DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
.
Would help if he'd join the party he says he wants to lead. I mean would Labour supporters be happy with someone who refuses to join the Labour party being the party leader?
Would help if he'd join the party he says he wants to lead. I mean would Labour supporters be happy with someone who refuses to join the Labour party being the party leader?
On Friday, the U.S. congratulated Juan Orlando Hernández on what it said was his re-election as president of Honduras. The U.S. State Department’s congratulations to Hernández came a month into a standoff between the government and the opposition over the vote tally, and five days after the Honduran electoral commission, which is controlled by Hernández-installed allies, declared him the winner.
The State Department message came amid continuing vote-fraud allegations by the opposition, journalists, and foreign observers. The Organization of American States had announced on December 17 that the purported victory was “impossible” to verify, and called for a new, clean election.
Despite the U.S. embassy’s calls earlier this month for a “transparent, impartial” and “credible” vote count, the U.S. has been working behind the scenes for weeks urging the Honduran opposition to shut down protests calling for a full recount or a new election.
Salvador Nasralla, the opposition candidate who held the lead when the public vote count was halted, told me on December 7 that U.S. officials “don’t want there to be any demonstrations” — “ellos no quieren que haya manifestaciones,” he said in Spanish.
Nasralla said that he been meeting with Deputy Assistant Secretary of State John Creamer as well as with Heide Fulton, the acting U.S. ambassador to Honduras who Nasralla said he had spoken to by phone hours before our interview in Tegucigalpa. Creamer is a former top aide to retired Gen. John Kelly, the influential White House chief of staff who has referred to Hernández as a “great guy” and a “good friend.” (Hernández has responded in kind, calling Kelly a “great friend” and “someone who opens many doors.”)
When I asked Nasralla if the U.S. officials wanted him to stop the marches, he replied, “Yes, [they want] that they be stopped, that we calm the people down.” (In Spanish, he said, “Sí, que paren. Que tranquilicemos a la gente.”
Then why doesn't he form his own bloody party and leave the Democratic Party to get on with things. He's like the pesky kid in the playground who doesn't want to join in a game. Just wants to disrupt it then cries when they don't want to play with him.I'm not surprised he wants to keep a certain distance from the Democratic Party, it's probably one of the reasons why he's so popular.
Then why doesn't he form his own bloody party and leave the Democratic Party to get on with things. He's a pest.
The presidential seal has been replaced by an eagle bearing President Trump’s signature. The eagle’s head faces right, not left, as on the seal. The 13 arrows representing the original states have disappeared. And the national motto, “E pluribus unum” — a Latin phrase that means “Out of many, one” — is gone.
Instead, both sides of the coin feature Trump’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.”
The changes don’t stop there. In addition to his signature, Trump’s name appears three times on the coin, which is thicker than those made for past presidents. And forget the traditional subdued silver and copper: Trump’s coin, a White House aide marveled, is “very gold.”
Wtf?Relatively small potatoes, but it feels very emblematic of the narcissistic, insecure twat.
It’s ‘very gold’: The presidential coin undergoes a Trumpian makeover
No, of course it isn't. My point stands though, there is a widening gulf between the UN and the US, with the US coming under more and more criticism. As they are a major donor, it is somewhat naive to heap condemnation on a country, then expect it to pay up as usual.Is the rest of the world beholden to the US, no matter what?
What the ani UNers in the US need to ask themselves is why that organization denigrates the US. In this case it's because the US unconditionally backs the right wing gov of Israel continuing to occupy and brutalize the Palestinians.
Tacky, but what else would one expect?Relatively small potatoes, but it feels very emblematic of the narcissistic, insecure twat.
It’s ‘very gold’: The presidential coin undergoes a Trumpian makeover
Then why doesn't he form his own bloody party and leave the Democratic Party to get on with things. He's like the pesky kid in the playground who doesn't want to join in a game. Just wants to disrupt it then cries when they don't want to play with him.
He's had decades to join the party and help shape it. I'd have loved to have seen that. Now he and his supporters just want to destroy it.
You'll probably say, 'Oh that's a good thing.'. Sure, revolution's just round the corner. Yup.
for the removal of ANY lingering doubt that there is a racist cunt as President
Trump administration officials, under pressure from the White House to provide a rationale for reducing the number of refugees allowed into the United States next year, rejected a study by the Department of Health and Human Services that found that refugees brought in $63 billion more in government revenues over the past decade than they cost.
The draft report, which was obtained by The New York Times, contradicts a central argument made by advocates of deep cuts in refugee totals as President Trump faces an Oct. 1 deadline to decide on an allowable number. The issue has sparked intense debate within his administration as opponents of the program, led by Mr. Trump’s chief policy adviser, Stephen Miller, assert that continuing to welcome refugees is too costly and raises concerns about terrorism.
State Democrats spent Monday announcing nine new candidates – including six women – in their 2018 effort to break Republicans’ veto-proof majority in the state legislature.
In North Carolina, the elections for state legislative seats aren’t until November 2018, and the deadline for candidates to file (Feb. 28, 2018) is still more than two months away. In the meantime there might be more women of either party to sign up to run for what has always been a male-dominated state legislature.
One of those parents, José Fuentes, presented himself to immigration officers at the border, along with his 1-year-old son Mateo, to claim asylum in November. The family had fled El Salvador with a caravan of asylum seekers because of gang violence, said Mr. Fuentes’s wife, Olivia Acevedo.
After four days of being held in custody together, Mr. Fuentes was transferred to a detention facility more than 1,000 miles away, in San Diego, Calif., while their son was held in a facility for children in Laredo, Tex.
For six days afterward, Ms. Acevedo said, she, her husband and their lawyers could not confirm where Mateo was. They were terrified. “Can you imagine?” she said in Spanish in a telephone interview from Mexico, where she remains with the couple’s other son, Andrée, who is 4. “It’s inhuman to take a baby from its parents.”
Not shit, stuff to help fix the shit. More of this please!
NC Democrats announce new candidates, and they’re almost all women
2/3 but still good.
Surely it's their policies which will matter, not their sex?
Wouldn't that be nice
Surely it's their policies which will matter, not their sex?
President Trump kicked off his holiday weekend at Mar-a-Lago Friday night at a dinner where he told friends, "You all just got a lot richer," referencing the sweeping tax overhaul he signed into law hours earlier. Mr. Trump directed those comments to friends dining nearby at the exclusive club — including to two friends at a table near the president's who described the remark to CBS News — as he began his final days of his first year in office in what has become known as the "Winter White House."
The president has spent many weekends of his presidency so far at the "Winter White House," where initiation fees cost $200,000, annual dues cost $14,000, and some of the most affluent members of society have the opportunity to interact with the president in a setting while many Americans cannot. This weekend, the president arrived after signing the most consequential legislation, and arguably, the greatest achievement, of his presidency thus far.
If support for Sanders came from outside the Democratic Party, my suggestion would be that he build his base of support either within a different party, or found his own. I genuinely don't understand the obsession with dragging the Democratic party in a direction most members don't want, rather than trying to influence its direction by discussion, listening to the base and yes, compromise.
African Americans have a narrower range of experiences in America because of the constraints of white supremacy. There was literal segregation of public spaces and services that in parts of America that was still in place during my lifetime. There were "Sundown Towns" elsewhere, and "zoning policies" that barred Black folks from renting or buying in some areas. There were government backed programmes like New Deal and the GI Bill that weren't open to Black Americans, but set up a whole cohort of white blue collar folks with greater financial and social stability they could pass on through the generations. Many Trade Unions excluded Black workers, and shop floors were often segregated with jobs occupied by white workers attracting better salaries and conditions. Even now, we see white supremacy at work in the way communities are policed, how crises are managed (or not), how education is resourced, etc. White people, even those that are poorer with limited opportunities still don't suffer the limitations POC do within a white supremacist nation.
There is information out there that shows African Americans backed Clinton because they liked her policies and they generally aren't convinced by the message Sanders and his followers are giving out even now. For example, you've mentioned universal health care and free education. I've posted lots of links before, but it's not hard to find articles, blogs and social media discussions from African Americans explaining exactly why they aren't convinced by the "if it's good for everyone, it will be good for you" argument. History tells us that "universal programmes" can still exclude some people (see New Deal, GI Bill, etc.) and it tends to be the people who are already more advantaged get the most from these. And, you'll also see that they're not buying the idea that Sanders' approach will bring an end to structural racism or the mechanisms of white supremacy because well, they don't actually address them at all.
In a recent Ohio Rally, Trump said, "I think that the vast majority of Trump supporters are people who are in pain, who are struggling economically, who are worried to death that their kids are going to be in even worse shape economically than they are, and they turned to Trump because Trump said things that made sense." Back in March, he said, "Some people think that the people who voted for Trump are racists and sexists and homophobes and deplorable folks. I don't agree . . ." He's has said similar things on other occasions. His continuing refusal to genuinely acknowledge and condemn the racism of Trump and his supporters undermines efforts to "reach out" to Black Americans.
You said, "Your suggestion they "prefer" Clinton sounds like bollocks and a lot of African Americans would have liked Sanders policies like universal health care and free education." Black voters aren't stupid. They understood the respective policies of Clinton and Sanders, and of Clinton and Trump and made their choices who to support accordingly. I'd suggest so long as Sanders fails to acknowledge the magnitude of white supremacy in the US and persists with the fantasy that universal social programmes and wealth redistribution will make that all go away, he's never going to get significant numbers of African Americans to back him. My worry is he's too afraid of alienating his own base of support, who either think the whole racism thing is over-blown and/or frankly don't want to critically examine their own part in perpetuating white supremacy. So, sadly, I think he'll still be chasing that unicorn disaffected, economically anxious, blue collar Trump supporter who just needs a bit of tlc and they'll convert the Sanders cause. Maybe someone will follow him who does have the have the courage to leave the comfort zone, but I'm not seeing signs of that yet.
Bollocks.Wanted to reply properly to this when I had time, because while other posters have pointed out some of your logic quirks, there are some really serious points here to discuss.
Firstly, it's a two party system, so just founding a new party isn't that quite straightforward - Sanders reached an audience that would never have been possible if he hadn't campaigned within the Democratic Party. And I think that was the right thing to do. I wish, I really wish, that Sanders had gone further, and having reached that wide audience by running for the Dem nomination he had stood as an independent in the Presidential election and used that to build a new party. This was easily achievable - at one point he had 550,000 people contributing to his campaign on monthly direct debits, most of them outside of the Dems, which could have provided the basis for a new party. Possibly you will feel that people shouldn't use your party for their own agenda's. I really don't care - the Dems are the political representatives of capital and big business. The people who own and control your party are the enemy. There is nothing useful about the Democrats whatsoever, except that it provided a platform for Sanders. Which he wasted, the silly reformist fuck.
First of all, nobody is denying that for the majority of black Americans (not all) their life experiences are more limited than white/wealthy people. That's also the case by the way for working class people in relation to wealthy people. But fuck your noise about black Americans being somehow more homogenous as a racial group. Seriously, fuck off.
You are correct to say that universal programs in the past have excluded people. That does not mean on any level that Black Americans dont support free healthcare and free education, and I guarantee you will produce no evidence that a majority of Black Americans feel that way. As for Black Americans supporting Clinton's policies, what fucking policies? All she offered was a continuation of Obama. As for bringing an end to structural racism, nobody thought Sanders was going to achieve that, obviously a Presidential election was never gonna solve that problem whoever the candidate was - are you trying to claim Clinton was going to eradicate structural racism? You're chucking shit to see what sticks because you oppose free healthcare and free education and you don't want a genuine political alternative for working class people (Black or otherwise) to develop.
Sanders isn't perfect by any means - but he sees what you can't. Because he's right - the majority of Trump voters are people who are struggling economically and who chose "something different" to the "more of the same pain" Clinton offered. Clinton was the most establishment Presidential candidate in history. She went on telly promising to put coal miners out of jobs and demanding to know why she wasn't ahead in the polls. Trump said he would create jobs. Do you not see how this was not a good strategy? Clinton was literally the only candidate that could have lost to Trump and the fact that she did does not make millions of ordinary working class people racists.
Everyone is painfully aware that vicious, systemic racism remains one of the most oppressive elements of US capitalism. Sanders has done a lot more to challenge that than you and your fucking Democrat scum politicians, you dirty scab.
Bollocks.
Merry Christmas!