress towards long term goals. What would FDR do? Republicans seem to know exactly where they want to go, but have different views of how much they can get away with. A decision will have to be made soon, if energizing the party around a winning issue in 2020 is important. Bold plans, and direction generate voter enthusiasm. Even if it's framed as a long term goal, like 'Healthcare for All by 2040'.
  17. Prior to midterms, 7 States (CA, AZ, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, NJ, & Washington) had some form of non-partisan or bipartisan redistricting commission An 8th state, Iowa, uses a special redistricting process that uses neither the state legislature nor an independent redistricting commission to draw electoral district boundaries. During midterms, voters in 4 more states (Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, and Utah) approved measures to have independent commissions — rather than politically charged state legislatures — draw the boundaries of districts where candidates will run for Congress and state legislatures. Voters in Colorado passed two separate amendments by 71 to 29 percent. In Michigan, voters approved a redistricting commission, 61 to 39 percent. Missouri, created a “state demographer” position to draw up plans for a commission, 62 to 38 percent. Utah’s prop 4 passed narrowly. Ohio voters back in May approved a change requiring bipartisan votes in the legislature on any redistricting plan. If a bipartisan consensus can’t be reached, a commission would draw the lines. There is substantial voter interest in not only who does redistricting, but how those lines are drawn. There appears to be differences on what the standards might be, in terms of defining districts that are ‘contiguous and compact’. So, about a dozen (mostly blue) states currently have commissions involved in redistricting. But their makeup varies widely. Colorado’s ballot measure will create an independent commission to redraw congressional and state legislative district lines. Each commission will have 12 members, an equal number of Democrats and Republicans and some independents. Under Michigan’s new constitutional amendment, both congressional and legislative districts will be created by a commission. Utah’s Proposition 4 would create an independent, seven-member commission to draft election maps for both congressional and state legislative districts. In Missouri, the approved ballot initiative will have a nonpartisan state demographer file proposed maps with the existing election commissions. The maps would need support from 70 percent of commissioners. The demographer is tasked with considering “partisan fairness and competitiveness,” contiguousness, compactness and the boundaries of existing political subdivisions in drawing up the plan. There should be some type of standard developed at the national level that would define more specifically what ‘contiguous and compact’ means. To me, it should mean no more than 4 sides, with provisions for existing state boundaries (that may not be a straight line). Getting anti gerrymandering measures on the ballot in the deeply red states in the deep south may be difficult (to say the least). On top of that, these states also have big voter suppression issues. Stacey Abrams has a good case in GA that may provide a legal opinion, and precedent to battle Republican suppression efforts in other states. Throwing one or two corrupt election officials (like Kemp) in jail would help as well.
  18. ExPDXer

    WTF is Schumer doing?

    The 'game' of politics (getting elected), is very different than the duty to govern. What is Chuck getting for his acquiescence? Is it a secret? Why did he give up on DACA? He has some explaining to do, IMHO. There many Democratic Congressmen & Senators that oppose any funding for the wall. There are many Democratic, Progressive, and Independent voters who realize spending $1.6B to solve a 'problem' manufactured by Trump and the Republicans could be spent on better things. Giving Trump a 'win' on building his wall is not good political gamesmanship. It probably will not be well received by Hispanics in CA, AZ, or TX.
  19. ExPDXer

    To impeach or not that is the question

    Do you believe that Trump committed high crimes, misdemeanors, or treason? If he fires Mueller, would you favor starting impeachment investigations in the House? If not, what would Trump have to do to start impeachment in the House?
×