Attorney in Texas
Attorney in Texas's JournalHillary (when in India): Outsourcing US Jobs to India Has "Pluses and Minuses"
link; excerpt:Appearing on Indian station NDTV during her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton was asked during a town hall-style public affairs program for her thoughts on outsourcing from the United States to India.
“Well, you know, it’s been going on for many years now,” Clinton said on the program, “and it’s part of our economic relationship with India, and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefited many parts of our country, and there are disadvantages that go to the need to, you know, improve the job skills of our own people and create a better economic environment, so it’s, like anything, it’s, you know, got pluses and minuses.”... Sanders’s campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said he’s convinced Clinton’s comments will not play well in Michigan “when so many communities like Detroit and Flint have been hurt so badly by outsourcing.”
“Secretary Clinton should explain to the people of Michigan how they have benefited from outsourcing of their manufacturing jobs,” Weaver said.... At a news conference in Lansing earlier this week, Sanders made the case that he has consistently opposed “disastrous” trade deals, starting with the North American Free Trade Agreement in the 1990s, that Clinton supported during her tenures as first lady, a senator from New York and secretary of state.
Sanders has also been critical of the length of time it took for Clinton to reach her current opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership, a pending pact championed by President Obama that Sanders opposed from the outset.... Weaver also argued that Clinton’s comments in India differed from what she has said about outsourcing during appearances in the United States. The campaign pointed to a 2004 statement during his Senate tenure in which she says: “I do not think outsourcing American Jobs is a new kind of trade . . . and I certainly do not believe it is a good thing.” ... She {Clinton} said that Americans who have lost manufacturing jobs are fearful because they “don’t feel like they have any other job possibilities.”
WOW!
Sanders campaign finds fodder with Clinton’s TV appearance in India on outsourcing
Source: Washington Post
Appearing on Indian station NDTV during her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton was asked during a town hall-style public affairs program for her thoughts on outsourcing from the United States to India.
“Well, you know, it’s been going on for many years now,” Clinton said on the program, “and it’s part of our economic relationship with India, and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefited many parts of our country, and there are disadvantages that go to the need to, you know, improve the job skills of our own people and create a better economic environment, so it’s, like anything, it’s, you know, got pluses and minuses.”... Sanders’s campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said he’s convinced Clinton’s comments will not play well in Michigan “when so many communities like Detroit and Flint have been hurt so badly by outsourcing.”
“Secretary Clinton should explain to the people of Michigan how they have benefited from outsourcing of their manufacturing jobs,” Weaver said.... At a news conference in Lansing earlier this week, Sanders made the case that he has consistently opposed “disastrous” trade deals, starting with the North American Free Trade Agreement in the 1990s, that Clinton supported during her tenures as first lady, a senator from New York and secretary of state.
Sanders has also been critical of the length of time it took for Clinton to reach her current opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership, a pending pact championed by President Obama that Sanders opposed from the outset.... Weaver also argued that Clinton’s comments in India differed from what she has said about outsourcing during appearances in the United States. The campaign pointed to a 2004 statement during his Senate tenure in which she says: “I do not think outsourcing American Jobs is a new kind of trade . . . and I certainly do not believe it is a good thing.” ... She {Clinton} said that Americans who have lost manufacturing jobs are fearful because they “don’t feel like they have any other job possibilities.”
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/04/sanders-campaign-finds-fodder-with-clintons-tv-appearance-in-india-on-outsourcing/
WOW!
The Hill: "Why Sanders outperforms Clinton against Republicans"
link; excerpt:In a new CNN/ORC poll released Tuesday morning, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) defeats Donald Trump (R) in a general election match-up by 55 percent to 43 percent, defeats Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) by 57 percent to 40 percent and defeats Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) by 53 percent to 45 percent.
By contrast, Hillary Clinton (D) defeats Trump by 52 percent to 44 percent, less than Sanders but still impressive. However, while Sanders would defeat Rubio and Cruz by hefty margins, Rubio beats Clinton, 50 percent to 47 percent, while Cruz defeats her 49 percent to 48 percent.
This new poll is not an outlier. It reflects the broad trends of most polling. ... The data tell us ... that Clinton could be vulnerable in a general election ... Most important, this latest of many polls showing Sanders running well ahead of Clinton against Republicans suggests that the real majority... in American politics is the progressive populism of Sanders, which is a major reason polls suggest he would run stronger than Clinton against Republican opponents.... Sanders speaks of making healthcare truly universal through a single-payer system, raising the minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour, providing young people with a free public college education financed by a tax on Wall Street speculation, increasing Social Security benefits and breaking up the big banks, a position recently championed even by a member of the Federal Reserve Board.
Progressive populism triumphs politically over the supply-side economics of the right, the root-canal budget-cutting of more establishment Republicans and the crony capitalism of more conservative Democrats.... Bernie Sanders is winning the battle of ideas. In most polling, he soundly defeats Republicans because his message is far more powerful and appealing to the nation. Hillary Clinton is moving in the direction of Sanders by emphasizing more progressive and populist positions, which is good for America and heathy for Democrats.
NEWSFLASH: Most of the US is not the Deep South, and Sanders is winning outside of Dixie
Hillary's "50-state inevitability" meme has failed.
Hillary's new "no path inevitability" meme is also false.
Outside of the Deep-Red Southern States, Sanders is winning. By wide margins, Sanders has won 5 of 8 states outside of Dixie, and Clinton's 3 wins have been dirty and very narrow:
Iowa - Clinton won in dirty close race (closest in Iowa's history)
New Hampshire - Sanders won by wide margin
Nevada - Clinton won in narrower win than she beat Obama in 2008
Colorado - Sanders won by wide margin
Massachusetts - Clinton won dirty by very narrow margin
Minnesota - Sanders won by wide margin
Oklahoma - Sanders won by over 10% margin
Vermont - Sanders won by wide margin
The states of the former Confederacy include Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. The Clintons rose to power in the Deep South, and this is a region of the country that has not historically embraced Northeastern Jewish civil rights activists. Clinton has swept these states so far, but they are not states she can win in a general election.
These Southern states are not a perfect representation of America. Of course they get a vote in selecting our nominee (and I'm not suggesting otherwise), but these states do not get to pick our nominee to the exclusion of the majority of states with a different history, a different culture, and different attitudes toward progressivism. The Clinton campaign should stop suggesting the race is over simply because Clinton is winning Dixie and is currently losing outside of the Deep Republican South.
The enthusiasm gap is a lurking turnout disaster. It's Sanders or a ballot-wide Republican landslide
Sanders is working hard to bring new Democrats to the ballot box and Clinton (with the DNC's collaboration) is inspiring no growth or enthusiasm.
"1.1 million more Republicans have voted than Democrats" on Clinton-centric Super Tuesday:
The RNC is building its party while our DNC is shrinking and discouraging our base:
This voter downturn is the foreseeable result of the DNC conspiring with the status quo establishment candidate who has little appeal to new voters, independent voters, and young voters. If the DNC had put as much effort into building our party as it put into its effort to hamstring our other primary candidates in an effort to grease the skids for Clinton, we would not be behind the turnout eight ball like we are.
As things stand right now, we change the DNC's game plan or we lose in November.
Onward for the people! The next 4 states- Sanders projected to win 3/4: Kansas, Nebraska, and Maine!
Sanders has passed almost all the way though Dixie, and this is still a tight race: Clinton has earned 596 pledged delegates (over 59%) while Sanders has earned 399 (just over 40%) pledged delegates during the part of the primary calendar calculated to favor the moderate status quo establishment candidate.
The next 4 races are Kansas, Nebraska, Louisiana, and Maine.
The betting markets favor Sanders in Kansas (Sanders at a 71% favorite), Nebraska (Sanders at a 70% favorite, and Maine (polling advantage in addition to 83% betting market favorite), while Clinton nears the end of her Dixie collection of former Confederate states in Louisiana.
To put the pledged delegate count in context, Sanders is doing better than Rubio or Cruz (Rubio has won less than a fifth of the delegates and Cruz has won just under a third while Sanders has won just over 40%).
On the eve of the primary: "In Oklahoma, Sanders leads Clinton 48% to 43%"
link; excerpt:WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Donald Trump holds a big lead in Alabama and Oklahoma -- one that would box out everyone else for delegates in Alabama, according to a new poll.
On the Democratic side of the race, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders split the states, with Clinton holding a big lead in Alabama and Sanders a small one in Oklahoma, according to the Monmouth University survey out Monday.
Both states vote in Tuesday's big primary day.... In Oklahoma, Sanders leads Clinton 48% to 43%...
Poll: Donald Trump leads in Alabama, Oklahoma; Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders split
Source: KXLF (Montana CBS affiliate)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Donald Trump holds a big lead in Alabama and Oklahoma -- one that would box out everyone else for delegates in Alabama, according to a new poll.
On the Democratic side of the race, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders split the states, with Clinton holding a big lead in Alabama and Sanders a small one in Oklahoma, according to the Monmouth University survey out Monday.
Both states vote in Tuesday's big primary day.... In Oklahoma, Sanders leads Clinton 48% to 43%...
Read more: http://www.kxlf.com/story/31344036/poll-donald-trump-leads-in-alabama-oklahoma-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-split
"Warren Buffett: Here's what I like about Bernie Sanders"
link; excerpt:
"What I like about Bernie Sanders is he'll say exactly what he believes. He is not tailoring his message week by week. You'll find with some of the candidates that they shift around, or they don't answer the question. With Bernie, you know exactly what he thinks," Buffett told CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Monday.
The billionaire investor said he agrees with Sanders in certain areas, including the influence of money in politics, as well as income inequality. "{Sanders} is bothered by the fact that, in a country with a $56,000 GDP per capita so many people are poor. ... He would like to do something about that."
I'm not a huge fan of Buffett (although I like him better than most in his industry), but this seems like a fair assessment.
The Nation: "Bernie Sanders Just Won Three of His Biggest Endorsements in a Long Campaign"
link; excerpt:
From the earliest stages of the primary process, pundits and political operatives try to wrap things up in tidy little boxes of conventional wisdom. Again and again the message is delivered: everything is finished but the final counting up of delegates, despite the fact that the vast majority of states have not voted. The pressure to conclude the competition disempowers voters and damages the discourse, and candidates have every right and reason to resist the rush to shut the competition down before it has really begun.
But resistance is futile if a candidate gets no encouragement to challenge the emerging narrative.... Something has upset the rush to write off Sanders, however. It seems that a good many Democrats, including several prominent partisans who just endorsed the insurgent, are disinclined to embrace the conventional wisdom... Yet, the primary schedule goes on through June 14, with a number of states that are friendly to Sanders voting in April and May and the biggest prize for both candidates (California) up for grabs on June 7....On Friday, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, announced his support for Sanders, writing that the senator is “leading a movement to reclaim America for the many, not the few. And such a political mobilization—a ‘political revolution,’ as he puts it—is the only means by which we can get the nation back from the moneyed interests that now control so much of our economy and democracy.”
The longtime associate of Bill and Hillary Clinton explained that his endorsement had to do with issues, as opposed to personalities.
“I have the deepest respect and admiration for Hillary Clinton, and if she wins the Democratic primary I’ll work my heart out to help her become president. But I believe Bernie Sanders is the agent of change this nation so desperately needs,” he wrote, while focusing on the issue that has animated the Sanders insurgency. “This extraordinary concentration of income, wealth, and political power at the very top imperils all else – our economy, our democracy, the revival of the American middle class, the prospects for the poor and for people of color, the necessity of slowing and reversing climate change, and a sensible foreign policy not influenced by the ‘military-industrial complex,’ as President Dwight Eisenhower once called it. It is the fundamental prerequisite: We have little hope of achieving positive change on any front unless the American people are once again in control.”
Two days after Reich made his announcement, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, endorsed Sanders. And the next day, Congressman Alan Grayson, D-Florida, announced that he give his super-delegate vote at this summer’s Democratic National Convention to the senator from Vermont.... The announcement by Gabbard was particularly dramatic, in that the congresswoman announced on national television that she would quit a party leadership post in order to free herself to campaign for Sanders.
A Democrat from Hawaii, Gabbard is an proudly independent member of the House Democratic Caucus who does not mind stirring controversy or breaking with leadership. She has sparred with the Obama administration over foreign policy, she has sparred with congressional Democrats over defense policy, and she sparred with the party leaders over debate policy—making headlines early in the 2016 race by stepping up, as a vice chair of the DNC, to demand more forums featuring the presidential candidates. ... On Sunday, Gabbard said that: “I have taken my responsibilities as an officer of the DNC seriously, and respected the need to stay neutral in our primaries. However, after much thought and consideration, I’ve decided I cannot remain neutral and sit on the sidelines any longer.”... “I think it’s most important for us, as we look at our choices as to who our next commander in chief will be, (to) recognize the necessity to have a commander in chief who has foresight, who exercises good judgment,” explained Gabbard, an Iraq War veteran and member of the Hawaii Army National Guard, has been especially outspoken in her criticism of regime-change strategies that she suggests are dangerous and ineffective. To that end, she has introduced legislation seeking to focus U.S. policy on defeating Islamic State, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups in Syria, as opposed to a dual strategy that seeks to combat terrorist groups while also trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad. She has, as well, been a sharp critic of Clinton’s proposal for a no-fly zone in Syria—which President Obama and Sanders also oppose.... “We need a commander in chief who has foresight, who exercises good judgment, and who understands the need for a robust foreign policy which defends the safety and security of the American people, and who will not waste precious lives and money on interventionist wars of regime change. Such counterproductive wars undermine our national security and economic prosperity,” added the veteran of two deployments to the Middle East. “As these elections continue across the county, the American people are faced with a very clear choice. We can elect a president who will lead us into more interventionist wars of regime change, or we can elect a president who will usher in a new era of peace and prosperity. It’s with this clear choice in mind that I am resigning as vice-chair of the DNC so that I can strongly support Bernie Sanders as the Democratic nominee for president of the United States.”
Grayson, a popular figure with grassroots Democrats who has often clashed with party leaders on questions of policy and political style, is mounting an insurgent bid this year for his party’s Senate nomination in Florida (and getting plenty of pushback from top Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid). The congressman conducted an online poll asking who he, as a Democratic National Convention super-delegate, should support in the presidential race. “The response has been absolutely overwhelming. Almost 400,000 Democrats voted at GraysonPrimary.com. More than the number who voted in the South Carolina primary. More than the number who voted in the New Hampshire primary and the Nevada caucus combined,” wrote Grayson in a Monday message.... 86 percent of those who responded to his appeal encouraged him to back Sanders, calling the result: “More than just a landslide. An earthquake.”
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Aug 2, 2015, 11:10 AMNumber of posts: 3,373