TheCid

2018 Elections

644 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

From the WP ...

Opinion
Look what crawled out from under Trump’s rock
A host of anti-Semites and white supremacists are carrying the Republican banner into November.
By Dana Milbank  •  Read more »
  1a2807d322d470dd8d3a4261e3617c25-320-0-70-8-Virginia_Senate_92056jpg9c8aa.jpg

This should not surprise anyone.  Ever since Nixon, Reagan and the Tea Party, these people have been becoming more open in the Republican Party.  But they have been there ever since 1964.  The majority of people who vote Republican believe these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://theslot.jezebel.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-democratic-primary-opponent-w-1827540576

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Democratic Primary Opponent Will Remain on the Ballot Because of Some **** 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 28-year-old Democratic congressional primary winner who simultaneously rouses feelings of inspiration and deep inadequacy within my young, icy heart, will not be the sole Democrat on the November ballot in her district. Instead, 20-year incumbent Joseph Crowley, whom she beat in an exciting, improbable primary race, will stay on the ballot—creating a situation that could split the Democratic vote. 

If you are wondering why in the **** this is happening, you can thank New York’s byzantine election laws and the stubbornness of bad men. As the New York Times explains, Crowley received the endorsement of the Working Families Party, a group of labor unions and activists that has also backed New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s primary challenger, Cynthia Nixon. But after Ocasio-Cortez’s primary win, Bill Lipton, the state director of the Working Families Party, reached out to Crowley’s team and asked that he vacate the line. Crowley, however, declined. This means he’ll remain on the ballot, which is certainly a curious decision to make!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Column by Gene Lyons, Arkansas Times, describes the Supreme Court scenario and impending disaster for America quite well.  Basically, the Trump Court will solidify rule by white, elitist Republicans and corporations for generations to come.  Civil Rights, Voting Rights, health care rights, gun regulation, equal opportunity, women's rights, etc. will be drastically reduced, if not eliminated.

https://www.uexpress.com/gene-lyons/2018/7/5/a-nation-of-many-represented-by

Article by Fredreka Schouten, USA Today, reports on the impact of dark money in forthcoming Congressional elections.  The Koch brothers, primarily through their Americans for Prosperity and Concerned Veterans for America, are spending 25% of the dark money.  40% of outside group spending is from secret donors.

The dark money people are especially going after Dem. Sens. Donnelly (IN), McCaskill (M), Tester (MT), Heitkamp (ND), and Baldwin (WI).  But they are not ignoring House races.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/12/secret-money-funds-more-than-40-percent-outside-congressional-tv-ads-midterm-elections/777536002/

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

There are actually restrictions on how to get off the ballot once you are on, in many states. As you must know, there are even times deceased candidates have to remain on ballots, all over the country (though not in that district).

This is a dangerous situation. Ocasio-Cortez won an election with low turnout in a district that, though Democratic, probably has more Republicans than most in NYC (outside of Staten Island, that is). Hopefully they will figure out a way to deal with this, allowing Crowley to keep his job as head of the Queens Democratic Party.

I used to live in a version of that district. In the days when there were fewer women in Congress, that district regularly elected a woman: the great Geraldine Ferraro. This is not a man/woman issue.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Swithin said:

There are actually restrictions on how to get off the ballot once you are on, in many states. As you must know, there are even times deceased candidates have to remain on ballots, all over the country (though not in that district).

This is a dangerous situation. Ocasio-Cortez won an election with low turnout in a district that, though Democratic, probably has more Republicans than most in NYC (outside of Staten Island, that is). Hopefully they will figure out a way to deal with this, allowing Crowley to keep his job as head of the Queens Democratic Party.

I used to live in a version of that district. In the days when there were fewer women in Congress, that district regularly elected a woman: the great Geraldine Ferraro. This is not a man/woman issue.

 

Here in CA many left-leaning women and people-of-color activist have made their local elections a man/woman issue during the primaries.   E.g. implying one should vote for any man is anti #MeToo.

Most of these districts are so blue it isn't going to matter and a Dem will win,  but in close general election races first time running women (and there are more this time in CA then ever before) may have difficultly getting left-leaning men to come out and vote for them.    (if these men do come to the polls they are likely to continue to vote Dem so there is no worry there).

Saying one is part of a group of deporables, but "I didn't mean you, per se,  so vote for me',   isn't a sound strategy to gather support.    

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.....“The nation’s most accomplished Democratic Party is leading the call for a new generation of leadership who will fight to advance a bold agenda,” de León said in a statement. “We have presented Californians with the first real alternative to the worn-out Washington playbook in a quarter-century.”

The executive board has grown more and more progressive for a decade, since a new generation of activists secured spots in the party hierarchy.

......De León proved to have better relationships with party delegates than a senator who spends most of her time in Washington, and little connecting with Democratic activists back home. But the endorsement is also a resounding rejection of Feinstein’s brand of centrist politics, which simply doesn’t mesh well with the party’s most dedicated and plugged-in supporters.

“It shows that California Democrats expect our legislators to stand up for progressive values on issues from climate change to immigration to judicial nominees,” said David Atkins, a writer and regional director for Santa Barbara County. “We know that de León will do the right thing and be a leader on the issues that matter to Californians.”

...De León still faces an uphill battle to make up a large deficit. But one key hurdle — viability for the general election — was cleared tonight.

“Kevin de León has shown vision, courage, and tenacity,” said RL Miller, environmental caucus chair of the party. “He’s an extraordinary leader for extraordinary times.”

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/15/kevin-de-leon-stuns-dianne-feinstein-wins-california-democratic-party-endorsement-in-a-landslide/

more info: https://www.kevindeleon.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't live in California so maybe the residents there think different about Diane Feinstein than Democrats elsewhere.  But to turn against Feinstein seems short sighted.  She has seniority and is in a position of leadership in the Senate and is smart.  There's "progressive" and then there's "not thinking things through."  I consider myself pretty liberal but see the need for centrists to be part of the Dem party, too.  Isn't that part of the "big tent" thing Dems are always talking about?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ChristineHoard said:

I don't live in California so maybe the residents there think different about Diane Feinstein than Democrats elsewhere.  But to turn against Feinstein seems short sighted.  She has seniority and is in a position of leadership in the Senate and is smart.  There's "progressive" and then there's "not thinking things through."  I consider myself pretty liberal but see the need for centrists to be part of the Dem party, too.  Isn't that part of the "big tent" thing Dems are always talking about?

Both parties are being increasingly dominated by their fringe elements, since they make the most noise, and "play better" on the 24 hour news cycle and on the short-attention-span social media platforms. The quiet reasoned approach, whether from the left or the right, is being drowned out and steamrolled. Whether you view this as a good or a bad thing depends on your own personal positions. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mr6666 said:
.....“The nation’s most accomplished Democratic Party is leading the call for a new generation of leadership who will fight to advance a bold agenda,” de León said in a statement. “We have presented Californians with the first real alternative to the worn-out Washington playbook in a quarter-century.”

The executive board has grown more and more progressive for a decade, since a new generation of activists secured spots in the party hierarchy.

......De León proved to have better relationships with party delegates than a senator who spends most of her time in Washington, and little connecting with Democratic activists back home. But the endorsement is also a resounding rejection of Feinstein’s brand of centrist politics, which simply doesn’t mesh well with the party’s most dedicated and plugged-in supporters.

“It shows that California Democrats expect our legislators to stand up for progressive values on issues from climate change to immigration to judicial nominees,” said David Atkins, a writer and regional director for Santa Barbara County. “We know that de León will do the right thing and be a leader on the issues that matter to Californians.”

...De León still faces an uphill battle to make up a large deficit. But one key hurdle — viability for the general election — was cleared tonight.

“Kevin de León has shown vision, courage, and tenacity,” said RL Miller, environmental caucus chair of the party. “He’s an extraordinary leader for extraordinary times.”

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/15/kevin-de-leon-stuns-dianne-feinstein-wins-california-democratic-party-endorsement-in-a-landslide/

more info: https://www.kevindeleon.com/

This is confusing to me.  Feinstein received 70% of the vote in the Democratic primary, but the Democratic Party endorsed her opponent?

Personally I think Feinstein has served long enough and should have retired and let the people select a new candidate all together.

As for de Leon, his candidacy would not help the Democrats nationally and would probably hurt it.  People may complain about centrist politicians, but that is what made America great in the first place.  The very liberal, leftist politicians provide fodder for GOP advertising and the dark money interests.  It pushes voters away from Democrats in the battleground states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheCid said:

This is confusing to me.  Feinstein received 70% of the vote in the Democratic primary, but the Democratic Party endorsed her opponent?

Personally I think Feinstein has served long enough and should have retired and let the people select a new candidate all together.

As for de Leon, his candidacy would not help the Democrats nationally and would probably hurt it.  People may complain about centrist politicians, but that is what made America great in the first place.  The very liberal, leftist politicians provide fodder for GOP advertising and the dark money interests.  It pushes voters away from Democrats in the battleground states.

People complained when the Democratic Party was accused of favoring Clinton over Sanders. Those same people seem not to be complaining now.

Yes -- Feinstein won the primary, despite the fact the de Leon ran a shockingly ageist campaign against her. Feinstein has worked hard, done a great job, and deserves to win. She is far ahead in the polls; hope it stays that way. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Swithin said:

People complained when the Democratic Party was accused of favoring Clinton over Sanders. Those same people seem not to be complaining now.

Yes -- Feinstein won the primary, despite the fact the de Leon ran a shockingly ageist campaign against her. Feinstein has worked hard, done a great job, and deserves to win. She is far ahead in the polls; hope it stays that way. 

Are Feinstein and de Leon both running as Democrats?  Jamesjazzguitar has explained CA's weird primary system before, but is there no Republican running for the Senate seat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Are Feinstein and de Leon both running as Democrats?  Jamesjazzguitar has explained CA's weird primary system before, but is there no Republican running for the Senate seat?

Here's this from Wikipedia:

Under California's non-partisan blanket primary law, all candidates appear on the same ballot, regardless of party. In the primary, voters may vote for any candidate, regardless of their party affiliation. In the California system, the top two finishers—regardless of party—advance to the general election in November, even if a candidate receives a majority of the votes cast in the primary election. Washington, Louisiana have similar "jungle primary" style processes for U.S. Senators, as does Mississippi (for special elections only).

So yeah, on the final ballot, it will be Feinstein vs de Leon.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dems pulled a neat trick here. On the last day to file for a Supreme Court

seat, a Dem entered the race, registered as a Republican, so now there will be

two Republicans running and one Democrat. With all the shenanigans the

GOP has pulled in NC, this was richly deserved. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Daily BeastVerified account @thedailybeast 9h9 hours ago

 
 

The nation’s top voting-machine maker has admitted installing remote-access software on election-management systems, in what one U.S. senator described as

“the worst decision for security short of leaving ballot boxes on a Moscow street corner”

----------------------------------------------------------

Voting-Machine Vendor Put Remote-Access Software on Systems Sold to U.S.

 

............ contain software used to program the voting machines and count up final results from the voting machines. The remote-access software created an opportunity for hackers to breach the machines. Election-management systems and voting machines are supposed to be disconnected from the internet and from any other systems that are connected to the internet for security reasons ,,,,,,,

https://www.thedailybeast.com/voting-machine-vendor-put-remote-access-software-on-systems-sold-to-us

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:
The Fix • Analysis
The Fix’s top 10 Senate races show Democrats with a (narrow) opening to win the Senate
But there are a lot of buts for Democrats in The Fix's latest Friday Line Senate rankings,
By Amber Phillips  •  Read more »
  8bbcce32e61fab02725bc3f0a7f1d0ee-320-0-70-8-2018senateseats0720v2.jpg
 

Like many 'headlines' I find this one to be somewhat misleading.    Yea, it does say 'narrow',  but based on their own evaluation the: : Democrats will need a near-perfect midterm performance to take back the Senate.

They need to overthrow at least two Republicans in competitive states while protecting nearly all of the Senate Democrats running for reelection in states that President Trump won. Seven of those red-state Democrats make our list of the most vulnerable incumbents, and five of those Democrats are trying to hang on in a state Trump won by double digits.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/18/hackers-states-elections-upgrades-729054

States slow to prepare for hacking threats

Most states aren’t planning to use federal funds to make major election upgrades before November.

 

By ERIC GELLER

 

07/18/2018 05:04 AM EDT

U.S. intelligence officials and security experts have spent years urging states to shore up their elections’ digital defenses, and the latest indictments from special counsel Robert Mueller drew fresh attention to Russia’s cyberattacks on the 2016 presidential election.

But less than four months before the midterm elections that will shape the rest of Donald Trump’s presidency, most states’ election offices have failed to fix their most glaring security weaknesses, according to a POLITICO survey of all 50 states.

And few states are planning steps that would improve their safeguards before November, even after they receive their shares of the $380 million in election security funding that Congress approved in March.

Only 13 states said they intend to use the federal dollars to buy new voting machines. At least 22 said they have no plans to replace their machines before the election — including all five states that rely solely on paperless electronic voting devices, which cybersecurity experts consider a top vulnerability.

 

 

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:blink:

Will Russia Help the Democrats Next?

"..... “There should be no doubt that Russia perceives its past efforts as successful and views the 2018 U.S. midterm elections as a potential target for Russian influence operations,” Coats said in February. “We expect Russia to continue using propaganda, social media, false-flag personas, sympathetic spokespeople and other means of influence to try to exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States.” ..

Vladimir Putin’s goal isn’t—and never was—to help the Republican Party, at least in the long run. Boosting Trump’s presidential campaign was a means to Putin’s end: Weakening the West, and exploiting the seams and divisions of the West’s open democracies to undermine our legitimacy and moral standing. Russia accomplished that with great success in 2016—and it’s a strategy that is continuing to pay dividends today. “Their purpose was to sow discontent and mistrust in our elections; they wanted us to be at each others’ throat when it was over,” former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Mike Rogers said last year. “It’s influencing, I would say, legislative process today. That’s wildly successful.” ........

We should all care about securing our elections against foreign interference, for many patriotic reasons. But even if Trump and the Republican Party’s turn-the-other-cheek approach to Russia’s cyber attacks is based on crass self-interest, they should rethink their silence. There’s no guarantee that today’s allies are tomorrow’s allies.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/19/russia-democrats-election-meddling-219020

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voter purge frenzy after federal protections lifted, new report says

Nine states with a history of racial discrimination are aggressively removing voters from the rolls, the Brennan Center for Justice says.

 

.....

After reviewing voter purges nationally from 2012 to 2016, the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice found that the mostly Southern jurisdictions that had once been required to get changes to voting policies pre-approved by the Justice Department had higher rates of purging than jurisdictions that were not previously subject to pre-clearance.

 

A key section of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which was designed to protect minority voters from state disenfranchisement, was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013, allowing states to begin making changes affecting voting without first getting federal approval...

"They've actually been encouraging jurisdictions to purge more aggressively," he said. ...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/voter-roll-purges-surged-after-changes-voting-rights-act-new-n893056?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good article by Steve Peoples, AP.  More and more Democrats, including those in House and Senate and state offices are providing the GOP with ammunition it will use to persuade more and more people to vote REPUBLICAN in 2018 and 2020 and beyond.

Democratic Socialism Party (from their constitution) "...rejects private profit and shares a vision of popular control or resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution..."

1/3 of Senate Democrats and 2/3 of House Democrats have signed on to Bernie Sanders' free government health care for all.  Including Sens. Warren, Booker, Gillibrand and Harris who may run in 2020.  Estimated cost is $32 TRILLION.

DSA sponsored candidates, except Ocasio-Cortez, have performed very poorly in elections.

Apparently the Dems. did not learn a damn thing in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016.

https://apnews.com/a1770fd620d94bf58d0ff1035d3e0eea

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Voter purge frenzy after federal protections lifted, new report says

 

One aspect is that Trump, the Federalist Society and the extremist GOPers are appointing federal judges at all levels, not just the Supreme Court.  These judges will hear the first challenges to voter suppression and rule in favor of it.  Then the challengers have to appeal to another Trumpist judge who will rule against them and then to the Supreme Court who will rule against them.  Assuming they have enough money to do this in every district and state in the US.

18 hours ago, mr6666 said:

:blink:

Will Russia Help the Democrats Next?

 

Why not?  As the article implies, Putin's goal is not to help Republicans or Trump, but to weaken the United States of America specifically and democracy in general.  Disruption and discord in US with accompanying economic collapse helps in achieving that goal.  Same for Europe and elsewhere.

Russia's new missles may not ever be used against the US, but their threat will cause the hawks in DOD and Congress to authorize trillions to "combat" the Russian threat.  This is actually how US defeated the Soviet Union - we spent many more billions on Defense and they tried to counter and created the financial failure that led to dissolution.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey, if the democrats do good in the midterms, trump can invalidate it and blame it on the Russians!

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Topher SpiroVerified account @TopherSpiro 16h16 hours ago

 
 

This is soo much better than that New York Times map making the rounds.

Instead of filling in entire precincts with blue or red, it uses dots to represent each vote, accounting for population density.

https://www.wired.com/story/is-us-leaning-red-or-blue-election-maps/?mbid=social_twitter 

DjHtGu8XcAIMzj6.jpg

Really don't see the purpose of this map.  If to show which districts may vote blue or red, it is wrong.  A district in SC that is leaning blue has voted red for years and years.  There is only one blue district in SC (not shown at all?) and that is the token, gerrymandered Dem/minority district of Jim Clyburn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us