HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » LiberalFighter » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

LiberalFighter

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Wisconsin
Current location: NE Indiana
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 40,174

About Me

Member since 3/21/2002. I have been interested in politics since the early 70's. I registered to vote by riding my bicycle to the nearest registration site while still in high school. The first time I voted was with my parents. By the general election, I was in college and voted absentee. During the Watergate hearing I was in college and watched the hearings. I have only voted for a Republican once. And it was due to the endorsement of the local union's political group. It was for the position of the county sheriff. I have never missed voting in an election. Both primary and general. I have voted in at least 69 elections. Political Science and History was my focus in college. I became more involved in politics in 1987 with the mayor's campaign helping at headquarters. It was at this time that I became a precinct committee person. In a couple of years I was involved in setting up the database for a congressional campaign due to Quayle becoming VP and Dan Coats was appointed as Quayle's replacement. I have attended many Democratic State Conventions and other Democratic fundraisers and events.

Journal Archives

Hillary and Bernie are both Liberal

Hillary and Bernie are both Liberal

?1454177411

?1454177537
Posted by LiberalFighter | Sun May 15, 2016, 11:37 PM (1 replies)

Harry Enten" Hillary Clinton Was Liberal. Hillary Clinton Is Liberal (FiveThirtyEight)

Hillary Clinton Was Liberal. Hillary Clinton Is Liberal
Posted by LiberalFighter | Sun May 15, 2016, 11:36 PM (0 replies)

This and other sources would say otherwise.

http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2013/house-and-senate-partisanship
House

Senate
Posted by LiberalFighter | Sun May 15, 2016, 11:33 PM (0 replies)

Likely why some voters have their voter registration screwed up. (BMV)

The link was posted over at GDP.
Florida motor-voter foul-up means no primary ballots for some

The problem most likely stemmed from the way Florida handles motor-voter registrations and affected people who had updated their voter information while obtaining or renewing their driver license since the previous primary elections, county officials said. Because of the way the form is set up, these voters apparently didn’t indicate their party preference, leading the state to change their party affiliation, unbeknownst to the voters, from Democrat or Republican to “no party affiliation.”

Abrams said about 2,000 people had submitted provisional ballots in the presidential race after being told they weren’t properly registered. But probably fewer than half of these were affected by the motor-voter problem, officials said.

That’s because elections staff “literally attaches to each provisional ballot the information on when they became NPA,” Abrams said.

Some people made the switch decades ago and likely forgot, but for many, there was a printout showing that their registration was switched at the Department of Motor Vehicles, Abrams said.


Abrams said people likely either skipped over that page in their haste or presumed that if no box was checked, their party affiliation would default to what it had been.

But there is no such default in the process. If a voter, even a longtime party member, doesn’t select the party in updating his or her information, the default actually is “no party affiliation.


These are two separate entities that for the most part don't know or understand how each performs their duties. It doesn't help to throw in IT people to create software when they don't understand what is really needed. Especially when the BMV doesn't have a clue about what is needed on the voter registration end.

What it appears to be saying when there is a default of "no party affiliation" is that the party affiliation data is not stored with the drivers license data. They likely purge the voter registration data once it is sent to the voter registration office.
Posted by LiberalFighter | Sun May 15, 2016, 10:38 AM (10 replies)

This is my take on Sanders' complaint about committee representation.

From the DNC Convention Rules.

Presidential Preference:
1. The members of the standing committees allocated to the states and territories shall proportionately represent the presidential preference of all candidates (including uncommitted status) receiving the threshold percentage used in that state’s delegation to calculate the at-large apportionment pursuant to Rule 13.E. of the Delegate Selection Rules, provided, however, that members of the standing committees from primary states shall be allocated to presidential candidates (including uncommitted status) based on the statewide popular vote.


Platform Committee:
5. The National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, in consultation with the Chair(s) of the Platform Committee, shall appoint fifteen (15) persons to serve on a Platform Drafting Subcommittee and the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee shall appoint the Chair(s) thereof. In addition, one (1) non-voting member may be appointed by each presidential candidate to serve on the Drafting Subcommittee. The Platform Drafting Subcommittee is considered a subcommittee of the Platform Committee as defined in Article I.A.6 provided, however, that members of the Platform Drafting Subcommittee need not be members of the Platform Committee. The Drafting Subcommittee shall be responsible for the drafting of the report of the Platform Committee under the direction and with the approval of the full Platform Committee.


Rules Committee:
There is no allocation as provided in the Platform Drafting Subcommittee


Credentials Committee and Procedures for Challenging Delegates or State Delegations:
There is no allocation as provided in the Platform Drafting Subcommittee


So in effect, DWS does not have to do what Sanders wants to have done. Sanders is already represented from each state based on primary results.
Posted by LiberalFighter | Fri May 13, 2016, 11:31 PM (3 replies)

WSJ and DU Clinton haters are slamming the Clinton Foundation

Here is a source with information about the operation of the Clinton Foundation.

Where Does Clinton Foundation Money Go? --(FactCheck)

Fiorina and others are referring only to the amount donated by the Clinton Foundation to outside charities, ignoring the fact that most of the Clinton Foundation’s charitable work is performed in-house. One independent philanthropy watchdog did an analysis of Clinton Foundation funding and concluded that about 89 percent of its funding went to charity.

Simply put, despite its name, the Clinton Foundation is not a private foundation — which typically acts as a pass-through for private donations to other charitable organizations. Rather, it is a public charity. It conducts most of its charitable activities directly.

Daniel Borochoff, president and founder of CharityWatch, told us by phone that its analysis of the finances of the Clinton Foundation and its affiliates found that about 89 percent of the foundation budget is spent on programming (or “charity”), higher than the 75 percent considered the industry standard.


Here is the Du posting -xx-
Posted by LiberalFighter | Thu May 12, 2016, 06:23 PM (7 replies)

The Right-Wing Pundits Who Pushed Automatic Classification Myth To Smear Clinton Are Burned Again

Media Matters

A State Department letter sent to Capitol Hill reportedly stated that sending “‘foreign government information’ in unclassified emails ‘does not amount to mishandling the information,’” undercutting right-wing media claims that Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton violated the law by sending and receiving emails that contained “foreign government information."

Security Expert: Order "Authorizes Classification; It Doesn't Require It." In an interview with Mother Jones, security expert Steven Aftergood explained that Executive Order 13526 on classification "is permissive, not mandatory." Rather than requiring that communication between foreign officials be automatically classified, the order "authorizes classification":
Posted by LiberalFighter | Thu May 12, 2016, 12:31 AM (2 replies)

Per The Green Papers the delegate breakdown is as follows:

Update as of 11:20 pm with 80% precincts reporting.

CD1 - Sanders: 4 --- Clinton: 3
CD2 - Sanders: 4 --- Clinton: 3
CD3 - Sanders: 4 --- Clinton: 2
PLEO- Sanders: 2 --- Clinton: 1
At Large- Sanders: 4 --- Clinton: 2

Total - Sanders: 18 --- Clinton: 11

Delegates
Clinton : 1706 (+11) -- 1717
Sanders: 1419 (+18) -- 1437

Percentage of delegates for Sanders:
Before WV: 45.408000%
After WV : 45.561192%



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
CD1 - Sanders: 4 --- Clinton: 3
CD2 - Sanders: 4 --- Clinton: 3
CD3 - Sanders: 3 --- Clinton: 3
PLEO- Sanders: 2 --- Clinton: 1
At Large- Sanders: 3 --- Clinton: 3

Total - Sanders: 16 --- Clinton: 13

There is unlikely to be a change for PLEO and At Large delegates due to the votes needed to exceed the percent.

Note: Only 31% of precincts have reported according to NY Times.
Posted by LiberalFighter | Tue May 10, 2016, 09:43 PM (14 replies)

Why do people misuse numbers all the time?

1956 -- Eisenhower -- 5,008,132 --- out of 5,828,434
1960 -- Nixon -- 4,975,938 --- out of 5,743,634
1964 -- Goldwater -- 2,267,079 --- out of 5,514,527
1968 -- Nixon --- 1,679,443 --- out of 4,473,251 (Reagan received 1,696,632) (15 states)
1972 -- Nixon --- 5,378,704 --- out of 5,828,483 (18 states)
1976 -- Ford --- 5,529,899 -- Reagan --- 4,760,222 (First time primaries or caucuses held in every state)
1980 -- Reagan --- 7,709,793 --- out of 12,850,432 -- (60.0%)
1984 -- Reagan --- 6,484,987 --- 98.78%
1988 -- Bush --- 8,253,512 --- out of 12,851,740 -- (64.2%)
1992 -- Bush --- 9,199,463 --- out of 12,596,601 -- (73.0%)
1996 -- Dole --- 9,024,742 --- out of 15,313,343 -- (58.9%)
2000 -- Bush --- 12,034,676 --- out of 19,391,600 -- (62.1%)
2004 -- Bush --- 7,853,863 --- 98.1%
2008 -- McCain --- 9,840,746 --- out of 20,828,435 -- (47.3%)
2012 -- Romney --- 9,947,433 --- out of 18,908,313 -- (52.6%)
2016 -- Trump --- 10,717,357 --- out of 25,731,093 -- (41.7%)

Population in 1956 was nearly 168.9 million
Population in 1976 was nearly 218.0 million
Population in 2016 is nearly 322.7 million

Even using population to attempt a correlation would be wrong by virtue of not everyone even participating in the primaries and not everyone is a Republican. Even the ratio of Republicans changes through time.

What is evident is the weak support Trump has within the Republican Party compared to past elections.
Posted by LiberalFighter | Mon May 9, 2016, 12:33 PM (0 replies)

Hillary Clinton Is A Progressive Democrat, Despite What You May Have Heard

Huff Post

If Sanders is the standard by which you’re going to decide whether a politician is a progressive, then almost nobody from the Democratic Party would qualify. Take Sanders out of the equation, and suddenly Clinton looks an awful lot like a mainstream progressive — firmly on the left side of the American ideological spectrum and maybe on the left side of the Democratic Party’s, as well.


Note that this partial list leaves out whole categories of policies — like immigration, gun violence, and abortion rights — where Clinton also has staked out strongly progressive positions. In some cases, her positions are arguably more progressive than the ones Sanders has taken. (The list also does not include foreign policy, where Clinton’s interventionist instincts put her at odds with many progressives — but where, as Max Fisher of Vox has noted, Clinton’s enthusiasm for diplomacy sets her apart from conservatives.)


But Clinton’s responsibility for her husband’s agenda isn’t always self-evident, because, as first lady, she had less ability to dissent than other advisers. A better indicator of her instincts is probably her subsequent record as a senator from New York. According to those same DW-NOMINATE ratings, Clinton was the chamber’s 11th most-liberal member during her tenure. It’s a crude statistic, but it suggests strongly that she was not just progressive relative to the Senate. It suggests that she was also progressive relative to members of her own party.
Posted by LiberalFighter | Mon May 9, 2016, 08:57 AM (2 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »