Categories
Politics

Bernie Sanders Lays Out his Economic Agenda – Video

After a one-sided win against Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, Democratic Presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders flew back to Harlem, New York and was interviewed for MSNBC’s Politics Nation by the Rev. Al Sharpton. In the interview, Bernie Sanders laid out his policy agenda for the upcoming votes in Nevada and South Carolina, and for the rest of the country.

Among his policy initiatives are positions the Senator has advocated for decades –

  • Reforming Wall Street,
  • Healthcare for all,
  • Tuition free colleges,
  • Creating Jobs and
  • Reforming the tax code ensuring that the rich pays their fair share.

The presidential candidate spoke about his agenda in the video below. The interview will broadcast on Sunday’s episode of Politics Nation on MSNBC.

Video

Categories
democrats Domestic Policies

The Very Late New Hampshire Primary Predictions

Here’s how it will go down:

GOP

Trump–28%
Kasich–20% (upset special)
Rubio–17%
Bush–13%
Cruz–11%
Christie–8%
Fiorina–2%
Carson–1%

Democrats

Sanders–54%
Clinton–46%

There’s a real possibility that nobody on the GOP side drops out, but I think that Fiorina is the likliest.

For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives or Twitter @rigrundfest

Categories
Iowa Politics

Bernie Sanders Increases lead in Iowa and New Hampshire

It is Sunday and another secret Democratic debate will begin hours from now. But if having these secret debates at all weird hours of the night was a tactic by the DNC to favor the better known Hillary Clinton while keeping the lesser known Bernie Sanders away from the masses, then this has been a colossal failure on the DNC.

Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday showed Sanders with a five-percentage-point lead over Clinton, 49% to 44%.

The latest poll suggests a stark difference from a month ago where Clinton held an 11 percentage point lead over Sanders. Quinnipiac’s survey found that voters in Iowa, where caucuses are held on Feb. 1, see Sanders as more honest and more empathetic than Cliton who, however, is seen by voters as more electable than Sanders in a general election and stronger on foreign policy.

“Iowa may well become Sen. Bernie Sanders’ ‘Field of Dreams,’ Peter A. Brown, the assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, said in a statement. “After three months of Secretary Hillary Clinton holding an average 10-point lead among Iowa Democrats, the playing field has changed.”

If Sanders beats Clinton in Iowa, it would be a surprise given her deep support among Iowa’s Democratic establishment. It would also likely draw comparisons to Clinton’s 2008 presidential run. In the caucuses that year, then-senator Barack Obama beat Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards, largely due to the support of first-time caucus-goers.

A win for Sanders in Iowa would give him a boost headed into New Hampshire’s Feb. 9 primary. Sanders, who represents the neighboring state of Vermont, continues to hold a slight lead in the polls there.

A Monmouth University poll released Tuesday found Sanders leading Clinton in New Hampshire, 53% to 39%. 

Categories
Mitt Romney Politics

Another New Poll – President Obama Leads Romney in New Hampshire

President Obama has a seven-point lead over Mitt Romney in New Hampshire but they’re neck-and-neck in North Carolina and Nevada, according to new swing state polling.

Likely voters in the NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist Institutepolls released last night prefer Obama 51%-44% in New Hampshire, where Romney has a vacation home. Obama leads Romney by 2 percentage points each in North Carolina and Nevada, but the numbers are within the margin of error.

The findings track other recent polling in these battlegrounds — among about a dozen states where the presidential contest will likely be decided.

Obama’s standing in these polls has been aided by improved perceptions about the direction of the country, especially in New Hampshire.

Categories
Black people Newt Gingrich Politics Republican Rick Santorum United States

Poverty In America – More Whites In Poverty Than Blacks

 Edward Wyckoff Williams writes: The leaders of today’s Republican Party are expert storytellers. When it comes to manipulating racial stereotypes for political gain, they are akin to animation artists of the 1920s: coloring the lines in black and white.

Last Thursday Newt Gingrich told a crowd of senior citizens in New Hampshire, “The African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.” Rick Santorum was even more egregious, claiming he doesn’t “want to make black people’s lives better by giving them other people’s money” (although he later claimed that he never intentionally said “black”).

Gingrich’s latest offense comes only weeks after he received widespread criticism for saying that poor children should work as janitors and clean toilets. He specifically made a point of addressing “inner city” youths — which has become conservative code for black and brown people everywhere, from the South to the coasts, the suburbs to the metropolises, regardless of where they actually live.

The report states;

Of the 46 million people living in poverty in America in 2010, the U.S. census revealed that 31 million were white. Ten million were black. Of the 49 million people without health insurance coverage, 37 million were white; 8 million were African-American. The face of poverty in America is overwhelmingly white, but as a 2009 study on children in poverty [explained], the white American poor, especially those in rural areas, are “forgotten.”

Categories
Mitt Romney Newt Gingrich Politics South Carolina

Romney Holds Small Lead Over Gingrich In South Carolina

With just days to go before the South Caroina prmary begins, new polling shows some good news for Gingrich and some bad news for Romney, as conservative Republicans still questions the moderate record of Mitt Romney.

The former Massachusetts governor’s lead is so small in the Palmetto State that he’s essentially tied with Newt Gingrich, according to a poll conducted for The Augusta Chronicle by InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research. Romney’s 23 percent and Gingrich’s 21 percent fall within the 3.6 percent margin of error. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who came in second in the Iowa caucuses is in third place in South Carolina with 14 percent, while Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the runner-up in New Hampshire, is effectively tied with him at 13 percent.

Categories
Mitt Romney Politics Ronald Reagan

Joe Biden on Mitt Romney – He Has No Idea Of The Broken Bargain

In a twenty minutes conference call to New Hampshire Democrats on Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden and the Obama Administration amplified the 2012 presidential campaign.

Taking direct aim at the Republican frontrunner, Mr. Biden said that Romney’s “I like being able to fire people” comment – although it may have been taken out of context – shows how out of touch Republicans are with the struggles of the working class America.

He thinks it’s more important for the stockholders and the shareholders and the investors and the venture capital guys to do well [than] for those employees to be part of the bargain,” he said.

“We inherited a broken bargain. A deal our parents didn’t have to face. Middle-class folks, if you gave them an even chance, they got to share in the benefits they helped to produce for this country. That bargain was broken during the Bush years and we were determined to fix it.

“Listen to Mitt Romney. He has no idea the bargain even exists, let alone is broken. How else can you say the best way to fix the financial crisis is by letting it all go down to the bottom?”

Greed. It has been the underlining and unmentioned trait of the rich in this country for centuries. And for centuries, because of the negative stigma of greed, a stigma the rich didn’t want to be associated with, working class America felt as though they were part of the solution and shared in the profits they helped create.

Then something happened about thirty years ago. With the election of Ronald Reagan, the me first you never attitude was born and the decline of middle class America begun.

Today, after the Bush presidency, that attitude is in full view for all to see. Greed is no longer considered a negative word, in fact, it is a trait Americans are judged by. It is the dividing line that separates the two political parties, as Republicans believe giving everything to the rich is the only way the middle class would survive while Democrats on the other hand believe that all Americans should have a fair shot at the American dream.

The 2012 election is about a choice that couldn’t be any clearer. Do we re-elect a president who believes that every American must have equal opportunities to make their American dream a reality, or do we elect someone who agrees with the Ronald Reagan and George Bush philosophy that taking from the poor and giving to the rich is all that matters?

With one candidate’s policies we can once again return to a system where the American dream is possible. With the alternative, we can continue the nightmare that Reagan and Bush started.

Categories
Citizens United Mitt Romney Newt Gingrich Politics presidential Republican Rick Santorum South Carolina

Apres-Primary Musings: Mitt Can’t Conquer the Mountain

We are not impressed.

If Mitt Romney can’t muster over 40% of the vote in a backyard state against a field of sub-par candidates with extreme positions on the issues, then he’s not ready yet for his curtain call. Yes, it certainly was a good day for Romney, but not as good as his victory speech would indicate.

He’ll win the nomination, but two things are abundantly clear. The first is that Romney still hasn’t galvanized his party as a candidate, and the second is that Republican enthusiasm is turning out to be somewhat of a myth.

Let’s get to the numbers.

Here’s what I said would happen (left) and here’s what actually happened (right):

Romney      38%        39.4%

Paul            19%        22.8%

Huntsman   16%       16.8%

Gingrich      11%         9.4%

Santorum    10%         9.3%

Roemer         3%         0.4%

Perry             1%          0.7%

As in Iowa, not bad. I seem to have underestimated Ron Paul’s reliable support and overestimated Buddy Roemer’s, but I don’t think I was alone.

If present reports are true, all the candidates are moving on to South Carolina where the PAC-men will be gobbling up money and air time in their quest for Romney’s scraps. This will be Citizens United writ not on the main stage, but as regional summer stock theater. Millions of dollars that otherwise could be spent on more significant pursuits will be sucked down the rabbit hole of ego and vanity. That’s the new democracy at work, and we’d all better get used to it because when the campaign moves to Broadway in the fall, there’s going to be an ad war like no other.

South Carolina is the last stand for Huntsman, Santorum and Perry to be sure unless any of them pull wild upsets and finish in the top 3, and above 20%. Gingrich could stay in if he’s in the top 3 because he now has PAC money and Paul and his minions will stick around for the duration. Romney can claim the nomination with a dominant performance, over 40%, but 30% will be enough to make him inevitable.

Follow the march to the south at facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives.

Categories
Elections Mitt Romney Politics Rick Santorum

The Polling Report: Special New Hampshire Edition

You can just call me the Hammer, because I nailed the Iowa results almost perfectly. Of course now I will suffer for my obvious act of hubris, but I don’t believe that will come in New Hampshire.

This primary has an odd air about it because the overwhelming sentiment is that Mitt Romney will win, but it won’t matter much. The fun will come later in the month in South Carolina and Florida.

So let’s get to the polling and analysis. The latest RealClearPolitics average shows Romney with a large lead over, in this order, Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich. Here are the specifics from the latest PPP Poll. Santorum has not received a major bounce out of Iowa because he’s far too conservative for New Hampshire and he’s professed some ideas that haven’t sat well with pragmatic New Englanders, like his diatribes against gay marriage. He’s also, well, Rick Santorum, who has some well-publicized issues stemming from when he was a Pennsylvania Senator and those came to light once the press started snooping around.

Ron Paul has his reliable legions who will support him throughout the primary season, so it’s no surprise that he’s in second place. This primary is make-or-break for Jon Hunstman, and I expect that he’ll drop out of the race when he finishes a distant third. Newt will stay in through at least Florida as a pain-in-the-side for Romney now that he’s received a huge infusion of money, and Rick Perry will also drop out after South Carolina when he finishes fourth in a conservative state he otherwise could win. If he wasn’t such a terrible debater, that is.

The only drama I see in New Hampshire is Mitt’s vote percentage. He must, in my estimation, receive above 40% of the vote in New Hampshire in order to meet expectations. If he falls below that threshold, it will be a major embarrassment for him and it will expose him as the second choice to everyone else in the field. It won’t really matter what the other candidates poll. The pressure is on Mitt. If he gets above 47%, then he shows obvious strength with the people who will decide the 2012 race, moderates and independent voters, and will be seen as the presumptive nominee. Having said that, the latest polls show Mitt actually losing some support according to the tracking polls. He began the weekend at around 42%, but has dropped to 33% in the Suffolk/7News Tracking survey released on Monday.

At this point in the race, we need to face some facts: Santorum, Gingrich and Perry are damaged goods and are just saying the most outlandish things in a last-ditch effort to appeal to the far right. Paul isn’t even popular with Republicans, for heaven’s sake, Huntsman never received his bump (and he won’t in South Carolina) and is seen as the other Mormon in the race. That’s America: two, three or four Protestants of any denomination, no problem, but room for only one Mormon.

Leaders of the conservative movement have recently been stepping up their efforts to find an alternative to Mitt, and it looks like the early winner is Santorum. I think they should find a true conservative who’s not in the race, vet them for all of their transgressions and run them as a candidate outside the primaries. That’s their best chance at having a conservative who can be elected. I’ve always thought that there would be a third party candidate in this election and that they would come from the right. This might be the time to start that movement.

The last big issue is the Super-PAC money entering this race from all sides. It’s enabling the field, minus Huntsman, to buy ads in South Carolina that will probably blanket the state for the next two weeks. Most of it will be aimed at Romney, and I’m sure we’ll hear more about how he likes to fire people and how many employees lost their jobs because of Bain Capital.

And now for the stick-out-my-neck-for-the-guillotine moment: Prediction for Tuesday.

Romney 38% Paul 19% Huntsman 16% Gingrich 11% Santorum 10% Roemer 3% Perry 1%

Mitt gets enough to claim a win, but falls short of the 40% threshold. Huntsman leaves the race gracefully, Santorum, Gingrich and Perry move on to the south to make their final stands. Perry leaves after South Carolina and perhaps Santorum does too. Newt stays around because he loves to hear himself talk.

Mother Jones has a Fantasy Primary Predictor here if you’d like to play.

For more, please visit: facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives

Categories
Mitt Romney MSNBC Newt Gingrich Politics Republican republican debate Rick Santorum

Republican Debate – A Record Flip Flop For Romney – Video

A Republican debate happened yesterday and Romney stood above the fighting fray, walking away with little or no real attacks on him or his record.

A Republican debate happened today, and things were much different, as Romney took swings from Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman.

But Newt Gingrich took to the floor with one clear goal in mind. He wanted the audience to know the truth about Romney and his SuperPAC’s attempts to derail his candidacy with negative ads. Romney had previously said that he knew nothing about the actions of the PAC, or who they were. But today, he flip-flopped on that claim too.

Watch below, as Romney claimed he hadn’t seen any of the ads Gingrich was talking about, only to turn around and perfectly describe the ads he didn’t see.

Categories
Politics teachers

We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Teachers

It’s simply amazing what happens when people get elected to statewide office. They seem to become experts on everything. Today’s Exhibit A is education, specifically in Idaho and New Hampshire, where the legislatures have passed legislation that not only threatens the role of teachers in their classrooms, but also undermines their expertise and reduces them to penitents at the altar of official incompetence.

I’ve been thinking about Idaho for most of the week. Not just because I used their yummy potatoes to make latkes for Chanukah (this should be Idaho’s official dish), but because of a law passed last year that mandates the use of technology in public school classrooms and requires students to take two online classes in order to graduate high school. What’s wrong with that, you say? Plenty, because it was passed with no teacher input and is based on faulty educational premises.

Why would any state pass rigorous teacher certification requirements and observe educators for a number of years to make sure they’re competent, only to ignore them when making key decisions about how to implement a costly program of technological innovation? That’s what happened in Idaho. Teachers had almost no input into the law, and even though the Governor said this was not a first step in reducing the number of teachers in classrooms, that sentiment was contradicted by the online course requirement.

It’s not a leap of imagination to believe that if the online component proves successful, either academically or economically, then the course requirement would be increased. Further, part of the funding for this program would be taken from teacher and administrative salaries, which is usually the first step towards the self-fulfilling prophecy that says since we need computers and they cost money, we need to reduce staff because we’re paying too much in salaries.

The even larger concern is the legislature’s, and governor’s, ignorant attitude towards the classroom teachers. From the article:

Idaho is going beyond what other states have done in decreeing what hardware students and teachers should use and how they should use it. But such requirements are increasingly common at the district level, where most decisions about buying technology for schools are made. 

Teachers are resisting, saying that they prefer to employ technology as it suits their own teaching methods and styles. Some feel they are judged on how much they make use of technology, regardless of whether it improves learning. Some teachers in the Los Angeles public schools, for example, complain that the form that supervisors use to evaluate teachers has a check box on whether they use technology, suggesting that they must use it for its own sake. 

The most effective scenario for any change in the curriculum is to have teachers at the table engaged in the process they will be asked to implement. Educators are the experts in child development, learning theories and styles, and how best to guide their particular classes (which change every year) so that every child has the opportunity to learn at their optimal level. When politicians get involved, you get attitudes like this:

For his part, Governor Otter said that putting technology into students’ hands was the only way to prepare them for the work force. Giving them easy access to a wealth of facts and resources online allows them to develop critical thinking skills, he said, which is what employers want the most. 

When asked about the quantity of unreliable information on the Internet, he said this also worked in favor of better learning. “There may be a lot of misinformation,” he said, “but that information, whether right or wrong, will generate critical thinking for them as they find the truth.” 

First, technology is not “the only way” to prepare students for the work force. Teachers know that technology can be a valuable tool in the classroom, but there are many other skills that students need to learn. Tell me how a computer teaches a student interpersonal skills. Tell me how technology actually teaches a student correct spelling, grammar and usage (and no, a red or green underline doesn’t count). Tell me how a computer teaches someone how to negotiate for their salary. Tell me how technology alone teaches critical thinking skills. Tell me how technology teaches organizational skills. Tell me how technology teaches a student which websites contain legitimate information and which do not.

The truth is that teachers teach these skills. They can use technology as their activity or resource to support and facilitate the lesson’s educational objective, but the technology is not the end itself. So when the governor says that technology is the only way and that computers themselves can teach critical thinking, he’s wrong. And that’s exactly the problem with the Idaho initiative. I applaud its goals. Classrooms should have technology available to all students because not all homes are equipped, but education decisions must include teachers. Even the students in Idaho’s schools get what the state’s leaders miss:

Last year at Post Falls High School, 600 students — about half of the school — staged a lunchtime walkout to protest the new rules. Some carried signs that read: “We need teachers, not computers.” 

Having a new laptop “is not my favorite idea,” said Sam Hunts, a sophomore in Ms. Rosenbaum’s English class who has a blond mohawk. “I’d rather learn from a teacher.” 

New Hampshire’s new law has nothing to do with technology. I wish it did, because it’s even more frightening and potentially damaging to teachers and public schools. This Nashua Telegraph article tells the story, and here is a summary:

Public schools can now be forced to come up with an alternative to any lesson or assignment that a parent finds objectionable.

On Wednesday, the Legislature overturned a veto from Gov. John Lynch on a bill, HB 542, that will require school districts create a policy “allowing an exception to specific course material based on a parent’s or legal guardian’s determination that the material is objectionable.” 

The legislation does not attempt to define “objectionable,” giving parents complete discretion.

So essentially, any parent can’t walk into any public school and demand an alternative curriculum by objecting to any lesson plan they want. As opposed to Idaho, Governor John Lynch vetoed this bill but was overridden by the Republican majority. The effect is the same, though. Teachers will now have to look over their shoulders at every turn and will need to craft alternate lessons, indeed an alternate course, if one parent objects. This not only undermines educational professionals in New Hampshire, but also subjects the schools to even more political mischief in the form of pandering to particular groups and stirring up dissent over familiar targets like sexual references, defense of non-western religions and vocabulary that others find objectionable. All you need to do is read the comments under the article to see what kind of damage awaits New Hampshire’s educational community (Pete Perkins, you are my hero). Yes, parents will need to pay if there’s a cost involved, but replacing a book or video for one child would have minor economic repercussions.

But there’s also the matter of the new national test score craze.What happens when a parent opts their child out of enough lessons and the child doesn’t perform well on the tests? Who’s responsible? Is it the teacher’s job to develop an alternative state test to measure what that students has learned in their curriculum? Will the parent be responsible for the parts of the test that the student never learned (already know the answer here). How can a teacher prepare all students when there are so many potential changes due to parent objections? Who’s thought this one through (already know the answer)?

As a resident of New Jersey, I am used to having politicians with no teaching backgrounds expound on their damaging ideas. Governor Christie is a fan of using test scores to evaluate teachers, but he ignores the research that says how difficult it is to design an accurate evaluation model or the economic and curricular impact of testing every student in every subject every year. He’s also excluded public school teachers from a panel that studied reform ideas that, surprise, concluded that Christie’s ideas were more beneficial.

A recent New York Times article used the Value Added Model to reinforce the idea that good teachers have an impact on their students that reaches far beyond the classroom. What makes a good teacher according to the research? Why, one that raises student test scores. I call this Reinforced Illogical Garbage, or RIG. And right now, the system is RIGged against informed, rational, collaborative educational policies that tap into the enormous knowledge base of teachers, who actually know best how to educate children.

Join the debate at facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives

Categories
Iowa Mitt Romney Newt Gingrich Politics Republican Rick Santorum

Republican Debate – To Romney’s Delight, The Losers Attacked Each Other

With the Iowa primaries over and Mitt Romney crowned the winner by an apparent technicality, the expectation was that his fellow competitors would use whatever avenue they had available to show why they are more deserving of the Republican nomination. That perfect avenue presented itself last night in yet another Republican debate, but the other five Iowa primary losers on stage were more satisfied with fighting each other, instead of distinguishing themselves from Willard.

The former Massachusetts governor was subject to the first attack of the night but that early fire was quickly overshadowed by testy exchanges between Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich.

It’s been more than three weeks since the Republican presidential candidates have been on stage together. The last time they gathered,

Gingrich led in the polls and Michele Bachmann was still in the race.

It was a different scenario at Saturday night’s debate, sponsored by ABC News and Yahoo News.

Romney, who virtually tied Santorum in the Iowa caucuses and holds a double-digit lead in the New Hampshire polls, was expected to be a target.

He wasn’t.

There was one early attack.

Meanwhile, Romney stood idle by with a smile on his face.

How dumb was this strategy to attack each other instead of the leader? After the debate, one of ABC’s political analysis observed that Ron Paul was on the attack – going after Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich – but did not lay one finger on the leader Mitt Willard Romney. This insight led to the conclusion that Paul was like a puppet on a string. “I’m sure if you rip open Paul’s shirt,” he said, “you’ll see one of Mitt’s sons at the control.”

If you are trying to win your party’s nomination, but are too scared to use a debate to point out Romney’s non-existent record, then you have no business running for the most powerful office in the nation.

Exit mobile version