Tag Archives: tuesday

Here’s What Today’s Primary Voters Think About the Planet’s Most Important Issue

by JenniHarlow Posted on April 26, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Residents of five Northeastern states are voting Tuesday in crucial presidential primary contests. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton has a chance to all but clinch the nomination with a strong showing. On the Republican side, Donald Trump is looking for massive victories that could put him one step closer to securing a majority of the delegates at the GOP convention in Cleveland.

The presidential election will, of course, have enormous implications for a range of issues—but some of the biggest consequences will relate to the fight against global warming. Clinton essentially wants to continue President Barack Obama’s climate policies. Her opponent, Bernie Sanders, wants to go even further by enacting a carbon tax. Trump and his closest rival, Ted Cruz, are both outspoken climate change deniers. John Kasich is somewhat less extreme on the issue but has still made contradictory statements about the science, and he refuses to commit to any meaningful action.

But what do the voters think?

Back on March 1—as a dozen or so states around the country voted on Super Tuesday—we pointed out that the electorate that day contained an awful lot of deniers. Less than half of adults in those states—48 percent—agreed with the scientific consensus that humans are mostly responsible for recent warming, according to data from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. Drawing from more than 13,000 interviews, the Yale researchers used a complicated statistical model to estimate the 2014 views of residents of every state, county, and congressional district on key climate science and policy questions.

This Tuesday, the voters look a bit different than they did on March 1. Residents of the Northeast hold some of the country’s most progressive (and accurate) views on climate change, according to the Yale study. Small majorities in most of Tuesday’s state’s—as well as in nearby New York, which voted last week—embrace the scientific consensus.

Here’s another way to crunch the same data. The researchers combined people who said global warming is caused mostly by humans with those who attribute it to both humans and nature. They also combined two kinds of climate science deniers: people who think the warming is natural and those who don’t think the planet is getting warmer at all.

Those numbers look pretty good for science, especially when you compare them with those from some of the Southern states that voted on Super Tuesday.

But here’s the thing: Trump may insist global warming is a “hoax,” but that isn’t stopping him from winning in states where most people understand he’s wrong. He won Massachusetts and Vermont on Super Tuesday. He won overwhelmingly in New York last week. And he’s leading in the polls in every state voting Tuesday.

That’s probably because voters in Republican primaries don’t have the same views on science as the average resident of their states. In New Hampshire, for instance, large majorities of Democrats and independents say humans are the main cause of global warming. But only a small minority of Republicans agree. Trump won New Hampshire by 20 percentage points.

Original post: 

Here’s What Today’s Primary Voters Think About the Planet’s Most Important Issue

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Northeastern, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s What Today’s Primary Voters Think About the Planet’s Most Important Issue

Donald Trump Is Right: The GOP Primary System Is Rigged

by SheritaClune Posted on April 20, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I hate to agree with Donald Trump about anything, but he’s got a point: the Republican primary process is really unfair. Just look at New York: Kasich and Cruz won 40 percent of the vote but only 4 percent of the delegates. It’s an outrage.

And it’s been that way all along. In the early contests, Trump’s opponents won 68 percent of the vote but only 38 percent of the delegates. On Super Tuesday they won 66 percent of the vote but only 57 percent of the delegates. In early March they eked out a fair result: 63 percent of the vote and 66 percent of the delegates. But on Super Tuesday II it was back to business as usual: they crushed Trump with 60 percent of the vote but won only 38 percent of the delegates.

I’m glad Trump is helping shine a media spotlight on this gross inequity—and he deserves special credit since he’s the one benefiting from it. It’s a pretty selfless act. Maybe someone will finally start paying attention to the way the Republican establishment is so obviously in the bag for Trump.

See original: 

Donald Trump Is Right: The GOP Primary System Is Rigged

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Is Right: The GOP Primary System Is Rigged

After New York Win, Clinton Campaign Says Sanders’ Attacks Help Republicans

by KrystleLaughlin Posted on April 20, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

After a decisive victory in New York on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton’s campaign called on Bernie Sanders to strike a more positive tone in the final two months of the primary contest, hinting that the senator from Vermont should ultimately leave the race gracefully without damaging the party’s chances of winning in the fall. As an example for how Sanders should conduct his campaign, a Clinton aide pointed to how the then-Sen. Clinton helped unite the party behind Barack Obama in 2008.

Speaking with reporters after Clinton’s victory rally in Manhattan Tuesday night, Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri called on Sanders to run a more positive, issue-based campaign. “He needs to decide as he closes out the Democratic primary, if he is going to continue on the destructive path that he started down in the New York primary where he is making personal character attacks against her that mimic the attacks that Republicans make and aid Republicans, or if he is going to end this primary the way that he promised to run—the kind of campaign he said he would run—that was focused on issues,” she said. “There’s no question that Sen. Sanders, that the behavior of him and his campaign has been destructive.”

Palmieri pointed to Sanders’ recent comment that Clinton is not qualified to be president—a remark Sanders quickly walked back—as well as his assertion in the last debate that he questioned her judgment. She also noted that the Sanders campaign on Monday accused the Clinton campaign of campaign finance violations.

Palmieri cited Clinton’s own example in the 2008 primary against Obama as a guide for Sanders. Because Clinton stayed in that race until June, she said the Clinton team respects Sanders’ decision to see the race through to the end. But, she noted, Clinton did not contest Obama’s win at the Democratic National Convention in Denver that year.

Palmieri did not note the nasty tone of the 2008 contest. “I think she set a gold standard for how people who don’t end up with the nomination, who lose in that effort, should come together and help the party,” she said. “Given the primary that they went through, where they both went all the way to the end, very hard fought, to come and ask to play that role and be the person to who says, ‘By acclamation, I say this party stands behind this nominee and he’s going to be our next president’…that’s what we have seen happen before. We think that can happen again.”

More:  

After New York Win, Clinton Campaign Says Sanders’ Attacks Help Republicans

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on After New York Win, Clinton Campaign Says Sanders’ Attacks Help Republicans

Trump Dominates New York, Reclaiming Momentum

by RubenDriskell Posted on April 20, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Donald Trump emphatically reclaimed momentum Tuesday night in the fight for the Republican presidential nomination, scoring an overwhelming victory in his home state of New York.

The major networks called the race immediately after polls closed at 9 p.m. ET. Exit polls showed Trump winning more than half the vote in the state, with John Kasich and Ted Cruz trailing far behind.

The Republican front-runner’s win follows a string of losses this month, in the Wisconsin primary and at state conventions in Colorado and Wyoming where Cruz outmaneuvered Trump in the delegate selection process. But in New York, which will send 95 delegates to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July, Trump worked hard to climb back on top.

Continue Reading »

Originally posted here:

Trump Dominates New York, Reclaiming Momentum

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Northeastern, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Dominates New York, Reclaiming Momentum

Former Mexican President Slams Trump’s Plan to Pay for the Wall as "Absolutely Crazy"

by CedricBoyland Posted on April 19, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In an interview with Mother Jones on Tuesday, former Mexican president Vicente Fox intensified his war on Donald Trump and the GOP front-runner’s proposed wall between the United States and Mexico. In February, Fox declared, “I’m not going to pay for that fucking wall.” At that time, Trump had not detailed how he would make good on his plan to force Mexico to pay for the border wall. Since then, Trump has released a plan to compel Mexico to pick up the tab. He would demand from Mexico a one-time payment of $5 billion to $10 billion, and if Mexico failed to comply, he would freeze all wire transfers between undocumented workers and their home countries. He would also impose stiff trade tariffs on Mexican products and cancel visas for Mexicans traveling to the United States, and Mexican travelers would have to higher fees for visas and for border crossing cards.

Asked about Trump’s plan, Fox exclaimed it was “crazy” and demonstrated Trump’s “ignorance about the economy.” Fox added, “We cannot take him seriously.”

A wall along the southern border of the United States has become Trump’s most popular campaign promise. At his rallies, he routinely asks his throngs of supporters, “Who’s going to pay for the wall?” They scream in response, “Mexico!” In early April, when he released his plan for the wall, he estimated its construction would cost $8 billion he estimated. A more realistic estimate put the total closer to $25 billion, if he could even build it at all. His proposal asserted, “We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage.”

Fox, the president of Mexico from 2000 to 2006, doesn’t think so. He told Mother Jones Tuesday that Trump’s plan makes no sense and would never happen. “It’s an absolutely crazy idea, it’s totally arbitrary, and it goes against established practices on transferences,” he said. “It’s impeding against the free transfer system that works throughout the world. He cannot do that. It’s impossible.”

Fox noted that Trump’s plan would backfire and harm the US economy, perhaps even Trump’s own businesses. Mexico and other countries, he said, would likely retaliate against the United States by imposing their own fees or restrictions on US money transfers, which would hurt American business. “It’s absolutely crazy,” Fox repeated. “It’s ignorant.” (Fox has trolled Trump on Twitter several times regarding the wall.)

Increasing tariffs on Mexican goods—and perhaps getting into a trade war with China, as Trump has suggested—would hurt US corporations doing business overseas, Fox insisted, and “kill the United States economy as we know it today.”

Trump campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks did not respond to a request for comment.

“Okay, what about the retaliation of Mexico, which will say I will not give visas to Americans to come to work in Mexico, or to come to Cancun?” Fox said. “It’s absolutely stupid. He’s going against all the operating procedures that we have developed worldwide through 200 years of history and open markets.”

Fox maintained that Trump shouldn’t be taken seriously, but he added, “The problem is that he’s causing severe damage to relationships that we hold in the world, diplomatic relationships, with all the free world. It’s just stupid.”

Trump has said that Mexico “has taken advantage” of the United States by allowing “gangs, drug traffickers, and cartels” to infiltrated the country and commit crimes here. Fox countered that the American drug market is the biggest in the world. “How can he have the moral ground if all of those drugs are consumed by his own citizens?” Fox remarked. “The huge drug consumption, the largest in the world, is right there in the United States.” Fox said the United States needed to do a better job of getting its own citizens to stop using drugs. He favors legalization as a means of reducing cartel violence. He also pointed out that most of the illegal drugs in the United States come from Central and South America (though the Mexican cartels do play a significant role).

Trump, Fox commented, is “showing his total ignorance about the way things work in this world.”

Continue reading – 

Former Mexican President Slams Trump’s Plan to Pay for the Wall as "Absolutely Crazy"

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Former Mexican President Slams Trump’s Plan to Pay for the Wall as "Absolutely Crazy"

Ted Cruz Calls for Security Patrols in America’s "Muslim Neighborhoods"

by GermanPkc735 Posted on March 22, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the wake of the Brussels terror attacks Tuesday morning, GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz suggested that the United States “empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”

Here is the full statement from the Cruz campaign:

Cruz: We Can No Longer Surrender to the Enemy Through Political Correctness
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, presidential candidate Ted Cruz responded to the horrific terrorist attacks in Brussels:

“Today radical Islamic terrorists targeted the men and women of Brussels as they went to work on a spring morning. In a series of coordinated attacks they murdered and maimed dozens of innocent commuters at subway stations and travelers at the airport. For the terrorists, the identities of the victims were irrelevant. They –we—are all part of an intolerable culture that they have vowed to destroy.

“For years, the west has tried to deny this enemy exists out of a combination of political correctness and fear. We can no longer afford either. Our European allies are now seeing what comes of a toxic mix of migrants who have been infiltrated by terrorists and isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods.

“We will do what we can to help them fight this scourge, and redouble our efforts to make sure it does not happen here. We need to immediately halt the flow of refugees from countries with a significant al Qaida or ISIS presence. We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.

“We need to secure the southern border to prevent terrorist infiltration. And we need to execute a coherent campaign to utterly destroy ISIS. The days of the United States voluntarily surrendering to the enemy to show how progressive and enlightened we are are at an end. Our country is at stake.”

See the article here:

Ted Cruz Calls for Security Patrols in America’s "Muslim Neighborhoods"

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ted Cruz Calls for Security Patrols in America’s "Muslim Neighborhoods"

A bill to block GMO labeling fails key Senate vote

by TodWarfield Posted on March 16, 2016

A bill to block GMO labeling fails key Senate vote

By on 16 Mar 2016commentsShare

A bill that would have stopped states from mandating labels for genetically engineered food failed a key vote on Wednesday morning. The measure would have quashed local laws, including one about to take effect in Vermont, that require food companies to label packages with genetically modified ingredients.

The Senate’s rejection of the current bill doesn’t mean its dead. Senators are likely to resume negotiations on the bill after they return from a two-week break and vote on it again. A similar bill has already passed in the House, so the Senate’s approval would put it a short step away from becoming law.

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) sponsored the bill and got broad support from his party. But Republicans needed the help of farm-state Democrats who wound up voting against it. Earlier this month I predicted that Roberts would need to compromise with Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) to get this passed. Her vote is particularly important, because she has been able to pull in reluctant Democrats to vote on bipartisan agriculture bills. But Roberts never compromised: The bill sailed through committee and straight to a Senate vote without any horse trading. And on Tuesday, after meeting with organic industry leaders, Sen. Stabenow said she was against the bill as it stood. She wants something that will provide eaters with more information than they currently get, but that wouldn’t stigmatize GMOs.

Another bill championed by Oregon farmer Jeff Merkley calls for mandatory labeling. These two bills represent the initial offer and counter offer in the Senate. Now the bargaining will begin in earnest. Before the vote, Roberts sounded like someone playing the long game. “We are working both sides of the aisle very hard and, if we are not successful in getting 60 [votes] … we will have to come back after the [Easter] break and get something done,” Roberts said on Tuesday, according to Politico.

Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) proposed an amendment that could serve as a compromise and draw in those 60 votes. His amendment would give food manufacturers a chance to propose their own method of labeling. If companies failed to come up with a transparent method in three years, then labeling would become mandatory. That kind of middle ground might sway farm-state Democrats to vote for the bill without alienating Republicans who seem dead set against a mandatory-labeling law.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Link to article – 

A bill to block GMO labeling fails key Senate vote

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A bill to block GMO labeling fails key Senate vote

Our election process is dead. Only the internet can revive it

by linwoodcurley Posted on March 1, 2016

Our election process is dead. Only the internet can revive it

By on 1 Mar 2016 5:02 pmcommentsShare

Happy National Pig Day! Coincidentally, it’s also Super Tuesday, the day when citizens of 13 states will cast their ballots for the candidate they want to represent their party in the general election — who, in one case, may be an actual pig. And how many people will take part in the glorious democratic process today? Hardly any! Voter turnout in 2008, the last time both parties were in hotly contested races, was a historically high 27 percent. That’s right: 27 percent was actually record-breaking turnout. And this year, it’s predicted to be even lower, at least among Democrats, who aren’t being forced to choose between four climate change deniers and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Why is it that so few of us turn out to vote in the primaries, even in races as dramatic and consequential as this year’s? Well, voting is surprisingly difficult, and the process varies widely depending on where you live.

Take Colorado, where tonight’s primary is actually a caucus, one of the more confusing aspects of American democracy. Caucus states require registered voters to go to a precinct meeting run by their local parties, recite the Pledge of Allegiance, listen to the rules, stand around for a while, and then cast their ballots for their preferred presidential nominee. After that, each precinct will elect a designated number of delegates based on the votes for presidential candidates. It’s confusing, and the process — which can take several hours — begins right around the time you would normally be making dinner. They don’t make it easy, especially if you have to work, have to travel, have children, are registered as an independent in the state, or don’t have access to transportation and many free hours to commit to the onerous process.

And even in places without the oh-so-confusing caucus, voting in primaries is actually getting harder as some states (looking at you, North Carolina) have shortened the early voting period, curtailed same-day registration, and now require government-issued IDs in an effort to prevent non-existent voter fraud.

Whew! It’s almost enough to make you want to skip it all together — which, incidentally, is what the vast majority of eligible voters do. But would we skip voting if it were easier? According to a new survey of 1,000 registered voters by Smartmatic, a corporation specializing in voting technology, the majority of respondents view our current voting system as “inefficient” and say that it discourages people from voting. While all demographics held this view, it was especially true of minority populations. As Brentin Mock at CityLab points out, Smartmatic found that 83 percent of African-Americans and 76 percent of Hispanic/Latino voters agreed that modernizing the voting system would increase voter turnout and strengthen our democracy.

While Smartmatic, a company that deals in voting technology, obviously has a horse in this race, it does seem crazy that in an era where you can apply for a credit card, buy a car, bid on a home, and find a mate from the comfort from your smartphone, voting is so old school. Why haven’t we invested in technology that would make it easier to vote? Clearly, if we can make driverless cars and send probes to Mars and create holograms of Tupac Shakur, we can figure out how to hold elections online. We landed a man on the moon nearly 50 years ago, for Christ’s sake! You’d think we can get a website up and running. And, if not that, the least we could do is make Election Day a holiday in all 50 states. Collectively, we could walk to our precincts, wave to our neighbors, cast our ballots, and think, just for a moment, how nice it is to be an American.

But, no. This Super Tuesday, the process will continue as it has in the past: A cumbersome and ill-devised system that keeps you from being heard. And until this system is fixed, until you can cast your ballot from your phone or you laptop or your local public library, the only way to take part is to force yourself, despite all the barriers, to show up — because someone wins when voter turnout is low, but it’s certainly not the voter.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Credit: 

Our election process is dead. Only the internet can revive it

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Our election process is dead. Only the internet can revive it

Donald Trump Wins Nevada Caucuses

by DannEarley364 Posted on February 24, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Coming off big wins in New Hampshire and South Carolina, Donald Trump secured his position as the clear front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination on Tuesday night with another resounding victory in the Nevada caucuses.

The major networks called the race for Trump shortly after the caucuses concluded. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas were locked in a battle for second place, with Ohio Gov. John Kasich and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson trailing.

Trump, who has broken all the usual campaign rules with brash promises that range from building a wall along the Mexican border to banning Muslims from entering the country, has now won the last three caucuses or primaries. He enters the Super Tuesday contests on March 1 with a commanding lead in the delegate count.

Link: 

Donald Trump Wins Nevada Caucuses

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Wins Nevada Caucuses

Bernie Sanders Wins Democratic New Hampshire Primary

by VernMeza4862675 Posted on February 10, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was declared the winner of the New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary as soon as polls closed at 8 p.m. EST on Tuesday night. Results are still trickling in at the moment—some polling locations are still open to accommodate people in line at the cutoff time—but it looks like Sanders will likely defeat former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by double digits.

The two have now split the first two states, with Clinton coming out narrowly ahead in Iowa a week ago.

The Clinton campaign was quick to concede, immediately circulating a memo to reporters from campaign manager Robby Mook touting Clinton’s strength in the states voting in March.

See original article here:  

Bernie Sanders Wins Democratic New Hampshire Primary

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bernie Sanders Wins Democratic New Hampshire Primary