Jump to content
Carolina Huddle

NanuqoftheNorth

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    16,236
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

NanuqoftheNorth last won the day on March 22

NanuqoftheNorth had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10,308 Fuggin Awesome

About NanuqoftheNorth

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Seattle WA
  • Interests
    Politics, Hiking, Skiing, Travel, Photography.

Recent Profile Visitors

16,049 profile views
  1. Joe Biden is attacking Medicare for All with lies straight out of the playbook of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell and the health insurance industry. Can you guess who said it? https://berniesanders.com/who-said-it/
  2. Fifty years ago today, Apollo 11 began its voyage into American history. The Saturn V rocket carrying astronauts Neil Armstrong, Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin and Michael Collins launched from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida at 9:32 a.m. on July 16, 1969 — and just four days later, man first set foot on the moon. The moon mission was a milestone in human history. But it was also a groundbreaking moment in broadcast television, as CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite brought the frontier of space to living rooms across America. Watch live:
  3. Actually, a significantly higher percentage Bernie supporters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton supporters voted for Obama in 2008. Indeed, Bernie supporters showed up to vote for Clinton at a higher rate than any other demographic with the exception of senior citizens — who always top the voting demographics for both Republicans and Democrats. Absolutely, Americans should show up to vote far more than they do, though you can’t underestimate voter suppression as a force. But the whole “Bernie supporters lost 2016” is just as numerically false to the fact as “Stein lost 2016”. If you took all the Stein voters and assigned them to Hillary, she would still have lost. If you took all the Sanders supporters who didn’t vote Democrat and gave them to Hillary, she still lost. https://medium.com/@TomSwirly/actually-a-significantly-higher-percentage-bernie-supporters-voted-for-clinton-in-2016-than-aaadaec82a1c
  4. The 12% Bernie-to-Trump figure (and 24% Clinton-to-McCain figure)[see note below] comes from Brian Schaffner of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst who based it on extrapolations from the data in the Cooperative Congressional Election Study. Shaffner limited his examination only to those voters whose participation in both the primary and general could be validated. Theoretically, the idea is to weed out people who said they voted in one or other but didn’t. In practice, it cripples the headline conclusions at the end of it. Problem #1: That approach entirely excludes caucus states. Guess who did disproportionately well there? Problem #2: It entirely excludes voters in states where validation info wasn’t readily available. Short version: A large chunk of the U.S. is entirely unrepresented in his figures. The RAND Corporation did a much better study in which they tracked the same nationwide sample-group, surveying them half a dozen times throughout the campaign process. They found that 6% of Sanders voters subsequently cast their general-election ballots for Trump. This dovetails with an ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted only days before the election, which found that only 8% of Sanders primary supporters who were participating in the general planned to vote for Trump or had already done so: That great big blue stack there also helps make the point about the absurdity of efforts to blame Sanders voters for Trump’s victory; the overwhelming majority of Sanders voters voted for Clinton. If Sanders voters hadn’t voted for Clinton, she would have lost badly. Sanders was the energizing hope-and-change candidate in the race and brought into the process many new people who had never voted or had given up on voting but who came back to support him. Because of Sanders’ presence in the race, Clinton’s final vote-count is padded with x number of votes she wouldn’t have gotten absent Sanders’ presence. And now that I’ve unnecessarily belabored these points, I’ll note something that usually gets lost in this sort of minutiae: no politician is entitled to the anyone’s vote. If a pol wants someone’s vote, it is incumbent upon that pol to earn that vote. If one doesn’t proceed from the assumption that Clinton was entitled to the votes of people who didn’t want to give it to her, there’s nothing to discuss when it comes to this. https://medium.com/@jriddle/the-12-bernie-to-trump-figure-and-24-clinton-to-mccain-figure-comes-from-brian-schaffner-of-the-9905971c9f45
  5. Sorry, but not sorry about calling you out on your 3 year old false narrative. Too bad registered dems weren't as loyal to Hillary as supporters of Senator Bernie were. If dems had been as loyal, Hillary probably would've won. So next time you want to have a tantrum, direct it a Hillary, the candidate who was unable to convince enough voters from her own party to vote for her.
  6. This is a false equivalency I've seen used by others. Alaska's Permanent Fund Dividend is not a UBI. It is a once a year payment (variable amount) given to every verified/registered Alaskan resident (regardless of age) from the state's Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation. The APFC is an institution created to invest a portion of the states mineral rights revenues (Alaska owns the minerals). How those investments perform over the course of several years determines the amount of the annual payment. https://apfc.org/who-we-are/history-of-the-alaska-permanent-fund/ The residents of Alaska are not subject to any sort of tax to fund the PFD. The investment funds are generated from the states ownership/lease of mineral rights within its borders. While the PFD is nice to receive, the cost of heating a home in sub zero temperatures and the expense of shipping products from the lower 48 manages to reduce/eliminate much/all of the amount received each year.
  7. False^^^I can't believe this bullshit is still being passed off as fact almost three years later. More than 90% percent of Bernie Sander's supporters voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 general election. 10% of registered dems voted for Trump. Yeah, that is right. Registered dems had less loyalty to Clinton than Sanders supporters. In 2008 significantly less Hillary Supporters voted for Obama than Sanders supporters voted for Hillary in 2016. Hillary failed to campaign in key blue states (that she later lost) choosing to chase right leaning republican voters instead. FACT: At the end of the day no voter is obligated to vote in this nation. It is the candidate's job to convince voters to cast a ballot for her/him. In this respect Hillary failed to do her job and that is no one's fault other than Hillary's.
  8. I will say IMHO if something is called universal it needs to be for everyone. Making people choose between their current government supplemental income or UBI by definition means it is not universal. Those who receive 1K/month without conditions would increase their income more than those who would have to give up program X to receive UBI (1K/month minus X). That approach would increase wealth inequality rather than reduce it. This is a big problem. Another issue is funding. Rather than looking to tax those corporations moving away from human labor, Yang is depending on a VAT tax. We need to have more details on how his VAT will impact consumer purchasing power. The way I interpreted Yang's comments in the video, he expects at least some, if not most/all, of our current safety net programs to eventually be done away with. I remain skeptical that Yang's UBI proposal is an adequate alternative to what we have now. Bottom line: I appreciate Yang's efforts to raise the public's awareness to the challenges posed by AI and UBI.
  9. Anybody that still believes that NBC/MSNBC is "liberal" after the 2016 election should watch FOX News instead. Oh, wait, why bother? You wouldn't notice much of a difference.
  10. I'm pretty sure @CRA is David Brooks
  11. This guy will shine on the offensive line, he looks really planted!
  12. No problem let us know what you find out. For now I'm going with what Yang said in the link and it wasn't encouraging.
  13. Oh, Yang is not being dishonest, he has admitted his UBI is intended to draw people away from our current social safety net programs. "Much easier than pulling them up by the roots". You can skip the commentary and jump in around 3:40 if you want. However, I found the commentary to enhance my understanding of the UBI issue.
  14. Are we talking about Venezuela? A nation in such bad shape because of "socialism" (please ignore the fact that 80% of businesses in Venezuela are privately owned) that the US government has felt compelled to impose additional crippling economic sanctions on its people? Hmm. Seems like if things were so bad, the poor people of Venezuela would revolt, but instead it is the wealthy who have conspired to overthrow the government. Weird. The very same wealthy people of European decent who were quite content to live the good life while their poorer countrymen (of Indian and African decent) starved in the streets? Maybe that is why the majority of Venezuelans don't support US interference in their internal affairs? And perhaps why the CIA's puppet Venezuelan government lacks credibility and meaningful support? https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IF10715.pdf
  15. Then you shouldn't have an issue with any of the democratic candidates (based on "socialism"). They all support a mixed economy.
×
×
  • Create New...