#please let trump make a big show of voting and then get charged with voter fraud 🙏🙏🙏

[ladyluscinia]

Funniest thing about Trump's 34 felonies is that while Florida did do that significant voting rights reform (big win!) it's still illegal for felons to vote until they've served their whole sentence. So if he refuses while he appeals or drags his feet on a fine or is just sentenced to more than 6 months of probation, then he can't legally vote for himself in November!

Edit: maybe not...

[newdog14]

I want to talk to everyone who's still saying "I know Biden is bad, but Trump is worse, so just vote Blue."

I know that American Politics sucks right now. Everyone is a bad option and every year our options get worse. I get it, and it sucks, but here's the thing: If we keep saying "Vote Blue no matter what!" then the Democratic party is never going to get better. In fact, it'll probably get worse, because if ignoring the voices of their voter base doesn't lose them votes, then why bother listening?

If you want things to get better, if you want politicians that you can vote for without feeling like you've betrayed your ethics, then we need to show that we WILL stop voting for people who we don't agree with. We need to show that the American people have heard Biden's Administration say "There are no red lines for Israel" and we do not agree.

Politicians only care about us for our votes. If supporting genocides demonstrably loses votes, then politicians will take note and change their policies in accordance. But if we vote Biden no matter what, if we vote Blue no matter what, then they aren't going to listen to us when we call and protest and scream.

Now, some of you may be thinking, what about Trump?

There is a chance he won't be able to run after all; he's currently in a legal shit storm that got his ability to do business in New York revoked. And with many of his co-defendants and associates pleading guilty things aren't looking good for him. Even if he can dodge the numerous felony fraud charges he's been hit with, this is going to be an expensive, embarrassing, dragged out process that will severely limit his time and funds for campaigning.

That doesn't mean he won't find his way onto the ballot anyway, but he hasn't won the Republican nomination yet. Even if he does though, sticking by Biden doesn't mean you're putting someone better in the White House. Given the ever climbing death toll that Biden is not just ignoring but enabling, it’s getting increasingly difficult, at least for me, to believe that Trump is actually worse. They’re both bad, and they’re both hurting people, so instead let’s look at why so many are clinging to the democratic party, even in the face of a genocide.

I know the biggest reason so many folks are hesitating to cut support for Biden is that they're worried about what that means for those of us in the United States.

Who will stop the anti-trans bathroom bills that keep popping up? Who will keep abortion bans off the books? Who will prevent censorship in schools?

Well, in point of fact, not your president!

Think about it. Did Biden being president put a stop to Florida's "don't say gay" bill? No. He had zero impact there.

Is he what stands between Virginia and the Abortion Ban currently being proposed for the state? Also no. He's not involved at all.

Has Biden stopped the bans on Drag Shows so many states are trying to implement? No, the Federal Courts have been doing that, including judges who were appointed by Trump.

See, the President of the United States is all about the big picture. Their opinions matter, and they can set a tone for their party, but they don’t control everything. Their impacts on the governing of states come from the people they appoint, like judges, but even then, most people will still do their jobs over pleasing the person who got them that job. Especially so because federal judges are actually really difficult to remove, and that only really happens if they’re so bad at following the rules that congress gets rid of them.

I’m not sure if Biden can’t stop states from making laws or if he just wouldn’t, but either way he’s not protecting us. 

The President honestly can’t do a hell of a lot to the American people, especially not in just four years. That’s why we survived Trump’s first presidency, and it’s why we as a whole would survive it if he got a second term.

The place where a President’s influence is immediately and drastically felt, however, is in the international sphere. The American people are protected, the citizens of the world are not, and with that fun little “well we’re not declaring war” workaround, the President, aka the Commander in Chief of the US Military, can do a hell of a lot of damage.

The people of Palestine may not survive another four years of Biden’s presidency. If things carry on like they are, they may not survive the remaining one year of his term.

So we the American people need to show that we will not stand by a president that endorses genocide. We need to show that we will not stand by a party that endorses genocide. We need to start talking, and loudly, about how we will not be voting for Biden next year. We need it to be clear that it is specifically his foreign policy that has lost his support, and that we will not be willing to just switch him out for a newer model who reminds me of no one so much as a modern day Aaron Burr.

There are a lot of things that we can do to express our displeasure for Biden, and for Israel, and there are a lot of people who can help you call for change, plan boycotts, organize marches, and determine where to aim direct action to have the greatest impact. But all of that needs to be done while putting our votes where our voices are, or else all of that rage will burn out and nothing will really change, just like it has in the Black Lives Matter movement.

In this case, as we do not currently have a better option, the place to put our presidential votes is with no one.

It’s not an ideal solution, I know. After all the years we’ve spent saying, “Vote! Vote no matter what! Vote or else you can’t complain about what happens!”, not voting feels like one of the most counterproductive moves to make. The reason we have to do it though, is because voting in the same sort of people and hoping they’ll make things better isn’t working, and we’re never going to get new options if we keep supporting the old ones. Cutting support for Biden, for Democrats on the national level, without a viable alternative isn't an easy choice to make. It's scary and I admit that it's kind of a gamble. No one has ever tried it before, not the way I'm hoping you all will.

Have you ever heard the phrase, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it?” It’s time for us to break. No more unconditional blue votes. 

We have to force the Democratic party to recognize that their voting base will not just mindlessly support them, and that the candidates they put forth will be expected to hold up a certain moral standard. Our democracy is skewed to favor the opinions of corporations and the mega rich, but politicians do still need the masses to vote them into office, just like companies need us to buy things so that they can make money in the first place, and voting margins are tight enough that just like in the Speaker of the House vote, it won’t actually take that many of us to throw a wrench in the party’s bottom line.

We might not be able to win, but we can make sure that they lose until they shape up and start making meaningful changes.

And you may be thinking, won’t that just leave us in the hands of Republicans?

I want you to scroll back up. Look at all the bills I brought up that Biden didn’t stop. We are already in Republican hands, and the majority of Democrats are not willing to actually stand up to them.

That said, not voting across the board isn’t what I’m asking you to do. 

Our choices for President may be shot to hell, but there will be other people on that ballot in 2024. Local people, who will very directly affect your hometown and not much outside of it. Vote for your local sheriff, for your school board members, for your mayor and your state delegates. 

These are the people who control whether or not your senator can pass a drag show ban. These are the people who enable or block bills that hurt LGBTQ+ students. These are the folks who vote on whether or not to pass abortion bans. And in local elections? Your vote really, truly counts in a way that it just can’t on a national level.

And it’s not just people who wind up on your ballots. Local initiatives for conservation, funding for infrastructure, redistricting drives, and changes to your state’s constitution appear on your ballots too, and those are things that you’re going to want to have a say in.

There’s more to this mess than just voting or not voting, of course. There is always going to be more than one step we have to take to force change. That's why we cannot and do not vote inside a vacuum. We still have to make calls, and go to protests, and put our money where our morals are. Change isn't easy, and when you're fighting a decades old machine it's not quick either. But the longer we drag our feet about pushing back, the longer we keep betting on the lesser evil to change, the worse our options will get.

It might feel hopeless right now. Like our voices don't matter, and that we're screaming our lungs out alone. We can't give up though. We can't give into despair, and we can’t let up the pressure before new voices step forward, even if it takes time, and even if it takes more effort then checking a box or sharing a post.

One step will never be enough on its own, but every step we take adds up, and when we take those steps together we magnify our voices into something that cannot be ignored.

This is how we force our politicians to change: consequences and losses. If we start up early enough we might even get better options who could actually win the presidency, but we can't balk if we don't.

I know you might be scared to lose this election. As I write this, it feels counterintuitive, and it's something I never could have imagined saying years ago. But we can't change our political options unless we force politicians to change, and that only happens if they can't get elected as they are.

So don't elect them, and make sure they know that you're doing it on purpose and for a reason.

[mars-the-4th-planet]

October electoral college polling map + an explanation of my stance on the election!

It's been a while since I posted an election polling map, but here it is!

Biden seems to be hitting a high point in the campaign after it was stagnating for a while, and it couldn't come at a better time (the election is just next month!). He is breaking previous records and outpacing where Hillary Clinton was at this point by over five percent nationally and doing better than her in several swing states. And that was before the email scandal got reinvestigated!

Since I've done so many already over the course of 2020, and since then I've learned more about it, I've worked very hard to make it as accurate as possible. Such as differentiating Maine's districts and omitting polling sources that are reputed for being consistently about 7+ points off of every other source due to oversampling and poor methods. I don't really understand why anyone would try and make their data off on purpose. Making your side look like they're doing better than they are is not helpful to anything. It doesn't make your side more likely to win after all.

But remember, these polls only show how people feel about the candidates and say nothing about voter enthusiasm/determination to vote. Who actually wins depends on people going and voting for them. And with the voter surpression by the GOP, that may not be super easy. So please, if you want to see trump lose, do not assume that your state is a guaranteed win! Go and vote! (I assume you want to see trump lose if you are following me, I'm pretty consistently left wing.)

Why should you consider voting for Joe Biden if you're a leftist and wanted a different candidate like Bernie Sanders, (I know I did) or prefer the green party? Let's go over a few things that Joe Biden will improve.

First and most importantly to me, the environment. I don't want climate change to be accelerated. I want it to be combated to prevent an ecological collapse that would ruin my life, if not outright take it. If you care about the futures of young people, that's a pretty big plus to Biden... He may not be at the same level as AOC or Sanders in that regard, but he will do anything that is economically viable to help the environment which is more than we can say about the Incumbent.

Secondly, his policies for people with disabilities are much better than trump's. He wants to raise the financial ceiling for when one loses their disability benefits, he wants to end the marriage penalty, and increase protections. The lives of Americans with disabilities will be tangibly better under a Biden presidency. If you care about people with disabilities, it's something to consider. I say this as someone with a disability and in a relationship with someone else with a disability.

Thirdly, his policies towards working class families are better. He is offering affordable and in some cases even free daycare and preschool for families where both parents need to work. He also wants to keep the food stamps program. If you care about struggling poor families, its something to consider. I say this as someone who has relied on food stamps when I was little.

Forth, Biden has a better temperament. This means he is more likely to keep a steady mind during situations where we need a leader who is able to remain calm. Trump has been in charge of the nuclear arsenal and our entire military for four years, and people have lost their lives because of it. We cannot trust trump with these powers any longer.

Fifth, democrats are trying to pass legislation on making our elections more free and fair. It will never pass under trump. Biden is simply better for preserving our democracy and improving it to make it more actually democratic.

Sixth, Trump is trying to bring in more conservative judges who threaten the rights of the lgbt, women, and racial minorities. And they serve for life. It could severely set back the United States and undo even more progress if trump is re-elected and gets his way.

Seventh, he will manage Coronavirus better by actually listening to experts and scientists. Trumps politicizing of the virus has gotten a lot of Americans killed and could get a lot more killed. Including himself and his family. Things have gotten completely out of control, and it's mainly trump and his supporter's faults.

Lastly, trump is out to get people. Worryingly so. He weaseled out of condemning white supremacists and practically endorsed them by deflecting that they weren't the real problem and that their goals were good. He agreed that someone needs to "do something" about antifa and the left in general. Not only that, but he has retweeted a video of his supporters going "white power!" and another tweet saying "the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat". He has also refused aid to states with left wing governors such as Michigan, making things worse in that state solely because he has beef with the governor. And one of the most blatent examples is his militaristic attack on peaceful protestors because they were in the way of his bible photoshoot. His behavior has been far right of some kind for sure, many would call it fascist. Trump himself identifies as a Christian Nationalist, which is practically the same as a Fascist but more religious. I would easily take a Liberal over a Christian Nationalist if it were up to me.

I hope you enjoy looking at my little graph. Would appreciate feedback to it and the argument I made, and would especially like to know what @atheistforhumanity @feelingbluepolitics and @acabats think about it. (note that my views do not represent theirs so if I said something here that annoyed you, don't go bug them about it.)

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 13, 2021

Heather Cox Richardson

At 4:22 this afternoon, the House of Representatives passed the number of votes necessary to impeach Trump. In the end, 232 Representatives—222 Democrats and 10 Republicans—agreed that the president had incited an insurrection and must be removed from office. But 197 Republicans disagreed.

And so, Donald Trump makes the history books as the first president of the United States of America to be impeached twice.

This is an indictment of him, of course, but also of the Republican Party that let him off the hook a year ago for undermining the national security of the United States as he tried to steal the 2020 election. Shortly before the Senate vote on conviction almost exactly a year ago, House impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-CA) charged his Republican colleagues to look to the future, telling them, “you know you can’t trust this President to do what’s right for this country. You can trust he will do what’s right for Donald Trump. He’ll do it now. He’s done it before. He’ll do it for the next several months. He’ll do it in the election if he’s allowed to.”

But every Republican senator other than Mitt Romney (R-UT) voted to acquit the president of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. And now, here we are.

A week ago, our Capitol was overrun by insurgents seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and install Trump in the White House for at least another term. In their fury, they murdered a Capitol Police officer and came within a hair’s breadth of getting their hands on our elected officials.

The insurgents were answering the call of their president, who urged them to fight for him and claim a victory he insisted, without evidence, had been stolen from him. As they stormed the Capitol and aid did not come for the besieged lawmakers, Trump watched events unfold on the television, pleased… and, as people have begun to note, curiously unsurprised.

In the week since the attack, emerging information indicates the insurgency was planned, not spontaneous, and that lawmakers might be involved. Democrats have stood up to this attack on our democracy, but Republicans are in the same bind they’ve been in for years: how can they both keep Trump’s voters and reject Trump himself? Some establishment Republicans who have their own bases of power--Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Romney, for example-- have finally said enough is enough, and have come out against the president.

But Republican lawmakers whose only base is Trump supporters have downplayed the attack that killed five people, including a police officer, and wounded many others; defended Trump; and argued that any attempt to remove him is simply a dangerous Democratic effort to create divisions in society. They warn that holding Trump accountable will anger his supporters even more, an observation that many interpret as a threat.

This Republican split showed up today. Liz Cheney (R-WY), chair of the House Republican Conference, blamed the president for the attack on the Capitol and voted to impeach him. But only nine other Republicans joined her. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) tried to split the baby by blaming the president for the attack on the Capitol but voting against impeachment. Trump loyalists like Jim Jordan (R-OH), who just received the Medal of Freedom from Trump, continued to allege that the election was tainted. They supported Trump wholeheartedly and attacked the Democrats. Refusing to acknowledge that their attacks on the election created the crisis in the first place, they called for unity and blamed the Democrats for dividing America.  

One hundred and ninety-seven Republicans voted against impeaching the president. A year ago, Schiff infuriated Republicans by repeating a rumor published by CBS News that White House officials had warned party members: “Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.” Today, rumors swirled that a number of Republicans did not dare to vote in favor of impeachment because they feared for their safety and that of their loved ones.

While the House debated impeachment, the FBI continued to hunt down the insurgents, companies withdrew support from Republicans who supported the attacks on the election, and New York City canceled $17 million worth of contracts with the Trump administration.

The article of impeachment now goes to the Senate. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) suggested yesterday that he supported impeachment, but today said he would not change the Senate’s schedule to permit a trial before January 19. McConnell was likely pushing impeachment to pressure Trump to resign but, having failed, will do the bare minimum to guide the Republican Party past this moment. He needs to bend just enough to loosen up the purse strings of the companies who are saying they won’t continue to support Republicans who attacked our elections and launched a coup.

In the next week, Trump Republicans might be able to convince Americans that holding Republican insurrectionists responsible for their actions is Democratic overreaction. In that case, the Republicans can avoid taking a stand either for or against Trump while they turn this moment into a referendum on the Democrats just as they take power in the national government. They are running this play headlong, complaining bitterly, for example, about the new metal detectors installed at the entrance to the House chamber-- even as National Guard personnel patrolled the Capitol to protect them-- and complaining about “censorship” to television cameras after Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube removed QAnon accounts and Trump’s accounts.

It could also be that, as more information comes out, the story will get even worse, and it will be easier for senators to vote to convict, especially once Trump is out of office. Yesterday’s briefings by the FBI and acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin gave notice that the evolving story of what happened on January 6 will be shocking and could well involve figures in government. More than 30 House Democrats have called attention to an unusual number of Capitol tours held on January 5, at a time when coronavirus restrictions have largely ended tours. Those tours, combined with the fact that the insurrectionists appeared to have a detailed knowledge of the Capitol complex, have led to suspicions that some members of Congress might have offered aid to the rioters.

A sign that there is something big still hanging out there came tonight in the form of a taped video by Trump himself, emphasizing that he disavowed violence and defending the right to free speech protected in the First Amendment to the Constitution. It sounded like a charge and a defense. To release such a video means he must be worried indeed about his legal exposure.

Another sign is that virtually no one in the White House tried to defend Trump from today’s impeachment. There were no talking points, no briefings, no interviews, no calls to lawmakers. Even White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, who defended the president at his first impeachment last year, wanted people to know he was not defending him this time.

Furious and isolated, Trump is lashing out at those he blamed for getting him into this mess. He has told aides that he wants personally to approve any expenses his lawyer Rudy Giuliani ran up as he traveled around the country to challenge election results, and he has told them not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees.

Trump had largely given up governing after the election anyway, but now our government seems to be operating haphazardly. Today, Israeli warplanes hit Iranian and Iranian-backed militia positions in Syria. Israeli forces are often active in this area, but this was the hardest attack in years, hitting missiles recently brought to the area and killing around 40 people. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted Trump to pressure Iran before he left office, and this strike seems intended to demonstrate a U.S.-Israeli partnership against Iran. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Yossi Cohen, the head of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency, made this message obvious by being seen together Monday at Café Milano in Washington, D.C., a restaurant the Washington Post described as “Washington’s ultimate place to see and be seen.”

Also yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar announced new coronavirus vaccine schedule guidelines, as the U.S. reported 4,327 deaths from Covid-19. In the first 13 days of 2021, we have seen more than 3 million new infections. More than 23 million Americans have been infected so far.

Almost exactly a year ago, on January 23, 2020, Adam Schiff urged Senate Republicans to convict Trump for abusing his power and obstructing Congress, and to remove him from office. “Now,” he said, “you may be asking how much damage can he really do in the next several months until the election?

“A lot,” Schiff said. “A lot of damage.”

—-

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[arizonaconservativegal]

Hi, I was wondering if you could explain to a non-American what is happening/has happened with this whole impeachment stuff? I’ve tried looking through new reports, but they’re all heavily left-wing biased.

Ah heck, I really haven't been following it because there is zero chance they are going to remove the president but I'll do my best. Also I apologize if this is over explained but I'm not sure if it's the process you're confused about or the details of this specific case so I'm going to try to explain both.

Alright so Congress is made up of two bodies of elected officials, the House of Representatives and the Senate. The president is entirely separate from Congress, but the two oversee each other. Impeachment is one of Congress's options for handling a president who has violated his oath of office and it functions a little like a criminal trial.

The House of Representatives investigates and determines if there is enough evidence to suggest there might have been a crime (kind of like how a grand jury would decide if a case would move to an actual trial). They hold investigative hearings and call witnesses to help them determine if a crime has been committed and if so, what that crime was. This has been going on for several weeks now and if you hear the term "impeachment inquiry," this is what it refers to.

The House then draws up the Articles of Impeachment, which you can think of as an indictment in a criminal trial. They lay out all of the charges the president is facing and a simple majority (50% plus one) must approve each of them. This vote happened last week.

In this case, Trump is facing charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Allegedly, he abused his power by threatening to withhold aid from Ukraine if they did not investigate a political rival (Joe Biden) and he may have obstructed Congress by instructing his staff not to comply with Congressional subpoenas.

If I can insert my own commentary here, these charges are excuses rather than reasons for impeachment. House Democrats have been looking for anything they can possibly use against Trump since before he was even inaugurated. This whole thing is flimsy at best and a mockery of our constitution with unconsidered consequences at worst.

Once the House votes to approve the Articles of Impeachment, the president is officially considered "impeached" but not yet removed from office. The paperwork is sent over to the Senate where the president will stand trial and it is up to the Senate to determine if the president should be convicted and "sentenced" to removal from office. This requires a two-thirds majority vote of the Senate. I should note that although this functions like a criminal trial, it is not technically a true criminal trial so if the president is convicted, he could still face actual criminal charges and potential jail time later on after he has been removed from office.

The hang up right now is that the House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats who hate the president, but the Senate is controlled by the Republicans who are generally more fond of the president because he is also a Republican. The House has voted to approve the Articles of Impeachment, but they are currently refusing to deliver the documents to the Senate because the president's allies there are not likely to convict him.

I have to be honest, I have no idea if the House Democrats will be able to avoid delivering those papers to the Senate and I'm not really clear on what happens if the Senate never officially receives them. As far as I know, this has never happened before. I'm actually more interested in how that piece of the fight plays out than anything else so far.

But if the Senate trial does get started, Mitch McConnell (as the head of the majority party in the Senate) gets to decide what happens next. And if there is one thing you should know about Mitch McConnell it is that he is one devious son of a bitch and he knows every single Senate rule backwards and forwards and isn't afraid to exploit them especially if he feels the Democrats have already been playing unfairly. I have to say I respect and fear him immensely for it.

So basically there are two options for McConnell once he receives the paperwork:

#1: he can table it in favor of working on more pressing matters and the entire thing stalls. No hearings are held, no votes are taken, no one is removed from office. Trump is still technically impeached but who cares because nothing ever comes of it (at least until the Democrats take control of the Senate but let's be honest, if they manage that in 2020, Trump's done for anyway)

Or #2: he can proceed to trial. I think he will pick this route. There are very few rules in a Senate impeachment trial. McConnell gets to call any witness he likes, bar anyone from testifying that he wants (which is something the Democrats already did on the House side so you can bet McConnell feels this is a completely fair strategy at this point), ask any questions he wants, and drag the whole thing out as long as he pleases. Sure, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court gets to preside over the whole circus, but that guy is a Republican too so I wouldn't count on him to be much help to the Democrats.

Now the thing to remember here is that Democrats currently have 5 presidential candidates who are members of the Senate, plus Joe Biden who is very much at the center of all the allegations against Trump. So McConnell can tie up every single one of these people in months and months of hearings during election season, meaning they can't be out on the campaign trail. In fact, federal law prohibits them from doing any campaign activities while on the premises. No fundraising calls, no strategy meetings with staff, no checking email even. Nothing. They can grandstand as much as McConnell lets them during the trial, but it's not like C-SPAN is a popular channel these days. Every hour he has these guys in a hearing is an hour that is completely wasted for them during the most critical point in their campaign.

But there is something else here. Joe Biden is looking at least as guilty as Donald Trump in all of this. There is not a single thing to prohibit McConnell from calling ol' Joe and even Hunter Biden to testify. Defying his subpoena would be Obstruction of Congress (the very same thing Trump is charged with). If they do respond to a subpoena and testify, any crime they implicate themselves in would be fair game for a criminal trial. They would have little choice but to plead the fifth (constitutional protection against self-incrimination) and how do you think that would look to American voters? "Uh sorry, I can't answer that because it will make me look really guilty..."

If this thing ever came to a vote in the Senate (and that is a big if), a two-thirds majority would be required to convinct and remove the president from office. Two-thirds of the Senate is 67 Senators out of 100. There is no separate vote to acquit. If the vote to convinct fails to get the necessary 67 votes, the president is automatically considered acquitted and gets to stay in office.

The current Senate is made up of 45 Democrats, 53 Republicans and 2 Independents (although I think one of those two is Bernie Sanders who is running for president as a Democrat). Even if Democrats managed to pull a couple of Republican votes to their side, they wouldn't come close to that magic number of 67.

But just for fun, let's pretend this is Democrat Fantasy World and they do get 67 votes. What happens next? The US Constitution says that the president is then removed from office and the vice president takes his place. Which means Mike Pence would be the president. Mike Pence, the only person Democrats fear more than Trump because he is far more conservative and actually knows how to get things done in government. By the way, it's late enough in Trump's term that Pence could serve out the remaining few months of this term, run for the seat in 2020, and then run for re-election again in 2024 (constitution technically says a president may serve 10 years, this would put him at about 9). Do you hear that sound? That is the sound of me laughing until my sides hurt because if this happens, Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves.

Oh and if they want to impeach Pence too? The entire process starts over. Good luck guys.

TL;DR: Congress got tired of actually doing its job and decided to waste a lot of time and resources on a dog and pony show. Nothing is actually going to come of it.

[reading-writing-revolution]

Heather Cox Richardson

August 31, 2020 (Monday)

A bird's eye view of the country today sees a president seeming to slide off the rails. Trump is exaggerating the violence in cities to the point of caricature, while his supporters outright lie to try to advance his candidacy. On Thursday, Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway tipped the president’s hand on “Fox and Friends” when she said that “the more chaos and anarchy and vandalism and violence reigns, the better it is for” a candidate running on “law and order.”

In the wake of the Republican National Convention, which failed to boost his candidacy, Trump has been tweeting at an intense pace. Between 5:49 am and 8:04 am on Sunday, he tweeted or retweeted 89 messages, many of them inflaming the conflicts between protesters and his supporters. He retweeted a post from One America News claiming that “According to the mainstream media, the riots & extreme violence are completely unorganized. However, it appears this coup attempt is led by a well funded network of anarchists trying to take down the President.”

Yesterday, the president called the participants in the Portland “Trump cruise rally” “GREAT PATRIOTS!” and today called them “peaceful,” despite the fact they were shooting paintballs and pepper spray and driving vehicles into crowds. Today the president condemned what he called “the radical left,” but refused to condemn Trump supporter Kyle Rittenhouse, the seventeen-year-old who allegedly shot and killed two people and wounded a third with a friend’s AR-15 rifle (meaning Rittenhouse had it illegally) in Kenosha, Wisconsin last week. Trump suggested Rittenhouse, who has been charged with homicide, was “very violently attacked” by demonstrators (video does not indicate this). Trump supporters, including Fox News Channel personality Tucker Carlson, have also defended Rittenhouse.

This afternoon, Trump claimed that Portland, Oregon “is ablaze.” Josh Campbell, a CNN law enforcement correspondent on the ground in Portland and a former FBI supervisory special agent, called this "a lie."

Campbell told CNN: "Portland is not a city under siege. Today, I went to a Starbucks downtown, ate lunch at one of the city's famous downtown food trucks, and bought a new pair of shoes at the mall. As I write this, I'm looking out of my hotel room at a bike tour riding by outside on the downtown street…. To be sure, there have been protests -- peaceful during the daytime, and some turning violent at night -- for over 90 days, but the rioting has largely been confined to one city block downtown near the federal courthouse. Last night, protesters showed up at a police precinct a few miles from downtown and were dispersed by police after some protesters started throwing eggs and rocks at police cars. There has been periodic, localized violence, but nothing widespread."

Portland firefighter Lt. Rich Chatman agreed: “WE ARE NOT ABLAZE IN PORTLAND,” he texted to CNN reporter Daniel Dale. “There is a very isolated pocket of demonstrations that have involved fire… none of which have been substantial enough to need more than 1 fire engine.”

Trump’s vision of the world is getting more and more conspiratorial. Tonight in an interview with Fox News Channel personality Laura Ingraham, he claimed that “people that are in the dark shadows” are controlling Biden. He claimed this weekend there was an airplane full of “thugs” in “black uniforms,” out “to do big damage.” When Ingraham pressed for more information, he said: “I’ll tell you sometime but it’s under investigation.” Ingraham said: “That sounds like conspiracy theory.”

To push these ideas, Trump and his people are deliberately constructing a false narrative.

Trump’s YouTube channel is now home to a video featured at the Republican National Convention on Monday, showing rioting and a city in flames and implying those scenes are America in the past several months. In the film, one sister tells another that “This is a taste of Biden’s America,” as photos and videos of violence play. “The rioting, the crime. Freedom is at stake now and this is going to be the most important election of our lifetime.” In fact, the video is from Barcelona, Spain, in 2019.

Twitter has had to begin displaying warning labels on videos that have been “quote tweeted” (meaning users don’t simply retweet them, they add their own words, first), after leading Republican officials have circulated deceptively altered or edited videos, designed to hurt Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s candidacy.

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise tweeted a video that spliced together footage from an conversation between Biden and progressive activist Ady Barkan, who speaks with an artificial voice because he has ALS. The video added words to what Barkan actually said to make it sound as if the two were agreeing to defund police departments (in fact, Biden has proposed to increase police funding to include more money for “social workers, psychologists, people who in fact can handle those god-awful problems that a cop has to have four degrees to handle”). To the video, Scalise added "No police. Mob rule. Total chaos. That's the result of the Democrat agenda."

Barkan tweeted to Scalise: “These are not my words. I have lost my ability to speak, but not my agency or my thoughts. You and your team have doctored my words for your own political gain. Please remove this video immediately. You owe the entire disability community an apology.” Josh Marshall of TalkingPointsMemo was angry on Barkan’s behalf: “[Steve Scalise] you’re a disgrace. Who even imagines the depravity of doctoring the words of a man robbed of his voice by ALS let alone stoops to do it” he tweeted.

Twitter labeled the tweet with a warning and, under pressure, Scalise took it down, but not before tweeting: “While Joe Biden clearly said 'yes,' twice, to the question of his support to redirect money away from police, we will honor the request of [Barkan] and remove the portion of his interview from our video."

Today, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications and Director of Social Media Dan Scavino also posted a manipulated video, this one supposedly showing Biden falling asleep during a live television interview. But it was a mix of an old video of singer Harry Belafonte, apparently napping before an interview while technical glitches were worked out, and Biden looking downward for a moment. Twitter had to break out another warning, and Belafonte simply said: “They keep stooping lower and lower. A technical glitch in an interview I did nine years ago now becomes another one of their lies, more of their fake news. I beg every sane American: please vote them out. I knew many who gave their life for the right to vote. Never has it been so vital to exercise that right.”

The Trump campaign wasn’t done yet, though: on Monday it also tweeted a clip of Biden saying “You won’t be safe in Joe Biden’s America.” But in fact, when he said that, Biden was quoting the president and vice president. The full quotation was: “Trump and Pence are running on this, and I find it fascinating: Quote, 'You won't be safe in Joe Biden's America.' And what's their proof? The violence we're seeing in Donald Trump's America.”

Biden accused Trump of “fanning the flames of hate and division in our society and using the politics of fear to whip up his supporters.”

Apparently trying to link Biden to a radical left, Trump continues to demand that Biden must condemn “the Anarchists, Thugs & Agitators in ANTIFA,” and Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) has tried to tie Biden to “the Marxist Left.” It would be a stretch to link the famously moderate Biden with any sort of far left in America in any case, but, in fact, Biden has repeatedly condemned violence across the board. “I condemn violence of every kind by anyone, whether on the left or the right,” he said Sunday. Today he added: “I want to make it absolutely clear…. Rioting is not protesting. Looting is not protesting. Setting fires is not protesting. . . . It’s lawlessness, plain and simple, and those who do it should be prosecuted. Violence will not bring change, it’ll only bring destruction. It’s wrong in every way.”

Trump's America

The message that Trump is responsible for the unrest in the country is resonating with voters. A Military Times poll showed that almost 74% of active duty military personnel opposed Trump’s desire to use them against civil unrest in urban areas, while only 22% supported that idea. That opposition seems to be translating to voting preferences: 41.3% of active duty military personnel support Biden in the upcoming election, while 37.4 support Trump.

[newagesispage]

                                                              FEBRUARY             2021

 PAGE RIB

 The contents of someone’s bookcase are part of their history, like an ancestral portrait. –Umberto Eco

*****

The world is about to change with Biden and Harris in office. It is great to have Harris in there. More women in power is so important. Women don’t think with their dicks. I mean, a pussy likes to fuck just as much but we can also get some work done. Men are rarely as good at multitasking.  The inauguration went off with high security after the Trump insurrection. 5 were killed as the traitors stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 but Biden still became the President on the 20th. Hooray for Pastor Raphael Warnock and Jon Osoff in Georgia for taking the Senate. We are off to an interesting start with Merrick Garland nominated for AG.** Janet Yellen is the 78th US Treasury secretary and the first woman!**John Kerry is the envoy for climate and Pete Buttigieg is up for secretary of transportation. ** Biden reversed the ban on transgender troops, stopped the Muslim ban and signed many other executive orders.

*****

Kudos to Bill Maher for giving out  his Baldy award and talking about Henry Waxman. And I was glad to see Waxman mention it and the many others who do the hard work, the real work of running this country.

*****

Elon Musk is now the world’s richest person.

*****

Did ya see the Wendy Williams night on Lifetime?  I have known friends and family with her behavior, this complete lack of self- confidence and yet completely self -absorbed. Yes, she was married to a jack ass and she can be entertaining but whew.. high drama.  I learned one thing.. Her Father and brother are HOT!!

*****

Neil Young sold stake in 50% of his song catalogue to Hipgnosis songs fund in Britain.

*****

John Mulaney is in rehab.

*****

The Little things with Jared Leto, Denzel and Rami Malek was tops at the Box Office.

*****

Olivia Wilde and Harry Styles?? Ooh la la!! What a beautiful couple!!

*****

Thank you Cleveland Browns for all the hope!!** And..C’mon Packers.. U should have won that!!** Seahawk Chad Wheeler was arrested for domestic abuse.

*****

Think before you speak, read before you think. –Fran Leibowitz

*****

The Zodiac killer cipher was solved by amateur codebreakers David Orandak in Virginia, Jarl Van Eycke in Belgium and Sam Blake in Australia more than 50 years later.

*****

Rebel with Katey Sagal looks pretty good.

*****

Richard Lewis will not be in season 11 of Curb due to his many surgeries. Miss ya Richard!!

*****

Elliot Page has filed for divorce from Emma Portner.

*****

In the ‘some things never go away’ category, there are new shows coming of V.C. Andrews and the Great Gatsby.

*****

Dylan McDermott is joining Christopher Meloni in Law and Order: Organized Crime.

*****

Cigarette sales are up.

*****

Crayola is recycling old markers at colorcycle. Never throw away markers again! Less Waste!

*****

Days alert: The big reveal FINALLY came on Days about Gwen from Peoria. She thinks she is Jack’s daughter! It looks like the DNA will prove it. The plot will thicken as Laura returns with a secret and bad things happen to her. Susan Banks is also back and gets in the middle of a couple of stories. I am always glad to see Ivan but unfortunately Vivian is close behind. The twins story should come to a head. Please don’t push Rafe and Nicole together!! Word is that Patch and Kayla will remarry on their old anniversary of Valentine’s Day!! Best of all, Ciara is back and has thoughts of Romeo and Juliet. Find her Ben, before you get close to Claire.

*****

Tom Brokaw has retired from NBC after 55 years. I remember when he retired from the news desk way back when.

*****

Ex- Chester county Sheriff Carolyn Welsh has been charged with stealing from a K-9 unit charity.

*****

Succession has added Sanaa Latham, Jihae and Linda Edmond.

*****

People are filling in for Robert Costa on Washington Week while he is off with Bob Woodward writing their book.  Yamiche Alcindor was a great host!!!!

*****

Some last headlines and thoughts and facts about the end of the worst Presidency in our history. Let’s hope this is the last of the news about the Traitor in chief except for paying for his crimes. Unity does not mean there are no consequences for criminals. Make no mistake Trump and some of his followers are criminals. **Here are a few things I ran across: Vanilla Ice played Mar A Lago for NY Eve.** After the riot many rats started to jump ship like Elaine Chao, Hope Hicks and Betsy Devos. The American Federation of Teachers reaction to Betsy Devos resignation: “Good Riddance.”** Mo Brooks had told the crowd, “Take names and kick ass.” Plans for a Sen. Hawley book were scrapped.** Adam Kinzinger of Illinois was one of the first to call for the 25th amendment that never happened.** People are trying to get to the bottom of the Riot with questions like, “Who paid for the buses?” ** These types of people are the reason we can’t have nice things. **  Scary Clown is off Twitter for good. Funny how it took Senators, companies and voters so long, 2 weeks before he leaves office to make him a pariah. Trump was too dangerous for twitter but not for the nuclear codes?? ** To anyone complaining about a private media co. kicking Trump off their platform: Think of twitter as a Christian bakery and Trump as a wedding cake. _William Cusack**The riot proved that blue lives really don’t matter to them.** U.S. rep for Colorado Lauren Boebert was given $70,500 by Ted Cruz just as he asked for a probe into Netflix. Her husband, Jayson was arrested for exposing himself to a minor and for domestic abuse.** Trump was impeached again.** “Republican colleagues broke down in tears saying that Republicans are afraid for their lives if they vote for this impeachment.- Congressman Jason Crow.** Mike Pompeo cancelled his European trip after Luxemburg’s foreign minister and top European union officials declined to meet him.**232 was the number of votes to impeach him and the number of electoral vote in his loss to Biden.**Trump’s interior secretary had his own flag** Trumps EPA guy made super- secret phone calls in his own phone booth and had 24 hour security.** Toby Keith and Ricky Scaggs received the National medal of arts. ** The Supreme Court tossed out a lawsuit claiming that Trump violated the emoluments clause. ** Dominion voting systems sued Rudy.** Trumps impeachment lawyers, Butch Bowers and Deb Barbier quit. Word is that they refused to say the election was stolen. The new team seems to include Bruce Castor who would not prosecute Bill Cosby and Epstein’s would be lawyer David Schoen. That sounds about right.

*****

Hey Manson didn’t stab anyone. Incitement is a real crime. –Michael Mckean.

*****

ABC News President James Goldston has resigned.

*****

Everyone is talking about the SNL Krasinski/Davidson kiss.

*****

The NRA is bankrupt.

*****

Lenny Kravitz paid tribute to his Godmother, Cicely Tyson.

*****

Colbert could take a tip from Larry King. Ask simple direct questions and let the interviewee talk. We are watching to hear what they have to say. The beginning of the show is the host’s moment so shut up later!!

*****

R.I.P. Dan Dettman, Floyd Little, Pierre Cardin, Phyllis Mcguire, George Gerdes, Joan Micklin Silver, Carl Panzram, Gerry Marsden, Tanya Roberts, Kerry Vincent, KT Oslin, Tommy Lasorda, Michael Apted, Dave Creek, Jamie O’Hara, Dr. H. Jack Geiger, William Link, Neil Shehan, Joanne Rogers, Duke Bootee, Phil Spector, Don Sutton, Siegfried, Sheldon Adelson, Larry King, Ved Mehta, Bruce Kirby, Cicely Tyson and Cloris Leachman.

[hearthandgnome]

Warning, long post. TL/DR at bottom.

Okay so I've got a real hot take about the primaries.

And I'm just gonna stress this now. This is by no means fact checkable and is closer to a conspiracy theory than like, an actual reality we need to worry about. So please don't come at me for spreading false news. This isn't news. Its just a theory.

But I high key think our elections have been rigged again.

In short: my theory is that the obscene number of people that were running for the primaries who have since dropped out, never ACTUALLY wanted to run. They were just there to collect and hand over votes to Biden.

And I know that sounds nuts but let me walk you through my thought process here.

1- Not a single person I've spoken to or heard of, either in person or online, has said they wanted to vote for Biden. He was literally no ones first choice. Even the more conservative centrist end of people were saying Bloomberg before Biden.

2- a common joke amongst late night hosts has been just how ridiculous it was that sooooooo many people were running and how no one was willing to back down or quit, even when they had no chance.

3- Beyond just your pride, which will hurt either way, dropping out after voting has already started makes no sense. Spending all the time, money, and resources, on a presidential campaign for months if not years, just to drop out in the first week of the primaries makes no sense. At that point it's not like you can get your money back. So why drop out at that point?

Dropping out just before, when you see your polling low, makes sense. Cause it means not splitting the vote. But after? That means people that already voted for you don't really get the chance to vote their second choice. Their votes are basically just given to whoever you endorse.

Which brings me to

4- Pretty much every candidate who has dropped out after voting began has given their delegates to Biden. Like, even the ones who had basically nothing in common with his campaign. Even the ones who said they hated him the whole time they were "against" each other. And even the ones who claimed to be more progressive and aligned with Bernie when discussing their views and plans.

And I know I'm not the only one who has noticed this cause I've seen the memes, as well as the serious posts, all talking about how ridiculous it is for the media to claim Warrens delegates should go to Biden "cause he was the 2nd choice for most of her voters". Like no. He wasn't. She was Bernie's direct competition. They had incredibly similar campaigns. Warren and Biden had NOTHING in common policy wise.

5- The web domain for Bernie sanders currently redirects you to a donation page for Biden. Like You click the link thinking its for Bernie, and the only way to figure out your actually donating to Biden instead is to scroll up first or see it after you've already donated.

These above factors, mixed with a variety of other little things that just don't add up, have me pretty convinced there's something shady going on.

And the most probable cause in my opinion is a rigged election.

I know that seems like it would be hard to do. But honestly its pretty simple.

Copious choice splits the vote. Which makes it easier for them. So that was step one.

Then step two. Misleading voters into thinking these planted candidates are more progressive, which seeds false security by making them think they will endorse Bernie or another progressive candidate if they do drop out.

Step three is collect votes and delegates early on then drop out and give them to Biden. All of a sudden Biden has all the delegates and is somehow winning despite a huge portion of that being votes he didn't actually earn himself.

Step four will be people giving up and letting him win the primaries. They are literally already trying to end the primaries early and hand the win to Biden as I type this up.

And honestly.

I don't think step 5 will even be giving Biden the presidency. I don't think he's involved at all actually. I wholeheartedly think it'll be giving it to trump.

I think rigging the primaries in favor of Biden is jist phase one in a two part plan to get Trump re elected. And here's why:

1- Our last elections were hacked by the russians in trumps favor and there was literally 0 backlash for that for either of them.

2- Trump and his team just learned that they literally can get away with anything including trying to rig elections. He literally was impeached for this and got away with it. Soooo why shouldn't he do it if he knows its allowed for him?

3- There's no real know incentives for anyone with the ability to rig elections to rig them in the dems favor. The agenda of rigging elections is gaining power and money and it can only be done if you have some of that already. And who do the rich powerful people want to be in charge? Not Biden. And for SURE not Bernie.

4- Speaking of the impeachment trial.

Remember way back when the whole impeachment case story broke? Remember people making jokes about the fact that trump chose Biden of all people to get dirt on? Remember people thinking it was ridiculous cause there was no way he was gonna win the primaries?

Well. This is adding an extra layer of conspiracy to this conspiracy theory. But what if the plan to rig the election was already being formed back then?

What if Trump knew that Biden would eventually be the one running against him because he knew it would be rigged as such?

And I know your wondering why they would want Biden to be the one against trump as opposed to any of the other guys.

Well. Have y'all read the responses to the primaries so far? Everyone hates Biden. Like yeah we hate trump more. But I've already seen posts of people saying voting for Biden would be "just as bad".

I'm seeing people lose hope in Bernie winning or their voices being heard. And I'm seeing in fighting amongst people who are mad their first choice didn't win. All of this means potentially low voter turn out.

Especially amount younger more progressive voters who have taken a "Bernie or Bust" mentality.

And we know what happened when we take that stance. Cause its the same one that happened last time.

I know Hillary wasn't a perfect person or candidate either. And I too would have preferred Bernie in the last election.

But all that: "she's just as bad" "my votes don't count anyway" "id rather vote 3rd party than her" "Bernie or Bust"

All that.

Is how he won last time.

So all I'm saying is. Them rigging primaries in favor of a candidate they know most of the democratic voter base actually hates, makes it a lot easier to secure trump gets re-elected.

And the people potentially being pissed that Bernie lost primaries twice in a row wont help.

Even if my whole crazy theory is wrong. Even if their is no real evil plot being done here. That last point still stands.

If by some bizarre twist of fate. Biden wins the primaries. Be it honestly or by stealing delegates from the drop outs. He's still better than Trump.

Be prepared for that other shoe to drop.

Be prepared for the memes and social discourse trying to convince you not to vote or to throw away your vote on a 3rd party.

Be prepared for what ever dirt trump was trying to get on him to be released.

And know that he will STILL no matter what. Be better than Trump.

And in case I am right. And we are in the middle of an attempted coup.

Then this next part becomes twice as important.

If you live in a state that hasn't voted yet. PLEASE show up for Bernie.

I hate telling people how to vote. But mathematically speaking the only possible outcomes at this stage are Biden or Bernie. So for the love of god stop wasting votes on the other guys. Its almost as bad as voting third party for the actual election.

Plus if I'm right there's a 50/50 chance of those underdog votes being party of the conspiracy and going to Biden in the end.

If Biden really is your 2nd choice then fine. This doesn't apply to you.

But if you hate Biden and you prefer the more progressive stances, and your hoping for someone similar to Bernie, then just fucking vote Bernie.

Cause we learned from Warren that we cant trust ANYONE to give their endorsement to Bernie when they drop out.

So vote Bernie.

And if y'all don't, and we end of with Biden. I don't wanna hear any complaints.

If we get Biden then we gotta vote Biden. End of story.

Cause if Trumps re elected its game over.

He's already talking about extending his term limits or straight up erasing them. He wants to be a dictator and he's WELL on his way to achieving that.

He's proven above the law. And when the system fails the only hope left is the people.

Its 100% on us to make sure trump dosnt win. Its 100% on us to stay vigilant and not fall for the BS designed to turn things in his favor. It's 100% on us to show up, speak up, and carry a big ass stick of democracy.

Sorry for the long ass post. But I've been getting more and more suspicious/nervous by the day.

TL/DR: The primaries may or may not be rigged in Biden's favor. And that might be part of an even bigger plot to get Trump reelected. Don't waste your vote on 3rd party or underdogs. Please fucking don't inadvertently hand the election to trump.

And remember that I'm not a news source. Just a concerned citizen who worries too much and is hoping to inform/ warn people about a possible threat to our democracy.

[whitehotharlots]

Handicapping the 2020 Dem primary

Tier Four

The Tom Vilsack Memorial “No Chance in Hell” Tier

These are the candidates whose family members won’t even vote for them. They will drop out either before or immediately after Iowa. Some of them will be working specifically to plant the seeds of a 2024 run, while others are auditioning for an MSNBC gig.

Joe Kennedy

Any person who is simultaneously old enough and illiterate enough to have any fondness for the Kennedys is 100% in the Trump camp. Joe has zero appeal outside of this voting bloc, which literally does not exist. He won’t even win Massachusetts--won’t even be in the top five in Massachusetts.

Michael Avenatti

My man ain’t even announced his run and he’s already facing domestic assault charges. A potential Avenatti run had a mystical WWF vibe to it. I will admit, I was excited, the same as I’d be excited to finally pull alongside the accident that caused the pile up. No one has any idea what his policies are, because neither does he. He might honestly beat Trump in the general, as he is far and away the most likely candidate to physically assault Trump if the two ever share a stage (any Dem who punches Trump will be automatically 100% guaranteed to win the election). But he probably won’t even run.

Mitch Landrieu

Mitch will appeal to that small demographic of erstwhile independent voters who were drawn to Trump solely because he is an openly corrupt grifter. By May he will be a panel participant on a new MSNBC show that’s like Shark Tank but but all the contestants are trying to get the panel to fund their medical gofundme’s.

Eric Holder

Like every other member of the Obama administration, his faults are glaring and the relatively good stuff he did takes way too much context for most voters to understand. Under his leadership, the DoJ began began to litigate hate crimes, which had been almost completely neglected under Bush. That’s good. Also, under his leadership, the DoJ stalwartly refused to prosecute the war criminals who lied us into Iraq or the bankers who tanked the world economy. That’s bad. Politically, he has the platform of a Republican circa 1992. Personally, he has the charisma of a very dry snail.

Steve Bullock

He looks and sounds like the dumb guy sidekick of an old cartoon villain. He is therefore the Bebop/Rocksteady of the field. His policies are indistinguishable from any other civil moderate/fiscal conservative candidate, and his moistness will drive away both donors and media . (NOTE: With Bullock, the Avenatti Rule applies: if he threatens to physically assault Trump or any member of Trump’s family--especially including Baron--he will rocket to the top of the pack. If he actually assaults them, he will win the general election and usher in a glorious Centrist Utopia)

Kristen Gillibrand

She was once considered a front-runner for the same reason Corey Booker kinda sorta still is a frontrunner--because she looks similar to a previous Dem nominee, and many liberal strategists and commentators cannot conceive of a politics beyond identity markers. Trouble is, unlike Booker, Gillibrand pissed off her donor base by leading the the charge against Al Franken. I don’t for a second think that Gillibrand’s efforts had anything to do with principles. She just leaned into the wrong direction of the skid of cynicism: if there’s one thing Democrat donors hate, it’s a candidate who appears to adhere to any kind of moral framework. And Gillibrand is not the sort of candidate who stands a chance without full institutional support.

Tier Three

The “Gormless Dweebs” Tier

These people might stick around until late in the game for the same reason they’d stay at a house party until well after they were no longer welcome. Each also possesses a very particular strain of weirdness that might resonate with voters in New Hampshire enough that they’d finish in the top 3, but none has a realistic chance to live past Super Tuesday.

Martin O’Malley

O’Malley is the Democrat John Kasich. He’s mostly running because he wants to have people to talk to. Several New Hampshire people will nod at him and that will be it. 

Terry McAuliffe

Imagine if Joe Lieberman were a governor and slightly less physically repulsive. He is still a very moist man, and his only moments of attention will come when he criticizes one of the more left-leaning candidates after they point out that the Iraq war didn’t go so good. (Let me ask Senator Sanders a question. We he says that global warming is the biggest threat we face... has he ever heard of ISLAM?” *Tufts University crowd goes wild*)  Terry might come in top 3 in Virginia, and he also might stick around if a frontrunner is facing some kind of big scandal. But his main effect on this debate will be that of a zebra mussel on the side of a leaky rowboat, hoping it fills with just enough water that he’ll be able to slither aboard for the last few minutes before it sinks.

Elizabeth Warren

Warren is one of small handful of Dem candidates whose economic politics fall to the left of Margaret Thatcher. That doesn’t really work for her, though, because it’s hard for a quiet dweeb to project any sense of populism. She’d be a significantly less horrible president than most on this list, probably. But there’s no way she would beat Trump head to head. He can bait her with literally any claim and her response will always be “golly gee I will refute this man with logic and evidence and then those who repeated his taunts will surely see the error of their ways.” By August, it would get to the point where she’d be sending out topless pics to prove she really doesn’t have several teats and therefore is not a pregnant dog, as Trump suggested. But thankfully she will have flamed out long before that.

Tier 2

The “Viable Candidates Who Are Gonna Get Rat Fucked Really Hard” Tier

Sherrod Brown

Same general platform as Bernie, only without the voting record, name recognition, or widespread appeal. We are also living in an age where crudity is now taken for a sign of sincerity, and while he does kinda give off a “disheveled history teacher” vibe, that’s not enough to really combat Trump. Trump can only really be beaten by a platform, not a personality, so Brown might have a chance. But he’ll also almost certainly bow out before Super Tuesday. My guess he won’t be able to take the heat nearly as well as Bernie and he’s gone before Iowa.

Bernie

Bernie will win New Hampshire. He will win for the same reason he won it in 2016: he’s well-known there, he will be the only believable candidate running on a civil libertarian platform. He will win it by a bigger margin, because the Establishment field will be more split. He will win Iowa for the same reasons: much more name recognition now. Pledged delegates-wise, he will be far and away the frontrunner after the first two contests, although on-screen graphics will continue to present him as a longshot, due to superdelegates. He will then square off in a contest between 1-2 of the following candidates, whom the establishment will rally behind. He could win the nomination, but you and I literally cannot imagine the absurdity of the smears he will face. If he wins the nomination he wins the general Reagan vs. Mondale-style, and we might narrowly avoid civilization collapse. There’s only about a 25% of that happening, though.

Tier 1

The “If the Establishment Unites Behind Any One of These People They Will Beat Bernie for the Nom Then Get Stomped by Trump” Tier

None of these candidates would have a realistic chance against Trump, but each of them is well positioned to take advantage of the unique corruption of the Democratic Party. Our only real hope--as a society and a species--is that they manage to split the vote between themselves.

Kamela Harris

Did you watch HBO’s The Jinx? It’s about a weird, repulsive millionaire serial killer who keeps evading justice. She was the prosecutor who tried to convict him. To stress: she could not convict Robert Derst. She’s running in the right direction, though, (disingenuously) espousing some populist positions while hoovering up donor cash. She could very well wait this thing out and then see the donors line up behind her enough so that he "victory” is called by the AP right before the California primary.

Beto

Centrism couldn’t win in Texas, even with a candidate who was immensely more appealing than his opponent. That’s exactly what Centrism is designed to do, and it didn’t do it. It failed. It will always fail. Still, Beto is very handsome and very shameless and not Republican-level evil, which means he will make some money and also sway some idiots. But he’s not nearly connected enough, yet, to win the nom. He will come close however, and bow out at the right time so as to not burn any bridges. Beto will be the nominee in 2024, when he will narrowly win the popular vote but lose the electoral college to Immortum Joe.

Corey Booker

Laugh if you must, but Booker appeals strongly to the exact strain of idiocy that controls the strategy within the Democratic Party: He is a black male...  like Obama! That means he will win, since Obama did. Yes, anyone who spends a few minutes studying Booker will realize he lacks Obama’s intelligence, wit, and oratorical ability. But that’s not how the Democratic establishment understands politics: they believe, genuinely, that the way to win is to raise the most money while being in possession of the correct identity markers. Should a candidate do this and lose, as Hillary did, it was the inevitable result of machinations outside of their control. Ergo, we must appoint the anointed one and see if he pleases the gods. Plus, if you mute the TV and squint, Booker totally looks like Obama!

Hillary

The main benefits of wokeness--why it has so many adherents, so far as I can tell--is that it allows certain people to skirt all responsibility for everything they say and do, even as it forces others to attempt to adhere to literally impossible programmatics of speech and comportment. And so Hillary’s recent nativist turn will be forgiven (it will most likely go unmentioned), while Bernie’s wardrobe and posture will be used as evidence of his sexism. She can continue making jokes about Colored People Time, while any of her competitors will be crucified for not using the exact right terms in describing whatever happen to be the Woke Cause of the Day. This insulation from criticism is Hillary’s biggest strength with the Democrat electorate, while her fiscal conservatism will continue to help her with donors. She will get beaten horribly in the general, but still stands a strong chance in the primary.

Joe Biden

I have no idea how this man is leading in some polls other than name recognition. Which--don’t get me wrong, name recognition is huge, especially in early goings within a crowded primary field. But what does Biden bring to the table, policy-wise or personality-wise? I realize the people who bleat about how they don’t want any more OLD. WHITE. MALES. running for president are just trying to make their cruel centrist politics appear radical--but could they be shameless enough to actually throw their support to Biden? Biden, the dude who most certainly would have been MeToo’d were he still in a position of power? Biden, the pro-war economic conservative who repeatedly says that young people just need to stop whining? That’s the guy you’re gonna run against Trump? Probably. I would take a 50/50 bet on him winning the nomination.

Final odds:

Biden: 1:1

Hillary 1.5:1

Bernie 4:1

Booker 8:1

Beto 10:1

Harris 12:1

Field (including only aforementioned candidates): 30:1

[orbemnews]

Bankers, Please Return to Your Desks Manhattan calling Goldman Sachs has joined JPMorgan Chase in telling its bankers that it’s almost time to come back to the office. David Solomon, Goldman’s C.E.O., sent a memo to employees advising them to “make plans to be in a position to return to the office” by June 14 in the U.S. and June 21 in Britain. JPMorgan plans to open its offices on May 17 on a voluntary basis and require that workers return to their desks in rotations starting in July. Goldman and JPMorgan’s moves put pressure on other banks to put an end to remote work, several bankers told DealBook. While many thought they could work from home through the summer, some executives are keen to get employees back into the office sooner. (Retail branches have been open throughout the pandemic.) Other major banks aren’t expecting employees to return in meaningful numbers for several months: Citigroup expects to have about 30 percent of its North America-based employees back in the office by the end of the summer. Bank of America’s C.E.O., Brian Moynihan, said recently that a return to the office probably wouldn’t take place until after Labor Day. Wells Fargo said it was “optimistic” that workers would be able to return to the office on Sept. 6. These decisions may be complicated by where the banks’ offices are. It could be easier to coax workers back to JPMorgan’s headquarters in Midtown East, for example, than to Times Square, home to Barclays and Morgan Stanley, where businesses were especially hard-hit by the pandemic and a handful of highly publicized crimes have recently taken place. “People are so on edge and so uncertain about their own future that all these situations are exaggerated,” Kathryn Wylde, the president of the Partnership for New York City, told The Times. Jamie Dimon appears eager for the end of remote working. “I’m about to cancel all my Zoom meetings,” the JPMorgan chief said at an event hosted by The Wall Street Journal. Working from home “does not work for younger people, it doesn’t work for those who want to hustle, it doesn’t work in terms of spontaneous idea generation,” he noted. Dimon said his bank had lost some business because rivals had visited a potential client in person and JPMorgan’s bankers hadn’t. He acknowledged that there was some pushback on the bank’s plans, but didn’t seem willing to give in. “Yes, people don’t like commuting, but so what,” he said. In other Manhattan workplace moves, the New York Stock Exchange issued guidance that allows trading firms to increase their staff on the floor if the employees provide proof of vaccination. And the United Nations is taking a more cautious approach to reopening than its host city, saying that it was premature to plan for an in-person General Assembly in September. Even Eric Yuan, Zoom’s C.E.O., has Zoom fatigue. As a result, he has stopped scheduling back-to-back video chats. “I’m so tired of that,” he said. HERE’S WHAT’S HAPPENING Business groups oppose voting restrictions in Texas. A coalition including HP and Microsoft published a letter yesterday criticizing “any changes that would restrict eligible voters’ access to the ballot.” A second letter, signed by more than 100 Houston executives, criticized the Texas legislation as “voter suppression.” Both show how companies are more willing to wade into the debate over voting limits after Georgia enacted a bill with restrictions last month. More details emerge about the Gates divorce. Cascade Investment, a holding company owned by Bill Gates, transferred over $1.8 billion worth of assets to Melinda Gates on Monday, the day that the two announced their plans to split. And although they will retain their roles as co-chairs and trustees of the Gates Foundation, questions remain about whether they will focus more on their individual philanthropies after they divorce. The White House alters its Covid-19 vaccination strategy. The Biden administration will shift emphasis from mass inoculation sites to smaller ones like pharmacies to get more people in the U.S. vaccinated. Meanwhile, the campaign to vaccinate the world is floundering, with the virus spreading more rapidly than ever, driven by new waves in South America and India. Corporate America responds to India’s pandemic surge. The Global Task Force on Pandemic Response, organized by the Chamber of Commerce, Microsoft, IBM and Accenture, with support from the Business Roundtable, will organize assistance to the country. It will begin by sending 1,000 ventilators and 25,000 oxygen concentrators by the end of the month. Pfizer reveals how its Covid-19 vaccine has boosted its financials. The drugmaker said it had collected $3.5 billion in sales from the shot, likely equating to roughly $900 million in pretax profits. It plans to seek emergency approval to use the vaccine in children age 2 to 11 in September and full approval for use in adults this month. Janet Yellen states the obvious, and markets shudder Janet Yellen, the Treasury secretary and former Fed chair, got in a bit of a tangle yesterday. She rattled the markets at one event — then used her appearance at a second conference to clarify her remarks. Today in Business Updated  May 4, 2021, 6:53 p.m. ET “It may be that interest rates will have to rise somewhat to make sure that our economy doesn’t overheat,” she said at the first event, hosted by The Atlantic. Investors seized on those words — tech stocks tumbled most of all on the prospects of higher rates — and critics said she was improperly interfering in monetary policy. Fed officials have said that any spike in inflation linked to robust government spending and a postpandemic reopening is likely to be temporary; the central bank has pledged to keep interest rates low for a long time. “Let me be clear, it’s not something I’m predicting or recommending,” Yellen said at the second event, hosted by The Wall Street Journal, a few hours later. “If anybody appreciates the independence of the Fed, I think that person is me.” Indeed, when she was the Fed chair, Yellen had to deal with persistent jawboning from Donald Trump, who spoke out more explicitly about Fed policy than many previous presidents. Stocks pared their losses. “Markets were unhappy at this statement of the blindingly obvious,” Paul Donovan of UBS wrote in a note to clients today. He and other market watchers have noted that Yellen’s comments essentially described the mechanics of monetary policy and weren’t framed as a prediction. Still, her words carry extra weight, given her previous job. The brief freakout over the mere notion of higher interest rates also revealed how dependent the markets have become on extraordinarily easy monetary policy over the past year. “This trial is going to be a sprawling mess of irrelevant, prejudicial evidence.” — Amy Saharia, a lawyer for Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of Theranos, at her client’s first appearance in court over criminal fraud charges in more than a year. A federal prosecutor responded that Holmes “defrauded patients by saying tests were accurate and reliable when they weren’t — and she knew it.” Dogecoin does its thing Dogecoin, the cryptocurrency that started as a joke, is still on a tear, after another surge pushed it up a whopping 14,000 percent so far this year. One theory is that the upcoming appearance of Elon Musk, a noted Dogecoin superfan, as host of “Saturday Night Live” could get more people interested in trading the crypto token. (It’s as good a reason as any for those who try to rationalize its movements.) The latest bout of Dogecoin mania has overshadowed what’s going on in Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency, which set records this week and made its 27-year-old co-creator, Vitalik Buterin, a billionaire (in dollars). Ethereum is up more than 350 percent for the year to date, outpacing Bitcoin’s relatively pedestrian 90 percent gain — which, for context, outpaces every stock in the S&P 500. Who decides Trump’s fate on Facebook At 9 a.m. Eastern today, the Facebook Oversight Board will announce whether it believes Facebook was justified in barring Donald Trump after he used the platform to incite a mob of supporters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6. Here’s what you need to know about what Mark Zuckerberg has called Facebook’s “Supreme Court,” whose decision could influence how all social networks treat political speech. What is the Facebook Oversight Board? Facebook assembled the board to vet its most sensitive decisions on moderating content. It consists of 20 members, including experts in human rights, constitutional law and journalism. The board’s cases, which are referred by Facebook or the public, are reviewed by a panel of five members, who consider whether the company’s decision is consistent with its rules and human rights laws. A majority of the full board must approve the final decision. Does the board have any power? Only what Facebook gives it. The company has said it will abide by the board’s rulings, and the board’s charter emphasizes its independence. But Facebook has no legal obligation to follow those decisions, and it funds the organization through a $130 million trust. What exactly will the board decide in this case? It could vote to reinstate Trump’s Facebook account or uphold the ban. Or it could provide a ruling with more nuance, such as finding that the ban was appropriate at the time it was initiated but is no longer necessary. In addition to a ruling in this case, Facebook has asked for broader policy recommendations. “Basically the board is setting the tone here for what they’re going to do going forward — how much power they’re going to have, how much power they’re not going to have, whether they’re even going to be constrained by how the question was posed to them with Facebook,” Kate Klonick, an assistant professor of law at St. John’s University, told NPR. THE SPEED READ Deals Tiger Global, the big tech investment firm, reportedly plans to raise $10 billion for its next fund. (FT) Listing news roundup: Jessica Alba’s Honest Company raised $413 million in its I.P.O. at a $1.5 billion valuation; JAB’s Krispy Kreme filed confidentially to go public; and the Equinox gym chain is reportedly in talks to merge with a SPAC founded by Chamath Palihapitiya. (Bloomberg) Politics and policy How two Black C.E.O.s got corporate America to pay attention to voting rights. (WaPo) U.S. officials are pushing Taiwanese chip makers to prioritize American automakers’ demands to ease supply shortages. (Reuters) Inside the debate about who would actually pay President Biden’s corporate tax increase. (WSJ) Tech China is building electric car plants nearly as fast as Europe and the U.S. combined. (NYT) The privacy-focused messaging app Signal said Facebook had blocked it from buying Instagram ads about the social network’s user-data gathering practices. (Insider) Best of the rest A majority of G.E. shareholders voted to reject a $230 million compensation package for the company’s C.E.O., Larry Culp. (FT) Pandora, the world’s largest jewelry maker, is abandoning mined diamonds for lab-created ones. (NYT) We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com. Source link Orbem News #bankers #desks #return

[corona-de-vil]

Via Heather Cox Richardson

January 13, 2021 (Wednesday)

At 4:22 this afternoon, the House of Representatives passed the number of votes necessary to impeach Trump. In the end, 232 Representatives—222 Democrats and 10 Republicans—agreed that the president had incited an insurrection and must be removed from office. But 197 Republicans disagreed.

And so, Donald Trump makes the history books as the first president of the United States of America to be impeached twice.

This is an indictment of him, of course, but also of the Republican Party that let him off the hook a year ago for undermining the national security of the United States as he tried to steal the 2020 election. Shortly before the Senate vote on conviction almost exactly a year ago, House impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-CA) charged his Republican colleagues to look to the future, telling them, “you know you can’t trust this President to do what’s right for this country. You can trust he will do what’s right for Donald Trump. He’ll do it now. He’s done it before. He’ll do it for the next several months. He’ll do it in the election if he’s allowed to.”

But every Republican senator other than Mitt Romney (R-UT) voted to acquit the president of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. And now, here we are.

A week ago, our Capitol was overrun by insurgents seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and install Trump in the White House for at least another term. In their fury, they murdered a Capitol Police officer and came within a hair’s breadth of getting their hands on our elected officials.

The insurgents were answering the call of their president, who urged them to fight for him and claim a victory he insisted, without evidence, had been stolen from him. As they stormed the Capitol and aid did not come for the besieged lawmakers, Trump watched events unfold on the television, pleased… and, as people have begun to note, curiously unsurprised.

In the week since the attack, emerging information indicates the insurgency was planned, not spontaneous, and that lawmakers might be involved. Democrats have stood up to this attack on our democracy, but Republicans are in the same bind they’ve been in for years: how can they both keep Trump’s voters and reject Trump himself? Some establishment Republicans who have their own bases of power--Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Romney, for example-- have finally said enough is enough, and have come out against the president.

But Republican lawmakers whose only base is Trump supporters have downplayed the attack that killed five people, including a police officer, and wounded many others; defended Trump; and argued that any attempt to remove him is simply a dangerous Democratic effort to create divisions in society. They warn that holding Trump accountable will anger his supporters even more, an observation that many interpret as a threat.

This Republican split showed up today. Liz Cheney (R-WY), chair of the House Republican Conference, blamed the president for the attack on the Capitol and voted to impeach him. But only nine other Republicans joined her. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) tried to split the baby by blaming the president for the attack on the Capitol but voting against impeachment. Trump loyalists like Jim Jordan (R-OH), who just received the Medal of Freedom from Trump, continued to allege that the election was tainted. They supported Trump wholeheartedly and attacked the Democrats. Refusing to acknowledge that their attacks on the election created the crisis in the first place, they called for unity and blamed the Democrats for dividing America.

One hundred and ninety-seven Republicans voted against impeaching the president. A year ago, Schiff infuriated Republicans by repeating a rumor published by CBS News that White House officials had warned party members: “Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.” Today, rumors swirled that a number of Republicans did not dare to vote in favor of impeachment because they feared for their safety and that of their loved ones.

While the House debated impeachment, the FBI continued to hunt down the insurgents, companies withdrew support from Republicans who supported the attacks on the election, and New York City canceled $17 million worth of contracts with the Trump Organization.

The article of impeachment now goes to the Senate. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) suggested yesterday that he supported impeachment, but today said he would not change the Senate’s schedule to permit a trial before January 19. McConnell was likely pushing impeachment to pressure Trump to resign but, having failed, will do the bare minimum to guide the Republican Party past this moment. He needs to bend just enough to loosen up the purse strings of the companies who are saying they won’t continue to support Republicans who attacked our elections and launched a coup.

In the next week, Trump Republicans might be able to convince Americans that holding Republican insurrectionists responsible for their actions is Democratic overreaction. In that case, the Republicans can avoid taking a stand either for or against Trump while they turn this moment into a referendum on the Democrats just as they take power in the national government. They are running this play headlong, complaining bitterly, for example, about the new metal detectors installed at the entrance to the House chamber-- even as National Guard personnel patrolled the Capitol to protect them-- and complaining about “censorship” to television cameras after Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube removed QAnon accounts and Trump’s accounts.

It could also be that, as more information comes out, the story will get even worse, and it will be easier for senators to vote to convict, especially once Trump is out of office. Yesterday’s briefings by the FBI and acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin gave notice that the evolving story of what happened on January 6 will be shocking and could well involve figures in government. More than 30 House Democrats have called attention to an unusual number of Capitol tours held on January 5, at a time when coronavirus restrictions have largely ended tours. Those tours, combined with the fact that the insurrectionists appeared to have a detailed knowledge of the Capitol complex, have led to suspicions that some members of Congress might have offered aid to the rioters.

A sign that there is something big still hanging out there came tonight in the form of a taped video by Trump himself, emphasizing that he disavowed violence and defending the right to free speech protected in the First Amendment to the Constitution. It sounded like a charge and a defense. To release such a video means he must be worried indeed about his legal exposure.

Another sign is that virtually no one in the White House tried to defend Trump from today’s impeachment. There were no talking points, no briefings, no interviews, no calls to lawmakers. Even White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, who defended the president at his first impeachment last year, wanted people to know he was not defending him this time.

Furious and isolated, Trump is lashing out at those he blamed for getting him into this mess. He has told aides that he wants personally to approve any expenses his lawyer Rudy Giuliani ran up as he traveled around the country to challenge election results, and he has told them not to pay Giuliani’s legal fees.

Trump had largely given up governing after the election anyway, but now our government seems to be operating haphazardly. Today, Israeli warplanes hit Iranian and Iranian-backed militia positions in Syria. Israeli forces are often active in this area, but this was the hardest attack in years, hitting missiles recently brought to the area and killing around 40 people. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted Trump to pressure Iran before he left office, and this strike seems intended to demonstrate a U.S.-Israeli partnership against Iran. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Yossi Cohen, the head of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency, made this message obvious by being seen together Monday at Café Milano in Washington, D.C., a restaurant the Washington Post described as “Washington’s ultimate place to see and be seen.”

Also yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar announced new coronavirus vaccine schedule guidelines, as the U.S. reported 4,327 deaths from Covid-19. In the first 13 days of 2021, we have seen more than 3 million new infections. More than 23 million Americans have been infected so far.

Almost exactly a year ago, on January 23, 2020, Adam Schiff urged Senate Republicans to convict Trump for abusing his power and obstructing Congress, and to remove him from office. “Now,” he said, “you may be asking how much damage can he really do in the next several months until the election?

“A lot,” Schiff said. “A lot of damage.”

[whereareroo]

FALSE PREMISES

WF THOUGHTS (11/14/20).

Trump received 73 million votes in the election. That's 10 million more than he received in 2016. Does a 10,000,000 increase smack of voter fraud to you? If the system was rigged against Trump, how did he surpass his former total by 10 million votes? Trump didn't lose because of voter fraud or because votes were improperly counted. He lost because Biden, who received 78 million votes, beat him "fair and square."

Despite the huge body of evidence which proves that Trump is a pathological liar, millions and millions of people continue to believe whatever Trump says. They believe Trump's claim that he is the victim of "voter fraud." They believe Trump's claim that recounts will overturn the results of the election.

Trump's latest lies are very, very dangerous. He is attacking the very foundation of our democracy. He is trying to permanently undermine the credibility of our elections. This is very serious stuff.

If you are a Trump voter, I beg you to ignore Trump's lies about voter fraud and recounts. It is very important that you believe in the integrity of our elections. Please look at the facts instead of Trump's lies. Isn't your loyalty to America, and to our democracy, more important than your loyalty to Trump? Please don't damage America by believing, and repeating, Trump's dangerous lies.

Let me give you the facts. Please consider these facts with an open mind. The facts don't lie.

1. VOTER FRAUD IS VIRTUALLY NONEXISTENT IN AMERICA.

A. Think about how our elections for president work. There are 50 "mini-elections," one in each state. Right off the bat, there are 50 state officials (usually the Secretary of State) monitoring the elections. Every official has a big staff. To rig an election, the officials and their staffs would have to coordinate with each other. There's no way that a bunch of election officials, and hundreds of staff people, could wrongfully influence an election without getting caught.

B. Keep thinking about the process. In every state, there is a county election official who monitors the election activity in their county. Within each county, there are dozens of "district captains" who monitor the election activity in their district. At each polling place, there is a manager who monitors the election activity at that polling place. Once again, all of these administrators are surrounded by hundreds and hundreds of staff people. In short, within each state there are thousands of people who monitor election activity. Voting fraud would involve coordination between hundreds of people. They couldn't do it without getting caught.

C. On top of everything else, there are "observers" all over the election process. Every step is observed and monitored by members of the political parties. Every step is observed by members of the media. For voter fraud to occur, a number of observers would have to be involved. It doesn't happen. If it did, the other observers would sound the alarm.

D. Common sense alone should tell you the people who run our elections don't engage in voter fraud. Our process involves too many people. There are too many eyes on the process. In addition to the fact that it would be wrong, election officials don't attempt to manipulate the process because they'd be caught. When Trump says that the election officials from Blue States engage in voter fraud, he's lying.

E. If you don't trust what your common sense tells you about the integrity of our elections officials, try Google. I dare you to find a case where an election official was caught engaged in voter fraud. It doesn't happen.

F. Voter fraud by individual voters happens so rarely that it never influences the outcome of an election. A recent study by the Brennan Center for Justice found that the chance of getting struck by lightning is greater than the chance that an individual voter will commit voter fraud.

G. If you're a Trump supporter, don't take my word that individual voter fraud is an extremely rare and inconsequential occurrence. Maybe you'll listen to the Heritage Foundation, an extremely right-wing organization that actively supports Trump. The people at Heritage did a major study of "mail ballot voter fraud" and "in-person voter fraud." For mail ballots, they analyzed 250 million ballots cast between 2000 and 2019. They only found 193 fraudulent ballots. Thus, the fraud rate was 0.00007%. Let's call it 0%. For in-person voting, the Heritage folks picked 6 suspicious states and they looked at all votes cast for 16 years. They were looking for things like voter impersonation, multiple voting, voting by non-citizens, and voting for dead people. They found only 13 cases of in- person voting fraud. Let's call that O% too. The point is that even the very conservative Heritage Foundation admits that in-person voting fraud is virtually nonexistent. Trump is lying when he talks about individual voters committing voter fraud. Don't listen to him. (Trump supporters might question anything from Loyola University, but they studied 1,000,000 in-person votes--from 2000 to 2014--and found only 31 fraudulent votes.)

H. I can bore you all day with stories that prove that voter fraud is a myth. Let me give you 3 quick examples that might be convincing to Republicans:

▪The Secretary of State in Kansas, Kris Kobach, is a huge Trump supporter. After the 2016 election, he spent 2 years looking for voter fraud in Kansas. He found 9 cases.

▪There was recently a lawsuit in Texas regarding its strict Voter ID law. Texas is very pro-Trump.

Evidence in the lawsuit included the results of a voter fraud investigation that had been done by the Texas Special Investigations Unit from 2002-2014. The investigation found 2 cases of voter fraud.

▪Before the 2016 election, the Republican Governor of Florida (Rick Scott) launched a major effort to purge noncitizens from the voting rolls. They reviewed the records of 12,000,000 voters. They identified 85 wrongfully registered noncitizens, but only 1 of them had ever voted. I'm glad I didn't pay for that investigation.

I. I like court cases. I'm sure you don't want to hear about the hundreds of court decisions which find that voter fraud is virtually nonexistent in America. For Trump supporters, let me provide three quick examples from Republican states:

▪In a 2016 elections case in Texas, referring to the time period from 2004 to 2014, the federal court found that there were "only two convictions for in-person voter impersonation fraud out of 20 million votes cast in the decade."

▪In a 2016 case in North Carolina, the federal court found that the state "failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with in-person voting fraud in North Carolina."

▪In a 2016 case in Indiana, the home of Mike Pence, the state Supreme Court found that there was "no evidence of any in-person voter fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history."

J. This week, with respect to the 2020 election, The New York Times contacted the top election officials in all 50 states. The Times asked if the state had encountered any statistically relevant illegal voting. Not surprisingly, 49 states reported no relevant voting issues. Texas, of course, did not respond.

K. The Department of Homeland Security, part of the Trump Administration, just issued a report with respect to the 2020 election. It says that: "The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history." It also says that: "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised." Those are the words of Trump's own people.

L. I have end the voter fraud discussion here so I can make a few comments about the ridiculousness of recounts. All Americans, especially Trump supporters, should have full confidence in our electoral process. The facts show that voter fraud--by election officials or by individual voters--is virtually nonexistent in America. Trump is lying when he complains about voter fraud.

2. RECOUNTS WON'T CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE ELECTION

A. Trump is also lying when he claims that he will win after the votes are recounted in a few states. The history of recounts proves that Trump is a liar.

B. In effect, the presidential election is 50 separate statewide elections. An organization called "Fair Vote" has studied every statewide election from 2000 to 2019. Here are the facts:

▪There were 5,778 statewide elections.

▪There were 31 recounts.

▪ Only 3 recounts overturned the original results of the election. In all those cases, the original margin of victory was less that 2,600 votes.

▪In the 31 recounts, the average shift of votes was 430 (0.02%). The largest shift of votes was 2,600 (0.11%).

C. Thus, history tells us that recounts normally do not change the vote tally very much. For the sake of argument, let's say that the shift might be 500 votes.

D. Right now in this election, here are the vote deficits that Trump would have to overcome in the key states:

▪Wisconsin = 20,500

▪ Michigan = 145,000

▪ Pennsylvania = 55,000

▪ Arizona = 12,000

▪ Nevada = 36,000

▪Georgia = 14,000

Those deficits won't be eliminated by recounts. Trump would have to win several recounts to win the election. It's not going to happen. Trump is lying when he says he is going to win the recount war.

E. Thankfully, the courts follow the law and aren't hypnotized by Trump's recount fantasies. So far, Trump has launched 16 lawsuits related to recount issues. He's lost 15 of those cases. He won a minor Pennsylvania case that involved a small number of mail-in ballots that were received after a deadline. Those ballots had never been counted because the cautious election officials had set them aside pending the legal ruling.

F. This is a good place for me to note an obvious point regarding recounts. In the Senate races across the country, Republicans did better than expected. In House races, Republicans did better than expect. In general, Republicans are very pleased with how the votes were counted in the various states. Why is Trump the only one asking for recounts? Trump's opponents desperately wanted to win control of the Senate. If anti-Trump forces were rigging the election, why didn't they rig a few Senate races too? Trump's position makes no sense. Trump sticks out like a sore thumb.

G. It's instructive to look at 2 particular examples involving Republicans:

▪There was a big Senate race in Arizona. The Republican candidate, who got fewer votes than Trump, was defeated. She is not seeking a recount. If she thought there was a problem with how the votes were counted, wouldn't she want a recount too? Why is Trump the only person who is talking about recounts with respect to Arizona?

▪In a Michigan Senate race, a Republican candidate got the same number of votes as Trump and lost. He is not seeking a recount. Why is Trump still making noise about a Michigan recount, where he lost by 145,000 votes?

H. Everybody should disregard all of the noise about recounts. The election is over. Recounts are not going to change the outcome.

Let me conclude by focusing on Trump's dangerous behavior. It's been a week since Biden was declared the winner. The writing is on the wall. Is Trump unable to concede, or is he simply unwilling to do so?

Many who know Trump personally say that he is unable to concede. They say that his psychological deficits make it impossible for him to take personal responsibility for any setback. The same psychological deficits prevent Trump from removing himself from the spotlight. If Trump doesn't keep fighting, he will no longer be the center of attention. Trump can't do that to himself.

Others say that Trump is unwilling to concede because a concession is not in his self interest. Most people in this camp think that Trump is planning to launch his own media company. He needs to keep the controversy going until late January so his followers subscribe to his new outlet. His initial ratings will be better if he is dragged, kicking and screaming, from the White House. He's afraid that he will be forgotten, and his ratings will suffer, if he concedes now and acts rationally for the rest of his term.

I don't really care about Trump's psychological issues or his offensive commercial motivations. I care about the fact that, by spewing fake claims about voter fraud and recounts, he is damaging America. There is nothing we can do about Trump. Individually, however, we can each fight back against his lies. We should renounce his false claims, and we shouldn't spread his false claims. The facts, set forth above, reveal the truth. The election is over. Joe Biden will be the next president. Let's move on, and let's reject all attacks on our democracy.

[treadmilltreats]

Our fight to vote

There are 26 days left until the election and I am going to be speaking on this alot until then.

If you follow me you know that I think it is an honor and privilege to vote. Not so many years ago our ancestors fought and many died for this right you and I now have.

Years ago they had all kinds of road blocks to stop people from voting such as literacy tests, because they knew many could not read. They had grandfather clauses, as in if your grandfather voted you could but many blacks were slaves, so this kept them out of the voting.

If you had a felony, you were disenfranchised. There were taxes placed on voting, and many poor people couldn't afford to pay these taxes and so they could not vote.There were understanding clauses, to see if you could understand the legal terms, many poor people could hardly read let alone understand legal terms and could not pass these tests as well. And women well, women had no rights at all, we were just properly of our husbands. All of this was so they could hold on to power, the power they felt was for rich white men.

Women didn't get the right to vote until 1920, Native Americans didn't get to vote in every state until 1962.

Imagine that, we steal their land and then make them wait until 1962 to vote on a land that was theirs, yeah, that is some kind of shit! 

Blacks didn't get the right to vote until 1965! And that was after many years of fighting and being killed for that right. Yes, you read that right only 55 years ago! 

They did all of this to target communities so they could hold on to the power. This was common all over the country but in the south it was the worst.

By 1940 only 3% of blacks in the south were registered to vote.

It wasn't until the sixties when the protests finally gave black people the right to vote.

And yet they are still trying to keep our voices from being heard. Did you know that in 2013 the Supreme Court knocked down one of the pillars of the Civil rights movement by saying the areas covered by the voting rights act changed but the law has not kept up.

Capital states and counties that the voting rights act had regulated, could now change their election laws without federal pre clearance. This meant that half of the United States enacted new restrictions on how people voted. This also meant it gave them free reign to make it harder for people to vote.

They had the power to close 1688 polling places and between 2012 and 2018 and lines grew longer. With Black and Latino voters waiting 45% longer than white voters, seriously does this even make any sense? Why? Because they don't want us to have a voice just like back before 1920. They want all of the power, they don't want to know what women, Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Asians or any other people of color or poor white people have to say because it doesn't benefit them and their causes.

Then they started talking about voter fraud in 2017, because they figured if you have no transportation to get to the polls on that one day when most of the world must work then they would start to take away your way to vote by mail.

When Trump was elected he got a commission together to look into all of this "voter fraud" but 8 months later he disbanded them because they couldn't find any fraud.

One analysis found that in 3 vote by mail states, they only found 372 suspicious cases out of 14,600.00 ballots. So that tells you they are only trying to do this to suppress votes, to not let our voices hear. The elderly who can't get out, the single moms who must work to feed their families and can't get off in time to vote. The poor who would have to find a way miles away from where they live to vote. Anything to make it harder for many to vote.

Here is a startling fact, did you know most countries besides us have elections on weekends and in a few, voting is more than a right, it is a duty, just like jury duty.

And another huge thing is that almost all of them make voter registration entirely automatic. Wow, what a concept! Imagine that, making voting easier? 

And why can't we do this? We already know the answer to this question, because politicians who are getting pay offs, politicians who sit on high benches for life with big benefits don't want any of this to change, are you kidding? They like that the good ole boys are still running the show but one thing that they have forgotten is that we are the voice of this country. We have the power to change things, and so we need to vote, to run for office, to speak out for change because change starts with one person. One person like Rosa Parks that finally had the courage to say enough is enough. We need to be that one person, we need to change this broken system, we need more people that look like us to take charge and make changes.

So today my friends remember we only have 26 more days left and I am begging you to go out and vote… to make a change.

We need to change all of this, to find out more go to  vox.com/vote.

 "Be the change you want to see"

 

"And just when the caterpillar thought his life over...he turned into a beautiful butterfly"

**Now released my latest book**

The Blessing in Disguise.... revealed

https://www.amazon.com/Blessing-Disguise-Revealed-story-faith/dp/1074340493/ref=sr_1_19?keywords=the+blessing+in+disguise&qid=1561392004&s=books&sr=1-19

***Now available***

My 1st book The blessing in Disguise 

Selling on my website

:

Http://www.treadmilltreats.com

And on Amazon.com

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0692437398/ref=mp_s_a_1_13?qid=1462358109&sr=1-13&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=the+blessing+in+Disguise

http://www.am6azon.com/gp/aw/d/0692437398/ref=mp_s_a_1_12?qid=1434452632&sr=8-12&pi=AC_SX110_SY165_QL70&keywords=the+Blessing+in+Disguise

My weekly Youtube page, please subscribe:

https://youtu.be/LDSXCFJVnzM

Twitter: treadmill treats 

Instagram: treadmilltreats

Facebook :treadmill treats

#treadmilltreats 

#Theblessingindisguise 

#TheblessinginDisguiserevealed

#livinglifelarge 

#bethechangeyouwanttosee

#Thankyounext

#Garyvee

#Jayshetty

#newyearnewme 

#blogginglife

#write

#writer

#blogger

#NewYorktimesbestseller 

#womenoffaithtour 

#Motivationalspeaker

#OnOprahSupersoulSunday

#Oprah

#TylerPerry

#TylerPerryproducingmylifestory

#thisismypassion 

#livingmypurpose 

#blogging

#Newyork

#Florida

#internationalblogger

#francescavillardi

#francescavillardienterprise

[lhs3020b]

The election is tomorrow

So, goodness help me, the general election.

First off, please let me get one thing out of the way.

In the event that we have anyone in the 18-24 age range reading this - yes, you do need to vote, and yes, it is important. It only takes a few minutes - you probably won't even have to queue, given that over a third of the electorate doesn't bother to turn up these days.

The election is tomorrow; please don't forget and please don't sit it out. I can understand the "a plague on both your houses" feeling all too well, but it can lead you up the garden path. Yes, there's plenty that's wrong with the centre/left parties, but the fact remains that there's much more that's wrong with Mrs May and the Tories.

(Look at it this way - we've had over 7 years of Conservative rule now. In that time, can you think of any single thing that feels like a success? The only one I can think of is same-sex marriage act, and that only happened due to huge pressure from the Lib Dems and support from Labour - the Tories voted 134/126 against the first reading!)

TL;DR - please, please, please, remember to vote tomorrow!

As for the electoral campaign, it’s fair to say that it has surprised us all.

Mr Corbyn has run an unexpectedly well-organised and unexpectedly-vigorous program. The widely-expected Lib Dem revival ... isn't visible anywhere in the polling data, so barring a big surprise tomorrow, there presumably isn't one. UKIP have cratered, and - let's hope - may soon be a thing of the past.

Meanwhile, the Tories have run an eye-wateringly bad shambles of a campaign. Hiding from debates, politicising terrorist attacks, a candidate actually getting charged over election expenses from 2015 [fn.1], snuggling up to Trump after he pulled out from Paris ... and that's before you even get to the unforced error that was telling voters "Hi, we want your house!".

(Why yes, I have been enjoying their misery.)

The opinion polls are a complete mess. They consistently show a Tory lead, but that's the only consistency. There's that one much-retweeted poll with Tory/Labour at 41%/40% - if that's true, then it's inside the pollsters' self-admitted margin of error, and the election is wide open.

On the other hand, at the opposite end of the scale, another poll still has a 12pt lead for the Tories. What this is showing us, I think, is that the pollsters definitely do still have big methodological problems. Probably they're all wrong. I dare say we'll find out just how badly wrong they are on Friday morning.

Still, the Tory lead is a long way down on what it was a month ago. They've gone from a 20pt poll lead to one that could be as small as 1pt. I'm not quite sure I believe it's that small, but I'd like to! Even if it's 5pts, losing 15pts in three weeks is quite an achievement. It needs to be kept in mind that the Tories have the media on their side and all the money you could ever want, as well as having had incumbency and first-mover advantage on the election. Even with all those merits, they've still managed to turn in an inept dumpster-fire of a campaign. (Frankly, this alone demonstrates their unfitness to govern.)

There may still be a Tory lead, the fact still remains that the election has proved unexpectedly-competitive. A Tory landslide can certainly be averted, and there are actually some pathways that could produce a hung parliament.  While a Tory victory seems probable, it's no longer inevitable. And, if the events of the last 2 years have taught us anything, it's that electorates in the English-speaking world are unpredictable. No-one expected 2015 and no-one expected 2016 either. Upsets are possible.

Meanwhile there's this weird myth that Theresa May is a Brexit moderate. She isn't. Everything she's done is consistent with seeking the hardest, coldest Brexit she can arrange. It's a way to give her something she desperately wants, which is pulling the UK out of the ECJ and the ECHR. As for the economic damage - 40% higher food prices, thousands of jobs lost, mortgages underwater, widespread homelessness and unemployment - she knows that as a professional Tory, that will never happen to her personally, so she doesn't need to fear any of it. Her calculation is that she can blame all the chaos on Europe, and the right-wing press will back her up. The pensioners will stay in line once their anger has been redirected toward foreigners, and UKIP will be a dead letter, so the Tory Party will be safe in 2022, no matter how much the country is on fire.

That's the future she wants. That's the Britain she's trying to build. I think it's a nightmare. Isolationism, chaos, poverty, racism and an untouchable right-wing oligarchy squatting on top of the whole steaming mess. It's about as far from a socially-just future as you can imagine (short of 40K, of course - presumably that’s the Tory manifesto for 2022, but minus all the cool guns?).

There's one simple answer to all this, though. It happens tomorrow. It's called, mark the box on the ballot paper that isn't a Tory. If enough of us do that, she doesn't get what she wants. _______ Fn. 1 A small note concerning the Tory election fraud allegations. In the end, the other 30 or so files did not result in prosecutions. It turns out that the election finance laws are written in a rather curious way, such that "I didn't know it was illegal!" actually is a defence. (It's interesting to compare this to the laws on fraud and false accounting, which bind the rest of us - "I didn't know" is quite definitely not a defence in those contexts.)

It's fair to say I was disappointed with the decisions not to prosecute. However, Tories have good lawyers, have lots of money and are litigious. I have neither lawyers nor money[!] and I don't want to take any chance of being sued, so I will refrain from commenting any further. (I will note this does laxity-of-law does make you wonder about what happened in South Thanet, though.)

[j0sgomez-blog]

Dawn at Quiet Lake in Idaho’s Cecil D. Andrus-White Clouds Wilderness, created in 2015.

By Michael Lanza

How’s it feel to be a conservationist in America today? Does it feel like people who want the government to protect the environment—which is a large majority of Americans—suddenly find themselves losing a war that it seemed we had already won?

These are strange and frustrating times for conservation. We have to wonder: How could so many Americans believe that climate science is bogus—or even a “hoax,” as a certain world leader calls it? How could so many of our countrymen and women applaud as the current White House takes an axe to the agency created four decades ago to protect the very environment we live in? Or buy into the corrupt notion that ceding control of our prized public lands to private interests could, in any way, be in our public interest?

And where do we go from here?

Somewhere along the line, logic got turned on its head. We need to stand it upright again—and we can.

  The Bears Ears buttes in Bears Ears National Monument, which President Trump shrank by 85 percent.

The good news is that while we are, in many ways, mired in a war for the future not only of conservation but for the nation’s values—not to mention human civilization—environmentalists do have a much larger army than the opposition. Gallup reported in March 2018 that “62 percent of Americans say government is doing too little on the environment,” the highest that number has been since 2006.

The same poll found overwhelming majorities want more public investment in renewable energy, higher pollution and auto-emissions standards, and stronger enforcement of environmental regulations. Seven in 10 Americans believe climate change is happening and six in 10 want the government to do something about it.

  Hi, I’m Michael Lanza, creator of The Big Outside, which has made several top outdoors blog lists. Click here to sign up for my FREE email newsletter. Subscribe now to get full access to all of my blog’s stories. Click here to learn how I can help you plan your next trip. Please follow my adventures on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Youtube.

But the anti-environmental movement is very well funded—with the climate-change misinformation campaign led by the fossil-fuel industry and related special interests—and has massed its troops in elected positions from Congress to state capitols and local offices.

They are dismantling the protections created over decades to ensure that Americans can breathe clean air and drink clean water, and protect endangered species. They are working to undermine the international effort to combat climate change. They are abetted in their self-serving scheme by a president who embraces no ideology beyond self-aggrandizement, and who has mastered the dark art of sowing division and discord through stoking the fires of fear and hate—all in the service of increasing his own profit and power. And he is enabled by a congressional majority willing to deploy un-American tactics to achieve their goals, like actively preventing some citizens from voting, and extreme gerrymandering of districts so that politicians get to select their voters rather than the other way around.

  Lower Yellowstone Falls in the world’s first national park, Yellowstone.

Among many moves to roll back progress on climate change, the Trump administration has taken steps to allow increased emissions of methane—one of the most powerful greenhouse gases—to weaken car pollution rules, and to let states set their own rules on coal emissions (or no rules at all). The administration hires ex-lawyers and lobbyists for polluting industries to regulate those industries—the proverbial fox guarding the henhouse. Trump’s Interior Department under Director Ryan Zinke has rescinded an Obama-era policy requiring that national parks management be based in science.

This NY Times story lists 76 environmental rules Trump is throwing out, and concludes: “All told, the Trump administration’s environmental rollbacks could lead to at least 80,000 extra deaths per decade and cause respiratory problems for more than one million people.” That story goes on to quote a Harvard expert saying that number is likely to be “a major underestimate of the global public health impact.”

This is what an all-out war on the environment looks like. It’s enough to really piss you off, right?

Climate change constitutes, literally and figuratively, a steadily rising tide that threatens to overwhelm civilization. The science not only continues to affirm this reality, it strongly suggests that we are on a faster trajectory toward increasingly severe consequences than previously thought.

  Read about how climate change is affecting our national parks in my book Before They’re Gone—A Family’s Year-Long Quest to Explore America’s Most Endangered National Parks.

  Backpackers hiking through a burned forest in Glacier National Park. Climate change has made wildfires larger and more numerous.

The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned recently that we have until 2030 to slash carbon emissions by 45 percent, and until 2050 to eliminate all carbon emissions. Otherwise, we condemn our children, grandchildren, and generations for centuries to life on a planet undergoing catastrophic climate change.

Many of us followed a long path through the outdoors that led us into conservation. We are motivated by a love of hiking, climbing, fishing, backpacking, skiing, paddling, hunting, birding, and other pastimes that have given us some of the most inspirational and joyful moments in our lives. Pull back the covers on the phrase “conservation movement” and you simply find people who share simple, common values: protecting places in nature that give us a rejuvenating connection to our humanity, and maintaining a world environment in which humans can thrive and live healthy lives.

History will recall this era as a dark time when some leaders showed a ruthless and shameless willingness to destroy the planetary environment that sustains life as humans have always known it.

But we have the opportunity to ultimately record this period as the time that the conservation movement became reinvigorated and rose to the challenges we face today. Many organizations and individuals are engaged and committed to this mission. The technology exists to accomplish this; we need only the political will, and that begins with each of us.

Here are some ideas for getting back on the right track.

  The Big Outside helps you find the best adventures. Subscribe now and get full access to all stories!

  Backpackers on Clouds Rest in Yosemite National Park.

No. 1 Vote in Every Election

Voting represents the bare minimum effort we are all asked to make as citizens of what has been and could still be—if we’re ready to save it—the nation that leads the free world.

Voting is not a big ask. It’s not a heavy lift. In fact, we should all participate in the democratic process more deeply than merely voting.

The Teton Crest Trail in Grand Teton National Park.

We should certainly seek to inform ourselves thoroughly through a variety of legitimate sources in the media and elsewhere. Knowledge and accurate information offer the best protection against the demagogues, charlatans, and liars who employ today’s vast array of communication tools to foment the fear, intolerance, and hate that seem to motivate so many voters now. We don’t need impenetrable walls along our borders—we need virtual windows onto our entire world, through which we can see everything more clearly.

Just as we have a choice in how we drive a vehicle—we can drive it intelligently and with care and caution, or steer it over a cliff—we can use the infinite resources available at our fingertips today to make ourselves better-informed citizens, rather than pawns of the purveyors of misinformation.

But voting is step one on the stairway of democracy. And yet, millions of Americans do not vote—they do not contribute the bare minimum effort as a member of a democracy. Some, including young people and populations already marginalized, only vote occasionally, typically in presidential elections, skipping mid-terms that determine the crucial makeup of Congress and key state offices.

Think of it this way: There are 10 houses on your street, but only the owners of six of them make all the rules for the neighborhood, including how much you each pay to live there (and they charge others more than they charge themselves), because the owners of four houses don’t vote.

Sound like a good system?

If not, then get out and vote and urge everyone you know to do the same—especially anyone who’s never voted or does rarely, including young people. Tell anyone who complains about the cynicism in politics that they have the power to do something about it, beginning with their vote. If everyone eligible voter in America cast a ballot in every election, we’d be well on our way to having a functional democracy.

  Plan your next backpacking adventure in Yosemite, Grand Teton and other parks using my expert e-guides.

  Sahale Glacier Camp in North Cascades National Park, one of my 25 favorite backcountry campsites.

No. 2 Choose to Live More Sustainably

Yes, it sometimes seems the solutions to climate change and other environmental problems lie far beyond our reach as individuals. But we can all do more to reduce personal waste and consumption, and that exerts a positive collective impact.

We can make choices about lifestyle and family and work circumstances that affect our waste and consumption. A few examples of many possible steps include reducing car trips and driving an economical vehicle, being more careful about electricity and water use, buying food grown and produced as close to your home as possible and planting a vegetable garden, recycling and reusing, and composting home organic waste. Larger steps like improving house insulation and converting to solar create expense up front but pay off over the long term.

The Center for Biological Diversity lists these 12 ways to live more sustainably, but you can easily find much more information on that subject. Some actions are big and costly, others have long-term, significant impacts and save you money.

But the best news about living more sustainably? Instead of making you pissed off, it can make you happier and healthier and improve your life. When I gave my wife a cruiser bicycle for Christmas a few years ago, her attitude toward biking rather than driving local trips swung 180 degrees. Now we frequently ride into town, which creates time together that’s far more enjoyable than driving in traffic and searching for parking—not to mention far better for our community.

  Backpackers on the Piegan Pass Trail in Glacier National Park.

No. 3 Get Off Your Butt

Actions speak louder than bitching on Facebook. If you’re truly pissed off, do something.

Volunteer for and donate to political candidates and campaigns you like and respect, who you believe can help our world—or your little part of it—rather than harm it. Or even run for office and be an agent for change.

Find organizations that do work you support and offer them your time and resources. Join a board; many groups are desperate for intelligent, committed volunteers who bring a variety of expertise to the table. I’m no genius, but for years I’ve served on volunteer boards and committees working on protecting and managing conservation and recreation lands, improving public education (smarter kids make smarter voters and citizens), and electing pro-conservation politicians. (I’m on the board of Conservation Voters for Idaho, which has resounding success electing green candidates in a very red state and deserves your support.)

Step up. You might be surprised at how many people would love to have whatever you can give.

  Find your next adventure in your Inbox. Sign up for my FREE email newsletter now.

  Backpackers in Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, which Trump cut in half.

No. 4 Do What Jesus or Muhammad or Buddha Would Do

Religious leaders are increasingly joining the rising chorus of people who believe the world’s governments have a moral duty to protect the environment and take aggressive action to limit the severity of climate change.

In September 2017, Pope Francis and Orthodox Christian leader Patriarch Bartholomew called for a collective response from world leaders to climate change, saying the planet was deteriorating and vulnerable people were the first to be affected. Other religious organizations are investing directly in projects that protect the planet, such as renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and forest protection.

As well they should. Jesus said, “For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?” The Prophet Muhammad said, “Conduct yourself in this world as if you are here to stay forever.” The Buddha said, “I do not believe in a fate that falls on men however they act; but I do believe in a fate that falls on them unless they act.”

  Planning your next big adventure? See “America’s Top 10 Best Backpacking Trips” and “The 20 Best National Park Dayhikes.”

  Bighorn sheep in Glacier. Click photo for 10 Tips for Getting a Hard-to-Get National Park Backcountry Permit.

No. 5 Please, Don’t Give Up or Give In

It’s easy to feel defeated. It’s hard to make things better. And it’s not enough to just be pissed off. Consider how much is at stake. I’m reminded of that every day when I look at my kids.

There are many reasons to be optimistic for our future. I’m encouraged by the efforts of politicians at the state and local levels and businesses committed to a sensible future in an economy built upon clean energy—the only future. California has committed to meeting 100 percent of its energy needs by 2045. Thousands of cities, regional governments, investors, and corporations have pledged to reduce their carbon footprint, motivated in large part by Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the international Paris climate change agreement.

I am encouraged by the energy, intelligence, and determination of today’s young people. They don’t wallow in fear and despair. They aren’t mourning the planet’s future and lamenting that climate change seems so gigantic and daunting a problem that any action feels futile. They are acting. They are educating themselves. They are demanding leadership.

Larch trees reflected in Rainbow Lake, in Washington’s North Cascades.

But those of us in the generations now running the show—who are responsible for much of this problem—have to hand them the tools to help them complete the most important work humanity has ever faced. We have to give them a fighting chance.

If we fail to right our ship, then we will deserve it when today’s children look at us in the fast-approaching future, as the oceans drown cities and starvation and political instability spawn refugee waves unlike anything we’ve ever seen in history, and ask, “What were you thinking?”

I’m reminded of three quotes that speak to the time we live in now. The first has been described as an Aboriginal proverb but also attributed to various sources: “We do not inherit the planet from our ancestors, we borrow it from our grandchildren.”

The second is a quote that has been attributed to the Irish philosopher, statesman, and parliamentarian Edmund Burke: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

Finally, we might all find inspiration in the words written by a young girl while she suffered through the worst evil the world has ever known. Anne Frank famously wrote: “It’s a wonder I haven’t abandoned all my ideals, they seem so absurd and impractical. Yet I cling to them because I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart.”

We have no other choice. We cannot fail, because failure now means giving up on hope.

  Tell me what you think.

I spent a lot of time writing this story, so if you enjoyed it, please consider giving it a share using one of the buttons below, and leave a comment or question at the bottom of this story. I’d really appreciate it.

  Read about one great American adventure that’s possible today because of the conservation movement in my story “Why Conservation Matters: Rafting the Green River’s Gates of Lodore.”

  You live for the outdoors. The Big Outside helps you get out there. Subscribe now and a get free e-guide!

[toldnews-blog]

New Post has been published on https://toldnews.com/politics/watch-sen-amy-klobuchar-a-liberal-who-hasnt-gone-too-far-left-jonathan-karl/

WATCH: Sen. Amy Klobuchar 'a liberal who hasn't gone too far left': Jonathan Karl

Transcript for Sen. Amy Klobuchar ‘a liberal who hasn’t gone too far left’: Jonathan Karl

Our economy is the envy of the world. The rules in our economy have gotten rigged so far in the favor of the rich and powerful. Wages are rising at the fastest pace in decades. Wag in America have barely budged. We passed a massive tax cut for working families. Stop handing out enormous tax giveaways to rich people and giant corporations. Two very different views of the economy and the agenda. The president on Tuesday, and Elizabeth Warren her campaign yesterday. The round tablack and Jon, we saw on Tuesday night it’s already been engaged right there. The state of the union might not have put out too much about what’s going to get accomplished, but it laid out a lot for the president in 2020. And the big theme whi Democrats are essentially socialists. He used the word. Not essentially. That’s exactly what he used. You showed Elizabeth Warren and another big announcement, Amy Har. She is expected to announce she’s getting into this race. The senator frominnesota. Yeah. Much less fanfare surrounding her, but Amy klobuchar is a liberal in the united States senate who has worked with Republicans and unlike other leaders, she comes from a place that Democrats have to compete.e has won in the state of Minnesota. She won her first race by less than 1% back in 1998. Since then she has never won by less than 20 points in a race in Minnesota, and she is unlike Elizabeth Warren, kamala Harris, she doesn’t come out for the big Progressive items. Too far left. There will be more women democratic candidates than men. Jon just hit on what is likely to be a real fault line inside the democratic party between for wont of a better word, centrists and Progressives. Bernie Sanders as well is to the charge of socialists. Donald Trump did a great job at the state of the union of trying to message this issue as a polarizing issue, but what we know about the issues that Progressives push, most americanpport. Medicare for all. 70% of Americans support. A green new deal. 60% of Americans. These are not far left socialist ideals. The idea that a rich American should pay more is not a new idea. We have been here as a country, and so he did a great job of doing what he does, which is messaging scaring people and my hope is that Democrats don’t take the bait, right? Don’t start running away from this idea of socialism. We know that’s not what it is. It is America taking care of the folks who need us most. One of the president’s many tweets yesterdayris, said that. He hopes Democrats do do the green new deal. Yeah, listen. I watched Elizabeth Warren’s announcement yesterday, and I said, this is exactly what ica is pining for, a Harvard professor in the white house. That’s what they are looking for. I mean, that was a ridiculous announcement yesterday, and I will say as a Republican, please do all that stuff. Nominate Elizabeth Warren and let’s get to it. Don’t you think that would resonate with a lot of Americans? No. When people explain it, George — see, you know, the president brings things through the sound bites. What was the elizabe Warren message there? Nobody’s talking about how much it’s going to cost to D do medicare for all. When the voters start to hear about what the price tags ar for there, that’s why Amy klobuchar in a state like Minnesota doesn’t talk about this stuff and gets re-elected because she can get independents and Republicans to vote for her, and if Democrats can’t do that, Donald Trump is going to be in the white house for four more years. I thought senator Warren was a very, very clear voice on economic inequality which is a real experience for people. I spent 22 mths moving around the state of Florida and just this week had a report that said 44% of the people in our state cannot make ends meet at the end of the month. They’re working harder than ever, and still can’t pull down a wage where they can take care of themselves and their families. Those are real issues and the president wants to make this culture war and name-calling and socialism, but this race has to be about economics. It has to be about the future of our environment, which is a real issue and one of the issues which showed up in Florida in a very red, conservative area. They were concerned about climate change, global warming, sea level rise, blue-green algae. Those issues are real. If we followed the president down this rabbit hole of trying to respond to that name calling, we will be off target. The American people want to he us talk about these issues of what we’re going to do to help make their lives better. Simply put in a democratic nominee that can do that, can become president of the united States. One of the things the Democrats saw running on a lot of those themes in the midterm elections is they won the house by the largest margin ever. Well, but the majority of those who run those house seats, George, were moderate Democrats. A lot with military backgrounds and so on. One of the things that the president is doing very effectively is pointing out the the deep divisions within the democratic party. You have this resurgent and ascendant left, and then you have moderates who are going to Mrs. Pelosi and the speakership and saying, we should broker a deal on the border and so on because if we don’t, you’re no longer going to be speaker and the house is going to revert back to Republican control. One thing the president did, and it was an unapologetic embrace of exceptionalism, which we haven’t gotten, going to pattern his re-election in 2020 on Reagan’s 1984 model which is a 21st century version of morning in America. He delivered a thriving economy and a stronger U.S. Military and U.S. International position. Of course, the risk — That is what you saw in this speech. It was a speech of great clarity as well. Not just on immigration, but late-term abortion and on some other things. I think I listened to the wrong speech. Absolutely didn’t hear that.I didn’t hear that at all. There was a lot of rhetoric. He was talking to his base and trying to scare maybe more moderate members of the democratic party not to I think go where I think most Americans are going. Andrew said it. We had a federal shutdown where federal workers after one paycheck were in the food pantry line. That should encapsulate what most Americans are dealing with, and if you can pull medicare for most Republicans and most Americans support it shows where we’re going as a country. Our current view and our current respect among capitalism isn’t working. That doesn’t mean we don’t stay as a capitalist country. We just do it the right way, which means everybody pays their fair share. The top 1% pay 58% of the income tax. When is it fair share? The top 1% pay 58% of New Jersey is not fair share. What is it? 70%? I don’t know if standing up for the 1% here is winning. I think the energy among the Democrats is undoubtedly on the far left of the party. Absolutely. That’s why you have seen these leading presidential candidates like kamala Harris, Gillibrand and Warren come out in favor of positions that Democrats are rallying around, but it will be problematic in a general election. But to Monica’s point, a lot of the successful Democrats were those who ran a little more down the middle. Right. Alexandria ocasio-cortez was not — she represented one aspect of that winning coalition, but not the majority of that, and what trump is trying to do is define her as the voice of the democratic party. She was the diversity, and that one election to the united States congress and to legislative seats and governorships around the country and otherwise. If we think for a moment that people are satisfied economically where they are in this country, we have got another thing coming. People are terrified of going bankrupt over illness, health care. They’re terrified that they are working more hours, multiple jobs and are not making ends meet. Which is what makes medicare for all a great rallying cry for Democrats right now, but you get into the specifics, are you going to be able to defend that in a general election? But also — Say you’re going to abolish private health insurance in this country, which is what a number of the democratic candidates are come out — it’s out there now. There are a lot of prescripts as to how we get there. You hear folks saying giving 3 million people access to health care. You’re talking about generalities of the president’s speech and we have kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand saying they want to help. People don’t want to give their health insurance back to the government and when you come to the next levf medicare for all, that’s where the democr will be in trouble. What they want is to know if they get sick, they won’t be in the board house. Many people aren’t. And if you know about medicare, most people who are on it, love it. If you ask people whether they would like medicare, they would say yes, please. Thank you very much. Thank you all very much. That is all for us today. Thanks for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out “World news tonight” and I’ll see you tomorrow on

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.