A reader is producing a documentary about the injustices inherent in our immigration system to “reignite the conversation on immigration.” The reader is crowdfunding the film and invites other readers to check out the website for DISPLACED, at www.displacedshortfilm.com.
Reader Chris Duncan is running for CA State Assembly District 74. He is opposing an anti-choice, pro-Trump MAGA Republican Assembly member. Check out Chris Duncan for Assembly District 74 | Southern California. https://www.votechrisduncan.com/
Here is a note from frequent “commenter” Jennifer Berg: Hello Bay Area fans of Robert! If you are interested in postcarding or letter writing (you know that effective method of engagement!), we are a group of resisters that meet every Saturday from 1-3 in Oakland. Snacks, postcards, and good conversation provided. If interested, email me at jennberg@comcast.net.
I am working on a legal problem, that being that undocumented workers in America cannot get Social Security retirement benefits no matter they have been paying SS and Medicare taxes during their working years.
I no longer check the White box when asked for my race. Where possible I check Other and write in Euro-American. Seems more consistent with Native American, Asian American, African American, etc. and doesn't have the stigma of white nationalism which I abhor. Texas is now a majority-minority state with white Republicans controlling state government. 92% of the population growth in Texas in the past ten years has come from Hispanic Americans. The non-Hispanic white population is not replacing itself with only 1.65 births per woman. A replacement fertility rate of 2.1 is required to sustain a population (births equal to deaths). The good news is that the younger generations experience more diversity hopefully making them more egalitarian.
Aug 5, 2022·edited Aug 5, 2022Liked by Robert B. Hubbell
I agree although my own approach is simply to refuse to answer the question since by law it must be an option to make that refusal. For several years I checked other and wrote “human” since race is in reality an artificial societal concept and in reality there are no “races.”
I have gone back and forth on which answer is better when asked to provide race and have finally decided that taking the stand that simply asking the question is offensive, the best way to make that point is not to provide an answer. On one occasion I noticed that someone taking details on a credit application (leasing a car)wrote “white” on the application when I refused to answer. I spoke up and requested they change the answer to refused to provide. The person told me they were required to make a guess. I explained they had “guessed” incorrectly and if they did not change the answer I would refuse to do business with the dealer. They changed the answer to “refused.”
There are some things on which it is important to take a stand.
Dave, Though I had considered “refusing to answer,” that option, particularly face-to-face, likely would be less of an option for some of the groups Cathy mentioned. Hence, the appeal, at least for me, of “Euro-American.”
I agree with Cathy’s approach also. The important point is to make a statement that asking the question is offensive. I understand this is done in an attempt to police discriminatory practices. However, there are better methods to do this.
Generally, if an individual feels they have been denied services, such as credit or others, they have an option to request a reason for the denial. If they feel the reason may not be valid, they have an opportunity to file a complaint. Examining a history of complaints on denial of service would be a valid way of doing so.
Comparing denials or declines on zip code of the applicant is how red lining is identified. If you are uncertain what red lining is you can get an explanation by searching for the term.
I also suggest searching for and reading up on the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which is a statement required from all financial institutions describing their policies regarding how they support their local communities through investing and lending in areas their deposits originate. It is a measure of a financial institutions commitment to serving their local communities.
All of these are possible without requiring an answer to the question - Race? - on a credit application.
May have paid off. The Kingdom and the UAE announced today that, come winter, if Europe faces an acute shortage of fuel, they can up their oil production substantially. ("Can" is not quite "will," but it's a big step forward. Two weeks ago, they were rattling off impossibilities.)
I'm beginning to think our President is the least vain leader in the world. He's not afraid to look like a schmuck, if he gets what he needs in the end. Totally out of date, of course, in our image-driven era. He sells the steak and not the sizzle.
The good man reasons that a fist bump with Prince Bloody Hands is a small price to pay for NATO, just as he reasoned that slamming down Joe Manchin, soul-satisfying as it might be, wouldn't get him lower drug prices or climate control regulations.
If only the country wanted an adult in the White House, his polls would look a lot better.
When someone recently complained about Biden not being in public enough, I responded "because he is WORKING!" So much of policy making is never seen on talking head shows and is often relegated to the back pages.
WOW! Thanks so much for sharing this email, Lionel. I'm in total agreement with your reader. Is she the author of the entirety of your post or is part of it your thoughts? And, may I share elsewhere?
I think the Heritage Foundation and CPAC need to learn what a republic is. Here is the Oxford definition of a republic: “a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.” To deny the people and elected representatives of a republic is ignorance!
To put it nicely, my talents do not lie in debate. The argument between if we are a democracy or a republic has plagued me for years. This has been the number one arguments I’ve received from my Cuban family in Miami and my republican friends for their support of the trump Republican Party. I always come up short in the discussions because I don’t have a clear understanding of the issue. Nor have I been able to develop a clear answer. I’ve tried to read up on the issue starting with their definitions yet they haven’t helped me fine the words to have enough confidence to speak on the issues. If there is anyone here who can break it down for me in simple terms, I’d be grateful. Any suggested reading would also be appreciated. Thank you.
Very simply, a republic has representatives who act on our behalf. We must vote for them. In that sense we are a republic. A democracy means that (literally) everyone gets to speak up and vote. No electoral college, thank you!
An example of democracy might be consensus circles attributed to Northeastern Indigenous tribes. Nothing was solved until everyone agreed on the outcome. As you can imagine, for an entire nation to do that would be impossibly long and frustrating.
Alas, what the Republicans are likely referring to is absolute control as in "Do what I say, because I am the boss." They are not representing people, but interests such as wealth and war. It's a parental and authoritarian approach. That isn't a republic actually, but as you can see, there is a trend toward anything but a democracy.
A piece of paper and a pencil - or tech equivalent - draw a line down center of paper. On the left side, write one thing your friends say; on the right side, one answer you might make or as many as occur to you until you're done.
On the left side, write another of your friends' arguments; on the right, respond.
Try practicing speaking aloud - w/ or wo/mirror - a little bit.
Start slowly. You can always say, as my Grandson Jacob used to when he was very young, "That's all I have to say now.' But: start.
I can still remember the first time I stood up and spoke my piece - in fear and trembling! And the first time I read from the Torah out loud and in public. Neither practicing nor crib notes allowed: and I couldn't recall a single Hebrew letter! !! My rabbi's wife stepped up. I did it creditably several times after that. VA, those memories are part of my treasure now and they make me compassionate and wiser and they make me laugh - and that's the best thing! L&B&L
Hey, Vivian. I followed this explanation linked below, sorta. The bottom line is the U.S. is a representative democracy. This is true whether you vote Republican or Democrat. I'd be interested to know what your Cuban family/friends use as a definition.
"A democracy is achieved by conducting free elections in which eligible people 1) vote on issues directly, known as a direct democracy, or 2) elect representatives to handle the issues for them, called a representative democracy."
This article uses very simple terms to explain the differences. My take-away is that though we vote for candidates directly (democracy), in presidential elections we use the electoral college (republic form of government?) who elect delegates to advance our votes in each state to determine who our president is going to be. This was supposed to, in my understanding, strike a balance between states (mostly rural like Wyoming) who had smaller populations compared to larger states (like Florida) with larger populations.
I’ve never gotten far enough to get a definition, they just start shouting at me that we’re a republic, repeatedly. They’ve used this argument no matter what issue we are talking about. I definitely going to do the exercise Ida recommended.
I don't know if your family and friends are trying to have a conversation with you or just trying to drown out your opinion with shouting. But if they are attempting a two-way conversation, you might politely respond to their yelling by asking that they please stop shouting at you so you can continue the conversation in a normal tone of voice. I'm impressed at your persistence with such a difficult audience. I have a friend of many years that I don't talk to anymore because he's so glued to his religious and political MAGA beliefs.
When we did talk about something even slightly political he would raise his voice very fast. I think it's because he needed to cling to his beliefs for emotional strength and my threatening them by citing facts panicked him so he got angry to defend the indefensible and end the conversation. Good luck!
I hope I am understanding you correctly. But I will ask: Do you think it's bad that we're a republic? Do they think it's bad that we're a republic? Because we are in the sense that we choose our Congress and President to represent us when it comes to making laws and such. I mean it'd be impossible to have a Zoom meeting with 330+ million people every day to decide every issue that a country needs to decide. In fact, I don't think a country exists that has a "direct democracy."
To me, Ida's recommendations are a good way to prepare for your next conversation, which by the way, I commend you for even trying.
Good luck. I hope to hear back that you made some progress!
Democracy Docket (Marc Elias) provides this link about the hearing on August 3, 2022, by the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration chaired by Amy Klobuchar. You can click on another link to see the full hearing, or read the "outtakes" provided by Democracy Docket. To start at the beginning, you need to scroll down to the bottom of the link and then work your way up.
Now that we can get the Inflation Reduction Act, Dems need to tee up
all the popular pieces of Build Back Better that are on the cutting floor and make Republicans vote against them. Voting against vets should be just the start of assembling a record of Republicans voting against popular sentiment. I don’t know how much impact that will have on gerrymandered red House district elections, but it could help with Senate races.
Dear readers in Missouri and Kentucky, from C-Span: "The Senate debated and voted on a resolution of ratification to allow Finland and Sweden to join NATO 95-1 with Rand Paul (R-KY) voting as “present.” Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) was the lone dissenting vote."
The senate would be a far better senior chamber without the presence of either. But for now, let's despise the fast running, fist pumping Josh Hawley.
Charles Brooker is running against Rand Paul this November. I donated a small amount early on to his campaign. I read that his chances of winning are not good. Here’s his home page if anyone wants to read more about him. https://charlesbooker.org/
It's a good website. Booker's message is solid. His resume is strong. How does he come across in interviews? What makes Paul so popular? Is it his obstinance? Curious? Oh wait, could it be that Kentucky is 86.25% white and well...
Almost any body would be better than Rand Paul. But I bet Paul is suddenly thinking Federal Aid to Eastern Kentucky is a good thing. No doubt a much better thing than Federal Aid to any other disaster struck state. No doubt he's saying "this time, it's different".
After reading Todays Edition I have come to two conclusions. The Republican Party as you have described it so well today has evolved into what’s it has become because voters in primary elections have supported candidates that are white Nationalists. Just look at Arizona , Texas and Michigan and the candidates they have elected. This will not change until these candidates are voted out of office.
The ads that were run in Kansas were middle of the road ads focused perfectly on the electorate demographics and very focused on the real issue facing voters. We can only hope that Democrats in the mid terms listen and learn from Kansas
Using horses in the rural parts of the state, "Alejandro Rangel-Lopez, 21, a Dodge City resident and the event’s organizer, said that the Vote Neigh campaign was designed as a fun way to reach younger, rural voters. They did well, he said."
If I were on the fence (pardon the pun!) about an issue, as a horse lover, this tactic would have won me over!
It doesn't matter that not every single Republican speaks at CPAC and supports the fascist, racist views promoted by The Heritage Society, if the GOP has the majority in Congress (as well as State legislators) they have the Speaker and Majority Leader position, they run committees and decide what bills to bring forward. The point is that this is a national election for the control of Congress. Under this circumstance there isn't a single good GOP candidate, even if individually they are acceptable. The messaging should make it clear that this election isn't between individual candidates, but between the Democrats and the Republicans for Congressional majority. If you don't want McConnell deciding the next Supreme Court judge and you don't want Jim Jordan as a committee chair, you cannot vote for any GOP Congressperson or Senator. Even our present hero Liz Cheney, is one more Congressperson closer to letting GOP take charge.
Whether it is Republicans cheering Victor Orban, or Il Duce DeSantis eliminating his political opponents in Florida, they are trying to take us over the cliff. I normally criticize the coverage in the Tampa Bay Times, but today's editorial on DeSantis' removal of the State Attorney (Andrew Warren) in Hillsborough County is spot on: https://tampabaytimes-fl.newsmemory.com/?publink=2e40ce26a_13485a9
Thank you, Annette. As we hear more comments about the former president's mounting legal troubles and somewhat diminishing standing in the Republican party, I have been thinking we need to start highlighting the dangers of DeSantis more. He is often mentioned as the most logical next Republican presidential candidate if TFG doesn't run. He should not get a free pass between now and the next presidential election just because he isn't quite as bad as the worst president in American history.
Aug 5, 2022·edited Aug 5, 2022Liked by Robert B. Hubbell
Your ironic description of contemporary GOP political beliefs as "unbelievable" caught my attention. "Unbelievable" is why the Nazis blindsided the Western world. "Unbelievable" is why Putin's outrageously cruel actions in Ukraine surprise us. "Unbelievable" is why a Supreme Court of judicial thugs was permitted to form, blindsiding American women in one particular. We turn a blind eye to the darkest side of human behavior at our own peril, and injustice to some gathers to injustice for all.
A reader is producing a documentary about the injustices inherent in our immigration system to “reignite the conversation on immigration.” The reader is crowdfunding the film and invites other readers to check out the website for DISPLACED, at www.displacedshortfilm.com.
Reader Chris Duncan is running for CA State Assembly District 74. He is opposing an anti-choice, pro-Trump MAGA Republican Assembly member. Check out Chris Duncan for Assembly District 74 | Southern California. https://www.votechrisduncan.com/
Here is a note from frequent “commenter” Jennifer Berg: Hello Bay Area fans of Robert! If you are interested in postcarding or letter writing (you know that effective method of engagement!), we are a group of resisters that meet every Saturday from 1-3 in Oakland. Snacks, postcards, and good conversation provided. If interested, email me at jennberg@comcast.net.
I am working on a legal problem, that being that undocumented workers in America cannot get Social Security retirement benefits no matter they have been paying SS and Medicare taxes during their working years.
In response to my note last night about Professor Tribe's WaPo article being behind a paywall, he directed me to this publicly available article in Slate: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/08/congress-fix-electoral-count-reform-flaw-january-six.html
I have received a handful of requests asking for a reference to the quote from The Heritage Foundation that was included in the newsletter. Here it is: https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/FP-80.pdf
I no longer check the White box when asked for my race. Where possible I check Other and write in Euro-American. Seems more consistent with Native American, Asian American, African American, etc. and doesn't have the stigma of white nationalism which I abhor. Texas is now a majority-minority state with white Republicans controlling state government. 92% of the population growth in Texas in the past ten years has come from Hispanic Americans. The non-Hispanic white population is not replacing itself with only 1.65 births per woman. A replacement fertility rate of 2.1 is required to sustain a population (births equal to deaths). The good news is that the younger generations experience more diversity hopefully making them more egalitarian.
I agree although my own approach is simply to refuse to answer the question since by law it must be an option to make that refusal. For several years I checked other and wrote “human” since race is in reality an artificial societal concept and in reality there are no “races.”
I have gone back and forth on which answer is better when asked to provide race and have finally decided that taking the stand that simply asking the question is offensive, the best way to make that point is not to provide an answer. On one occasion I noticed that someone taking details on a credit application (leasing a car)wrote “white” on the application when I refused to answer. I spoke up and requested they change the answer to refused to provide. The person told me they were required to make a guess. I explained they had “guessed” incorrectly and if they did not change the answer I would refuse to do business with the dealer. They changed the answer to “refused.”
There are some things on which it is important to take a stand.
I like and respect that approach. I like Cathy's too, but refusing to answer is much more impactful, especially if it becomes a trend.
Dave, Though I had considered “refusing to answer,” that option, particularly face-to-face, likely would be less of an option for some of the groups Cathy mentioned. Hence, the appeal, at least for me, of “Euro-American.”
I agree with Cathy’s approach also. The important point is to make a statement that asking the question is offensive. I understand this is done in an attempt to police discriminatory practices. However, there are better methods to do this.
Please supply better methods Bruce - and thanks. L&B&L
Generally, if an individual feels they have been denied services, such as credit or others, they have an option to request a reason for the denial. If they feel the reason may not be valid, they have an opportunity to file a complaint. Examining a history of complaints on denial of service would be a valid way of doing so.
Comparing denials or declines on zip code of the applicant is how red lining is identified. If you are uncertain what red lining is you can get an explanation by searching for the term.
I also suggest searching for and reading up on the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which is a statement required from all financial institutions describing their policies regarding how they support their local communities through investing and lending in areas their deposits originate. It is a measure of a financial institutions commitment to serving their local communities.
All of these are possible without requiring an answer to the question - Race? - on a credit application.
I, too, would be interested in knowing the better methods.
I don't disagree and hadn't considered wider possibilities; too early in the morning for conceptual thinking.
Will follow suit and write in "Euro-American." Thanks, Cathy.
In light of the above commentary, I will be considering other likely methods to answering this question.
Cathy, I was so affected by your decision that I plan to enlist every one of my contacts to spread the word. Gratefully, Barbara
What a great move! I’m 82 years old and from now on will officially — and proudly — be Euro-American.
From one of my "readers"
From: Sara Sheldon <ssheldon42@hotmail.com>
Subject: Biden's Much-Lampooned Hat in Hand Visit to the Saudis
Date: August 4, 2022 at 11:49:15 PM EDT
To: Lionel Spiro <lbspiro@gmail.com>
May have paid off. The Kingdom and the UAE announced today that, come winter, if Europe faces an acute shortage of fuel, they can up their oil production substantially. ("Can" is not quite "will," but it's a big step forward. Two weeks ago, they were rattling off impossibilities.)
I'm beginning to think our President is the least vain leader in the world. He's not afraid to look like a schmuck, if he gets what he needs in the end. Totally out of date, of course, in our image-driven era. He sells the steak and not the sizzle.
The good man reasons that a fist bump with Prince Bloody Hands is a small price to pay for NATO, just as he reasoned that slamming down Joe Manchin, soul-satisfying as it might be, wouldn't get him lower drug prices or climate control regulations.
If only the country wanted an adult in the White House, his polls would look a lot better.
"He sells the steak and not the sizzle" I love this.
Thanks for expressing all your reasons, which I will try to memorize and repeat to others.
When someone recently complained about Biden not being in public enough, I responded "because he is WORKING!" So much of policy making is never seen on talking head shows and is often relegated to the back pages.
WOW! Thanks so much for sharing this email, Lionel. I'm in total agreement with your reader. Is she the author of the entirety of your post or is part of it your thoughts? And, may I share elsewhere?
Jennifer Rubin's article in WaPo. This is a gifted link so nonsubscribers of WaPo can access it.
https://wapo.st/3Qm0PRn
I think the Heritage Foundation and CPAC need to learn what a republic is. Here is the Oxford definition of a republic: “a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.” To deny the people and elected representatives of a republic is ignorance!
To put it nicely, my talents do not lie in debate. The argument between if we are a democracy or a republic has plagued me for years. This has been the number one arguments I’ve received from my Cuban family in Miami and my republican friends for their support of the trump Republican Party. I always come up short in the discussions because I don’t have a clear understanding of the issue. Nor have I been able to develop a clear answer. I’ve tried to read up on the issue starting with their definitions yet they haven’t helped me fine the words to have enough confidence to speak on the issues. If there is anyone here who can break it down for me in simple terms, I’d be grateful. Any suggested reading would also be appreciated. Thank you.
Very simply, a republic has representatives who act on our behalf. We must vote for them. In that sense we are a republic. A democracy means that (literally) everyone gets to speak up and vote. No electoral college, thank you!
An example of democracy might be consensus circles attributed to Northeastern Indigenous tribes. Nothing was solved until everyone agreed on the outcome. As you can imagine, for an entire nation to do that would be impossibly long and frustrating.
Alas, what the Republicans are likely referring to is absolute control as in "Do what I say, because I am the boss." They are not representing people, but interests such as wealth and war. It's a parental and authoritarian approach. That isn't a republic actually, but as you can see, there is a trend toward anything but a democracy.
A piece of paper and a pencil - or tech equivalent - draw a line down center of paper. On the left side, write one thing your friends say; on the right side, one answer you might make or as many as occur to you until you're done.
On the left side, write another of your friends' arguments; on the right, respond.
Try practicing speaking aloud - w/ or wo/mirror - a little bit.
Start slowly. You can always say, as my Grandson Jacob used to when he was very young, "That's all I have to say now.' But: start.
L&B&L
Thanks, Ida. This is very helpful! Like Vivian, I get tongue-tied when trying to advance my beliefs to the other side.
I can still remember the first time I stood up and spoke my piece - in fear and trembling! And the first time I read from the Torah out loud and in public. Neither practicing nor crib notes allowed: and I couldn't recall a single Hebrew letter! !! My rabbi's wife stepped up. I did it creditably several times after that. VA, those memories are part of my treasure now and they make me compassionate and wiser and they make me laugh - and that's the best thing! L&B&L
Hooray for you, Ida! I bet it feels good to have the fear/trembling in check.
So, if you don't mind, L&B&L means? Inquiring minds want to know!
Love&Blessing&Laughter. And very few have ever asked Lynell - good on you!!
Are VA/MD/DC Virginia/Maryland/District of Columbia?
What a grand day it would be when we all could meet and greet! L&B&LLLLLL
Man!!! Wish I would have know about that earlier in life! THANK YOU so much.
Hey, Vivian. I followed this explanation linked below, sorta. The bottom line is the U.S. is a representative democracy. This is true whether you vote Republican or Democrat. I'd be interested to know what your Cuban family/friends use as a definition.
"A democracy is achieved by conducting free elections in which eligible people 1) vote on issues directly, known as a direct democracy, or 2) elect representatives to handle the issues for them, called a representative democracy."
This article uses very simple terms to explain the differences. My take-away is that though we vote for candidates directly (democracy), in presidential elections we use the electoral college (republic form of government?) who elect delegates to advance our votes in each state to determine who our president is going to be. This was supposed to, in my understanding, strike a balance between states (mostly rural like Wyoming) who had smaller populations compared to larger states (like Florida) with larger populations.
https://www.dictionary.com/e/democracy-vs-republic/
If you find something else that explains it better, I'd be all ears!
I’ve never gotten far enough to get a definition, they just start shouting at me that we’re a republic, repeatedly. They’ve used this argument no matter what issue we are talking about. I definitely going to do the exercise Ida recommended.
I don't know if your family and friends are trying to have a conversation with you or just trying to drown out your opinion with shouting. But if they are attempting a two-way conversation, you might politely respond to their yelling by asking that they please stop shouting at you so you can continue the conversation in a normal tone of voice. I'm impressed at your persistence with such a difficult audience. I have a friend of many years that I don't talk to anymore because he's so glued to his religious and political MAGA beliefs.
When we did talk about something even slightly political he would raise his voice very fast. I think it's because he needed to cling to his beliefs for emotional strength and my threatening them by citing facts panicked him so he got angry to defend the indefensible and end the conversation. Good luck!
I hope I am understanding you correctly. But I will ask: Do you think it's bad that we're a republic? Do they think it's bad that we're a republic? Because we are in the sense that we choose our Congress and President to represent us when it comes to making laws and such. I mean it'd be impossible to have a Zoom meeting with 330+ million people every day to decide every issue that a country needs to decide. In fact, I don't think a country exists that has a "direct democracy."
To me, Ida's recommendations are a good way to prepare for your next conversation, which by the way, I commend you for even trying.
Good luck. I hope to hear back that you made some progress!
I believe we are both, but I am not an expert! I will try to find some written by Professor Heather Cox Richardson on the subject.
Thank you Adele
Good and simple...and true, Adele!
WaPo article about the Electoral Count Reform Act - gifted for nonsubscribers:
https://wapo.st/3P3nReJ
Democracy Docket (Marc Elias) provides this link about the hearing on August 3, 2022, by the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration chaired by Amy Klobuchar. You can click on another link to see the full hearing, or read the "outtakes" provided by Democracy Docket. To start at the beginning, you need to scroll down to the bottom of the link and then work your way up.
https://www.democracydocket.com/alerts/live-updates-u-s-senate-committee-hearing-on-electoral-count-act-reform/
THANK YOU!!!
Now that we can get the Inflation Reduction Act, Dems need to tee up
all the popular pieces of Build Back Better that are on the cutting floor and make Republicans vote against them. Voting against vets should be just the start of assembling a record of Republicans voting against popular sentiment. I don’t know how much impact that will have on gerrymandered red House district elections, but it could help with Senate races.
Dear readers in Missouri and Kentucky, from C-Span: "The Senate debated and voted on a resolution of ratification to allow Finland and Sweden to join NATO 95-1 with Rand Paul (R-KY) voting as “present.” Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) was the lone dissenting vote."
The senate would be a far better senior chamber without the presence of either. But for now, let's despise the fast running, fist pumping Josh Hawley.
Working on that but, since he's not up for election this time, we're trying to flip Roy Blunt's seat.
May the Force be with you. So sorry McCaskill doesn't still represent you.
That makes two of us. I'd even take a John Danforth clone over Hawley. The Force is with me always, not sure which side right now.
Charles Brooker is running against Rand Paul this November. I donated a small amount early on to his campaign. I read that his chances of winning are not good. Here’s his home page if anyone wants to read more about him. https://charlesbooker.org/
It's a good website. Booker's message is solid. His resume is strong. How does he come across in interviews? What makes Paul so popular? Is it his obstinance? Curious? Oh wait, could it be that Kentucky is 86.25% white and well...
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/2021/01/22/kentucky-must-face-ugly-realities-systemic-racism-achieve-equity/4245376001/
Almost any body would be better than Rand Paul. But I bet Paul is suddenly thinking Federal Aid to Eastern Kentucky is a good thing. No doubt a much better thing than Federal Aid to any other disaster struck state. No doubt he's saying "this time, it's different".
Charles Blow article in NY Times - gifted for nonsubscribers
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/03/opinion/republican-party-anti-democracy.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuomT1JKd6J17Vw1cRCfTTMQmqxCdw_PIxftm3iWka3DFDm4ZiOMNAo6B_EGKf6d7etE33j-SQppZOaUzVbl7yPNeekBgTg6juJKPidIFPyAx48qVb18B4qjsD_o-4CO4KS6wMvt-z7my-EnZYWW-CvDYzSV2cVx6pZpvckWhjHIM2qeWRbZy0tZ62a11AotoBmtVPFn8tPHqCRR-OdqEbwiNqVVlHrEEBkyA2IKU-LkCcw5NCFPZTX8Z4Gg069xUOdJ_L7-oZld7O5K42eNNfzQueIS5BJQxRJzWn6FotNPPrx-Mz8m0zpYmBYSGGGFyjGWkuccji_6DU3E&smid=url-share
Thank you!
Thank you!
After reading Todays Edition I have come to two conclusions. The Republican Party as you have described it so well today has evolved into what’s it has become because voters in primary elections have supported candidates that are white Nationalists. Just look at Arizona , Texas and Michigan and the candidates they have elected. This will not change until these candidates are voted out of office.
The ads that were run in Kansas were middle of the road ads focused perfectly on the electorate demographics and very focused on the real issue facing voters. We can only hope that Democrats in the mid terms listen and learn from Kansas
Using horses in the rural parts of the state, "Alejandro Rangel-Lopez, 21, a Dodge City resident and the event’s organizer, said that the Vote Neigh campaign was designed as a fun way to reach younger, rural voters. They did well, he said."
If I were on the fence (pardon the pun!) about an issue, as a horse lover, this tactic would have won me over!
A great example how candidates need to be creative and focus on local voters.
So much to absorb, a classic to save and reread to gain the full benefit of how to engage. Thanks
It doesn't matter that not every single Republican speaks at CPAC and supports the fascist, racist views promoted by The Heritage Society, if the GOP has the majority in Congress (as well as State legislators) they have the Speaker and Majority Leader position, they run committees and decide what bills to bring forward. The point is that this is a national election for the control of Congress. Under this circumstance there isn't a single good GOP candidate, even if individually they are acceptable. The messaging should make it clear that this election isn't between individual candidates, but between the Democrats and the Republicans for Congressional majority. If you don't want McConnell deciding the next Supreme Court judge and you don't want Jim Jordan as a committee chair, you cannot vote for any GOP Congressperson or Senator. Even our present hero Liz Cheney, is one more Congressperson closer to letting GOP take charge.
Whether it is Republicans cheering Victor Orban, or Il Duce DeSantis eliminating his political opponents in Florida, they are trying to take us over the cliff. I normally criticize the coverage in the Tampa Bay Times, but today's editorial on DeSantis' removal of the State Attorney (Andrew Warren) in Hillsborough County is spot on: https://tampabaytimes-fl.newsmemory.com/?publink=2e40ce26a_13485a9
Thanks for the link! I would not have seen that.
Thank you, Annette. As we hear more comments about the former president's mounting legal troubles and somewhat diminishing standing in the Republican party, I have been thinking we need to start highlighting the dangers of DeSantis more. He is often mentioned as the most logical next Republican presidential candidate if TFG doesn't run. He should not get a free pass between now and the next presidential election just because he isn't quite as bad as the worst president in American history.
Your ironic description of contemporary GOP political beliefs as "unbelievable" caught my attention. "Unbelievable" is why the Nazis blindsided the Western world. "Unbelievable" is why Putin's outrageously cruel actions in Ukraine surprise us. "Unbelievable" is why a Supreme Court of judicial thugs was permitted to form, blindsiding American women in one particular. We turn a blind eye to the darkest side of human behavior at our own peril, and injustice to some gathers to injustice for all.