Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
November 19, 2015
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
FULL Q&A Part 1
FULL Q&A Part 2:
Bernie Sanders Delivers REMARKS On Democratic Socialism At Georgetown University
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders visits Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. to share his vision for a United States governed through the philosophies of Democratic Socialism.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
FULL Q&A Part 1
FULL Q&A Part 2:
November 19, 2015
John Podesta ✔@johnpodesta
Hillary's strategy to defeat Isis:
✓Defeat Isis in Syria & Iraq
✓Disrupt & dismantle terrorist infrastructure
✓Harden our defenses
11:13 AM - 19 Nov 2015
http://gawker.com/step-one-of-hillary-clintons-multi-part-strategy-to-def-1743540476
LOL!- Step One of Hillary Clinton's Multi-Part Strategy to Defeat ISIS Is "Defeat ISIS"
How many Generals did it take to advise Hillary on this strategy?.....
John Podesta ✔@johnpodesta
Hillary's strategy to defeat Isis:
✓Defeat Isis in Syria & Iraq
✓Disrupt & dismantle terrorist infrastructure
✓Harden our defenses
11:13 AM - 19 Nov 2015
http://gawker.com/step-one-of-hillary-clintons-multi-part-strategy-to-def-1743540476
November 19, 2015
Mo Elleithee ✔@MoElleithee
The @GUPolitics #BernieAtGU event starts at 2pm.
The line began at 5:30am.
Who says young people aren't engaged?
8:54 AM - 19 Nov 2015
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/19/1452058/-Line-formed-at-5-30am-to-hear-Bernie-Sanders-speak-about-Democratic-Socialism-at-2pm-today
Line Formed at 5:30am TO HEAR Bernie Sanders Speak About Democratic Socialism at 2pm Today
Mo Elleithee ✔@MoElleithee
The @GUPolitics #BernieAtGU event starts at 2pm.
The line began at 5:30am.
Who says young people aren't engaged?
8:54 AM - 19 Nov 2015
Line formed at 5:30am to hear Bernie Sanders speak about Democratic Socialism at 2pm today at Georgetown University in Washington, DC.
This crowd looks dedicated enough to spend a few hours standing in line to vote on primary voting day.
Official live stream of speech is here.
Bernietv will also be
&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank"> live streaming here.
This crowd looks dedicated enough to spend a few hours standing in line to vote on primary voting day.
Official live stream of speech is here.
Bernietv will also be
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/19/1452058/-Line-formed-at-5-30am-to-hear-Bernie-Sanders-speak-about-Democratic-Socialism-at-2pm-today
November 19, 2015
Bernie Sanders Campaign Releases POLLING With 'Very Encouraging News'
The Sanders campaign has released its internal polling. Really good news from their pollster Tulchin Research. I encourage you to delve into their link above as they expand on the key points given below with the numbers and analysis.
A series of reputable public polls released recently – notably the ABC News/Washington Post poll and the New York Times/CBS poll – contained a lot of very encouraging news for Senator Bernie Sanders and his presidential campaign. Yet the articles discussing the results positioned Hillary Clinton as "dominating" or "sweeping" the Democratic primary. In response to this erroneous interpretation, we felt compelled to set the record straight and provide a more accurate analysis of this polling data and its implications for Sanders, Clinton and the Democratic presidential primary contest.
There are several key points we will address in this memo, focusing on the fact that:
- Bernie Sanders continues to close the gap in the primary horserace with Hillary Clinton, even over the past month which pundits broadly declared a very good period for HRC, even going so far as calling it her "best month ever";
- Sanders is steadily increasing his name ID and favorability ratings with Democrats, especially Democratic primary voters;
- Sanders’ message of income inequality and political corruption by special interests is driving the issue agenda within the Democratic primary;
- Hillary Clinton has real vulnerabilities within the Democratic primary electorate, particularly on "being too close to special interests and Wall Street," among other issues;
- Sanders is much more popular with independents than HRC, which has major implications for both the primary and the general election; and
- Sanders is currently much better positioned with Republican voters than HRC. When combined with his vastly superior standing with independents, this helps explain why Sanders does at least as well if not better than Clinton in general election match-ups with leading Republican candidates. These findings raise real questions as to which of these leading Democratic candidates is in fact the best positioned for the general election.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/19/1451862/-Sanders-campaign-releases-polling-with-very-encouraging-news
A series of reputable public polls released recently – notably the ABC News/Washington Post poll and the New York Times/CBS poll – contained a lot of very encouraging news for Senator Bernie Sanders and his presidential campaign. Yet the articles discussing the results positioned Hillary Clinton as "dominating" or "sweeping" the Democratic primary. In response to this erroneous interpretation, we felt compelled to set the record straight and provide a more accurate analysis of this polling data and its implications for Sanders, Clinton and the Democratic presidential primary contest.
There are several key points we will address in this memo, focusing on the fact that:
- Bernie Sanders continues to close the gap in the primary horserace with Hillary Clinton, even over the past month which pundits broadly declared a very good period for HRC, even going so far as calling it her "best month ever";
- Sanders is steadily increasing his name ID and favorability ratings with Democrats, especially Democratic primary voters;
- Sanders’ message of income inequality and political corruption by special interests is driving the issue agenda within the Democratic primary;
- Hillary Clinton has real vulnerabilities within the Democratic primary electorate, particularly on "being too close to special interests and Wall Street," among other issues;
- Sanders is much more popular with independents than HRC, which has major implications for both the primary and the general election; and
- Sanders is currently much better positioned with Republican voters than HRC. When combined with his vastly superior standing with independents, this helps explain why Sanders does at least as well if not better than Clinton in general election match-ups with leading Republican candidates. These findings raise real questions as to which of these leading Democratic candidates is in fact the best positioned for the general election.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/19/1451862/-Sanders-campaign-releases-polling-with-very-encouraging-news
November 19, 2015
There are countless reasons why Senator Bernie Sanders is a superior presidential candidate to his rival, Hillary Clinton. The second Democratic debate further highlighted this. Ms. Clinton’s biggest gaffe of the night was a nonsensical tangent about 9/11 and her female donors, when confronted on her ties to Wall Street. Her divergent tactics were poorly executed and embarrassing for the Democratic Party as a whole. Some of the biggest donors to the Clinton Foundation include the largest banks in the country, such as Citigroup, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs. Despite both Mr. Sanders and Ms. Clinton spending the majority of their careers in public service, only Ms. Clinton has used it to make several million dollars for herself, and she has done this, in part, through political favors to large banks and corporations. Her ties to Wall Street were further" target="_blank">exhibited in an interview between Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bill Moyers in 2004. Ms. Warren explained how, in the 1990s, Ms. Clinton influenced her husband, Bill Clinton, to veto a bankruptcy bill that favored creditors over consumers—later to vote in favor of it herself when she became a U.S. Senator.
Hillary Clinton’s corruption isn’t limited to Wall Street. The Chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was also Co-Chair of Ms. Clinton’s 2008 campaign. Ms. Wasserman Schultz strategically limited and scheduled the debates to protect Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama defeated her through confronting Ms. Clinton on her inconsistent political record. Still it continues, as the second Democratic debate of the 2016 election cycle was the only one to take place in Iowa, and was scheduled on a Saturday night when the Iowa Hawkeyes—who have been undefeated this football season—played nationally ranked Minnesota.
Voters become disenchanted with the political system because of people like Hillary Clinton. Her complaint to Mr. Sanders during the debate—in response to discussing the corrupt role money plays in politics—that he was trying to “impugn her integrity,” might be true if she had any integrity to impugn. As Mr. Obama pointed out in his 2008 campaign against her, Ms. Clinton flips frequently on issues to whatever stance wins her greater political favor. There is no case in which she has changed her mind or stood her resolve on a controversial issue based on principles like Mr. Sanders did in his opposition to the Iraq War, despite nearly unanimous favoritism by congress and the public at the time. Ms. Clinton admitted making a mistake in voting for the Iraq War, but the American public cannot afford another mistake like that from future presidential administrations.
Lies and exaggerations were a significant part of Ms. Clinton’s rhetoric during the second Democratic debate. She touted that the majority of her donors, 60 percent, were women. She failed to mention her opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders outnumbers her in overall small donor contributions, including from women. Ms. Clinton lied again when she said, “I have hundreds of thousands of donors, most of them small.” Only 17 percent of her donors give contributions of $200 or less, compared to 74 percent for Mr. Sanders. While debating minimum wage and economic policy, Ms. Clinton bragged about Princeton economist Alan Krueger supporting her minimum wage proposal of raising it to $12 an hour, yet in a New York Times op-ed, Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman acknowledged it doesn’t matter as long as a Democrat wins the presidency. “If a Democrat does win, does it matter which one it is? Probably not. Any Democrat is likely to retain the financial reforms of 2010, and seek to stiffen them where possible,” he said. “In other words, while there are some differences in financial policy between Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders, as a practical matter they’re trivial.”
cont'
http://observer.com/2015/11/second-democratic-debate-proves-why-sanders-is-better-than-clinton/
Second Democratic Debate Proves Why Sanders Is BETTER Than Clinton
"...Forget public service; Clinton has used her career to make millions through favors to big banks and corporations.."
"...Hillary Clinton’s influence on the Democratic Party—who have treated her as not only the front runner, but as their nominee throughout the campaign—Bernie Sanders faces an uphill battle. Not only must he convince voters to support him, but he also faces a strong Democratic establishment geared toward his defeat because of his integrity in favoring principles and what is best for the American public over party politics and what unifies Democrats..."
"...Hillary Clinton’s influence on the Democratic Party—who have treated her as not only the front runner, but as their nominee throughout the campaign—Bernie Sanders faces an uphill battle. Not only must he convince voters to support him, but he also faces a strong Democratic establishment geared toward his defeat because of his integrity in favoring principles and what is best for the American public over party politics and what unifies Democrats..."
There are countless reasons why Senator Bernie Sanders is a superior presidential candidate to his rival, Hillary Clinton. The second Democratic debate further highlighted this. Ms. Clinton’s biggest gaffe of the night was a nonsensical tangent about 9/11 and her female donors, when confronted on her ties to Wall Street. Her divergent tactics were poorly executed and embarrassing for the Democratic Party as a whole. Some of the biggest donors to the Clinton Foundation include the largest banks in the country, such as Citigroup, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs. Despite both Mr. Sanders and Ms. Clinton spending the majority of their careers in public service, only Ms. Clinton has used it to make several million dollars for herself, and she has done this, in part, through political favors to large banks and corporations. Her ties to Wall Street were further
Hillary Clinton’s corruption isn’t limited to Wall Street. The Chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was also Co-Chair of Ms. Clinton’s 2008 campaign. Ms. Wasserman Schultz strategically limited and scheduled the debates to protect Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama defeated her through confronting Ms. Clinton on her inconsistent political record. Still it continues, as the second Democratic debate of the 2016 election cycle was the only one to take place in Iowa, and was scheduled on a Saturday night when the Iowa Hawkeyes—who have been undefeated this football season—played nationally ranked Minnesota.
Voters become disenchanted with the political system because of people like Hillary Clinton. Her complaint to Mr. Sanders during the debate—in response to discussing the corrupt role money plays in politics—that he was trying to “impugn her integrity,” might be true if she had any integrity to impugn. As Mr. Obama pointed out in his 2008 campaign against her, Ms. Clinton flips frequently on issues to whatever stance wins her greater political favor. There is no case in which she has changed her mind or stood her resolve on a controversial issue based on principles like Mr. Sanders did in his opposition to the Iraq War, despite nearly unanimous favoritism by congress and the public at the time. Ms. Clinton admitted making a mistake in voting for the Iraq War, but the American public cannot afford another mistake like that from future presidential administrations.
Lies and exaggerations were a significant part of Ms. Clinton’s rhetoric during the second Democratic debate. She touted that the majority of her donors, 60 percent, were women. She failed to mention her opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders outnumbers her in overall small donor contributions, including from women. Ms. Clinton lied again when she said, “I have hundreds of thousands of donors, most of them small.” Only 17 percent of her donors give contributions of $200 or less, compared to 74 percent for Mr. Sanders. While debating minimum wage and economic policy, Ms. Clinton bragged about Princeton economist Alan Krueger supporting her minimum wage proposal of raising it to $12 an hour, yet in a New York Times op-ed, Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman acknowledged it doesn’t matter as long as a Democrat wins the presidency. “If a Democrat does win, does it matter which one it is? Probably not. Any Democrat is likely to retain the financial reforms of 2010, and seek to stiffen them where possible,” he said. “In other words, while there are some differences in financial policy between Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders, as a practical matter they’re trivial.”
cont'
http://observer.com/2015/11/second-democratic-debate-proves-why-sanders-is-better-than-clinton/
November 18, 2015
~snip~
Triangulating against Sanders (and, by proxy, the left wing of the Democratic Party) with conservative attacks does make some sense. For one, she is a Clinton, and this is what they do. At issue is Sanders’ support for a single-payer universal health care system, which he and others brand as “Medicare for all.” A single-payer bill he introduced in 2013 would have levied a 2.2 percent tax on individuals making up to $200,000 or couples making up to $250,000, and progressively increased that rate to 5.2 percent for income beyond $600,000. It also would have tacked an extra 6.7 percent payroll tax on the employer side, at least some of which employers would likely pass on to workers. The Clinton campaign is suddenly quite upset about that proposal and wants everyone to know. She has committed to the same (policy-constricting) pledge that President Obama took in 2008 and 2012, ruling out tax increases on individuals making less than $200,000 per year or joint filers making less than $250,000. This neatly positions her camp to say, by contrast, that the bug-eyed socialist Bernie Sanders wants to take all of your money.
This is a truly messed-up thing for the leading Democratic presidential candidate, who claims to be a progressive stalwart, to be broadcasting. A standard Democratic presidential nominee representing the center-left of the party might call a single-payer system politically impractical in order to argue against it. “If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system,” Sen. Barack Obama said during his 2008 presidential campaign, for example. He then explained why he wouldn’t pursue such a model: “People don’t have time to wait. They need relief now. So my attitude is let’s build up the system we got. Let’s make it more efficient. We may be over time—as we make the system more efficient and everybody’s covered—decide that there are other ways for us to provide care more effectively.” In the end that approach resulted in the Affordable Care Act, compromise legislation that greatly expanded coverage without really overhauling the country’s private health insurance model. But Obama didn’t really disown the idea of single-payer, which many progressives still prefer to the current system. Clinton, however, is going much further by appropriating one of the right’s central talking points against government-funded universal health insurance: Think of the taxes! She’s not just saying that a single-payer system is a political nonstarter with conservatives. She’s reciting the actual conservative talking point that would make a single-payer system a political nonstarter.
There are fairly obvious policy counterpoints to that argument. She is well-aware of them and chooses to ignore them, because they would either blunt or negate her convenient political attack. Sure, under Sanders’ plan, the combination of the income and payroll taxes would add up to 8.9 percent (assuming employers pass on the full 6.7 percent payroll tax) on most earners. But people would not be paying for health insurance anymore, and a universal, public system would save money by eliminating all of the actuarial costs and profit expectations associated with the private insurance system. If Clinton wanted to say that she wouldn’t push for a single-payer system because it’s a political dead-ender right now, or because she’s spotted another legitimate policy flaw with the idea, that would be more acceptable. What she’s doing, instead, is essentially red-baiting about Bernie Sanders’ Wacky Taxes in her dismissal of a policy that, on paper, draws plenty of support among Democratic voters. That’s not good for the single-payer health care movement, which is hoping that some blue states will be able to use ACA waivers to experiment with single-payer in their states but so far are running into trouble thanks to the exact talking point Clinton’s deploying. And it’s not good for American liberalism in general, which is supposed to defend the belief that government funded by taxes can solve problems and improve people’s livelihoods.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/11/hillary_clinton_triangulates_against_bernie_sanders.html
Hillary Is Already TRIANGULATING Against Liberals
"...Her new attack on Bernie Sanders’ single-payer health care plan shows her indifference to progressive voters..."
"...Perhaps the Clinton campaign has some horrific polling data that’s leading them to launch this direct assault on Sanders, or it’s just trying to distract everyone from Clinton’s bizarre explanation at Saturday’s debate for her voluminous contributions from Wall Street over the years. But it also seems like Clinton feels like she has the nomination secure and is triangulating ahead of the general election, mortgaging progressive policy in the process. Does that sound familiar?..."
"...Perhaps the Clinton campaign has some horrific polling data that’s leading them to launch this direct assault on Sanders, or it’s just trying to distract everyone from Clinton’s bizarre explanation at Saturday’s debate for her voluminous contributions from Wall Street over the years. But it also seems like Clinton feels like she has the nomination secure and is triangulating ahead of the general election, mortgaging progressive policy in the process. Does that sound familiar?..."
~snip~
Triangulating against Sanders (and, by proxy, the left wing of the Democratic Party) with conservative attacks does make some sense. For one, she is a Clinton, and this is what they do. At issue is Sanders’ support for a single-payer universal health care system, which he and others brand as “Medicare for all.” A single-payer bill he introduced in 2013 would have levied a 2.2 percent tax on individuals making up to $200,000 or couples making up to $250,000, and progressively increased that rate to 5.2 percent for income beyond $600,000. It also would have tacked an extra 6.7 percent payroll tax on the employer side, at least some of which employers would likely pass on to workers. The Clinton campaign is suddenly quite upset about that proposal and wants everyone to know. She has committed to the same (policy-constricting) pledge that President Obama took in 2008 and 2012, ruling out tax increases on individuals making less than $200,000 per year or joint filers making less than $250,000. This neatly positions her camp to say, by contrast, that the bug-eyed socialist Bernie Sanders wants to take all of your money.
“...Bernie Sanders has called for a roughly 9-percent tax hike on middle-class families just to cover his health-care plan,” a Clinton spokesman said Tuesday, via Politico. “Simple math dictates he'll need to tax workers even more to pay for the rest of his at least $18-20 trillion agenda. If you are truly concerned about raising incomes for middle-class families, the last thing you should do is cut their take-home pay right off the bat by raising their taxes....”
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-taxes-middle-class-bernie-sanders-215958
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-taxes-middle-class-bernie-sanders-215958
This is a truly messed-up thing for the leading Democratic presidential candidate, who claims to be a progressive stalwart, to be broadcasting. A standard Democratic presidential nominee representing the center-left of the party might call a single-payer system politically impractical in order to argue against it. “If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system,” Sen. Barack Obama said during his 2008 presidential campaign, for example. He then explained why he wouldn’t pursue such a model: “People don’t have time to wait. They need relief now. So my attitude is let’s build up the system we got. Let’s make it more efficient. We may be over time—as we make the system more efficient and everybody’s covered—decide that there are other ways for us to provide care more effectively.” In the end that approach resulted in the Affordable Care Act, compromise legislation that greatly expanded coverage without really overhauling the country’s private health insurance model. But Obama didn’t really disown the idea of single-payer, which many progressives still prefer to the current system. Clinton, however, is going much further by appropriating one of the right’s central talking points against government-funded universal health insurance: Think of the taxes! She’s not just saying that a single-payer system is a political nonstarter with conservatives. She’s reciting the actual conservative talking point that would make a single-payer system a political nonstarter.
There are fairly obvious policy counterpoints to that argument. She is well-aware of them and chooses to ignore them, because they would either blunt or negate her convenient political attack. Sure, under Sanders’ plan, the combination of the income and payroll taxes would add up to 8.9 percent (assuming employers pass on the full 6.7 percent payroll tax) on most earners. But people would not be paying for health insurance anymore, and a universal, public system would save money by eliminating all of the actuarial costs and profit expectations associated with the private insurance system. If Clinton wanted to say that she wouldn’t push for a single-payer system because it’s a political dead-ender right now, or because she’s spotted another legitimate policy flaw with the idea, that would be more acceptable. What she’s doing, instead, is essentially red-baiting about Bernie Sanders’ Wacky Taxes in her dismissal of a policy that, on paper, draws plenty of support among Democratic voters. That’s not good for the single-payer health care movement, which is hoping that some blue states will be able to use ACA waivers to experiment with single-payer in their states but so far are running into trouble thanks to the exact talking point Clinton’s deploying. And it’s not good for American liberalism in general, which is supposed to defend the belief that government funded by taxes can solve problems and improve people’s livelihoods.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/11/hillary_clinton_triangulates_against_bernie_sanders.html
November 18, 2015
The highly influential, 2-million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU) endorsed Hillary Clinton for president yesterday. In her announcement, SEIU President Mary Kay Henry said that,
But a good number of those 2-million members disagree. A New Hampshire local SEIU chapter has broken from national leadership to endorse Bernie Sanders, and members around the country are protesting the union’s support of a candidate running on a $12 minimum wage, when the SEIU has been leading the Fight for 15.
From In These Times,
“Rodney Muhammad, an SEIU 1199 member in Massachusetts, echoed the contrasts between Clinton and Sanders that are often mentioned by Labor for Bernie supporters.
‘Being a union delegate and being deeply involved with the union, Bernie would have been the right person for the job. He’s pro-labor, he’s been on picket lines, he’s very proactive and he’s for $15 an hour. It just seems like Hillary Clinton has too many ties to Wall Street. She has not really done much to procure help for the unions over the past few years...”
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18616/seiu_endorses_hillary_while_rank_and_file_activists_continue_to_push_for_be
cont'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/18/1451648/-SEIU-Members-Outraged-After-Hillary-Endorsement
SEIU Members OUTRAGED After Hillary Endorsement
The highly influential, 2-million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU) endorsed Hillary Clinton for president yesterday. In her announcement, SEIU President Mary Kay Henry said that,
“Hillary Clinton has proven she will fight, deliver and win for working families. SEIU members and working families across America are part of a growing movement to build a better future for their families, and Hillary Clinton will support and stand with them."
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/seiu-endorses-hillary-clinton-215980
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/seiu-endorses-hillary-clinton-215980
But a good number of those 2-million members disagree. A New Hampshire local SEIU chapter has broken from national leadership to endorse Bernie Sanders, and members around the country are protesting the union’s support of a candidate running on a $12 minimum wage, when the SEIU has been leading the Fight for 15.
From the International Business Times,
“The service workers’ union has poured millions into the.. Fight for 15, a protest-driven campaign that has helped pass $15 hourly minimum wages in Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles and shifted the national debate over what constitutes an adequate federal pay floor, currently $7.25 an hour.
But during the most recent Democratic debate, Clinton criticized a proposed $15 nationwide minimum, calling instead for $12. Both her opponents, Martin O’Malley and Bernie Sanders, support $15 an hour.
Many SEIU members prefer Sanders, including Rand Wilson, a staffer for the union's Massachusetts-based Local 888 and founding member of the grassroots network Labor for Bernie…
‘It’s important to support the candidate who’s supportive of our objectives,’ he says. ‘It’ll be hard to continue to support a candidate who supports $12 an hour when there’s a viable one who supports $15...’
Wilson predicts the move will generate backlash against the leadership. Sanders is seen as a more passionate defender of the union’s broader agenda.
‘It’s going to divide the membership in the face of important campaigns — the fight to raise minimum wages, immigration reform, breaking up the banks, the need to overturn Citizens United,’ Wilson says. ‘This is the time we need to unite.’
http://www.ibtimes.com/election-2016-key-labor-union-endorses-hillary-clinton-defying-rank-file-critics-2188461
“The service workers’ union has poured millions into the.. Fight for 15, a protest-driven campaign that has helped pass $15 hourly minimum wages in Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles and shifted the national debate over what constitutes an adequate federal pay floor, currently $7.25 an hour.
But during the most recent Democratic debate, Clinton criticized a proposed $15 nationwide minimum, calling instead for $12. Both her opponents, Martin O’Malley and Bernie Sanders, support $15 an hour.
Many SEIU members prefer Sanders, including Rand Wilson, a staffer for the union's Massachusetts-based Local 888 and founding member of the grassroots network Labor for Bernie…
‘It’s important to support the candidate who’s supportive of our objectives,’ he says. ‘It’ll be hard to continue to support a candidate who supports $12 an hour when there’s a viable one who supports $15...’
Wilson predicts the move will generate backlash against the leadership. Sanders is seen as a more passionate defender of the union’s broader agenda.
‘It’s going to divide the membership in the face of important campaigns — the fight to raise minimum wages, immigration reform, breaking up the banks, the need to overturn Citizens United,’ Wilson says. ‘This is the time we need to unite.’
http://www.ibtimes.com/election-2016-key-labor-union-endorses-hillary-clinton-defying-rank-file-critics-2188461
From In These Times,
“Rodney Muhammad, an SEIU 1199 member in Massachusetts, echoed the contrasts between Clinton and Sanders that are often mentioned by Labor for Bernie supporters.
‘Being a union delegate and being deeply involved with the union, Bernie would have been the right person for the job. He’s pro-labor, he’s been on picket lines, he’s very proactive and he’s for $15 an hour. It just seems like Hillary Clinton has too many ties to Wall Street. She has not really done much to procure help for the unions over the past few years...”
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18616/seiu_endorses_hillary_while_rank_and_file_activists_continue_to_push_for_be
And, perhaps most telling of all, the SEIU Facebook Page erupted, yesterday and today, with person after person outraged at the Clinton endorsement.
Cathy Bosell Haye:
“Please retract the SEIU endorsement for Hillary Clinton. She does NOT represent the average working American. She takes funding from Wall Street PLUS foreign donations as well as contributions from Private Prison Corporations. So just exactly who does she work for?”
Louie Vidmar:
“Members, please copy the following text and email it to your union leadership:
I beg you to please reject SEIU’s endorsement of HRC for president! The union should take a thorough poll of it’s members before making such a disastrous decision!
I will be canceling my CAPE contributions until this is rectified!
As a truly progressive candidate for the Democratic Party nomination, Senator Sanders has the chance to inspire millions of Americans with policy proposals that put the interests of the 99%, front and center. His campaign will draw attention to what unions and collective bargaining have accomplished for workers and energize our movement.
Labor must step up to change the direction of American politics. We need politics to focus on the issues of our time: growing inequality and pervasive racism, the power of concentrated wealth and its corruption of our democracy, an escalating pension and retirement security crisis, runaway military spending and a militarized foreign policy, Medicare for All, and the need for new, bold solutions to our shared problems.
We call on labor leaders, union members and working people to unite behind Bernie Sanders for a voice in the presidential political process and to elect the President working families need – a President who will answer to the 99 percent!
We are Labor for Bernie 2016.”
Angel Rodriquez:
“This is scandalous, shameful, counterintuitive, problematic, defeating, and divisive. Pathetic.
‘SEIU's biggest national campaign is the Fight for $15 and a union. Across the country, we are organizing workers to strike and demand a $15 minimum wage.’
DESPITE THIS:
‘Hillary Clinton is on public record as opposing a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.’’
THEY ARE ENDORSING CLINTON, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THAT:
‘It is hard to ask workers to strike for $15 an hour in one breath when we are opposing the candidate (U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders) who proposed national legislation for $15 an hour.’”
“You campaign for $15. Bernie is fighting for your $15. Hillary is capping it at $12.
Sure, this makes sense. SMH. Shameful. Seriously, SHAME ON YOU.
Denise Welte:
“This SEIU member will be voting for Bernie! Who actually gets labor unions isn't bought by one! Disgusted.”
Paul Moriarty:
“LET'S BE CLEAR: SEIU does not poll its members as to whom it should endorse. How can SEIU say it's going to fight for a $15/hr wage when it endorses Hillary Clinton who wants the wage set at $12/hr. Not to mention that Hillary is a disgrace to this country and will be the 21st century version of Nixon. As an SEIU member I DENOUNCE any endorsement of Hillary Clinton. What a joke!”
https://www.facebook.com/SEIU/?fref=ts
Cathy Bosell Haye:
“Please retract the SEIU endorsement for Hillary Clinton. She does NOT represent the average working American. She takes funding from Wall Street PLUS foreign donations as well as contributions from Private Prison Corporations. So just exactly who does she work for?”
Louie Vidmar:
“Members, please copy the following text and email it to your union leadership:
I beg you to please reject SEIU’s endorsement of HRC for president! The union should take a thorough poll of it’s members before making such a disastrous decision!
I will be canceling my CAPE contributions until this is rectified!
As a truly progressive candidate for the Democratic Party nomination, Senator Sanders has the chance to inspire millions of Americans with policy proposals that put the interests of the 99%, front and center. His campaign will draw attention to what unions and collective bargaining have accomplished for workers and energize our movement.
Labor must step up to change the direction of American politics. We need politics to focus on the issues of our time: growing inequality and pervasive racism, the power of concentrated wealth and its corruption of our democracy, an escalating pension and retirement security crisis, runaway military spending and a militarized foreign policy, Medicare for All, and the need for new, bold solutions to our shared problems.
We call on labor leaders, union members and working people to unite behind Bernie Sanders for a voice in the presidential political process and to elect the President working families need – a President who will answer to the 99 percent!
We are Labor for Bernie 2016.”
Angel Rodriquez:
“This is scandalous, shameful, counterintuitive, problematic, defeating, and divisive. Pathetic.
‘SEIU's biggest national campaign is the Fight for $15 and a union. Across the country, we are organizing workers to strike and demand a $15 minimum wage.’
DESPITE THIS:
‘Hillary Clinton is on public record as opposing a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour.’’
THEY ARE ENDORSING CLINTON, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THAT:
‘It is hard to ask workers to strike for $15 an hour in one breath when we are opposing the candidate (U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders) who proposed national legislation for $15 an hour.’”
“You campaign for $15. Bernie is fighting for your $15. Hillary is capping it at $12.
Sure, this makes sense. SMH. Shameful. Seriously, SHAME ON YOU.
Denise Welte:
“This SEIU member will be voting for Bernie! Who actually gets labor unions isn't bought by one! Disgusted.”
Paul Moriarty:
“LET'S BE CLEAR: SEIU does not poll its members as to whom it should endorse. How can SEIU say it's going to fight for a $15/hr wage when it endorses Hillary Clinton who wants the wage set at $12/hr. Not to mention that Hillary is a disgrace to this country and will be the 21st century version of Nixon. As an SEIU member I DENOUNCE any endorsement of Hillary Clinton. What a joke!”
https://www.facebook.com/SEIU/?fref=ts
cont'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/18/1451648/-SEIU-Members-Outraged-After-Hillary-Endorsement
November 18, 2015
.
O’Malley Slams ‘SHAMEFUL’ Hillary Clinton For ‘Wrapping Herself in the Tragedy of 9/11
"...Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley took aim at frontrunner Hillary Clinton‘s comments during the debate invoking 9/11 to explain her closeness to Wall Street, saying on CNN’s New Day that her response was just a “smokescreen” to avoid the issue..."
.
November 18, 2015
Nina Turner is one of the most widely respected democrats in the state of Ohio. A former city councilwoman and state senator in Cleveland, she is often discussed as a viable candidate for mayor of the city in the future. A popular champion of voting rights and racial justice, the activist was widely expected to endorse Hillary Clinton for president. She didn't.
Instead, Turner shocked the democratic establishment in Ohio, endorsing Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. On Wednesday, in a conversation with the Daily News, she discussed her endorsement and why she believes Sanders is the best person for the job.
SHAUN KING with Nina Turner:
King: I hear so many people say that they love Bernie, love his principles, that they think he walks the talk, but that they just don't think he has a snowball's chance in hell at beating Hillary Clinton. How did you look at the same things they see and go in the other direction?
Turner: I actually think Bernie Sanders is viable. 2015 is actually the first year in which he has been a truly national politician. He has not had the privilege of being a household name until the past few months. When you think of how far he has come in that time, it's actually amazing. For me though, it was about principles.
When I overlay what I care about most, what issues matter to me the most, from civil rights, voting rights, and human rights, when I overlay those things against what Bernie Sanders believes, endorsing him just made sense to me.
King: Did you have a pivotal moment where you decided that you were going to buck the trend and endorse Bernie? I see that many prominent democrats in your state are firmly in Hillary's camp.
Turner: I actually met with Senator Sanders and his team. He says it like it is. He doesn't sugarcoat things. My son is a police officer. My husband was a police officer. Senator Sanders and I both respect good police, but when (Sanders) talks about police brutality, which has been a major problem here in Cleveland, he goes right for the problem. He calls institutional racism out by name and actually has a comprehensive plan on how he's going to aggressively address it. So, for me, after I met with him, and experienced his authenticity for myself, I felt like I had to endorse him.
King: It's been widely stated that Hillary Clinton polls really well in the black community. How does Bernie overcome that in places like Ohio, South Carolina, and other early primary states?
Turner: People need to understand that polling well and actually energizing a community are two very different things. All across the country, people are enthusiastic and excited about Bernie Sanders. We had nearly 10,000 people come out to his rally this week in Ohio and the crowd was probably 10-1 in favor of young voters. Young people love him, they trust him, the find him authentic. If African Americans, en masse, had a real opportunity to hear this man's message, to know his history, to be truly introduced to him, I think they would feel as strongly as I feel and as strongly as millions of people do about his candidacy.
cont'
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-respected-ohio-dem-nina-turner-endorses-bernie-sanders-article-1.2439200
King: Respected Ohio Dem. Nina Turner STUNS Party Leaders By Endorsing Bernie Sanders Over Hillary
Nina Turner is one of the most widely respected democrats in the state of Ohio. A former city councilwoman and state senator in Cleveland, she is often discussed as a viable candidate for mayor of the city in the future. A popular champion of voting rights and racial justice, the activist was widely expected to endorse Hillary Clinton for president. She didn't.
Instead, Turner shocked the democratic establishment in Ohio, endorsing Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. On Wednesday, in a conversation with the Daily News, she discussed her endorsement and why she believes Sanders is the best person for the job.
SHAUN KING with Nina Turner:
King: I hear so many people say that they love Bernie, love his principles, that they think he walks the talk, but that they just don't think he has a snowball's chance in hell at beating Hillary Clinton. How did you look at the same things they see and go in the other direction?
Turner: I actually think Bernie Sanders is viable. 2015 is actually the first year in which he has been a truly national politician. He has not had the privilege of being a household name until the past few months. When you think of how far he has come in that time, it's actually amazing. For me though, it was about principles.
When I overlay what I care about most, what issues matter to me the most, from civil rights, voting rights, and human rights, when I overlay those things against what Bernie Sanders believes, endorsing him just made sense to me.
King: Did you have a pivotal moment where you decided that you were going to buck the trend and endorse Bernie? I see that many prominent democrats in your state are firmly in Hillary's camp.
Turner: I actually met with Senator Sanders and his team. He says it like it is. He doesn't sugarcoat things. My son is a police officer. My husband was a police officer. Senator Sanders and I both respect good police, but when (Sanders) talks about police brutality, which has been a major problem here in Cleveland, he goes right for the problem. He calls institutional racism out by name and actually has a comprehensive plan on how he's going to aggressively address it. So, for me, after I met with him, and experienced his authenticity for myself, I felt like I had to endorse him.
King: It's been widely stated that Hillary Clinton polls really well in the black community. How does Bernie overcome that in places like Ohio, South Carolina, and other early primary states?
Turner: People need to understand that polling well and actually energizing a community are two very different things. All across the country, people are enthusiastic and excited about Bernie Sanders. We had nearly 10,000 people come out to his rally this week in Ohio and the crowd was probably 10-1 in favor of young voters. Young people love him, they trust him, the find him authentic. If African Americans, en masse, had a real opportunity to hear this man's message, to know his history, to be truly introduced to him, I think they would feel as strongly as I feel and as strongly as millions of people do about his candidacy.
cont'
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-respected-ohio-dem-nina-turner-endorses-bernie-sanders-article-1.2439200
November 18, 2015
Poll: Clinton TRAILS GOP Rivals In Colorado
Washington (CNN)Colorado could be big trouble for Hillary Clinton. The Democratic front-runner in the 2016 presidential race trails all the leading Republican contenders by 11 percentage points or more in the key swing state, a new Quinnipiac University poll shows.Florida Sen. Marco Rubio bests Clinton 52% to 38%, the biggest gap. Ben Carson wins a potential head-to-head matchup as well, with a 52% to 38% advantage. And Donald Trump leads 48% to 37%. Tim Malloy, the assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, described it as a "chilly if not frigid reception" in Colorado for Clinton.
In the nominating contest, Colorado's GOP voters' preference carries little weight. The party's caucus doesn't count because it violates Republican National Committee rules that require states to bind their delegates to the winners of their votes.
con't
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/18/politics/colorado-quinnipiac-poll-clinton-trails-rubio-carson/
Colorado voters back any leading Republican contender over Clinton by wide margins:
Rubio over Clinton 52 - 36 percent;
Carson leads Clinton 52 - 38 percent;
Cruz tops Clinton 51 - 38 percent;
Trump beats Clinton 48 - 37 percent.
Sanders runs better than Clinton in general election matches;
Rubio over Sanders 52 - 39 percent;
Carson beats Sanders 52 - 40 percent;
Cruz tops Sanders 49 - 42 percent;
Trump gets 46 percent to Sanders' 44 percent.
Clinton has the lowest favorability rating of any top candidate in Colorado, a negative 33 - 61 percent. Trump also gets a negative 34 - 58 percent favorability rating. Favorability ratings for other candidates are:
49 - 30 percent positive for Carson;
46 - 25 percent for Rubio;
37 - 33 percent for Cruz;
40 - 37 percent for Sanders.
Colorado voters say 67 - 30 percent that Clinton is not honest and trustworthy and 57 - 37 percent that Trump is not honest. Rubio has the best score for honesty, 58 - 28 percent, with Sanders at 56 - 30 percent, Carson at 57 - 33 percent and Cruz at 50 - 35 percent.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=2303
Rubio over Clinton 52 - 36 percent;
Carson leads Clinton 52 - 38 percent;
Cruz tops Clinton 51 - 38 percent;
Trump beats Clinton 48 - 37 percent.
Sanders runs better than Clinton in general election matches;
Rubio over Sanders 52 - 39 percent;
Carson beats Sanders 52 - 40 percent;
Cruz tops Sanders 49 - 42 percent;
Trump gets 46 percent to Sanders' 44 percent.
Clinton has the lowest favorability rating of any top candidate in Colorado, a negative 33 - 61 percent. Trump also gets a negative 34 - 58 percent favorability rating. Favorability ratings for other candidates are:
49 - 30 percent positive for Carson;
46 - 25 percent for Rubio;
37 - 33 percent for Cruz;
40 - 37 percent for Sanders.
Colorado voters say 67 - 30 percent that Clinton is not honest and trustworthy and 57 - 37 percent that Trump is not honest. Rubio has the best score for honesty, 58 - 28 percent, with Sanders at 56 - 30 percent, Carson at 57 - 33 percent and Cruz at 50 - 35 percent.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/colorado/release-detail?ReleaseID=2303
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923