All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[TheDarman]

I'd say his endorsement also says what he thinks of Tara Reade's accusations

I did a big, long blog post on my personal social media that I thought was particularly well sourced (if I do say so myself) about the allegation. I think any reasonable person would be holding at least a reasonable doubt about the verificity of such claims as I lay them out:

Tara Reade served in Biden's Senate office as a staffer's aide from December of 1992 to August of 1993. This is verifiable and employment information recovered by the Associated Press, the New York Times, and MSNBC can all confirm this.

Reade states that the assault took place sometime in the Spring of 1993 (I'll get back to that in a bit). She claims that she was not wearing any pantyhouse underneath her skirt (which would be--unconventional, especially at the time given how strict the dress code was for my peers who worked in the Senate during my TFAS program in 2016) when she was assaulted by Joe Biden after bringing a gym bag to him at the request of one of his aide's. Originally, she alleged that the assault took place near a public Senate hallway in a semi-secluded area. Recently, the Associated Press interviewed Reade and she claims, now, that it actually took place in the basement of the building.

These allegations come a year after her initial allegations in 2019 when several women came forward with stories about how Biden had made them feel uncomfortable and invaded their personal space. Her original allegations were more in line with the other women. She claimed that she had been in a few uncomfortable scenarios, but none that amounted to anything "sexual" she said.

This past week, however, Reade has filed a police report with the DC Metro Police (who don't have jurisdiction of the case, since the alleged assault took place in the Capitol and are, thus, the jurisdiction of the Capitol Police). In the report, though, Reade doesn't name Biden by name, but does insist that this police report is about him. She also gives a timeline for the assault from March to May of 1993.

Now, it should be noted that none of what I am about to say means that any of this is untrue. Trauma is complicated and it can result in memory lapses and faulty recollections. However, just from a realistic point of view, these things make it very difficult to verify the account one way or another. There is no definitive date provided for the assault so it gets that much harder to investigate. Even when we were talking about a hallway-adjacent assault, it was very difficult to establish place from that alone and determine if the meeting did occur. Without a timeline, it becomes difficult for Biden, himself, to release contrarian information about the exact time or provide himself an alibi. An additional detail that may or may not be important is that lying on a police report is a jailable offense and, should Biden have been named in the report, he would've been able to have it litigated, even if the alleged crime is past the statute of limitations. Without a name attached, it becomes difficult to conduct an actual investigation or have it litigated properly. This report will likely only be stored away somewhere.

Reade does seem to have some back-up though. Two anonymous friends have stated that they were told about the assault both contemporaneously for one and in 2008 for the other. One states that they were told by Reade that she went through the proper Senate channels to report harassment (the original harassment reported in 2019 in this case), but not the assault. However, there has been no recovered record of the report. If the report existed through these proper channels, Obama's team should've been able to get ahold of it in 2008 when they vetted Biden as Vice President. Its disappearance is probably unlikely and Reade claims that she never kept a copy for herself.

The people she claimed she told within Biden's office all deny that they got any single allegation of inappropriate behavior, and certainly not assault, from Reade or anyone else. Indeed, Biden seems to have a lot of defenders from his time in the Senate claiming that there was never even an atmosphere of harassment. Indeed, in the early '90s, after Anita Hill's confirmation battle, there was a bright spotlight pointed at new instances and allegations of harassment and assault. Many of Biden's colleagues fell as a result of these allegations. Nothing came out of Biden's office, meanwhile.

While it perhaps isn't shocking that Biden's former employees and folks he entrusted would have his back, it wouldn't necessarily be surprising that anonymous friends that Tara Reade directed outlets to would also have hers. While it is a bigger game of he-said, she-said, it still is that same game.

Reade's account gets a little more complicated from here though. She claimed, originally, that she left Washington D.C. to become an actress. A later account says that she actually left with her husband (whom she alleges abused her) to start a family and work on a Congressional campaign. Finally, she states that she was forced out of Washington by former members of Biden's team having her blacklisted and making it impossible for her to find another job on Capitol Hill.

Since she left Washington D.C., she went by many aliases and even had different Twitter accounts. On one of her previous accounts, back in 2017, she actually posted a number of positive tweets about Biden, calling him, affectionately, her "former boss".

EUcvJO3XYAA2aUm.jpg

A year later, she widely shared and spread posts about how much she loved President Putin of Russia and how most women are attracted to him, shirt on or off. She has since deleted a number of these posts and even her Medium article about how the power elite in America hate Putin for being a good person and a stoic leader. However, these posts and her Medium article have since been archived here.

Even more interesting is that this came after the same Twitter account mentioned above was used to disseminate information about Russia's influence on the 2016 election and how there was a need for election security.

After she vacated her old account, she went on to support Elizabeth Warren and, finally, Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary. While she claims TimesUp denied her assistance, TimesUp has never been a legal advocacy group. Their purpose, instead, is to give women the resources they need to get justice. Reade used their list of lawyers to try to find one to take her case. All of them declined to do so.

This part of the story doesn't even get to Biden's character. Biden was known as the Senator who would rush to catch a train back to his home state to see his wife. Typically, it isn't characteristic of someone to commit only one sexual assault, especially if they have the propensity to seek power and find it thrilling to have it. We can usually state with certainty that Senators and Presidents fit this archetype even without sexual assault allegations. This would beg the question as to why these news organizations couldn't find more. Why, in the era of Bill Clinton's impeachment for an extramarital affair, would Biden have been preserved for even having a consensual affair? If he had no consensual affairs, why was he so eager to have one with Reade, even if she was not consenting?

This isn't to say that her account is untruthful. However, it does seem to be very difficult to prove and she made moves that make it virtually impossible for it to be litigated in court. It also doesn't seem to match up to what we would expect from a sexual predator and their behavior. Indeed, her behavior doesn't seem to match up to that of a victim either. When it became clear that Biden would be the frontrunner to be the nominee for the Democratic Party, Ryan Grim, of the left-leaning organization called the Intercept, posited that Biden would probably lose in a one-on-one against Sanders because it would have us evaluate Biden more closely. Tara Reade commented with "Yup. Timing...wait for it...tic toc". Source here.

Only a few weeks later, Reade made her allegations against Biden.

Again, this isn't to say that Reade isn't telling the truth. I can't portend to understand the traumatic assault she detailed and how it would affect her. However, there are a number of questions that remain unanswered. Without further information, I think it becomes difficult to, without equivocation, call Biden a "rapist". That may change and, at such a time, we will have to be prepared for the real political repercussions of that. However, I'm not ready to make the leap in this particular case without further public corroboration, a thorough vetting of the claims (like with Ford with Kavanaugh, taking a polygraph), or any new information about Biden's history.

If you would like to read the sources I got my information from, I will oblige below:

https://apnews.com/d922da60baa91121f4529fe51a0fd55a

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/u...complaint.html

https://med ium.com/@eddiekrassenste...n-e4cb3ee38460 (Take out the space—oddly Medium is getting omitted.)

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Just to point this one out...

That was not how Jedediah Bila reacted the other day. She's not exactly turning in her badge, but the reaction was also not "Please, Sir, Can I Have Some More?"

Bila tested positive for coronavirus, so she had a personal reason to stop believing Trump's bullshit. However, she's an outlier while the rest of the talking heads continue slurping the Orange Menace.

====================

Trump Declares He Has ‘Total’ Authority As President In Defiant Press Briefing

He then refused to answer questions from a reporter who pressed him on the inaccuracy of that claim. Trump SO-OOOOOOOOO much wants to be a dictator, but that ain't happening. Meanwhile....

**********

Twitter Erupts Over ‘Emperor’ Trump’s Claim His ‘Authority Is Total’

The president was roasted for wanting both total authority and zero responsibility. Meanwhile....

**********

Democratic Governors Form Compacts To Coordinate Reopening Amid Pandemic

The governors in the Northeast and along the West Coast announced separate state compacts after Trump said he gets to decide when to “open up the states.”

**********

San Francisco Sees Major Coronavirus Outbreak At Homeless Shelter

Advocates have been warning about such a “preventable” COVID-19 spike among unhoused people for weeks. And that could happen from coast to coast.

**********

How To Answer Your Kid’s Coronavirus Question, ‘When Will This Be Over?’

How parents can address the uncertainty and fear surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic.

**********

FEMA Accused Of Hijacking Protective Gear For First Responders In Massachusetts Town

FEMA said moving supplies to “hot spots” determined by the Trump administration is not the same as “commandeering.” The hell it's not!

[worstblogever]

On this date in 2015, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" ran a profile of Tim Bearden, a former member of the Georgia House of Representatives who immediately upon entering office, began work to try and that the Confederate flag put back on the Georgia state flag. Yes, Bearden was a member of the Sons of the Confederacy tried to gin up support for himself by pushing for various anti-immigrant bills as well, and even expressed concerns that the paranoid conspiracy theory of NAFTA leading to a North American Union would come to pass. Bearden also loved to tout his love of the 2nd Amendment, once drawing the attention of the TSA after boasting he would walk into Hartsfeld-Jackson Airport in Atlanta packing heat just to prove how committed he was. Bearden's status began to wane, however, after several ethics complaints were lodged against him for accepting six-figure sums from municipalities for being a "consultant" without doing any work began to emerge. We wish we could say Bearden's career as a legislator came to an end due to a loss in an election, but it actually was the fact that he was granted a job by Gov. Nathan Deal to train people at the Department of Public Safety. Yes, a paranoid, Neo-Confederate, anti-immigrant kook who once tried walking into an airport with a gun to prove a point was employed to teach people about public safety.

In 2016, 2017, and in 2018, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” presented profiles of Michigan State Senator Tom Casperson, who gained some notoriety for his reaction to the Flint Water Crisis. As the Michigan state legislature’s Republicans relented, and begrudgingly approved $30 million in aid to go towards Flint (which falls well short of what they’ll need to fix their seriously damaged plumbing infrastructure), Casperson took to the floor of the chamber to give a passionate defense of poor, poor Gov. Rick Snyder. He did not, however, choose his words wisely, acknowledging “mistakes were made” but comparing some of the vitriolic attacks on Snyder to “a poison in the heart, a poison of the spirit.” This after the Snyder administration had LITERALLLY POISONED PEOPLE. Casperson continued his rant, claiming people were unfairly“crucifying” Snyder, as well. Of course, that isn’t the only time Casperson has had a major gaffe on the floor of the State Senate. Back in 2013, he gave a fictionalized account where he claimed a pre-school had been beset by three wolves “multiple times” just after children had come in from the playground. The original story involved zero children, and only one wolf. Casperson was forced to apologize, but based on his speech, the legislature already had voted to send a resolution to Congress try and get gray wolves removed from the Endangered Species List because they were “so dangerous”. If you’re still not getting the idea, Casperson is also a Birther, who in an interview on a local radio show talked about how he “wasn’t sure if President Obama was born in the United States”, and felt there was some bias, and that if the same controversy had surrounded, say, President Bush, the media would have never let it go. Casperson’s voting record includes support for HB 4745, which would allow medical professionals to deny healthcare services based on their “religious, moral, and ethical beliefs” (Because that should supersede the Hippocratic Oath), opposition to HB 6048, which would have allowed victims of rape and sexual assault to be provided access to emergency contraception, and support for HB 5697, also known as the “rape insurance law” which would force Michigan women to provide their own insurance plan to provide medical services if they want medical care due to a miscarriage or abortion… without any exception for rape. Casperson, also was the sponsor of SB 926, a bill which would have criminalized flying a drone anywhere near a hunter trying to bring down big game to try and scare off their quarry. (There were exactly zero reported incidences of anyone doing this when he drafted the bill.) J[He also has repeatedly voted for bills to attempt to begin drug testing welfare recipients, and voted for HB 4188, a bill to allow adoption agencies to refuse to allow couples to adopt children based on their own “religious beliefs”. It was a bit unnerving to find out that Tom Casperson was running for U.S. House in 2016, trying to get elected to represent Michigan’s 1st Congressional District, but he was mercifully defeated by Jack Bergman in the GOP Primary for that seat. As such, Casperson had to return to the Michigan State Senate, but in 2018, he was term-limited, and during his last term in office he became the target of an investigation by the FBI into politicians being bribed by a towing company, and in wiretaps, those who have been charged were recorded discussing paying off Casperson.

On this date in 2019, “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” profiled John Moore, a former member of the Mississippi House of Representatives from 1995-2017. While when Moore turned in his resignation, he claimed it was due to “health reasons”, but Mississippi House Speaker Philip Gunn said that Moore’s condition actually amounted to a chronic case of being a horny d***-weasel who sexually harassed a number of women in the state capitol over the two decades he was in office. In the interests of not making Moore’s profile all about him being brought down by the #MeToo movement, we’ll note that during his legislative career, he also co-sponsored legislation to expand the ways people could get exemptions from having to vaccinate their children, to legalize prayer in schools (despite what the Separation of Church and State says about that), and to authorize people to carry guns into houses of religious worship. He also voted for legislation to suppress the vote with stricter unnecessary voter ID laws that curb the non-existent problem of in-person voter fraud, voted against minimum wage increases, and was such a hardliner on abortion that he voted for exceptions for victims of rape or incest on any and all anti-choice legislation that he supported. As he is now out of office, we’ll profile another wacky Republican today instead. (Current crazy/stupid scoreboard, is now 852-45, since this was established in July 2014.)

[Steel Inquisitor]

Yes it has because his policies are more widely discussed and more mainstream than they were even 4 years ago. You’ll never see another Democratic primary in your lifetime where M4A isn’t on the table.

Yet the man himself is a dead end in national primaries. Sanders himself was a weakness he couldn't overcome winning national elections.

Like I said many times, I Bernie wasn’t my first choice. Warren was. Bernie was “purer” for whatever that is worth but I felt Warren would get more done and be a superior match up can Trump. I didn’t support Biden because I felt he falls short on both counts (he’s likely going to be as ineffective as a Bernie would have been, only it would have been with policies I don’t really care much for).

The last few weeks has shown this not to be true.

As far as burning every bridge, he’s still a Senator. He still is an influential voice amongst a group of Democratic reps that the party would like to keep in good favor. If the Dems don’t win the Senate they need him to be in lockstep. If they do, it will be by one vote so it will be more crucial than ever that he is still mostly in their camp. Not that it’s reflective of what pretty much everyone currently in the Senate says about him.

You say that as though that's all Sanders capable of doing, when he could have done a whole lot more. His voice has been fading every year, he's an 80 year old man and this was his last shot at being president. Sanders hasn't got the juice you think he has, he's no Joe Manchin.

But yeah overall him being a trouble maker was more than useful in making policies I like more mainstream than ever. And quite frankly I care more about 4, 8, 16, 24 years down the line than one election. If it makes it harder on Biden, I’m unsympathetic because he has about as low a bar as you have. Also quite frankly, just wait until it’s Trump vs Biden. You’ll find out real fast how light Bernie was tagging him when the Republicans adds start running and you can’t hide behind a golden carrot of fake unity.

Does being sexist fall under the "trouble maker" brand? You're omitting how badly him losing has affected you emotionally. I get that but don't pretend it didn't happen. Everyone expects the GOP to get nasty, Democrats don't expect fellow Democrats to weaken their nominee where they're more vulnerable than they had to be when it comes to the general. You think Chris Matthews was out of line this year with Sanders? That was a tiny spec of the heat he was in for had Sanders won. Picture multiple news networks pumping takes like that 24/7. For months.

Like I said before, it means nothing to me because it’s Biden’s job to win now and if all Bernie ever accomplished was getting more visible progressive Senators and making his wing of the party more visible and mainstream, that’s good enough. That branch of the party isn’t going away.

The establishment won this primary. Now it’s their job to go back and work to build a coalition that can win a general

Biden's not going to win you over, you've made that very clear. What do you think of Bernie saying you should vote for him? Even he gets this and Sanders is very out of his depth in coalition building. Who said anything about the leftists going away? You do know that he didn't have much to do with those politicians getting elected. He wasn't their mentor or anything. Inspiring someone isn't a reason to give them credit when you do the actual work yourself.

This isn't all on Biden, either. Do you want Trump to have another 4 years after what's going on with Corona virus? That's what happens if Biden loses the general. I don't like him anymore than you do but I know when to be practical when the results will save millions of lives.

[worstblogever]

Robert Aderholt

Welcome to what is the 852nd original profile here at “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day”, where we’ll be discussing the U.S. House Representative from Alabama’s 4th Congressional District, Robert Aderholt, who has served in Congress since 1997. Aderholt is the son of a part-time minister and district court judge who served for 30 years in Alabama, Bobby Ray Aderholt, so you might expect that the guy might be conservative.

Hoo boy, is he.

Robert Aderholt has a rating of 0, yes, ZERO from the Human Rights Committee because of his record on LGBTQ Rights. This has something do with him being closely aligned with the anti-gay hate group, the Family Research Council (who give him a 100% rating), that he has sponsored amendments to legislation to try to allow adoption agencies to deny gay couples adoptions based on their “religious beliefs”, and that he reacted to the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling with “a heavy heart” and fears that it would be a threat to his own religious freedom if gay people could get married.

On abortion, Rep. Aderholt is radical enough that on two occasions, he has tried to defund Planned Parenthood, and has called upon Mitch McConnell and the GOP-controlled Senate to overturn the filibuster to that they can move the same legislation through the Senate.

And, taking a look at his belief on climate change, yes, Robert Aderholt denies it exists, calling the current significant rise in temperature a part of a “normal warming cycle” and assuring everyone that a cooling cycle is coming right behind it, based on historical precedents that seem to have been pulled directly out of his anus:

”"I fall into the second group of people who believe, as do many very credible scientists, that the earth is currently in a natural warming cycle rather than a man-made climate change. Many scientists believe that natural cycles of warming and cooling have existed since the beginning of Earth. If we take the current models of climate prediction and apply those same models to what actually happened in the last thirty years, the models are shown to be very flawed. In addition, what knowledge we do have of a warming period in the Middle Ages cannot be explained by current models which are focused on greenhouse gas reductions."

But what’s quite concerning is seeing a Fundamentalist like Robert Aderholt bend over backwards to make his twisted view on Christianity even more broken by singing the praises of Donald Trump. Aderholt places Trump’s Christian values to be on par with Ronald Reagan’s, and somehow ahead of both Bush 41 and Bush 43. He's aligned himself fully with Trump’s white nationalist agenda, insisting we need a border wall because migrants are “smuggling drugs” across, defended Donald Trump’s incoherent rages, even if they’re directed at former Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, and has claimed the extraordinarily craven Trump would win a fist-fight with Joe Biden, because yes, Aderholt is that much of a toady.

But let’s review

• March 21st, 2005: Rep. Aderholt votes for the Terry Schiavo Incapacitated Persons Protection Bill.
  This despite the fact that a large majority of the country polled at the time felt that the government preventing a person's plan to die with dignity was an overreach.
• July 18th, 2006: Aderholt co-sponsors and votes for a resolution towards creating a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
• December 6th, 2006: Rep. Aderholt co-sponsors and votes for the "Abortion Pain Bill", which would create an unconstitutional ban on abortion at 20 weeks.
• July 31st, 2007: Robert Aderholt votes against the Equal Pay Bill.
• November 7th, 2007: Robert Aderholt votes against ENDA, allowing the continued discrimination of LGBTQ citizens based on their sexual identity in the workplace.
• July 24th, 2008: Rep. Aderholt votes against funding for the prevention of AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis.
• January 9th, 2009: Aderholt votes against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.
• April 29th, 2009: Robert Aderholt votes against the Hate Crimes Expansion that would provide protections to LGBTQ citizens.
• July 31st, 2009: Aderholt votes against the widely successfuly "Cash for Clunkers" program that helped save the American auto industry.
• June 30th, 2010: After Wall Street bankers taking unnecessary risks nearly imploded the global economy in 2007, legislation finally comes forward to prevent the same behaviors from being permitted in the future. The signature piece of legislation to prevent another financial meltdown was Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform, which Robert Aderholt voted against.
• July 30th, 2010: Months after the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a bill comes to the floor to better regulate off-shore drilling. Aderholt is apparently alright with ecological disasters continuing in the future, as he votes against it.
• December 8th, 2010: Rep. Aderholt votes against the DREAM Act.
• December 15th, 2010: Aderholt votes against the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".
• On January 5th, 2011, Rep. Aderholt votes the first attempt by Republicans to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He has voted for almost every attempt to do so since.
• On February 18th, 2011, Robert Aderholt votes to defund Planned Parenthood.
• March 17th, 2011: Rep. Aderholt votes to cut funding to National Public Radio.
• September 15th, 2012: Rep. Aderholt votes for the "No More Solyndras Act".
• September 21st, 2012: Aderholt votes for the "Stop the War on Coal Act".

[SUPERECWFAN1]

The Trump meltdown that CNN caught was insane to see. From claiming he has TOTAL AUTHORITY to taking NO RESPONSIBILITY it sums up everything about him. Now that Governors are likely frustrated as hell with this they are likely to do what they were forced to do from start of this and decide what their states do as we see.

[jetengine]

The Trump meltdown that CNN caught was insane to see. From claiming he has TOTAL AUTHORITY to taking NO RESPONSIBILITY it sums up everything about him. Now that Governors are likely frustrated as hell with this they are likely to do what they were forced to do from start of this and decide what their states do as we see.

Any Berniite or "Both Samer" who sees that interview and still goes "I'm not voting" may as well just leave America at that point.

[worstblogever]

• January 15th, 2013: Robert Aderholt votes against Disaster Relief Funding for victims of Hurricane Sandy.
• February 28th, 2013: Aderholt votes against the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
• June 19th, 2013: Robert Aderholt votes against restoring $20.5 billion towards the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program.
• September 30th, 2013: Rep. Aderholt votes for the 2013 Government Shutdown.
  When the vote came up seventeen days later to re-open the government, Aderholt voted to keep it closed.
• Feb 26th, 2014: Robert Aderholt goes "all in" on the faux-scandal surrounding the IRS researching SuperPACs by voting for the "Stop the Targeting of Political Beliefs by the IRS Act".
• July 10th, 2014: Aderholt votes for House Amendment 1040, to prevent the implementation of the dreaded United Nations Agenda 21 Treaty, that in spite of just being recommended climate change guidelines, have many conspiracy theorists within the extreme right convinced it’s a plot for global domination.
• January 22nd, 2015: Robert Aderholt votes for HR 7, an anti-abortion bill that makes even some Republicans pause before voting for it because of its language that tries to define the conditions for what “rape” is, in it.
• February 3rd, 2015: Rep. Aderholt votes for the 60th Republican attempt at repealing the Affordable Care Act. This in spite of the fact that the law is not just working, but better than experts predicted.
• March 3rd, 2015: Aderholt votes against funding the Department of Homeland Security as part of a Republican protest of President Obama’s executive orders on immigration.
• September 11th, 2015: Aderholt votes against the United States' nuclear treaty with Iran.
• September 18th, 2015: Rep. Aderholt co-sponsors and votes for a bill with most House Republicans to defund Planned Parenthood, based on highly edited “sting” videos submitted by a Pro-Life advocacy group that have been repeatedly debunked by investigators.
• November 19th, 2015: Aderholt votes for the American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act, reacting to the terror attacks in Paris by jihadists from France and Belgium by trying to create greater restrictions to keep out Syrian refugees, of whom exactly zero were involved in those attacks.
• February 2nd, 2016: Robert Aderholt votes for HR 3762, the 61st attempt by Congressional Republicans to repeal the Affordable Care Act (which is still working better than was predicted).
• February 16th, 2017: Aderholt votes for HJR 69, to make it legal for hunters on wildlife reserves to kill several species of hibernating bears or wolves while they’re sleeping. Because… well, the logic really isn’t there as to why, it’s just awful.
• March 16th, 2017: Robert Aderholt votes for HR 1181, which would allow veterans deemed mentally incompetent to continue to own firearms, and not have them taken away without a judge's written order. We feel safer already.
• May 4th, 2017: Aderholt votes for the GOP's healthcare plan, that would allow 24,000 more people to die a year, give $50,000 in tax breaks to millionaires, would eliminate coverage for pre-existing conditions, and would treat pregnancy, post-partum depression, and sexual assault as "pre-existing conditions". Oh, and a provision in the bill would make sure that Aderholt would be allowed to keep his healthcare plan as it exists under the ACA, which would be repealed for the rest of the country. He and his Republican compatriots threw themselves a beer bash to celebrate taking away healthcare from millions and then gloated about it with Donald Trump at a White House press conference, as well.
• June 8th, 2017: Robert Aderholt votes for HR 10, the GOP’s attempt to repeal Dodd-Frank financial reform, because what the country really needs is to allow the big banks to make the same mistakes that imploded the economy only a decade earlier.
• October 3rd, 2017: Aderholt votes for HR 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, that would try to create an unconstitutional ban abortion at 20 weeks (even though medical science tells us fetuses do not have the capability to feel pain until 29 weeks).
• December 19th, 2017: Robert Aderholt votes for HR 1, the GOP’s $1.7 trillion tax cut to benefit the wealthiest Americans and corporations permanently that coincidentally also removes the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate and kicks 13 million people off their health insurance.
• February 18th, 2018: Rep. Aderholt and his fellow Republicans decide that poor big businesses are suffering too much at the hands of the Americans with Disabilities Act too much, and vote for HR 620, which would strip most of the civil rights protections guaranteed by it.
• January 23rd, 2019: Rep. Aderholt voted against HR 648, because he was gleefully enjoying the longest government shutdown in history.
• January 27th, 2019: Robert Aderholt votes against HJR 30, which was meant to express disapproval of Donald Trump not acting against Russian Federation for attack Aderholt our democracy. You see, he’s fine with our nation being sublet to Vladimir Putin.
• February 28th, 2019: Aderholt votes against HR 1112, a bill which would have required universal background checks on all firearm purchases, and close the gun show loophole.
• March 14th, 2019: Rep. Aderholt votes against HJR 46, which sane members of Congress voted for to reject Donald Trump’s “national emergency” regarding the U.S. border and his attempts to reallocate funds for a border wall without Congressional approval.
• April 4th, 2019: Robert Aderholt is one of 158 Republicans who choose to vote against the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act, likely because they feel the 2nd Amendment remaining absolute is more important than preventing people with a history of domestic abuse from owning a firearm (which statistics show, makes them more likely to use those firearms against women in their lives).
• May 17th, 2019: Aderholt votes against The Equality Act, which would have prevented discrimination towards Americans based on their gender identity or sexual orientation.
• June 4th, 2019: Rep. Aderholt votes against the Dreamers Act, because he’s too xenophobic and partisan to care about immigration reform.
• July 16th, 2019: Robert Aderholt votes against a resolution to condemn Donald Trump for his racist statements that four people of color in Congress should “go back where they came from”.
• December 18th, 2019: Rep. Aderholt ignores his Congressional duty to hold a president who has been proven to commit high crimes and misdemeanors accountable and votes against the impeachment of Donald Trump.

Robert Aderholt has advanced out of the GOP Primary, and is currently seeking his thirteenth term in office. His challenger is Rich Neighbors, a Democrat who has already lost twice in attempts to get elected to office in Alabama’s 4th, and considering Aderholt usually pulls down between 75-80% of the vote in that highly conservative district, it seems like he’s going to remain in office until he decides to retire.

Excuse me while I go bang my head against a wall for the next 23 hours.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Any Berniite or "Both Samer" who sees that interview and still goes "I'm not voting" may as well just leave America at that point.

You could see the anger in Trump's face raising as the female reporter just DIGS in to counter this. Then others join in and Trump finally is like.."I'm moving on !"

[aja_christopher]

Loyalty should go both ways.

------
"Poll: Black VP pick could boost Biden"

Black voters in battleground states would be more enthusiastic about voting for Joe Biden in November if he chose an African-American woman as a running mate, a new poll shows.

Biden is already highly popular with black voters, according to the poll of 800 black voters conducted for BlackPAC, a progressive-leaning advocacy group. But 55 percent of African-American voters said they would be more excited to turn out or vote for Biden if he picked a black woman to join his ticket, the poll showed. Another 27 percent said the pick made no difference because they’d stick with Biden.

Only 7 percent said they would still vote for Donald Trump, who is deeply unpopular with black voters despite the president's outreach to them.

Biden, who announced last month he would pick woman vice presidential candidate, has been under increasing pressure from allies and advocacy groups to pick a black woman, which would serve as a recognition that black voters fueled his primary win and could do the same in November with big turnout in key battleground states.

“The choice of a black woman running mate is a motivating factor. That’s relevant. And it should be, and probably is, part of the Biden campaign’s calculations,” said Adrianne Shropshire, executive director of BlackPAC.

Biden has repeatedly said he’ll choose the best candidate who’s ready to be president on day one, if need be. He has said he has about a dozen potential picks in mind, among them California Sen. Kamala Harris, the only African-American woman who ran against him in the primary. The poll shows 50 percent of those surveyed view Harris favorably and 18 percent unfavorably, giving her a net favorability rating of 32 percentage points.

Georgia Democrats’ 2016 gubernatorial nominee Stacy Abrams, whom Biden advisers have also discussed as a running mate, has a net favorability rating of 36 points. Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, a Biden surrogate in Georgia and with black voters, is lesser-known than Harris and Abrams and has a net favorability rating of 17 points, as does Florida Rep. Val Demings.

BlackPAC’s Shropshire points out that black voters also like white women who are seen as strong Democratic champions, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has a 40-point favorability rating but isn’t in the running for Biden’s veep. Two other senators who ran against Biden in the primary — Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (+33 point rating) and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar (+17 points) — are also on his shortlist.

Biden had the highest net favorability rating in the poll: 58 percentage points.

Trump had the lowest rating: -59, 117 points worse than Biden...

The antipathy toward Trump is a “significant” reason for African-American turnout, Shropshire said. It has intensified due to the coronavirus, which 89 percent of black voters say is a real threat while 86 percent fear it will infect them or a family member.

Eight in 10 say the nation is on the wrong track.

“If there were black voters who were willing to give him some credit on the economy, that is gone,” she said. “That black people are paying with their lives for his incompetence on the coronavirus response, will be a motivating factor.”

Shropshire said there’s a contrast with 2016, when Republican voter suppression tactics, advertising from Trump, Russian disinformation and lack of enthusiasm for Clinton combined to keep black voter turnout relatively low and help deliver Rust Belt states and Florida to Trump by paper-thin margins. One reason for the survey, she said, was to identify those voters and find ways to bring them back and turn them out in November.

Of the subset of black voters who said they did not vote in 2016, 15 percent said Biden’s decision to pick a black woman running mate would make them more likely to turn out in November, and 23 percent said it would make them like him more — along with 8 percent of Trump’s black voters who said that as well, the poll showed.

“If we are in a position where we can get back these voters from the Obama coalition — who voted for Obama twice but didn’t vote in 2016 — it will have a significant impact on the election,” Shropshire said."

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...lack-vp-185043

[aja_christopher]

"Public health officials prod Trump’s team for minority data"

Former officials say the administration should adapt an Obama-era program using Medicare data to track viral infections by race, ethnicity and gender.

The Trump administration has yet to release comprehensive data about racial and ethnic outcomes in Covid-19 cases, despite the growing concerns about racial disparities and some former health officials urging Medicare to resurrect a similar Obama-era analysis. Medicare chief Seema Verma said at the White House daily briefing last week that her office would be providing such data “very shortly” but two officials in her department told POLITICO that no such release is imminent or has been marked as a priority.

Meanwhile, former Obama-era officials said they had prepared an analytical tool, based on Medicare billing data, to monitor the 2009-10 H1N1 outbreak, which allowed them to drill down into outcomes by race, ethnicity and gender. They expressed surprise that the Trump administration wasn’t adapting the system for coronavirus.

“If we saw disparities in vaccine uptake, or in hospitalizations, it gave us an early warning and allowed us to get ahead of them,” said Nicole Lurie, who led the health department’s emergency preparedness efforts during the Obama administration. “It was a very helpful early warning system, and could continue to be one.”

Lurie added that officials are currently operating with a piecemeal picture of Covid-19, relying on data published by some cities and states that suggests minority populations are at significant risk. For instance, African Americans make up 65 percent of coronavirus deaths in Chicago, according to real-time data posted by the city, despite representing about 30 percent of the population.

“You shouldn’t have to leave it to Chicago and Milwaukee to do this work,” Lurie said, urging the health department to publicize national data. “And we could get a real picture for seniors and the disabled, too.”

Lawmakers have warned that the Covid-19 outbreak is already significantly affecting minority populations, who are more likely to lack health insurance or serve as hourly employees who are either unable to leave work to social distance or fear they can’t afford to leave work. That raises the possibility that Covid-19 could find harbor in minority neighborhoods even after the country is reopened, perhaps spurring the likelihood of a second wave of infections.

Public health experts are increasingly frustrated, saying they are largely flying blind without public data on the racial and ethnic disparities. The Association of American Medical Colleges, which represents hundreds of hospitals, health systems and medical schools, on Friday called for a national system that would capture data on coronavirus patients based on race, ethnicity and other factors.

“Better data on the current pandemic will give us an opportunity to take decisive action to protect vulnerable communities and prevent further catastrophic outcomes,” said David Acosta, the AAMC’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, adding that the local data had shown “disturbing” disparities."

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...navirus-185074

[WestPhillyPunisher]

South Dakota’s governor resisted ordering people to stay home. Now it has one of the nation’s largest coronavirus hot spots.

As governors across the country fell into line in recent weeks, South Dakota’s top elected leader stood firm: There would be no statewide order to stay home.

Such edicts to combat the spread of the novel coronavirus, Gov. Kristi L. Noem said disparagingly, reflected a “herd mentality.” It was up to individuals — not government — to decide whether “to exercise their right to work, to worship and to play. Or to even stay at home.”

And besides, the first-term Republican told reporters at a briefing this month, “South Dakota is not New York City.”

But now South Dakota is home to one of the largest single coronavirus clusters anywhere in the United States, with more than 300 workers at a giant *pork-processing plant falling ill. With the case numbers continuing to spike, the company was forced to announce the indefinite closure of the facility Sunday, threatening the U.S. food supply.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Yet the man himself is a dead end in national primaries. Sanders himself was a weakness he couldn't overcome winning national elections.



The last few weeks has shown this not to be true.



You say that as though that's all Sanders capable of doing, when he could have done a whole lot more. His voice has been fading every year, he's an 80 year old man and this was his last shot at being president. Sanders hasn't got the juice you think he has, he's no Joe Manchin.



Does being sexist fall under the "trouble maker" brand? You're omitting how badly him losing has affected you emotionally. I get that but don't pretend it didn't happen. Everyone expects the GOP to get nasty, Democrats don't expect fellow Democrats to weaken their nominee where they're more vulnerable than they had to be when it comes to the general. You think Chris Matthews was out of line this year with Sanders? That was a tiny spec of the heat he was in for had Sanders won. Picture multiple news networks pumping takes like that 24/7. For months.




Biden's not going to win you over, you've made that very clear. What do you think of Bernie saying you should vote for him? Even he gets this and Sanders is very out of his depth in coalition building. Who said anything about the leftists going away? You do know that he didn't have much to do with those politicians getting elected. He wasn't their mentor or anything. Inspiring someone isn't a reason to give them credit when you do the actual work yourself.

This isn't all on Biden, either. Do you want Trump to have another 4 years after what's going on with Corona virus? That's what happens if Biden loses the general. I don't like him anymore than you do but I know when to be practical when the results will save millions of lives.

See the difference between you and me is that I’m more analytical in how I view politics. That’s why it’s inconceivable for you to see me move more to Sanders as the election went on. There’s only one candidate I donated to and went to rallies for. It wasn't Sanders it was Warren. In fact, I would even posit I did more for campaign than most anyone in this thread. The difference is that I follow politics enough that I knew very quickly she was out of the running and at that point I went to my second choice because he was quite frankly leading in the polls at that point and was only shot at a progressive nominee.

In fact if you look at my posts, I pretty much consistently said something to effect of that I thought Biden was likely winner and only Sanders and Warren had an outside shot if they could win the early states and build some momentum. I did that until Sanders surged in Iowa in a a way I didn’t expect. And by that point he was by most metrics and by most media considered a or the front runner At that point Sanders was in real position to win and Warren was underperforming in each state and tanking in the polls. It’s not hard to read tea leaves and if you care more about the policies, it’s easy to say “okay guess this guy is my best shot”. And if you really paid attention, after Biden defied all the polls on Super Tuesday, I was one of the first people to say it’s probably over in this thread. In fact, I generally tried to avoid debating Sanders for a few weeks after (but quite frankly the people that always make bad faith arguments about him and also claim they don’t want to relitigate 2016 and want unity surprisingly couldn’t help themselves and we know who they are).

When Warren jumped in, I viewed her as a candidate that would push progressive policies to win over that wing and also be less scary and obtrusive to moderates and more likely to have policy she could enact. You know who agreed with me? Virtually every poll that said former Clinton supporters felt the same way and that was where most of her support was. But it all rested on an early primary state strategy and was very easy to see she wasn’t going to rally back and the other progressive was making in roads there. So I had one choice in 2016 and picked that choice. I had only two choices for a real progressive in 2020, and I picked the one that wasn’t Sanders until it was clear it was a lost cause. You just view it more emotionally in terms of what you want and my actual actions and support rest more on viability and data.


To your second point, I think given the circumstances that was probably the best he could do. In another election where you had stronger candidates who had viability and an incentive to treat it like a normal primary and would have stayed in a bit longer (like the 2016 Republican primary where Rubio, Bush, and Cruz had attainable paths) he might have done better. However you basically had Biden and Sanders and then paper tigers who had no real chance that we’re quick to jump out last minute and throw what little support they had behind Biden enough for him to win some margins, and Warren supporters by and large were like me and were more pragmatic and jumped off a lost cause on ST (only her support overall did skew a bit more moderate so it benefitted Biden, which helped him significantly in MA).

But no realistically I viewed Sanders as unlikely for all but maybe a month and half and I had data and polls to justify it. So yeah I wasn’t surprised he didn’t win. I think your assessment that his voice means nothing now really has nothing tangible to back it up and is largely just “you don’t like Sanders so you want it to be true and are just stating it hoping it’s intangible enough to not argue” There’s a block of young voters that made up a good chunk of what made Obama win that listen Sanders and want those policies. Democrats are always going to want that support. They don’t want to lose youth support, they don’t want to be like Republicans who have to worry that they are the antiquated party without a future. Second again look at the makeup of the Senate man. If Democrats win, it’s going be so razor thin that they will need total unity to get any legislation passed. They can’t afford Sanders to hold up a bill because it’s not progressive enough. Well they can, but it probably means a lot of legislative losses. They also don’t really want AOC and the rest of the progressives in the house making life difficult, and again we know who all those people are loyal to. Also now that he’s probably not going to run again, he doesn’t really have to worry about whether he’s pissing off establishment Democrats. His next stop is retirement. Trust me read the tea leaves, if Biden wins, you’re going to see a lot of bills in the Senate that will be analyzed around “okay will Sanders join the party on this so we can get it done”. And yeah quite frankly. Young people without good insurance and student loan debt are never going to drop M4A or student loan debt forgiveness until it happens. Sorry moderates like Pete Buttigieg don’t make plans that literally have it in the plan name and people like Harris don’t go back and forth on it unless they see it as something viable and important to making in roads. The ship left the station when every primary debate became about that.

I would say it effected you more emotionally because you’re still bringing it up and making bad faith arguments about him. I actually tried to stop talking about him. Meanwhile people like you, Paul, Squirrel, shoo, etc still keep dragging these silly arguments on. I was ready to move on. It’s very clear this was more personal to you guys than you all let on. People who got what they wanted usually aren’t spending all their time talking about the loser. And again unfounded sexist argument that I could easily make a better case on your candidate about, but you couldn’t help it. Even before the first primary, I said many times, the only reasons I discuss him so much is because a group of your have hard on for complaining about him and most of your arguments are awful and in bad faith that you would scream bloody murder about if anybody used such non analytical hit posts against your favorite candidates (and yeah I see how much it bugs you all when thirty goes after Biden or Hillary or really any moderate, so... yeah let’s be real). I’m sitting here wondering why you are still obsessed about this. I’ve already detached and tried to move on to the next thing. You have no idea how uninteresting you’d thread has been for weeks. There’s probably the biggest crisis of our lifetimes going on and in every time I checked this thread it’s the same whiny “omg Sanders did this and his supporters are saying they won’t help”. You guys are so one track on that you don’t even see it. It’s just boring repetitive cycle that isn’t even dominating the national discourse now because most people don’t even care about the election right now.

As far as Biden, I said before, I’ll probably vote for him. Just like I voted for Hillary. I’m not voting for his policies (as most polls indicate most of his voters aren’t either) so I’ll probably be critical a lot about his shortcomings and him and his supporters will deal with it because I (and progressives who do vote for him) made the concession. There’s a give and take with that. But I’ll be very blunt, people like you and some others here definitely have similar people on line and as campaign surrogates for Biden and other moderates that did serious damage to building that bridge. So if Biden has a tough time trying to win, a lot of you are going to have to look in the mirror and realize what you did that made a very young, diverse, group of people very hostile to moderates. Hint “they don’t like being called sexist and racists because it was convenient politically”. Tbh I spent a good chunk of last night on twitter telling a hardcore Sanders supporter to vote for Biden. But honestly I think you guys might have already dug that grave a little too deep.

[Tami]

Independent Rep. Justin Amash says he’s looking ‘closely’ at White House run

Rep. Justin Amash (I-Mich.) said Monday that he’s considering a White House run against President Trump, a move that could pose a challenge to the president’s campaign for a second term.

Amash, who left the Republican Party last year and is seeking reelection to his Grand Rapids-area House seat as an independent, made the comment in a tweet responding to a statement by Trump on Monday night that as president, his “authority is total.”

“Americans who believe in limited government deserve another option,” the libertarian-leaning congressman tweeted. In a follow-up tweet to a supporter, he added, “Thanks. I’m looking at it closely this week.”

A spokesman for Amash did not respond to a request for comment.

Amash’s pronouncement came as Trump was making sweeping — and incorrect — claims about his presidential authority during Monday’s coronavirus task force briefing.

Even Joe Walsh is telling Justin Amash 'Don't do it'

[Tami]

My alma mater did good

FDA approves first saliva test for coronavirus

Researchers at Rutgers University now have a new tool to diagnose cases of COVID-19. With the authorization of the FDA, the school said on Monday, they now have clearance to use a new saliva test for coronavirus, which both expands the current testing options available and potentially signals a safer path forward for health care workers.

The test, which will initially be offered through hospitals and clinics affiliated with Rutgers, has the patient spit several times into a plastic tube, with that tube then analyzed for coronavirus at a laboratory. Compared to the current approach to testing, which involves a swab from the patient’s nose or throat, this test is both more convenient for patients and better for workers at risk of being exposed to the virus.