NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label DINOs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DINOs. Show all posts

05 June 2016

Wasserman Schultz reverses opposition to new payday lender rules 3JUN16


PRESSURE from Bold Progressives has forced rep debbie wasserman-schultz D FL (as well as rep patrick murphy D FL) to drop their sponsorship and support of pending legislation in the US House opposing the new CFPB regulations on payday lenders. Debt Trap Debbie is eating crow now, but that doesn't mean she isn't a DINO. wasserman-schultz needs to be removed as the chair of the DNC, and it has to happen before the convention in July. Doing so will not be a sign of chaos and infighting in the Democratic Party. It will be a confirmation to the American people that the party is dedicated to representing us and our best interest. From the +Tampa Bay Times .....

Wasserman Schultz reverses opposition to new payday lender rules

Friday, June 3, 2016 7:21am
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Friday became the second Florida Democrat to back away from opposition to new payday lender rules pushed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
In a statement, Wasserman Schultz said, "it is clear to me that the CFPB strikes the right balance and I look forward to working with my constituents and consumer groups as the CFPB works towards a final rule.”
Her support of a bill to delay the new regulations was a source of controversy, drawing TV ads from a liberal group that called her "Debt Trap Debbie." It also put her opposite President Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton and other advocates of a crackdown on the lenders.
The proposed rules were published Thursday. Rep. Patrick Murphy, a candidate for U.S. Senate, also retreated from the House bill, which held up Florida regulations as a model.
“As a strong supporter and partner of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in Congress, I stand with the CFPB in its efforts to protect Americans from predatory lending," Wassserman Schultz said. "From the outset of this process, I have said that I trust the CFPB to do what’s right for consumers, and these proposed rules are an important step towards that critical goal."
“I am pleased that the proposal includes lender reporting requirements to track loans and assess each borrower’s ability to repay. Florida has tracked loan data for over ten years and it has been pivotal in protecting consumers and helping to end the cycle of debt for many. The CFPB proposal also curbs the abusive lending practice of repeatedly attempting to withdraw funds from consumers’ accounts. This practice results in heavy overdraft fees for borrowers, and I support the CFPB’s plan to help rein it in and preserve access to credit without the burden of unexpected costs.
“After reviewing the proposed rule, it is clear to me that the CFPB strikes the right balance and I look forward to working with my constituents and consumer groups as the CFPB works towards a final rule.”
Allied Progress, which ran ads against Wasserman Schultz, declared victory. “This is a wake-up call for progressives in Congress and every state legislature around the country. Getting in bed with the payday lending industry isn’t only bad policy, it’s bad politics,” said Allied Progress executive director Karl Frisch. “Now that both Patrick Murphy and Debbie Wasserman Schultz have endorsed the CFPB’s proposed rule to rein in predatory payday lenders, we can say without hesitation that the push to spread the disastrous ‘Florida model’ of payday lending nationally is dead. Anyone who thinks this effort is still a viable alternative to the CFPB’s proposal without the continued support of its two most influential congressional backers is delusional.”
[Last modified: Friday, June 3, 2016 9:48am]

27 May 2016

Democrats Can’t Unite Unless Wasserman Schultz Goes! & Debbie Wasserman Schultz goes to bat for predatory lenders 23&1MAI16

CHARLESTON, SC - JANUARY 17:  U.S. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL 23rd District) and chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) speaks to reporters in the spin room after watching tonight's democratic presidential debate at the Gailla
FOTZE rep debbie wasserman-schultz D FL, chair of the DNC / Democratic National Committee, is a political whore. She is working for the 1%, for corporate America and especially for the bank-financial cabal to screw the poor, the retired, vets and active military, the working class and the middle class. Her latest action in support of the bank-financial cabal is co-sponsoring legislation that will nullify the new rules the CFPB / Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is enacting to regulate payday loan lenders (see below) to the financial detriment of the poor and working class. She has also welcomed lobbyist to dictate the Democratic Party Presidential Campaign Platform, the result will be little different than the republican's presidential campaign platform if she is not removed from the DNC. If the Democrats loose the presidency to donald drumpf it will, in large part, be thanks to wasserman-schultz. She needs to be forced out as the DNC chair and might as well change her party affiliation to repiglican. Then she will be able to sell herself to the highest bidders without needing to explain her actions. Word of warning to anyone thinking of getting in bed with her. You should tie a board across your ass so you don't fall in. Think she isn't a political whore? Take a better look at the picture above, schlempe has a lot of "miles" on her.....These from +Daily Kos 
Democrats Can’t Unite Unless Wasserman Schultz Goes!
To paraphrase the words of that Scottish master Robert Burns, the best laid plans of mice, men — and women — go often astray, or “gang aft agley,” as they say in the Highlands. No one knows this better than Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Twice now, the flight of her presidential aspirations has been forced to circle the airport as other contenders put up an unexpected fight: In 2008, Barack Obama emerged to grab the Democratic nomination away and this year, although all signs point to her finally grabbing the brass ring, unexpected and powerful progressive resistance came from the mighty wind of the Bernie Sanders campaign.
Certainly, Hillary Clinton is angered by all of this, but the one seemingly more aggrieved — if public comments and private actions are any indication — is Democratic National Committee chair and Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Hillary surrogate who takes umbrage like ordinary folks pop their vitamins in the morning.
As we recently wrote, “… She embodies the tactics that have eroded the ability of Democrats to once again be the party of the working class. As Democratic National Committee chair she has opened the floodgates for Big Money, brought lobbyists into the inner circle and oiled all the moving parts of the revolving door that twirls between government service and cushy jobs in the world of corporate influence.”
And that ain’t all. As a member of Congress, particularly egregious has been her support of the payday loan business, defying new regulations from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) that would rein in an industry that soaks desperate borrowers. As President Obama said, “While payday loans might seem like easy money, folks often end up trapped in a cycle of debt.”
In fact, according to an article by Bethany McLean in the May issue of The Atlantic, “After studying millions of payday loans, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau found that 67 percent went to borrowers with seven or more transactions a year, and the majority of borrowers paid more in fees than the amount of their initial loan.”
A recent editorial in the Orlando Sentinel notes that 7 percent of Florida’s population “must resort to this predatory form of small-dollar credit – nearly the highest rate in the nation…” What’s more, “Based on a 14-day loan term, the typical payday loan… had an annual percentage rate of 278 percent. Many lenders advertise rates of more than 300 percent.” Let us repeat that slowly… 300 percent!
So why has Wasserman Schultz been so opposed to the CFPB’s proposed rules? She has said,“Payday lending is unfortunately a necessary component of how people get access to capital, [people] that are the working poor.” But maybe it has something more to do with the $2.5 million or so the payday loan industry has donated to Florida politicians from both parties since 2009. That’s according to a new report by the liberal group Allied Progress. More than $50,000 of that cash has gone to Rep. Wasserman Schultz.
But we digress. It’s the skullduggery going on within the Democratic Party establishment that’s our current concern and as we wrote in March, Rep. Wasserman Schultz “has played games with the party’s voter database, been accused of restricting the number of Democratic candidate debates and scheduling them at odd days and times to favor Hillary Clinton, and recently told CNN’s Jake Tapper that superdelegates — strongly establishment and pro-Clinton — are necessary at the party’s convention so deserving incumbent officials and party leaders don’t have to run for delegate slots ‘against grassroots activists.’ Let that sink in, but hold your nose against the aroma of entitlement.” 
Now Wasserman Schultz has waded into the controversy over what happened or didn’t happen last weekend when Sanders supporters loudly and vehemently objected to the rules at the Nevada State Democratic Convention. In truth, some behaved badly at the event and others made trollish, violent and obscene threats to Democratic state chair Roberta Lange via phone, email and social media. There’s no excuse for such aggressive, creepy conduct, and Sanders was quick and direct in apologizing for the behavior of the rowdies and bullies.
But there is a double standard at play here. Why, pray tell, shouldn’t the peaceful majority of Sanders people be angry at the slow-motion, largely invisible rigging of the political process by Wasserman Schultz and the Clinton machine — all for the benefit of Secretary Clinton?
Wasserman Schultz claims the party rules over which she has presided (and manipulated) are “eminently fair.” She told CNN on Wednesday morning, “It is critical that we as candidates, we as Democratic Party leaders, everyone involved needs to make sure that we can take all the steps that we need to, to ensure that the process is not only run smoothly but that the response from the supporters of both candidates is appropriate and civil.”
In response to the DNC chair’s remarks, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver talked to CNN, too, and said Wasserman Schultz had been “throwing shade on the Sanders campaign since the very beginning… Debbie Wasserman Schultz has really been a divider and not really provided the kind of leadership that the Democratic Party needs.”
The Nation’s Joan Walsh, a Clinton supporter critical of the Sanders campaign, concurs: “Once again, Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz escalated a conflict that she should have worked to defuse,” she writes. “… Wasserman Schultz is not helping her friend Hillary Clinton with her attacks on Sanders. Just the appearance of fairness can go a long way in assuaging worries about fairness. Wasserman Schultz’s defiant rebuke to the Sanders camp has made it worse.”
So, too, has her abolition of the restraints that had been placed on corporate lobbyists and big money — now they can write checks bankrolling what doubtless will be swank and profligate parties during this summer’s Democratic National Convention. At The Intercept, Lee Fang and Zaid Jilani report that a number of the members of the Philadelphia host committee “are actively working to undermine progressive policies achieved by President Barack Obama, including health care reform and net neutrality. Some… are hardly even Democratic Party stalwarts, given that many have donated and raised thousands of dollars for Republican presidential and congressional candidates this cycle.”
This is a slap in the face to progressives calling for a halt to big money and allowing lobbyists to buy our elected officials. And it’s contrary to what Hillary Clinton herself has said about money and politics on the campaign trail. The Sanders movement has shown that lots of cash can be raised from everyday people making small donations. His supporters and all of us should be outraged that Debbie Wasserman Schultz and convention officials have kowtowed not only to the corporate wing of their own party but also to those high rollers who back the opposition and ideas antithetical to a democracy.
Rep. Wasserman Schultz is facing a primary challenge for the first time this year, her opponent a law professor, activist and progressive Sanders supporter named Tim Canova. But the primary’s not until late August, long after the Democratic National Convention. Unless she steps down now or Hillary Clinton has her removed, Philadelphia will be dominated by someone who represents everything that has gone wrong with the Democratic Party and Washington. At the convention’s opening session, Debbie Wasserman Schultz will be bringing the gavel down squarely on progressive hopes of returning the party to its legacy as champion of working people and the dispossessed.

We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: Time for her to go.
AN E MAIL FROM DAILY KOS ON PAYDAY LENDERS 23MAI16
Craig, payday lenders are known for their predatory practices, which include exorbitant interest rates (390% is the national average), transaction fees, penalties, and contracts which keep people in a vicious cycle of debt that is damn near impossible to break. 

These operations target the poorest populations, primarily operating in low-income and communities of color where they perpetuate the cycle of poverty. 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the brainchild of Elizabeth Warren, wants to change these practices by placing new rules on the industry, which currently operate on a state-by-state regulatory basis. 

Unfortunately, some Democrats are siding with the payday lending industry to restrict CFPB's ability to regulate the industry. 

The CFPB has been the target of Republican ire since its inception—and now corporate Democrats are jumping on the bandwagon. 

DNC chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is co-sponsoring a bill to restrict the CFPB from enacting rules, BEFORE they have been issued. 

The CFPB is scheduled to propose new rules on June 2, 2016 in Kansas City, MO. Daily Kos and our allies will be in attendance at the event, where we intend to deliver your support to members of the CFPB. 

These rules would be a huge financial victory for low-income workers and communities hardest hit by these practices. 

Keep fighting, 
Rachel Colyer, Daily Kos
Wasserman Schultz is co-sponsoring a new bill that would gut the [Consumer Finance Protection Board’s] forthcoming payday loan regulations. She's also attempting to gin up Democratic support for the legislation...
The CFPB hasn’t issued final regulations, but Republicans and the person supposedly running the Democratic National Committee have been fighting hard to protect those predatory lenders (and other enemies of American consumers). 
According to DWS, the feds should stay out of it and adopt Florida’s approach to payday lenders, a law that she proudly admits to “helping write.” And what about that law? 
The average interest rate on Florida's payday loans is 304 percent -- only slightly better than the 390 percent annual average. Critically, the average payday loan amount of $389 is equal to 35 percent of average paychecks in the state -- in line with national figures.
Odious. And, I suspect, getting rid of her is something that both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters can agree on.

04 November 2014

Final Update: Republicans Have A 3 In 4 Chance Of Winning The Senate & The Most Reliable Guide To Campaign 2014? History 4NOV14

HERE'S fivethityeight.com's Nate Silver's final projection for the US Senate followed by an article from +NPR on the history of mid term elections.....

Final Update: Republicans Have A 3 In 4 Chance Of Winning The Senate

After two months of forecasting, it comes down to this: Republicans are favored to win the Senate. Their chances of doing so are 76 percent, according to FiveThirtyEight’s Senate forecast, which is principally based on an analysis of the polls in each state and the historical accuracy of Senate polling.
But they are not necessarily favored to have the race “called” for them on Tuesday night. Because of a variety of circumstances like possible runoffs in Georgia and Louisiana and the potential decision of Kansas independent Greg Orman about which party he chooses to caucus with, the outcome of the Senate may not be determined until days or weeks from now. The forecast refers only to the probability that Republicans will eventually claim control of the Senate by the time it convenes in January.
Still, for Republicans, it would be worth the wait after failed attempts to win the Senate in 2010 and 2012. They’ve been modest favorites in the FiveThirtyEight forecast all year, in part because the national environment is favorable for them: the group of states holding key Senate elections lean red; several Democratic incumbents have retired and the others were last elected in 2008, a high-water mark for the Democratic party; President Obama is unpopular and midterm elections have a long history of being challenging for the president’s party.
Unlike in 2010 or 2012, however, the polls have moved toward Republicans in the closing days of the campaign — making their position more robust. The movement has been clearest in states like Kentucky, Arkansas and Georgia that typically vote Republican, suggesting the election may be converging toward the “fundamentals” of each state.
silver-senate-forecast-linechart

Difficult Math For Democrats, But Uncertainty About Poll Accuracy

The uncertainty in the forecast is fairly high. Compared to Republicans’ roughly 75 percent chance, President Obama had about a 90 percent chance of being reelected in 2012, while Democrats had a 95 percent chance of keeping the Senate that year, according to the FiveThirtyEight forecast. And Republicans had about an 85 percent chance of winning the House on Election Day in 2010.
For Democrats to make good on their 25 percent chance of keeping the Senate, they would need to win two or three races where they are underdogs according to the polls. Nevertheless, the GOP’s advantage is narrow in many states. Furthermore, polls in midterms and other elections have sometimes proved to have a systematic bias, overestimating the performance of one or the other party in most or all competitive races. If the polls underrate Democrats, they could win.
The uncertainty runs in both directions, however. Historically, the polls have been just as likely to be biased toward Democrats as they are to be biased toward Republicans. If Republicans beat their polls, they could win North Carolina and New Hampshire, which only narrowly favor Democrats, and finish with as many as 55 Senate seats — a potential 10-seat swing.
It has sometimes been hard this cycle to place the states into neat groupings. Republicans need to win a net of six seats from Democrats. But at least three of these — Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia — are all but guaranteed Republican pickups, while a fourth, Arkansas, has become increasingly certain. On the other hand, Republicans could easily lose Georgia and Kansas, meaning that they’d need to win a gross of seven or eight Democratic seats to finish with a net of six.
The battle will mostly be concentrated in the eight states which neither party has established more than a 95 percent probability of winning. These are Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire and North Carolina. Other states — particularly Arkansas, Kentucky and Michigan — were once competitive but would now require pronounced polling errors for the trailing candidate to win.
Still, eight is a large number of competitive states. The good news for Republicans is that they’ll win the Senate if they split them 4-4. The better news is that the forecast favors Republicans in five of them — Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa and Louisiana — while it gives even odds in a sixth, Kansas. Only New Hampshire and North Carolina favor Democrats. The math is not impossible for Democrats — but it’s difficult.
Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 11.57.01 PM
That may be why some Democrats have begun to hope the polls are “skewed” against them.
Indeed, the FiveThirtyEight model accounts for the possibility that the polls could have an overall bias toward one party. But suppose they do not. In the final set of simulations we ran, Democrats won just 14 percent of the time when the overall bias in the polls was less than one point in either direction. This represents what we’ve called the “squeaker” scenario — Democrats eke out victories in just enough of the competitive states to win, even though the polls do a reasonably good job overall.
The Democrats’ alternative is the “shocker” scenario — the case where the polls do prove to be skewed against them. In the simulations where the polls had at least a 1-point Republican bias, Democrats won the Senate 61 percent of the time. (As should be obvious, Democrats will have no chance at all if the polls prove to have a Democratic bias; instead, Republicans will finish with something like 54 seats.) At this point, most of the Democrats’ 24 percent overall win probability comes from the “shocker” scenario. Their situation is not as bad as Mitt Romney’s was in 2012, but their chances are slim if the polls are basically telling the right story.

Forecasting Models Largely Agree

Although the polls could be wrong, there isn’t much disagreement about what they’re saying. Of the seven forecasting models tracked by The New York Times, all point to a Republican win, and most with about the same probability (75 percent) as FiveThirtyEight’s forecast. Furthermore, they agree on the outcome of all states but Kansas. These include models that rely on polls alone and those like FiveThirtyEight’s that account for polls along with other factors.
Those other factors — the so-called “fundamentals” — have tended to converge with the polls over the course of the year. If used properly, they can make a forecast more stable and reduce the statistical noise associated with polling. But they make little difference now, since even those models that once used the fundamentals no longer weigh them heavily. The modest exceptions are in Kansas and Alaska, where the polling has been sparse and (especially in Alaska’s case) potentially unreliable; the FiveThirtyEight model sees the fundamentals as favoring Republicans in each state. But it would still have Republicans favored on the basis of the polls alone in Alaska. And in Kansas, the fundamentals are not enough to make Republican Pat Roberts the favorite.

Expect A Long Night — Unless Republicans Get A Big Win Early

Even if Republicans win, the outcome may not be determined quickly. David Perdue, their candidate in Georgia, has gained in the polls — but the model still has the race going to a runoff about half the time. Louisiana will almost certainly require a runoff. Alaska’s vote may take days or weeks to count, as it has in the past. The FiveThirtyEight model — even with its optimistic forecast for Republicans overall — estimates there’s just a one in three chance that the election will be called for them on Tuesday night or early in the day on Wednesday. For Democrats, meanwhile, there’s almost no chance to win without going to “overtime;” the party will hope to extend the race for as long as possible.
There are two Republican wins, however, that could end the race quickly. Pay attention to races in North Carolina and New Hampshire. Both states have early poll-closing times (7:30 EST for North Carolina and 8:00 EST for New Hampshire) and a Republican win in either state would require Democrats to run the table in almost every other competitive race. But Republican wins would simultaneously indicate that the polls might be biased toward Democrats rather than against them, making a Democratic sweep the rest of the night very unlikely.
Although this represents FiveThirtyEight’s pre-election forecast, we’ll be tracking the elections for as long as it takes on Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. That will include live updates of our forecast as our partners at ABC News project the winners of various states. We’ve appreciated your readership this election cycle and we hope you’ll join us tonight for our liveblog coverage as the results come in. It should be a fun one.

10 October 2014

FiveThirtyEight’s Senate Forecast 10OKT14 REMEMBER TO VOTE ON 4 NOV 14!!!!!


IF the gop / tea-baggers win control of the US Senate then the Democratic Party has nobody to blame but itself. Self defeating allegiance to the grand betrayal of the Obama administration and DINOS, the failure of the party to promote and back progressives, the inability of the party to reject the control of both the Democratic and republican parties as well as our government by the rich, corporate America, the bank-financial cabal and the military industrial complex is the reason the electorate is uninspired and uncommitted. I have done nothing for and have not donated to any Democratic candidates who are not Bold Progressives endorsed by the PCCC / +BoldProgressives and +Daily Kos. I strongly encourage all liberals and progressives to check out these two groups and donate to and / or volunteer for the candidates they have endorsed. I am done with candidates who do not represent the best options for our nation and best represent my values and concerns. I am a proud member of the +Senator Elizabeth Warren wing of the Democratic Party. Some of our candidates will win, some will loose. The result of the election, the ensuing state of our nation, will be on the current administration, the Democrats and gop / tea-baggers and the electorate. God help us all. From +FiveThirtyEight .....

FiveThirtyEight’s Senate Forecast

FiveThirtyEight’s election forecasting model combines hundreds of opinion polls with historical and demographic information to calculate odds for each Senate race. We estimate the probability that each party will win control of the Senate by running those odds through thousands of simulations. The forecast is updated regularly.
 
  • Republicans have a 57.8% chance of winning a majority.
    Democrats have a 42.2% chance of keeping the majority.
    There is an 18.4% chance Republicans will control 52 seats and Democrats will control 48 seats.
  • More 2014 Midterms
  • More Politics

Senate Control Could Come Down To Whole Foods vs. Cracker Barrel Oct 8

How FiveThirtyEight Calculates Pollster Ratings Sep 25

How The FiveThirtyEight Senate Forecast Model Works Sep 17

After The Midterms, The Diversity Gap In The House Will Be Wider Than Ever Sep 15

27 March 2014

IOWA AND SOUTH DAKOTA NEED OUR HELP 27MAR14

I keep getting e mails and phone calls from various campaign committee's requesting donations to help the party hold on to the Senate and take back the House. But I am no longer donating to committees that throw their support to any candidate claims to be a democrat but is actually a DINO. It is true the +koch brothers, the face of true evil in America, are pouring tens of millions of their own money and tens of millions from their political pacs, like +americans for prosperity / afp, into campaigns of tea-baggers against Democrats in swing states like Virginia. So to Sen Mark Warner's campaign in my state, Virginia, I'm telling you as long as +Sen Warner D VA remains a third way democrat and see's his job as representing the rich, corporate America, the military-industrial complex, the bank-financial cabal and the nra I will not volunteer for or donate to your campaign. I will vote for you in November as a lesser of two evils, and believe me, +ed gillespie, the gop / tea-bagger candidate, is evil, but until you are endorsed by the +PCCC, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, that is all you will get. +The Progressive Change Campaign Committee / PCCC is endorsing and raising money for +Bold Progressives running for Congress across the country. This is a request for donations for two such Democrats running for the US Senate, endorsed not only by the PCCC but by +Sen Elizabeth Warren D VA. Please make a donation to +Bruce Braley D IA and +Rick Weiland SD (I did) and sign up with the PCCC for more information on Bold Progressive candidates across America.






If you think things are dysfunctional in Washington now, just imagine what will happen if Democrats lose control of the Senate.
Scary, huh? But that’s the future we’ll have to live with if we don’t get to work right now.
Two of my Democratic colleagues in the Senate, Tom Harkin of Iowa and Tim Johnson of South Dakota, are retiring this year. Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers are already spending huge amounts of money to pick up those seats.
Luckily, we’ve got two smart, experienced, bold progressives running in Iowa and South Dakota: Bruce Braley and Rick Weiland. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee and I are proud to endorse their campaigns.
Will you donate $3 or more to Bruce Braley and Rick Weiland to protect the Democratic majority and send more bold progressives to the Senate?
Bruce Braley led the Populist Caucus in the House of Representatives – and is focused on economic fairness, investing in education, and addressing our retirement crisis.
Rick led South Dakota’s AARP and federal emergency management in his state, and he worked as a top Senate aide. He is campaigning actively on campaign finance reform and taking back government for hard-working everyday people.
I know we can count on Bruce and Rick to be strong voices in our fight to level the playing field for working families – whether it’s protecting Social Security for our seniors, making college more affordable for our kids, or holding powerful interests accountable.
That’s precisely why the right-wing Super PACs are already lining up to stop Bruce and Rick from going to the Senate. With two new Senate pickups on the line, they’ll say whatever they need to say and spend whatever they need to spend to win.
Bruce Braley and Rick Weiland are two strong progressive voices who need your help to protect the Democratic majority this November. Can they count on you? Make a donation right now.
I know that bold progressives like you can stand up to the most powerful interests. I know it because I saw it for myself when you encouraged me to run for the Senate in Massachusetts, and I saw it as you fought by my side every step of the way.
Thanks for all your support -- and for being a bold progressive.
Senator Elizabeth Warren
 
Want to support our work? Ed Schultz called us "The top progressive group in the country"! We're making big plans for 2014, and monthly donations help us plan with certainty. Chip in $3 monthly here. (You can also donate once here.)


Paid for by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee PAC (www.BoldProgressives.org) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Contributions to the PCCC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.

20 February 2014

Actual photo of the moment Democrats lost the white working class vote & Daily Kos Recommended 18FEB14

EXPOSING the falsehood of third way democrats, many of whom are DINOs (Democrats In Name Only) it is not necessary to embrace the austerity economics and class warfare of the extreme right wing gop tea-baggers to win an election and govern. However, it IS necessary to have Bold Progressive, Populist Democratic candidates who not only have the courage to explain why the opposition's policies are bad for America, for the 99% ( see my earlier post The real face of conservatism ( It should scare you!) 16FEB14 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-real-face-of-conservatism-it-should.html ) these candidates must have the courage to promote, defend, and govern in the best interest of the American people, not the rich and corporate America who have bought politicians of the left and right. From Daily Kos....
Chris Bowers

For those of you with your images turned off, that’s President Lyndon Johnson signing the Civil Rights Act into law. Martin Luther King, Jr. stands immediately behind him. It is taken as virtual gospel among progressives that Democrats once had a lock on white working class voters, but that position quickly eroded in the 1990s and later as party leaders pursued cuts to social programs, Wall Street deregulation, and anti-union trade agreements.
But what if the Democratic position among the white working class hasn’t eroded at all outside the south? What if, even as Democratic Party economic policies undeniably became more obsequious to the one percent, the entire Democratic decline among the white working class can be attributed to Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”?
In a paper (PDF) published on the eve of the 2012 election, political scientist Elisabeth Jacobs presented compelling data pointing to that exact conclusion:
On average, Democratic presidential candidates prospects with self-identified white working class voters have diminished somewhat over time. ... Yet, the downward trend in Democratic presidential vote choice between 1956 and 2008 is concentrated amongst the Southern white working class. ... White working class presidential party vote choice for non-Southerners is remarkably stable over time; if anything, the period between 1984 and 2008 has been one of improvement for the Democrats amongst this group. The opposite is true in the South. Prior to the 1960s rights revolutions (including, most notably for the South, the major upheavals of the Civil Rights Movement), a strong majority of the Southern white working class voted for Democratic candidates. Southern white working class voting appears to have settled into a basic equilibrium with Reagan’s 1984 election, with the notable exception of an uptick for Clinton’s first election in 1992, and again for Obama’s 2008 election gambit.
Please read below the fold for more on this story.
More from Jacobs:
[P]erhaps most importantly because it is so often overlooked in popular analysis, the defection of the white South from the Democratic Party plays a central role in driving the overarching story of white working class politics. As Bartels succinctly summarizes: “Democratic presidential vote share has declined by almost 20 percentage points among [S]outhern whites without college degrees. Among non-southern whites without college degrees, it has declined by one percentage point. That’s it. Fourteen elections, 52 years, one percentage point.” The same basic relationship holds across all income groups of non-college educated whites: a 20-point-gap between the South and the rest of the country. This is Richard Nixon’s Southern Strategy come to life, not a widespread national defection of white working class voters from the Democratic Party. Case in point: in 2008, Obama won 54 percent of whites with incomes under $50,000 outside of the South, while he secured just 35 percent of this group in the South.
For the greater good of this country, to reduce America’s intolerable levels of poverty and its obscene levels of inequality, every effort must be made to get the Democratic Party to become a serious advocate of pro-working class economic policies. On that front, we have a long way to go. However, just because Democrats moved to the right on economic policy does not mean that was the cause of their decline among the white working class. Instead, the Democratic decline among the white working class happened because the party did the right thing and stood up against oppression.
The fact is that whether “working class” is defined by income, education or by self-identification, Democrats have not seen their performance among the non-southern white working class decline at all over the past six decades. What’s more, the decline of Democrats among southern working class whites coincided precisely with the photograph at the top of this article, and not with the rise of the Democratic Leadership Council.
The dominating Democratic coalitions of the past were based not only on organized labor and economic populism, but also significantly on Jim Crow and American apartheid. It’s OK for us to admit that. As progressives, we strive for a better, more equal future that has never been attained, not for a past golden age that never really happened.

Originally posted to Chris Bowers on Tue Feb 18, 2014 at 07:32 PM PST.

Also republished by Barriers and Bridges, Three Star Kossacks, and Daily Kos.

 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/18/1278680/-Actual-photo-of-the-moment-Democrats-lost-the-white-working-class-vote?detail=email
Daily Kos Recommended
Make change happen. Log in or sign up for Daily Kos, the nation's largest progressive community.

Thanks for all you do,
The Daily Kos team

P.S. Please help keep Daily Kos strong by chipping in $3.