All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Twitter Link

Protesters Arrested at Joe Biden’s Des Moines Campaign Office



Not sure what to make of this.

What the hell were they protesting? That's what I want to know.

-----

Trump’s legal team gave thousands in contributions to Republican senators ahead of impeachment trial

We're talking flat out gangster grease the palms **** here. And in plain sight to boot.

[Tami]

Me either because the actual article and headline of the article never mentions sanders supporters, just says protestors. Only the random twitter person linking the article is saying that

That is Biden's Twitter account, and here's more info:

BREAKING: 30 @CCIAction and @IAStudentAction
members are refusing to leave @JoeBiden’s statewide headquarters in Des Moines over his lies about #MedicareForAll and his ties to the insurance company CEOs who are funding his campaign.

Twitter Link

[Michael Watkins]

Me either because the actual article and headline of the article never mentions sanders supporters, just says protestors. Only the random twitter person linking the article is saying that

https://apnews.com/f212a54ba1f2164023017cdb96611dc7

A news release from the Citizens for Community Improvement Action Fund said the five were members of the organization or Iowa Student Action. The two groups were demanding an audience with the former vice president to challenge what they said were his lies about the Medicare for All proposals being advanced by U.S. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, two other candidates remaining in the Iowa caucuses campaign.




you two neglected to mention Warren. i wonder why. doesn't fit your narrative?

[Tami]

Here’s the remaining trash from trumps Wildwood, NJ rally.
Mind you, this video doesn’t include all the supporters that attended!
Whole lotta trash!

Twitter Link with Video

[Theleviathan]

https://apnews.com/f212a54ba1f2164023017cdb96611dc7

A news release from the Citizens for Community Improvement Action Fund said the five were members of the organization or Iowa Student Action. The two groups were demanding an audience with the former vice president to challenge what they said were his lies about the Medicare for All proposals being advanced by U.S. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, two other candidates remaining in the Iowa caucuses campaign.




you two neglected to mention Warren. i wonder why. doesn't fit your narrative?

The group have both formally endorsed Bernie, so I don't think that's out of line to call them Bernie supporters.

So, what's your narrative now?

[Superbat]

Why does Joe Biden keep losing his cool with voters?

The Democrat had the latest in a series of bizarre encounters with voters on Tuesday, telling a man who asked about the climate crisis to ‘go vote for someone else’

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...box=1580309466

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Twitter Link with Video

I wonder if trash removal was factored into the cost of Trump's appearance in Wildwood? A bill he'll inevitably stiff the city for like he's stiffed other cities he's held his "Me First, America Second" rallies in?

[Michael Watkins]

The group have both formally endorsed Bernie, so I don't think that's out of line to call them Bernie supporters.

So, what's your narrative now?

that you lied by omission. they aren't connected to Sanders.

are these the scary "bernie bros" that you're always railing against?

[Theleviathan]

that you lied by omission. they aren't connected to Sanders.

are these the scary "bernie bros" that you're always railing against?

I'm simply pointing out a fact. They are "Bernie Supporters". That is a fact, one you seemed to be trying to weasel out of.

Bernie Bros? I don't know. Idiots? Yeah. Connected to Bernie? Doubtful. However, when your go to is "Bernie ignites passion" that can be true and it can be largely positive, but there will be a lot of ugliness and stupidity dredged up in that passion too.

[Michael Watkins]

I'm simply pointing out a fact. They are "Bernie Supporters". That is a fact, one you seemed to be trying to weasel out of.

Bernie Bros? I don't know. Idiots? Yeah. Connected to Bernie? Doubtful. However, when your go to is "Bernie ignites passion" that can be true and it can be largely positive, but there will be a lot of ugliness and stupidity dredged up in that passion too.

it was a non violent protest. they refused to leave knowing that they'd be arrested. and that's what happened. there was nothing thrown or broken. no one was harmed. i'd say that "passionate" is a good description. i'd say that ugliness is just your biased view of people speaking their mind in a way that offends you. they are using Biden's record against him. that's above board.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLJv9hTMcD0

[Jack Dracula]

To be fair, there is no question that the system is deeply rigged against anyone wanting to change the status quo actually being able to. That we even got the ACA at all was a miracle.

That said, as nice as it would be to see a sweeping tide of progressive change THIS YEAR, where we get everything we want and keep it for several elections, allowing us to reshape America closer to the progressive ideal than the regressive nightmare of the last several years, the fact that we haven’t really had the kind of ‘sweeping change’ to policy that progressives want more than two or three times since all of American history? Says we should focus on the wins we CAN get, and make sure those wins stick by not throwing our votes at protest candidates or refusal to participate at all because our perfect candidate didn’t get the nomination, and we need to stop trying to force the kind of all-at-once change that benefits the people most in need, but scares the easily befuddled into voting for the enemy...though, that being said, if you are the sort who refuses to vote in support of the marginalized and underrepresented because some aggressive progressive scared your feelings, like Joe Rogan’s core audience of neck beards and incels? Screw you.

In order for the kinds of changes in bold above to happen in one administration the overlaying problem of campaign finance reform needs to be fixed first. Without that, I just don't see any significant gains being made no matter which Democrat is elected.

[Tami]

Q&A time in the Senate

[Theleviathan]

it was a non violent protest. they refused to leave knowing that they'd be arrested. and that's what happened. there was nothing thrown or broken. no one was harmed. i'd say that "passionate" is a good description. i'd say that ugliness is just your biased view of people speaking their mind in a way that offends you. they are using Biden's record against him. that's above board.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLJv9hTMcD0

It's possible to be passionate and not a dink.

[Jack Dracula]

Trump’s Digital Advantage Is Freaking Out Democratic Strategists

Democrats may want to remind these people of Trumps earlier feud with the Pope.

If they're devout that should give them something to consider before voting.

[aja_christopher]

Republicans need to be removed from power.

----
"Appeals Court Finds Arizona Intended To Suppress Nonwhite Votes"

"The national conversation around voting rights is deeply skewed. Republican lawmakers and operatives openly endorse disenfranchisement; they brag when their attacks on suffrage succeed; and they work feverishly to rig redistricting in favor of white people. But all too often, judges refuse to acknowledge the racism of voter suppression laws, dancing around the purpose of these measures. Only rarely will a court admit what every reasonable observer should already know: The disproportionate impact of these laws on minority voters is no coincidence; it is exactly what legislators intended.

It is refreshing, then, that on Monday the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not tiptoe around the bald facts: Arizona Republicans' recent crackdown on voting rights was motivated by racism. The court invalidated a law that was plainly designed to stop Native American, Hispanic, and black voters from casting a ballot — not just because it happened to burden minorities more than whites, but because it is flat-out racist.

Arizona's “long history of race-based voting discrimination” combined with legislators “false, race-based claims of voter fraud unmistakably reveal an intent to discriminate on the basis of race", the 9th Circuit announced. The Supreme Court’s conservative justices may well reverse the ruling. But the 9th Circuit will at least force SCOTUS to confront the reality that white supremacy remains a driving force in Republican’ assault on the franchise, despite Chief Justice John Roberts’ declaration that racism is a historical relic."

One key reason for this disparity is the state’s own crusade to shutter polling places following the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which let Arizona change its voting laws without federal approval. Maricopa County, where more than 60 percent of Arizonans reside, slashed the number of polling places by 70 percent between 2012 and 2016. The county was disproportionately likely to close polling places in minority communities. These closures forced people of color to travel much farther than whites to reach their assigned polling places—raising the probability that they would mistakenly vote elsewhere in the precinct.

Under the “results test” of the Voting Rights Act, states may not enact laws with a disparate impact on minority voters that is linked to “social and historical conditions” of racism. “Extensive and uncontradicted evidence,” the court explained, proves precisely such an impact here. Arizona has a long history of racist voting restrictions, one that “has continued to the present day.” Election officials did not just close polling places in nonwhite neighborhoods; they also misled Spanish-speaking voters—by, for instance, claiming that the Nov. 6, 2012, election would be held on Nov. 8 in an official Spanish elections guide, a mistake mysteriously absent from the English-language pamphlet. And these officials provided the wrong translation of a ballot measure on Spanish-language ballots in an apparent effort to confuse voters. All of these factors, the court held, render Arizona’s OOP policy unlawful under the VRA.

The court then turned to H.B. 2023, which would forbid activists and community organizers from collecting absentee ballots and turning them in to election officials. White voters rarely vote in this manner, but minorities—especially Latino voters, including those who are elderly and disabled—rely upon third parties to collect their ballots. There is no evidence that this practice, sometimes derided as “ballot harvesting,” led to fraud in Arizona. Yet in 2016, the Legislature criminalized it, subjecting violators to felony charges.

Because H.B. 2023 indisputably affects minorities more than whites, the court found that it violated the VRA’s results test. But it went much further, also accusing the Arizona Legislature of intentional race discrimination in enacting the legislation, in violation of both the VRA and the 15th Amendment. The evidence for that claim is overwhelming. When Arizona first tried to pass this ban in 2011, the state’s elections director admitted to the Department of Justice that it was “targeted at voting practices in predominantly Hispanic areas.” Rather than face rejection from the DOJ, Arizona withdrew the measure. Supporters of H.B. 2023, the court wrote, used “false allegations and racial innuendo” to pass the bill.

After Shelby County, however, the state no longer needed the DOJ’s approval, and Republicans sought to reenact it. To support their allegations of voter fraud, GOP legislators circulated what the court called a “racially charged video,” created by Maricopa County Republican Chair A.J. LaFaro, that showed a Latino man lawfully dropping off ballots. LaFaro added “racially tinged and inaccurate commentary” asserting that the man may have been “an illegal alien” and was definitely “a thug.”

Arizona Sen. Don Shooter, who spearheaded H.B. 2023, made “demonstrably false” allegations of fraud, and his efforts to limit ballot collection were motivated by the “high degree of racial polarization in his district.” Put simply, he needed to suppress Latino turnout to keep his seat. (Shooter was later expelled from the Legislature for serial sexual harassment.)"

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...on-racist.html