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

fbc

fbc's Journal
fbc's Journal
November 28, 2014

Mathematicians Study Effects of Gerrymandering On 2012 Election

For example, in North Carolina in 2012 Republicans ended up winning nine out of 13 congressional seats even though more North Carolinians voted for Democrats than Republicans statewide.
...
The results were startling. After re-running the election 100 times with a randomly drawn nonpartisan map each time, the average simulated election result was 7 or 8 U.S. House seats for the Democrats and 5 or 6 for Republicans. The maximum number of Republican seats that emerged from any of the simulations was eight. The actual outcome of the election — four Democratic representatives and nine Republicans – did not occur in any of the simulations.


http://politics.slashdot.org/story/14/11/28/0338208/mathematicians-study-effects-of-gerrymandering-on-2012-election

Republicans win because they cheat, and because Democratic politicians won't call them on it.
October 9, 2014

In Defense of Obama (Krugman in Rolling Stone)

Krugman on Obama in Rolling Stone:

But now the shoe is on the other foot: Obama faces trash talk left, right and center – literally – and doesn't deserve it. Despite bitter opposition, despite having come close to self-inflicted disaster, Obama has emerged as one of the most consequential and, yes, successful presidents in American history.


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama-20141008#ixzz3FcH02otq

July 5, 2014

Hillary Inevitable? Fading Book Sales Say No

Source: Huffington Post

"It looks like they are going to be pulping a lot of paper," said a top industry source, who declined to be quoted by name because of the sensitivity of the matter in the industry. A Simon & Schuster spokesman declined immediate comment.

The sales figures come out amid a war of competing conventional wisdoms, fervently held by pundits and pols.

One says that Hillary is inevitable, that Obama-like lightning can’t strike twice, and that she has sewn up the allegiance of the left with no significant figures on the horizon to challenge her for the nomination -- or even the presidency in the 2016 general election. The New Republic, for example, put her on the cover with the word "Inevitable" just this week.

The other conventional wisdom is just as sure that Clinton is now, as she was in 2008, a heavier-than-air craft. She will never achieve lift-off because she is too establishment, too controlled, too weighed down by her years of association with the rich and powerful -- and too lacking in a clear message of change for younger generations. The rocky rollout of her book tour is evidence of the latter, they say.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/02/hillary-clinton-book-sales_n_5552694.html



Hope.

Lightning can strike twice.

We do not have to accept Wall Street's candidate.
June 18, 2014

Why is hiring more cops always the solution to crime

but the solution for failing schools is firing more teachers?

June 4, 2014

Hillary Clinton Was Skeptical of Taliban-Bergdahl Swap

Source: The Daily Beast

"On Tuesday, Clinton gave a vague and noncommittal statement on the prisoner swap, declining to say whether she was for it or against it or whether she still fears the released prisoners pose a threat to America.

“This young man, whatever the circumstances, was an American citizen—is an American citizen—was serving in our military,” Clinton said. “The idea that you really care for your own citizens and particularly those in uniform, I think is a very noble one.”

Read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/03/hillary-clinton-was-skeptical-of-taliban-bergdahl-swap.html



That article sure has a lot of behind the scenes information about how Clinton went for a much tougher deal. And so soon! Usually you'd have to wait for years and a book deal before you see that kind of insider info.

It looks like Hillary is hedging her bets here, waiting to see how public opinion goes before she sides with Obama or the Republicans on this one. That seems like a smart political move.
February 19, 2014

Lawrence O'Donnell Blasts Priorities USA for Staying Out of 2014 Midterms

Source: Crooks & Liars

Ever since PrioritiesUSA confirmed they would sit out the 2014 midterms, I've been fuming. But hey, this is what happens when campaigns are powered by billionaires.

No, PrioritiesUSA will not counter the $27 million spent by the Koch machine already in the midterms because they're gathering up money to support Hillary Clinton's (apparently) inevitable 2016 run.

Thank God someone scolded them over this...and no one better than Lawrence O'Donnell, who lets them know exactly what they're agreeing to with this incredibly poor strategy.

Should Hillary Clinton run and be elected in 2016, she will be president in name only, because she will have a Senate AND a House of Representatives which are so far to the right that the only Supreme Court nominees she could possibly appoint would be to the right of Justice Kennedy.

Maybe that's their goal.

Read more: http://crooksandliars.com/2014/02/prioritiesusa-determined-make-hillary



There is another story on this here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/key-democratic-group-will-sit-out-midterms

Profile Information

Member since: Tue Nov 26, 2013, 12:59 PM
Number of posts: 1,668
Latest Discussions»fbc's Journal