|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
It's also irrelevant. I highly doubt Citizen Healer was a Bernie voter.
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
This election has provided some great Alex Jones memes/videos.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
There's two of us now [Fistbumps Comrade Fergie]
Anyway, we can bet something else. Like I have to parade around in my red speedos for a week or something.
Oh, and I never brought it up, and it occurs to me, I don't think I ever saw a thread or even a post (?) about the Flint, Michigan water scandal, but, smaller and whiter, my hometown gets the Erin Brockovich treatment.
I'll probably be dead soon.
Federal contract workers at the National Visa Center in Portsmouth, New Hampshire voted today to join UE, by a margin of 279 to 247, despite an intense anti-union campaign by the company, FCi Federal and other subcontractors.
They mentioned this at Comrade Omar's memorial and we all lined up and did one of those "Vote UE!" videos.
New Hampshire hasn't gone Republican since Al Gore. I'll take bets that it goes to Clinton. To make the chances more even, know that I am working against myself and will be campaigning for Jill Stein.
If you want, we can even do the whole "if-I'm-wrong-I-will-vacate-Paizo-for-four-years" thing I did last time.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
You can't be neutral on a moving train, as Comrade Zinn said, once upon a time.
Daily Kos article on the same subject, but it's written by a guy going by the name of "Navajo,"so I doubt s/he's completely detached and disinterested.
Haven't had a chance to go through the past two days' posts, alas, but a couple articles on Social Security:
Maybe, without banging-intern scandals, Hillary will be able to pull off what Bill couldn't.
A few of the incredible images taken today as more than 1,000 people joined Harvard dining hall workers on Day 18 of their historic strike. Workers and their allies are needing to take it to the streets to get what they need to survive from the wealthiest university on the planet.
The rain let up just before we got there and didn't come back until the walk back to the car.
Young Gay Autistic Comrade was, once again, verbally attacked by a bunch of idiot student liberals for his outfit. They claimed that he looked "too militant," "fascistic" and that his Soviet military hat made him look like "a Nazi." When I pointed out to them that Nazis and communists were on opposite side of the spectrum, they said they didn't want our support. I then asked them if they were dining hall workers. When they said, no, I then pointed to my Teamsters pin, then pointed over to the flatbed truck from which the union leaders were speaking, and how it read "Teamsters Local 25." Later, my local president gave a pretty good speech (made me feel guilty for voting against him in the national election) and pledged $10,000 to the UNITE-HERE 26 strike fund and the idiot student liberals didn't say anything after that.
There were also sizable contingents from up and down the east coast, including one from Atlantic City with t-shirts reading "Trump Taj Mahal: I Held the Line Against Carl Icahn." They were pretty spirited despite having, as Comrade X reported above, having lost their jobs.
Leftist Bingo-wise, lots of Taafeites, Cliffites and Marcyites, and three Spart sympathizers that I hadn't seen in, oh, 20 or so years. One of them was uncomfortable, one of them asked hostile questions, but the last, who got me a job in an industrial print shop back in the day, stopped and talked to me about old times for awhile.
Anyway, pretty good rally.
Shame! Shame! Shame on Harvard!
But does he draw a more significantly working-class group than the Democratic primary candidates?
Based on, as I said, months-old data presented in this article, it doesn't look like it, but I am sure there other articles and other polls.
I guess I just take umbrage at a letter to "The (White?) Working Class" from a "College-Educated" poster who pops up every election cycle to suggest that we need to raise the Social Security retirement age in order to balance the budget.
A couple months old, but interesting nonetheless:
Yes, but according to the exit polls cited in the NBC article above, black voters under 30 voted for Sanders 52% to 47%.
Which might not mean much in the grand scheme of things (apparently, they're expecting low turnout among such voters as compared with the two elections in which Obama ran), but it is what I was talking about.
Oh, crazy, Guardian article on the same question published today:
Full disclosure: written by a contributor to Socialist Worker.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Thank you, I understand that "based on the people I know" isn't scientifically sound. Was surprised, however, to discover that "based on the people I know" ended up being in line with national trends.
Hillary Clinton's campaign employs more black women than any other presidential campaign in US history.
Found this article through the links:
I was wondering to myself, a couple of pages ago, if minority, i.e., black, voters were so overwhelmingly in favor of Hillary, why all the black activists I've worked with over the past couple of years were Sanders supporters. In retrospect, though, they were all under 30.
Well, I don't know what Citizen Lurker was referring to. It might have been a general question about gridlock, but since it came after my post about Schumer's public and Clinton's private talk about lowering the corporate tax rate so that the kleptocrats will bring their offshore money home, I chose to interpret it in regards to that and was pointing out that Schumer's already citing Ryan that they've got bipartisan support.
Digging through the links, Schumer's been working with Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) for about a year to get a similar bipartisan gift to the American capitalist class off the ground.
Besides, according to Schumer, Ryan's down with giving in to the capital strike, too.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
"Revenue-starved Democratic leaders have broadly hinted they are prepared to cave, either for a “holiday” period or permanently.
"In an exchange with CNBC’s John Harwood, Schumer confirmed that the latter is in fact in the works. When Harwood asked Schumer if 'it would be a permanent lower rate, not a holiday rate,' Schumer replied, 'Yes, you can’t do a one-shot deal.'"
When I have some more free time I should look up our previous conversation from years ago, maybe, about the capital strike.
Didn't see any of this one, was at a meeting in Worcester where the comrades were planning their "Who's Afraid of Jill Stein?" public meeting next week, but I did just run into this article:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
You're probably right, but there seem to be quite a few liberals, some in this thread, who have spent a lot of time claiming, for example, that Bernie pulled her to the left, etc., etc.
Four- to eight-more years of neoliberal austerity coming your way, America. Start building your strike funds and community organizations now.
Well, her follow up paragraph is pretty notable, can't say I'm surprised it isn't quoted as often:
"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."
(Can't believe I've made a semi-pro Hillary post.)
(Pardon me, Citizen Cursor, for using your post.)
Well this, plus Wikileaks quotes that the Clinton campaign didn't want to run against Jeb because there was little in his economic plan the Clinton campaign disagreed with, bodes pretty ominously for a "progressive" Clinton presidency.
Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
Woah, bro, talking shiznit about me behind my back?
I'm telling mom.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
But now I have:
Some, but not all, of the same ground covered in Chicago Tribune who, for the record, have endorsed Gary Johnson after their GOP pick, Rubio, got cut.
Spastic Puma wrote:
Whoa man, Trump has been for LGBT rights all his life, okay? He's not a flip flopper like HRC
I actually haven't found any indication that the Observer has a pro-Trump line. In fact, I wouldn't have even known it was owned by his son-in-law if they didn't run disclaimers every now and then. But then again, I admit, I only read their articles when they come across my feed.
More generally, I've heard some commentators opine that the WikiLeaks stash are gonna be studied for a long time as documentary evidence of how a successful presidential campaign operates. So far, I've enjoyed watching how talking points her staffers came up with last year have been successfully disseminated. For example,
"Earlier in Clinton's campaign, emails from October 2015 show staff trying to build a defense for their candidate's late arrival on supporting gay marriage, and her history of supporting 1996's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Again, Clinton campaign staff had to figure out how to defend her on something she actually believes in. 'I'm not saying double down or ever say it again,. I'm just saying that she's not going to want to say that she was wrong about that, given she and her husband believe it and have repeated it many times. Better to reiterate evolution, opposition to DOMA when court considered it, and forward looking stance.'"
Also interesting are Bill Clinton's comments from 2000 when he opined that he was more in line with the "gay agenda" than she was and that she was "really a little put off by some of this stuff."
Trump's son-in-law's paper on Clinton campaign staffers' efforts to create a narrative where Hillary doesn't look like a flip-flopping bigot.
I haven't gotten around to reading them myself, but I ran across this part:
"'We’re in a time in Syria,' she said, 'where they’re not finished killing each other . . . and maybe you just have to wait and watch it.'"
and was reminded of our discussion in the Syria intervention thread on what I dubbed the Luttwalk Thesis.