The RCP has not said what kind of elections they would have as far as I
know. They hold that the most advanced place on Earth on the road to
communism was China before the death of Mao and the overthrow of the
"gang of four." They do not consider that to have been a completed
process, but I would expect that they would want to recreate that
situation elsewhere before moving on.
On 3/27/2016 6:51 AM, Alice Dampman Humel wrote:
and what kind of elections does the RCP say it is going to have
On Mar 26, 2016, at 9:54 PM, Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Yes, why vote at all? It certainly doesn't do any good. But like I said, if you don't vote then you are still throwing away your vote. Personally, I intend to throw away my vote. I don't have a choice of whether to throw it away. I intend to throw away my vote by voting for someone who I know beforehand will not be elected. The only reason I will bother to do that is because if I don't vote that withholding of my vote will be depicted as apathy. That shows one of my big differences with the Revolutionary Communist Party. They urge everyone to not vote in order to register a protest. They entirely miss the fact that most people do not vote anyway and it is never depicted as a protest. It is always depicted as apathy. However, if you talk to people who do not vote - and you will not have to look very hard to find them - they hardly ever say that they don't care. Instead, they express disgust with the kinds who are bound to actually be elected. So that very large rate of abstention is actually the kind of protest that the RCP wants, but to find that out you have to talk to nonvoters individually because if you look anywhere else it is called apathy. If I vote for a candidate who will not be elected it is harder to call it apathy. If it is called a throwaway vote then that much is true. As to the question of whether we should stop having elections, it is not we who are having them in the first place. It is a government that exists for the benefit of a very small very rich class that is having the elections and the elections are being held to perpetuate the false impression that the masses are in charge. It is their electoral system, not ours. That kind of electoral system I would like to see abolished. I would replace it with a system in which everyone participates from the bottom up, a system in which the masses of the people actually are in charge because they take charge from a local level in running their factories and living places, because they act collectively to make decisions for themselves with the input of everyone who is effected by the decisions. In a system like that your vote would actually have some meaning. It would not be a vote that ratifies the decisions that your own enemies have already made for you.
On 3/26/2016 9:15 PM, Frank Ventura wrote:
Roger, if every vote cast is throwing away a vote then why vote at all? Should we not hold elections?
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 9:12 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Okay, suppose Clinton gets the nomination. If you vote for her you are throwing away your vote. You are throwing it away because you are voting against your own interests, because you are voting for your own enemy.
If you vote for the Republican you are throwing away your vote for the exact same reason. If you vote for Stein you are throwing away your vote because you are voting for just another bourgeois liberal who is also opposed to your interests, but at least you might have the satisfaction of knowing that your vote will not contribute to her election. If you vote for your own interests and vote for an actual socialist candidate you are again throwing away your vote because your vote will not get the candidate elected and it will not even be taken note of by the bourgeois news media that controls what information is mass promulgated. Then if you do not vote you are throwing away your vote because it is unused and it may as well have been a brand new cup of yogurt that was tossed in the garbage without being opened. You might withhold your vote to protest the election farce, but if you do it will be depicted as apathy, so it is still thrown away. What it comes down to is that no matter what you do you are throwing away your vote, but that waste of your vote is still not your fault. It is the farce of the electoral system that is forced on us. That system makes voting a waste in the first place. If you really want to have an effect then get involved in independent political action. And while you are at it cast a throwaway protest vote.
On 3/25/2016 11:51 PM, Frank Ventura wrote:
Miriam, again you are twisting what I am saying. First of all I specifically said that it doesn't matter which one of us has what. It is you that is comparing. I didn't say anything about wars or anything else like that. I said it was un-American to claim we aren't living in the free world, which it is. As far as wanting to privatize social security if you want to throw away your vote to Jill Stein, which is what started this conversation, then you are supporting that very same privatization of social security. Now don't give me any nonsense about if x amount of people vote for Stein blah, blah, blah. It is not going to happen. You yourself said that you don't know anyone in your area that has even heard of her. You are still obscuring the route of this conversation which is what we should do if Clinton gets the democratic nomination.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Vieni
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 9:36 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Please please listen to yourself. You are repeating a divide and conquer montra, promoted by the wealthy, I mean truly wealthy, of the world. You are saying that you are this poor working guy, working paycheck to paycheck, no savings, as opposed to me, an older white American who is financially secure because I receive social security benefits. So here I am, this secure older white person with my net social security check of $1,577 a month. And you work in rehab, with no fringe benefits, no savings? So you think that I want a President and a congress that will privatize social security and Medicare
and eliminate Medicaid? That's what you think I'm advocating? And you're
saying I'm anti-American, of course a terrible insult, because I want my country to restore civil rights to people and to stop waging war all over the world and propping up dictators? My wish for this country to live up to the values that I was taught were American values is anti-American?
We're supposed to be discussing things, not accusing each other of things.
What we say to each other has consequences. We discuss, we post articles, or I keep hoping that's what we do.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank
Ventura
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 7:46 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Miriam, there was no attack on you for who you are. What I was offended by was the anti-American rhetoric that we are not the free world. While you may have *read* that Norway or Denmark may be the land of milk and honey it still doesn't make it true unless anyone of us actually tries it. I take no ill feelings towards you. I merely pointed out that older white folks have the least to fear by electing a republican, either directly or by means of a protest. I have no idea whom of us has more money than the others, and I doubt it matters. I know personally I live pay check to pay check, as do many Americans, with no social security or pension, no savings, and one bad diagnosis away from ruin. No I don't like it and no I refuse to pass it along to future generations by promoting it with any sort of temporary feel good protest. Obviously that is your right to do so but it also my right not to.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Vieni
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 6:46 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Frank,
Really, I thought that you were a smart and kind person. I'm amazed at this post of your's. The first part, I can deal with because you're correct, in that Jill Stein's candidacy is symbolic and an attempt to organize people around a set of progressive values. The second part of your post is a personal attack on me, my age, my race, and my values. You are correct. I can write whatever I choose because I have absolutely no power. I am not a threat to the power elites in this country. I am an old, multiply disabled woman who hasn't learned to keep her mouth shut yet. But the fact that I can write what I think on an email list of perhaps, 15 blind people, does not mean that there is real freedom of conscience, thought, and action in this country anymore.
It means that so long as one is not being harassed by the cops or the NSA or the FBI, so long as one, personally have enough to eat and a place to live, it is easy to ignore what is being done to other people here and throughout the world. But you're correct. my basic needs are met at this time. Obama, a Democrat, did almost cut the way in which social security cost of living is figured, and actually, the current way isn't very helpful to older people either. And I was hurt by the housing crisis because that was just at the time when I had to sell my house and move to an apartment. And I do feel very vulnerable. I think all of us are. I have no idea what life is like in other places. From what I've read, I might feel a lot more secure in Norway or Denmark, but that is so hypothetical. America is my country. I live here, pay taxes here, have tried to do as much as I could to make it a good place for everyone, so I absolutely have a right to be critical of its foreign policy, of its harshness toward the poor and dispossessed, of the diminishment of civil rights and of the quality of life. Since you are also white and middle class, and are married, and probably have a lot more money than I have at this point, why attack me for my expression of disappointment with the Democratic Party of which I've been a member since 1958?
Miriam
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank
Ventura
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 5:05 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Miriam, Stein can write anything she wants, and yes I have read it. It all sounds lovely and pure. However, she has no documented plans on how to do any of the following:
a. Finance a 50 state campaign (aprox 1 billion) b. Get elected c. Avoid being setup for high crimes and misdemeanors d. Get any of her proposals into a subcommittee, let alone a full house vote given that she does not have even one ally in congress.
I can go on and on but I won't bother since your constant condemnation of anything and anyone democratic and silent support of the republican majorities both now and during the Clinton administration is telling of your real motives. As far as your feelings about the U.S. and the free world.
Consider life in just about any other part of the globe. Doubtful we would be having this conversation anywhere else since it wouldn't be allowed. And, yes this includes European socialist nations where some right wing speech is barred. But heck you are a older suburban white lady. That means no matter who wins, yes even Heir Trump, you will see little or no change. Even Trump supports keeping social security for current retirees. It is very easy to stomp your feet and take the position that if you don't get everything you want you are going to put Trump in office and thus condemn younger generations to poverty, hardship, and yes even death for those that don't make the cut for being 3/5 human.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Vieni
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2016 9:56 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Poor Jill Stein. Have you ever, ever looked at her website or read anything she's written or heard anything she's said? Saying that she's a Republican operative sounds like a paranoid delusion. No, saying that people who vote for Democrats regardless of what Democrats do are party loyalists is accurate. It was Bill Clinton who dismantled the banking regulations that permitted the crash of 2008. Yes, he certainly had hellp from Bush who lowered taxes for the wealthy and started a war that he couldn't fund. But it was Bill Clinton who removed the safety net for poor mothers and children and it was he who passed those tough on crime laws. It was he whose sanctions on Iraq killed 500,000 children. It was Hillary who destroyed Libya. Now when you refer to the President of the United States as "the leader of the free world", I really question as to whether or not we're on the same page at all. By the "free world", do you mean the western powers who have carved up and ruled the rest of the world, who continue to rule everyone else financially, to take their resources, and to bomb them into submission when they don't comply? Is the free world the countries who kidnapped people, brought them to black sites, and tortured them at the behest of the US?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank
Ventura
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 11:20 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Miriam, for someone who claims to have been called names you refer to Democrats as "party loyalists" in the very same sentence. I conjecture that it is you that is being lead like a lamb to the slaughter. Some Republican operative in comfy cushy surbabanville, like Jill Stein dribbles a few pro-public talking points at you, while not delivering any sane means of getting elected to carry out any such plans; then as the lamb you do everything she wants to put the Republican dujour into office. If merely pro-public, pro-working class rethoric was enough to be the leader of the free world then any of us on this list could be president. Not holding my breath personally.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Vieni
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 10:37 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Frank,
First of all, the polls say that Sanders has a better chance of winning, with real people, not political operatives, than Hillary. Your statement to Roger about the polls not including likely voters is inaccurate.
Additionally, he has a huge following among Independents. He also has a following among rank and file union members, again, not necessarily the large international organization leaders. What he says, rings true to working people when they actually get to hear him speak. The media has tried really hard to black him out. However, he's had crowds in the thousands wherever he's spoken. Yes, he appeals to young people and young people do vote and they have the energy to continue political organizing whether or not he wins. What is most important is that many many people hear him, and are moved to make changes in our system. The difference between Bernie and Jill is that Bernie has functioned in various political offices and she has not. I don't think that means he's "a machine politician" as you phrase it.
But he does know how to function in a political venue. He worked with John McCain to get that veterans' bill through. He compromised on one point, but it got passed. One weapon that Democratic Party loyalists use, is to call people names when they choose not to vote for the candidate whom the Party bosses choose. The epithet usually used is "spoiler". It is truly amazing.
The popular vote was pretty much split between Bush and Gore. Gore was not the most attractive ccandidate, after all. Aside from being a centrist, a follower of Clinton's legacy, he was somewhat stiff. But he might have won, that is, if a Republican operative in Florida and the Supreme Court hadn't stolen the election. But did the loyal Democrats blame the Republicans? No, they blamed the folks who voted for Nader, even though the numbers proved that those votes never would have changed what happened. So now, every time any of us considers making an independent and ethical choice, some party loyalist calls us names. What has happened this time is that the incredible assumption of entitlement of the Clinton supporters has been so obvious, and their actions in controlling the nomination process so disgusting, that if I had any positive feelings left toward the Democratic Party before this nomination season began, I have none left now. The Democratic Party assumes that because the Republicans are so horrific, it can do whatever it pleases and we will all follow it like lambs to the slaughter.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank
Ventura
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 9:39 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Miriam, the problem here is that, as you said yourself, Jill stein (and sadly probably Sanders as well) doesn't have a chance of winning. You can't be committed to the working class, or anyone else for that matter, if you don't have a viable plan to win an election. Just running to be a spoiler doesn't make you committed to the working class. As far as not knowing them, you are being very presumptious about that. In reality I have a 7 degrees of separation thing personaly with Sanders and although I generally like the guy he still is a political machine; not exactally one of us, if there is really anything as "us" left.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Miriam
Vieni
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 6:40 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
I think you are doing a disservice to both Sanders and Stein, probably because you haven't read anything about who they really are or their actual lives. The question is, who is it who is actually committed to working people and middle class people. The Democratic Party Establishment, funded by Wall Street and corporations, and represented by Hillary Clinton worth millions and millions of dollars, talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. There are Progressive Democrats, but even they are limited by the party establishment. If they don't tow the party line, they lose party funding. The Party didn't even give support to unions. The party has been good on LBGT rights and a woman's right to choose. They've been good on voter rights although from all I've been reading lately, the voting machines are so easily hackable, that it may not matter whom one votes for if there is a Republican in charge of voting in one's state. But I have a Democratic Congress woman and she, and the one before her, have voted against the interests of the people just about every time. And one of my Democratic Senators, Chuck Schumer, is no friend of the working man either. Hillary was on the board of Walmart. The fact that the Republicans are religious fascists, doesn't justify what the Democrats have been doing to immigrants, to people of color, to poor people, to working people and, in case you have forgotten, to blind people. Sservices for the blind are not what they were.
All of you competent, employed, tech savvy people seem to have forgotten about the less well favored blind folks. As chuck said, his life is comfortable. It's an American white middle class attitude. But in fact, all of us are damaged when huge numbers of our people are damaged and Americans are in danger when the rest of the world's population is in danger. There are no perfect candidates. But for honesty and integrity, I'd choose bernie or Jill over Hillary any day.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank
Ventura
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 4:08 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Chuck, while I did vote for Sanders in the primary, I am already regretting it. Sadly, Sanders is starting to sound more and more like Jill Stein; that is someone who merely wants to derail the democratic party and put a Republican in the oval office out of some sort of protest. The sad truth is that after Stein and Sanders get their jollies with their protest against the mainstream Democratic party they will go back to their comfy suburban homes and sit back with a glass of wine; while the rest of us working class suffer the onslaught of President Trump or President Cruz and all the horrors for our nation that it has brought. So a year from now when President Trump's death squads are roaming the streets killing the working class Bernie and Jill will be sitting back watching it all on Foxnews while their private security forces guard their nicely manicured lawns.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles
Krugman
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 2:00 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Miriam, in 2008 you voted for a typical Chicago politician. Spending time in Chicago growing up in the sixties I found the political machine in power fascinating. My problem is that I just don't like or agree with Bernie Sanders and don't believe he is electable nor does he possess the image of an American president. While There are lots of things I didn't like about the Clinton Administration and I believe that Hillary was an active participant in the decisionmaking process and since I don't support the extreme principles of third parties I feel that in this election I'm voting for the lesser of the evils. I guess that there is still part of me that buys in to the capitalistic mentality.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 11:43 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
I live in New York which, probably, will continue to be a blue state.
However, whatever kind of state it is, my vote, if Bernie isn't the Democratic candidate, will go to Jill Stein. It won't go to Trump and it won't go to the Clinton machine. In 2008, I thought I was voting for a Democratic candidate who represented the values in which I believed. I knew that he was a bit to the right in terms of Afghanistan, but I tought he was a Liberal Democrat who believed in the rule of law, in open government. I discovered that I'd voted for an opportunist, an elitist, for a President who would ignore the constitution whenever it got in the way of his appeasement of the security state, of a President who was ready to cut social security benefits, and who made unacceptable bargains with Republicans before it was necessary to do so. And he is the more Ppogressive of the two. If I vote for Hillary, I'd be voting for someone whose Neo Liberal policies are more warlike, who is even more comfortable with the elites, who will increase the US appeasement of Israel, whose concern about African Americans is pure fiction, and who uses her femaleness as a means to gain support from femininsts. I can't, in good consciience do it. No, I don't want Trump as President. But the fact that Clinton uses whatever words , she thinks, will get votes from the Democratic base, doesn't reassure me. I listened to Robert Sheer's discussion with Thomas Frank this morning on an audio clip on Truthdig. Are you aware that Bill Clinton was about to privatize social security? What stopped him? The Monica Lewinsky scandal. These Democrats, aside from social issues, LGBT rights, abortion rights, are not anymore the party of the working people.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles
Krugman (Redacted sender "ckrugman" for DMARC)
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 2:07 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
whether we might like it or not any vote that doesn't go to Hillary including those on principle to minor candidates could very strongly result in the trump presidency that no thinking person wants.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 8:21 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Well, voting for Clinton means voting for more of what we have now which means more wealth going to the 1%, more power for trans national corporations, larger even less regulated banks, and an escalation of war.
Voting for trump may very well mean and out and out war at home on minorities along with what I outlined above. One can't tell what Trump will actdually do in terms of international policy because his statements are contradictory. I caught a short interview with the author of a biography of Trump on NPR last night. Briefly, he said Trump never reads books, does not focus on one subject when you talk with him, but thinks just the way he sounds in his speeches, and his basically and ego maniac, although he didn't use that term. I can't visualize myself voting for Hillary because I can't think of any positives in her favor. But certainly, the prospect of a Trump Presidency is unthinkable.
Miriam
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:27 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses
Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
As the World turns...so turn firm resolves.
Of course it's early yet, but winning the primary appears to be slipping from the old, experienced hands of Senator Bernie Sanders.
To date I have held to my resolve to vote for Sanders, and then if he does not win the Party nomination, to vote for Jill Stein, of the Green Party.
But that was before the Republicans trotted out their Party's Best, the Clown Crew.
And, as we all guffawed and chuckled over their noisy sideshow, an awful thing happened. One of the clowns began to look like something out of the 1940's. A full blown Fascist!
Ranting and raving and telling one big lie after another, Donald Trump rose like the Phoenix, out of the ashes of the Third Reich.
Despite the Republican Party's denial that he has the popular Party support, Trump stomps about, stirring up the rank and file, and winning in state after state.
We now are upon the brink of National disaster. One direction leads to a Fascist State, and the other leads to a Corporate State. And we have only ourselves to blame.
If the choice comes down to Clinton or Trump, or even Clinton or Cruz, we will need to decide if we hold to our original plan to support Stein, or to "throw away" our vote in an effort to block the takeover of our emerging Corporate State by the Fascist State. What a choice!
Just a fair warning that I am not ruling out a vote for Hillary Clinton.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/16/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org) Home > Trump andTrump.
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters ________________________________________
Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders
Campaign and His Youthful Supporters By Steven Rosenfeld [1] /
AlterNet [2] March 15, 2016 Bernie Sanders' historic and
expectation-surpassing bid for the Democratic presidential nomination
ran into hard reality in several pivotal primary contests Tuesday,
where he could not break Hillary Clinton's hold on voters in several
critical battleground states needed to win in the fall-notably Ohio
and Florida.
While Sanders supporters will point to his narrow victory in
Missouri, and overwhelming support among independents who voted in
the Democratic primary, Clinton's victories in those fall
battleground states-as well as South Carolina and Illinois-means that
it is virtually impossible for Sanders to win the delegates needed
[3] for the party's nomination. That fact undoubtedly will take days
to seep into his remarkable grassroots campaign, where it remains to
be seen how Sanders will continue his quest or align himself with
Clinton-who he's criticized for some stances but praised as a person of integrity.
The backdrop for that as-yet unknown calculation is the deeply
disconcerting continuing rise of Donald Trump toward the Republican
nomination, who has continued to amass a delegate lead-winning in
Florida, Illinois, South Carolina and Missouri. Although Ohio Gov.
John Kasich beat Trump in his home state, his first victory on 2016,
his chances-based on the GOP's delegate nomination math-are an even
longer shot than Sanders catching up with Clinton and wresting the
nomination. Under the current Republican National Committee rules, a
candidate needs to have won at least eight states to have their name
placed in nomination for the presidency. That renders Kasich's pledge
to supporters that he will win this fall as little more than campaign
magical thinking.
"Only one campaign has beaten Donald Trump over and over and over again,"
said Sen. Ted Cruz, also striking a defiant tone despite losing in
every state Tuesday, including by several thousand votes in Missouri
to
Cruz recited his pledge to recast the federal government andTuesday's results.
judiciary in the most ideological right-wing mold possible, go after
enemies abroad, and said he was the only alternative to Trump.
"Starting tomorrow morning, there is a clear choice," Cruz said,
posturing before supporters in Texas.
Trump's victory in Florida prompted Marco Rubio to suspend his
campaign, telling his backers that it was not in "God's plans" for
him to win "in
2016
or maybe ever." He also implored Republicans to reject the hateful
politics pedaled by Trump, saying, "I ask the American people, 'Do
not give into the fear. Do not give into the frustration.'"
Tuesday's top two storylines-Trump's rise and Clinton all-but ending
Sanders' chances of winning sufficient delegates to be the
nominee-came together in her remarks, where she underscored that she
had won fair and square but tried to reach out to Sanders' team. "Our
campaign has won more votes than any other campaign-Democrat or
Republican," began Clinton, in remarks from Palm Beach, "and I want
to congratulate Sen. Sanders for the vigorous campaign he has waged."
Clinton said she needed the support of Democrats across the country,
and then focused on Trump but cited many issues raised by Sanders.
"Tonight, it is clearer than ever that this may be one of the most
consequential campaigns of our lifetimes," she said. "The next
president will walk into the oval office next year in January, and
sit down at that desk, and start making decisions that will affect
the lives and the livelihoods of everyone in this country and indeed,
everyone on this planet."
Clinton said the next president has three major challenges: making
positive differences in people's lives, keeping America safe and
bringing the country together. The first example she gave was a
direct nod to Sanders and his popularity with voters under age 35.
"Young people across America struggling under the weight of student
debt find it difficult to imagine the futures they want," she said,
"and they deserve a president who will relieve them of that burden
and help future generations go to college without borrowing a dime."
Clinton continued with another issue that he raised first. "And you
know grandparents who worry about retirement deserve a president who
will protect and then expand Social Security for those who need it
most-not cut or privatize it."
Her to-do list continued: affordable child care; paid family leave;
equal pay for equal work for women; good jobs with rising incomes-in
construction, manufacturing, small business and renewable energy;
standing up for workers and the middle class-"not China, not Wall
Street and not overpaid corporate executives." She said that she
knows how to make these promises become realities, and then slammed
Trump, especially his anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim stances, and his
embrace of torture and threatening adversaries.
"That doesn't make him strong, it makes him wrong," she said.
"We have to take on all forms of inequality and discrimination,"
Clinton said. "Together, we have to defend all of our rights-civil
rights and voting rights; worker's rights and women's rights; LGBT
rights and rights for people with disabilities. And that starts with
standing with President Obama when he nominates a justice to the
Supreme Court."
Whether or not Sanders' supporters will buy Clinton's words and see
how much he has sharpened her embrace and articulation of a
progressive agenda remains to be seen. There is no doubt that the
short-term messaging from the Sanders' campaign will be that they
will keep plowing ahead and fight for delegates in the remaining
states. As of Tuesday, half the states have voted. The math has
Clinton with 300 more [3] pledged delegates than Sanders. That is not
counting super-delegates, the elected officers and party officials,
where she has 427 to his 26 [3]. Sanders reportedly spent
$12 million in ads for Tuesday's contests, compared to Clinton's $7
million.
Many of Sanders' supporters have not been involved in political
campaigns before, and will have a hard time immediately processing
But there are some big unanswered questions about what is next fortogether.
them in 2016-and what Clinton will also do to bring these two
campaigns
Sanders has taken positions that appeal to the disaffected voters whoCitizen's Guide to Voting"
have been drawn in by Trump and Cruz. One can only hope that the
Democratic Party knows it will need the millions of young economic
progressives to turn out in November. And they may not unless they
have a candidate they can believe in.
Steven Rosenfeld covers national political issues for AlterNet,
including America's retirement crisis, democracy and voting rights,
and campaigns and elections. He is the author of "Count My Vote: A
(AlterNet Books, 2008).Trump.
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx>'. [4]
[5]
________________________________________
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trump-and-clintons-big-night-po
s es-har d-questions-sanders-campaign-and-his-youthful
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/steven-rosenfeld
[2] http://alternet.org
[3]
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar
-
and-re
sults.html?action=click&contentCollection=Election%202016&reg
i
on=Foo
ter&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNex
t &m oduleDetail=undefined&pgtype=Multimedia
[4] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters [5] http://www.alternet.org/ [6]
http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org) Home > Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters
Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders
Campaign and His Youthful Supporters By Steven Rosenfeld [1] /
AlterNet [2] March 15, 2016 Bernie Sanders' historic and
expectation-surpassing bid for the Democratic presidential nomination
ran into hard reality in several pivotal primary contests Tuesday,
where he could not break Hillary Clinton's hold on voters in several
critical battleground states needed to win in the fall-notably Ohio
and Florida.
While Sanders supporters will point to his narrow victory in
Missouri, and overwhelming support among independents who voted in
the Democratic primary, Clinton's victories in those fall
battleground states-as well as South Carolina and Illinois-means that
it is virtually impossible for Sanders to win the delegates needed
[3] for the party's nomination. That fact undoubtedly will take days
to seep into his remarkable grassroots campaign, where it remains to
be seen how Sanders will continue his quest or align himself with
Clinton-who he's criticized for some stances but praised as a person of integrity.
The backdrop for that as-yet unknown calculation is the deeply
disconcerting continuing rise of Donald Trump toward the Republican
nomination, who has continued to amass a delegate lead-winning in
Florida, Illinois, South Carolina and Missouri. Although Ohio Gov.
John Kasich beat Trump in his home state, his first victory on 2016,
his chances-based on the GOP's delegate nomination math-are an even
longer shot than Sanders catching up with Clinton and wresting the
nomination. Under the current Republican National Committee rules, a
candidate needs to have won at least eight states to have their name
placed in nomination for the presidency. That renders Kasich's pledge
to supporters that he will win this fall as little more than campaign
magical thinking.
"Only one campaign has beaten Donald Trump over and over and over again,"
said Sen. Ted Cruz, also striking a defiant tone despite losing in
every state Tuesday, including by several thousand votes in Missouri
to
Cruz recited his pledge to recast the federal government andTuesday's results.
judiciary in the most ideological right-wing mold possible, go after
enemies abroad, and said he was the only alternative to Trump.
"Starting tomorrow morning, there is a clear choice," Cruz said,
posturing before supporters in Texas.
Trump's victory in Florida prompted Marco Rubio to suspend his
campaign, telling his backers that it was not in "God's plans" for
him to win "in
2016
or maybe ever." He also implored Republicans to reject the hateful
politics pedaled by Trump, saying, "I ask the American people, 'Do
not give into the fear. Do not give into the frustration.'"
Tuesday's top two storylines-Trump's rise and Clinton all-but ending
Sanders' chances of winning sufficient delegates to be the
nominee-came together in her remarks, where she underscored that she
had won fair and square but tried to reach out to Sanders' team. "Our
campaign has won more votes than any other campaign-Democrat or
Republican," began Clinton, in remarks from Palm Beach, "and I want
to congratulate Sen. Sanders for the vigorous campaign he has waged."
Clinton said she needed the support of Democrats across the country,
and then focused on Trump but cited many issues raised by Sanders.
"Tonight, it is clearer than ever that this may be one of the most
consequential campaigns of our lifetimes," she said. "The next
president will walk into the oval office next year in January, and
sit down at that desk, and start making decisions that will affect
the lives and the livelihoods of everyone in this country and indeed,
everyone on this planet."
Clinton said the next president has three major challenges: making
positive differences in people's lives, keeping America safe and
bringing the country together. The first example she gave was a
direct nod to Sanders and his popularity with voters under age 35.
"Young people across America struggling under the weight of student
debt find it difficult to imagine the futures they want," she said,
"and they deserve a president who will relieve them of that burden
and help future generations go to college without borrowing a dime."
Clinton continued with another issue that he raised first. "And you
know grandparents who worry about retirement deserve a president who
will protect and then expand Social Security for those who need it
most-not cut or privatize it."
Her to-do list continued: affordable child care; paid family leave;
equal pay for equal work for women; good jobs with rising incomes-in
construction, manufacturing, small business and renewable energy;
standing up for workers and the middle class-"not China, not Wall
Street and not overpaid corporate executives." She said that she
knows how to make these promises become realities, and then slammed
Trump, especially his anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim stances, and his
embrace of torture and threatening adversaries.
"That doesn't make him strong, it makes him wrong," she said.
"We have to take on all forms of inequality and discrimination,"
Clinton said. "Together, we have to defend all of our rights-civil
rights and voting rights; worker's rights and women's rights; LGBT
rights and rights for people with disabilities. And that starts with
standing with President Obama when he nominates a justice to the
Supreme Court."
Whether or not Sanders' supporters will buy Clinton's words and see
how much he has sharpened her embrace and articulation of a
progressive agenda remains to be seen. There is no doubt that the
short-term messaging from the Sanders' campaign will be that they
will keep plowing ahead and fight for delegates in the remaining
states. As of Tuesday, half the states have voted. The math has
Clinton with 300 more [3] pledged delegates than Sanders. That is not
counting super-delegates, the elected officers and party officials,
where she has 427 to his 26 [3]. Sanders reportedly spent
$12 million in ads for Tuesday's contests, compared to Clinton's $7
million.
Many of Sanders' supporters have not been involved in political
campaigns before, and will have a hard time immediately processing
But there are some big unanswered questions about what is next fortogether.
them in 2016-and what Clinton will also do to bring these two
campaigns
Sanders has taken positions that appeal to the disaffected voters whoCitizen's Guide to Voting"
have been drawn in by Trump and Cruz. One can only hope that the
Democratic Party knows it will need the millions of young economic
progressives to turn out in November. And they may not unless they
have a candidate they can believe in.
Steven Rosenfeld covers national political issues for AlterNet,
including America's retirement crisis, democracy and voting rights,
and campaigns and elections. He is the author of "Count My Vote: A
(AlterNet Books, 2008).
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx>'. [4] Error!
Hyperlink reference not valid.[5]
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trump-and-clintons-big-night-po
s es-har d-questions-sanders-campaign-and-his-youthful
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/steven-rosenfeld
[2] http://alternet.org
[3]
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar
-
and-re
sults.html?action=click&contentCollection=Election%202016&reg
i
on=Foo
ter&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNex
t &m oduleDetail=undefined&pgtype=Multimedia
[4] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters [5] http://www.alternet.org/ [6]
http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
