Here is a list of Politics Blogs ordered by Most Commented, posted by members. A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you've learned. Post an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Update your blog on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with others. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about others. Click here to post a blog.
Should I write it ?
I fear a foolish ending to this blog !
But could it be any more foolish than the events that have taken us to its beginning
But could it be any more foolish than the events that have taken us to its beginning
STATE FUNERAL RISK
Any terrorist that wanted an opportunity to exploit a situation, would not have a more opportune moment than this. Thousands of people gathering, heads of state from many countries, including other countries royalty. The US president. No other occasion would be larger and have so much attention as this. A nightmare for security.
online today!
Introducing your next "totally unbiased" presidential debate moderator(!)
Steve Scully, C-SPAN host
And how did Steve start out his career? Interning for Joe Biden, no less!!! Don't believe me? Watch the beginning of this video interview with Scully from 2011:
On the back of Chris Wallace being chosen as the so-called "conservative" moderator pick (what a joke), this is just more proof of what President Trump is up against.
"When you take on The Swamp, The Swamp fights back."
And how did Steve start out his career? Interning for Joe Biden, no less!!! Don't believe me? Watch the beginning of this video interview with Scully from 2011:
On the back of Chris Wallace being chosen as the so-called "conservative" moderator pick (what a joke), this is just more proof of what President Trump is up against.
"When you take on The Swamp, The Swamp fights back."
online today!
Book Banning in America
I thought you guys, had Freedom of Speech, enshrined in your Constitution?
Just a humble Aussie, here, asking: Why?
Please Explain...
Just a humble Aussie, here, asking: Why?
Please Explain...
GIVE PUTIN ULTIMATUM
It should have happened a while ago, but the time has come to stop the Russians bombing and shooting and threatening the people of Ukraine.
Putin must be given an ultimatum. That should be for him to withdraw troops now from Ukraine otherwise NATO and it's forces will join in the defence of that country. Putin should be given 24 hours to start the withdrawal and if not undertaken, the ultimatum will take effect.
Putin must be given an ultimatum. That should be for him to withdraw troops now from Ukraine otherwise NATO and it's forces will join in the defence of that country. Putin should be given 24 hours to start the withdrawal and if not undertaken, the ultimatum will take effect.
Is there no level too low for slime to ooze to.
In response to:
Trump falsely suggests Kamala Harris, who was born in California, does not meet citizenship requirements.
President Trump on Thursday encouraged a racist conspiracy theory that is rampant among some of his followers: that Senator Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic vice-presidential nominee born in California, was not eligible for the vice presidency or presidency because her parents were immigrants.
That assertion is false; Ms. Harris is eligible to serve.
Mr. Trump, speaking to reporters on Thursday, nevertheless pushed the attack on his opponent. “I heard it today that she doesn’t meet the requirements,” Mr. Trump said.
“I have no idea if that’s right,” he added. “I would have thought, I would have assumed, that the Democrats would have checked that out before she gets chosen to run for vice president.”
Mr. Trump appeared to be referencing a widely discredited op-ed written in Newsweek by John C. Eastman, a conservative attorney who has long argued that the United States Constitution does not grant birthright citizenship, as proof. Ms. Harris, the daughter of Jamaican and Indian immigrants, was born in 1964 in Oakland, Calif., several years after her parents arrived in the United States.
In the hours after Joseph R. Biden Jr. announced Ms. Harris as his running mate, a new crop of memes and conspiracy website postings began proliferating online, suggesting that the junior senator was an “anchor baby” because of her background.
Mr. Eastman’s column attempts to raise questions about the citizenship of Ms. Harris’s parents at the time of her birth, and argues that she may be “owed her allegiance to a foreign power or powers” if her parents were “temporary visitors” and not residents.
Constitutional law scholars have argued that the argument against her parents is irrelevant, because Ms. Harris was born in California. And the requirements for the presidency, outlined in Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, are these: “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of 35 years, and been 14 years a resident within the United States.”
On Thursday, Newsweek defended Mr. Eastman’s column, and denied that it had “nothing to do with racist birtherism.” But it promptly landed in the hands of a president who spread another race-based theory nearly a decade ago, when he began sowing distrust in the background of another Democratic politician of color: President Barack Obama.
In 2011, Mr. Trump began appearing on television to question whether Mr. Obama was born in the United States — spreading a lie that he has never fully apologized for.
“Maybe I’m going to do the tax returns when Obama does his birth certificate,” he said in an interview with ABC in April 2011. “I’d love to give my tax returns. I may tie my tax returns into Obama’s birth certificate.”
Mr. Obama eventually released his birth certificate. Mr. Trump never released his tax returns.
— Katie Rogers
Trump falsely suggests Kamala Harris, who was born in California, does not meet citizenship requirements.
President Trump on Thursday encouraged a racist conspiracy theory that is rampant among some of his followers: that Senator Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic vice-presidential nominee born in California, was not eligible for the vice presidency or presidency because her parents were immigrants.
That assertion is false; Ms. Harris is eligible to serve.
Mr. Trump, speaking to reporters on Thursday, nevertheless pushed the attack on his opponent. “I heard it today that she doesn’t meet the requirements,” Mr. Trump said.
“I have no idea if that’s right,” he added. “I would have thought, I would have assumed, that the Democrats would have checked that out before she gets chosen to run for vice president.”
Mr. Trump appeared to be referencing a widely discredited op-ed written in Newsweek by John C. Eastman, a conservative attorney who has long argued that the United States Constitution does not grant birthright citizenship, as proof. Ms. Harris, the daughter of Jamaican and Indian immigrants, was born in 1964 in Oakland, Calif., several years after her parents arrived in the United States.
In the hours after Joseph R. Biden Jr. announced Ms. Harris as his running mate, a new crop of memes and conspiracy website postings began proliferating online, suggesting that the junior senator was an “anchor baby” because of her background.
Mr. Eastman’s column attempts to raise questions about the citizenship of Ms. Harris’s parents at the time of her birth, and argues that she may be “owed her allegiance to a foreign power or powers” if her parents were “temporary visitors” and not residents.
Constitutional law scholars have argued that the argument against her parents is irrelevant, because Ms. Harris was born in California. And the requirements for the presidency, outlined in Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, are these: “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of 35 years, and been 14 years a resident within the United States.”
On Thursday, Newsweek defended Mr. Eastman’s column, and denied that it had “nothing to do with racist birtherism.” But it promptly landed in the hands of a president who spread another race-based theory nearly a decade ago, when he began sowing distrust in the background of another Democratic politician of color: President Barack Obama.
In 2011, Mr. Trump began appearing on television to question whether Mr. Obama was born in the United States — spreading a lie that he has never fully apologized for.
“Maybe I’m going to do the tax returns when Obama does his birth certificate,” he said in an interview with ABC in April 2011. “I’d love to give my tax returns. I may tie my tax returns into Obama’s birth certificate.”
Mr. Obama eventually released his birth certificate. Mr. Trump never released his tax returns.
— Katie Rogers
Older voters turning their backs on Trump
In response to:
There are different “gaps” in American politics, but one that has consistently shown up in recent presidential elections is the age gap. That is, younger voters tend to vote more Democratic and older voters tend to vote more Republican.
In 2016, for instance, President Trump performed best among voters 65 years and older. He also won among those between the ages of 45 and 64. So looking ahead to November, you might expect Trump to once again do well with older voters. However, recent public polls — and the president’s own private polling — suggest that Trump may be doing worse among older voters against former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
In national head-to-head polls conducted since April 1, Trump is barely breaking even with most older Americans — and in some age groups, he’s even trailing Biden by as much as 1.4 points (see 45- to 64-year-olds). (Pollsters don’t all use the same age brackets, so there is some overlap in the different age categories.)
The most startling shift, though, is among voters age 65 and older. Four years ago, Trump bested Hillary Clinton by 13 points, 55 percent to 42 percent, according to the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, a survey of more than 60,000 voters organized by Harvard University and administered by YouGov. But now Biden narrowly leads Trump 48 percent to 47 percent, based on an average of 48 national polls that included that age group.1 If those figures hold until November, they would represent a seismic shift in the voting behavior of America’s oldest voters.
The last Democratic nominee who won voters 65 and older was Al Gore in 2000, according to national exit poll data. But at the time, that was the trend. Older Americans — those who came of age during the Great Depression and New Deal era, a period in which the Democratic Party was dominant — were disproportionately Democratic-leaning in the late 1990s and early 2000s. And political science has found evidence that party loyalties developed at a young age can persist over the course of a person’s life.
But it’s not just among voters 65 and older where Trump is slipping. He’s also fallen almost as far among voters 55 and older. Trump is essentially tied with Biden among that age group, even after winning these voters by 10 points in 2016, 53 percent to 43 percent, according to the CCES. Trump’s numbers have also fallen with 45- to 64-year-olds, as well as 50- to 64-year-olds (an alternate category employed by many pollsters), but the last Democrat to win 45- to 64-year-olds was Barack Obama in 2008 — albeit barely, 50 percent to 49 percent.
We don’t have as much state-level polling to work with, but there’s evidence that Biden is also doing better with older voters in some key swing states. Take two recent surveys from Florida, a state with one of the oldest populations in the country. A Fox News poll from mid-April found Biden with a slim 3-point lead over Trump and running even among voters 45 and older, while a Quinnipiac University survey from the same period found Biden up 4 points overall in Florida and leading Trump 52 percent to 42 percent among voters 65 and older. If this holds, this would represent a big swing from 2016, when Trump won Florida voters 45 and older by 13 points, and those 65 and older by 22 points, according to the CCES.
There are different “gaps” in American politics, but one that has consistently shown up in recent presidential elections is the age gap. That is, younger voters tend to vote more Democratic and older voters tend to vote more Republican.
In 2016, for instance, President Trump performed best among voters 65 years and older. He also won among those between the ages of 45 and 64. So looking ahead to November, you might expect Trump to once again do well with older voters. However, recent public polls — and the president’s own private polling — suggest that Trump may be doing worse among older voters against former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
In national head-to-head polls conducted since April 1, Trump is barely breaking even with most older Americans — and in some age groups, he’s even trailing Biden by as much as 1.4 points (see 45- to 64-year-olds). (Pollsters don’t all use the same age brackets, so there is some overlap in the different age categories.)
The most startling shift, though, is among voters age 65 and older. Four years ago, Trump bested Hillary Clinton by 13 points, 55 percent to 42 percent, according to the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, a survey of more than 60,000 voters organized by Harvard University and administered by YouGov. But now Biden narrowly leads Trump 48 percent to 47 percent, based on an average of 48 national polls that included that age group.1 If those figures hold until November, they would represent a seismic shift in the voting behavior of America’s oldest voters.
The last Democratic nominee who won voters 65 and older was Al Gore in 2000, according to national exit poll data. But at the time, that was the trend. Older Americans — those who came of age during the Great Depression and New Deal era, a period in which the Democratic Party was dominant — were disproportionately Democratic-leaning in the late 1990s and early 2000s. And political science has found evidence that party loyalties developed at a young age can persist over the course of a person’s life.
But it’s not just among voters 65 and older where Trump is slipping. He’s also fallen almost as far among voters 55 and older. Trump is essentially tied with Biden among that age group, even after winning these voters by 10 points in 2016, 53 percent to 43 percent, according to the CCES. Trump’s numbers have also fallen with 45- to 64-year-olds, as well as 50- to 64-year-olds (an alternate category employed by many pollsters), but the last Democrat to win 45- to 64-year-olds was Barack Obama in 2008 — albeit barely, 50 percent to 49 percent.
We don’t have as much state-level polling to work with, but there’s evidence that Biden is also doing better with older voters in some key swing states. Take two recent surveys from Florida, a state with one of the oldest populations in the country. A Fox News poll from mid-April found Biden with a slim 3-point lead over Trump and running even among voters 45 and older, while a Quinnipiac University survey from the same period found Biden up 4 points overall in Florida and leading Trump 52 percent to 42 percent among voters 65 and older. If this holds, this would represent a big swing from 2016, when Trump won Florida voters 45 and older by 13 points, and those 65 and older by 22 points, according to the CCES.
(continued in my first comment below)
Thomas Friedman essay
Trump Is Asking Us to Play Russian Roulette With Our Lives - Are we really going to bet that we can go back to life as normal without proper coronavirus tracking in place?
By Thomas L. Friedman
Opinion Columnist April 18, 2020
“LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” “LIBERATE VIRGINIA.”
With these three short tweets last week, President Trump attempted to kick off the post-lockdown phase of America’s coronavirus crisis. It should be called: “American Russian roulette: The Covid-19 version.’’
What Trump was saying with those tweets was: Everybody just go back to work. From now on, each of us individually, and our society collectively, is going to play Russian roulette. We’re going to bet that we can spin through our daily lives — work, shopping, school, travel — without the coronavirus landing on us. And if it does, we’ll also bet that it won’t kill us.
More specifically: As a society, we will be betting that as large numbers of people stop sheltering in place, the number of people who will still get infected with Covid-19 and require hospitalization will be less than the number of hospital beds, intensive care units, respirators, doctors, nurses and protective gear needed to take care of them.
Because it is clear that millions of Americans are going to stop sheltering in place — their own President is now urging them to liberate themselves — before we have a proper testing, tracking and tracing system set up. Until we have a vaccine, that kind of system is the only path to dramatically lowering the risk of infection while partially opening society — while also protecting the elderly and infirm — as Germany has demonstrated.
And as individuals, every person will be playing Russian roulette every minute of every day: Do I get on this crowded bus to go to work or not? What if I get on the subway and the person next to me is not wearing gloves and a mask? What if they sneeze? Do I get in the elevator at the office if there is another person on it? Do I go into the office lunchroom or not? Do I stop for a drink at this bar, where the stools are six feet apart, or that crowded one my friends chose? Do I use this toilet or that drinking fountain? Do I send my kid back to school or not? Do I stay in a hotel? Ride an airplane? Let the plumber in? Do I go to the doctor to check that strange lump or not?
What will be so cruel about this American version of Russian roulette is how unfair it will be. Some people will have no choice but to take the subway or the bus to work. Some people will have to send their kids back to school because they can’t afford to stay home from work. Some bosses will demand that their employees show up to reopen their workplace, but some of those employees may be afraid to come back. Do you fire them? Do they bring a lawsuit against you if you do, or do they go on Twitter and post a picture of how closely together you forced them to work — six inches apart, not six feet?
This is the state of play when you have a president who one minute is responsibly issuing sober guidelines for when and how people should go back to work, and the next minute is telling states that they are responsible for getting the testing, tracking and tracing units that we need in place and then, in the third minute, is inciting people on Twitter to “liberate” their workplaces, cities and beaches — even though none of the conditions are in place to do so safely.
“Liberate”? Think about the use of that word. We were not in jail! We were not doing something wrong! We were doing what our president, governor, mayor, and national epidemic experts told us to do: behave responsibly and shelter in place to break the transmission of this virus.
CONTINUED ... next page
By Thomas L. Friedman
Opinion Columnist April 18, 2020
“LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” “LIBERATE VIRGINIA.”
With these three short tweets last week, President Trump attempted to kick off the post-lockdown phase of America’s coronavirus crisis. It should be called: “American Russian roulette: The Covid-19 version.’’
What Trump was saying with those tweets was: Everybody just go back to work. From now on, each of us individually, and our society collectively, is going to play Russian roulette. We’re going to bet that we can spin through our daily lives — work, shopping, school, travel — without the coronavirus landing on us. And if it does, we’ll also bet that it won’t kill us.
More specifically: As a society, we will be betting that as large numbers of people stop sheltering in place, the number of people who will still get infected with Covid-19 and require hospitalization will be less than the number of hospital beds, intensive care units, respirators, doctors, nurses and protective gear needed to take care of them.
Because it is clear that millions of Americans are going to stop sheltering in place — their own President is now urging them to liberate themselves — before we have a proper testing, tracking and tracing system set up. Until we have a vaccine, that kind of system is the only path to dramatically lowering the risk of infection while partially opening society — while also protecting the elderly and infirm — as Germany has demonstrated.
And as individuals, every person will be playing Russian roulette every minute of every day: Do I get on this crowded bus to go to work or not? What if I get on the subway and the person next to me is not wearing gloves and a mask? What if they sneeze? Do I get in the elevator at the office if there is another person on it? Do I go into the office lunchroom or not? Do I stop for a drink at this bar, where the stools are six feet apart, or that crowded one my friends chose? Do I use this toilet or that drinking fountain? Do I send my kid back to school or not? Do I stay in a hotel? Ride an airplane? Let the plumber in? Do I go to the doctor to check that strange lump or not?
What will be so cruel about this American version of Russian roulette is how unfair it will be. Some people will have no choice but to take the subway or the bus to work. Some people will have to send their kids back to school because they can’t afford to stay home from work. Some bosses will demand that their employees show up to reopen their workplace, but some of those employees may be afraid to come back. Do you fire them? Do they bring a lawsuit against you if you do, or do they go on Twitter and post a picture of how closely together you forced them to work — six inches apart, not six feet?
This is the state of play when you have a president who one minute is responsibly issuing sober guidelines for when and how people should go back to work, and the next minute is telling states that they are responsible for getting the testing, tracking and tracing units that we need in place and then, in the third minute, is inciting people on Twitter to “liberate” their workplaces, cities and beaches — even though none of the conditions are in place to do so safely.
“Liberate”? Think about the use of that word. We were not in jail! We were not doing something wrong! We were doing what our president, governor, mayor, and national epidemic experts told us to do: behave responsibly and shelter in place to break the transmission of this virus.
CONTINUED ... next page
Refugees or not
There is a wave of migration going on in Europe. At first they were thought of to be refugees. Record show however, that for every 100 of them accounted for, about few are truly in need of refuge.
Since Germany opened its doors they now swarm the whole European Nation.
The question is: Is this really a move to seek refuge? Or is it more of an economic motivated migration?
Note: The latest report is that unrest is exploding due to the unprecedented invasion and inability of most countries to accommodate them. In fact all the borders are tightened and Merkel is calling for an emergency summit.
What impact has this wave done to the whole of Europe in terms of economic, social and political system?
Thank you all for your read and participation.
Since Germany opened its doors they now swarm the whole European Nation.
The question is: Is this really a move to seek refuge? Or is it more of an economic motivated migration?
Note: The latest report is that unrest is exploding due to the unprecedented invasion and inability of most countries to accommodate them. In fact all the borders are tightened and Merkel is calling for an emergency summit.
What impact has this wave done to the whole of Europe in terms of economic, social and political system?
Thank you all for your read and participation.
War, why is it a part of humanity?
Who started it and why it doesn't go away?
I am sure so many of us would not want war at all, and yet history says, it has been a part of man's life from the beginning until now.
When and how will it end? Any ideas?
Personally I wish there would be no war at all. With all its destruction and causes of suffering and deaths, I wish it never ever happen at all. But it does. Why?
I am sure so many of us would not want war at all, and yet history says, it has been a part of man's life from the beginning until now.
When and how will it end? Any ideas?
Personally I wish there would be no war at all. With all its destruction and causes of suffering and deaths, I wish it never ever happen at all. But it does. Why?
A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, your thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you have learned. It's your own page on Connecting Singles that you can update on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. You can write about an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with Connecting Singles members. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about members you have met here. Please be sure to read the blog rules before posting.
Would YOU like to post a blog on Connecting Singles? Have you written blogs that you'd like to share with other members? Posting your blogs shows your skill and creativity and helps members get to know you better. Your blog will appear on the Connecting Singles Blogs page and also in a link on your profile page. Click here to post a blog »