Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Topic: MEET THE CANDIDATES.
Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Wed 05/08/19 11:39 PM
Biden’s lead over Sanders keeps growing. Here’s why. "Now it’s official: Joe Biden is eating Bernie Sanders’s lunch. When the former vice president launched his third White House bid two weeks ago, on April 25, most experts expected him to get a bounce in the polls. And he did: Seven days later, Biden’s polling average was up nearly 6 percentage points, to 35 percent, and his lead over the next closest Democratic candidate — the senator from Vermont — had grown by nearly 16". http://news.yahoo.com/bidens-lead-over-sanders-keeps-growing-heres-why-161556004.html

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Sat 05/11/19 12:10 AM
There's no 'middle ground' on climate change, Sanders tells Biden "Bernie Sanders joined a chorus of critics Friday who belittled Joe Biden for saying he hoped to find “middle ground” when drafting a policy to address climate change". http://news.yahoo.com/sanders-hits-biden-over-climate-change-middle-ground-comments-210900081.html

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Sat 05/11/19 08:08 PM
Experts on Warren's $100 billion opioid plan: 'There's a tremendous amount to like' "Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has become known for her lengthy policy proposals ahead of the 2020 election. Her latest one is a detailed plan to tackle the nation’s opioid addiction problem". http://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/warren-opioid-addiction-plan-experts-222817985.html

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Sun 05/12/19 05:27 PM
Cory Booker says this Elizabeth Warren proposal sounds like 'a Donald Trump thing to say' "Presidential candidate Cory Booker characterized his colleague and 2020 opponent Elizabeth Warren’s proposals to break up tech giants as “a Donald Trump thing to say" and called for a “president that's going to enforce antitrust laws". http://news.yahoo.com/cory-booker-says-this-elizabeth-warren-proposal-sounds-like-a-donald-trump-thing-to-say-194255874.html

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Mon 05/13/19 11:40 PM
Democrat Warren says she would pick a public school teacher for education post "LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren pledged on Monday that if she wins the White House in 2020, her education secretary will be “a former public school teacher who is committed to public education". http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-warren/democrat-warren-says-she-would-pick-a-public-school-teacher-for-education-post-idUSKCN1SJ1Y5 2020 hopeful Biden says he’s open to breaking up Facebook "HAMPTON, N.H. (AP) — Joe Biden said Monday that he would be open to breaking up Facebook, a sign of the deep skepticism among many Democratic presidential contenders about the power of massive technology firms". http://www.apnews.com/71c998ad3b39486ca1dcc220201b68b0

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Tue 05/14/19 06:17 AM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions.

oldkid46 Joined Fri 02/09/18 Posts: 1719	Tue 05/14/19 07:57 AM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions. We already can see the suppression of free speech by various platforms. They determine what the public should be or not be exposed to. They have started to block certain individuals and other sources they consider objectionable. Where they draw that line determines if we get to hear opposing viewpoints or all get fed what the platform supports. This can rapidly spread to the destruction of free speech. The appropriate approach should be the separation and identification of commonly accepted facts from opinion. Most everything posted in this forum topic is opinion by someone. It is easy to assume what is posted is fact when no disclosure is required!!

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Tue 05/14/19 08:09 AM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions. We already can see the suppression of free speech by various platforms. They determine what the public should be or not be exposed to. They have started to block certain individuals and other sources they consider objectionable. Where they draw that line determines if we get to hear opposing viewpoints or all get fed what the platform supports. This can rapidly spread to the destruction of free speech. The appropriate approach should be the separation and identification of commonly accepted facts from opinion. Most everything posted in this forum topic is opinion by someone. It is easy to assume what is posted is fact when no disclosure is required!! That is different to me though oldkid. Websites are numerous. Owners put time and resources and money into them. Those rules SHOULD be up to them, instead of government, as long as no one is inciting violence. I think it would be too much work to read all posts and qualify them as fact or fiction. I am not sure if that is what you mean though. I rather would have an education system that TEACHES people a bit better how to discern for themselves and encourages them to research things that are on public non discretionary type sources or venues.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Tue 05/14/19 08:09 AM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions. We already can see the suppression of free speech by various platforms. They determine what the public should be or not be exposed to. They have started to block certain individuals and other sources they consider objectionable. Where they draw that line determines if we get to hear opposing viewpoints or all get fed what the platform supports. This can rapidly spread to the destruction of free speech. The appropriate approach should be the separation and identification of commonly accepted facts from opinion. Most everything posted in this forum topic is opinion by someone. It is easy to assume what is posted is fact when no disclosure is required!! That is different to me though oldkid. Websites are numerous. Owners put time and resources and money into them. Those rules SHOULD be up to them, instead of government, as long as no one is inciting violence. I think it would be too much work to read all posts and qualify them as fact or fiction. I am not sure if that is what you mean though. I rather would have an education system that TEACHES people a bit better how to discern for themselves and encourages them to research things that are on public non discretionary type sources or venues.

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Tue 05/14/19 05:20 PM
Elizabeth Warren rejects town hall on 'hate-for-profit racket' Fox News "Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Tuesday she would take a “hard pass” on a Fox News invitation to hold a televised town hall event, saying she didn’t want to help the conservative network build credibility with advertisers". "Four of her rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination — Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg and Kirsten Gillibrand — have agreed to the events, in which candidates take questions from moderators and voters. Sanders and Klobuchar have already appeared." http://news.yahoo.com/elizabeth-warren-wont-appear-on-hateforprofit-racket-fox-news-town-hall-194841332.html

oldkid46 Joined Fri 02/09/18 Posts: 1719	Tue 05/14/19 08:01 PM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions. We already can see the suppression of free speech by various platforms. They determine what the public should be or not be exposed to. They have started to block certain individuals and other sources they consider objectionable. Where they draw that line determines if we get to hear opposing viewpoints or all get fed what the platform supports. This can rapidly spread to the destruction of free speech. The appropriate approach should be the separation and identification of commonly accepted facts from opinion. Most everything posted in this forum topic is opinion by someone. It is easy to assume what is posted is fact when no disclosure is required!! That is different to me though oldkid. Websites are numerous. Owners put time and resources and money into them. Those rules SHOULD be up to them, instead of government, as long as no one is inciting violence. I think it would be too much work to read all posts and qualify them as fact or fiction. I am not sure if that is what you mean though. I rather would have an education system that TEACHES people a bit better how to discern for themselves and encourages them to research things that are on public non discretionary type sources or venues. I agree with you on the education part. I wasn't suggesting that each website should make a judgement on the accuracy and honesty of a story. Most media sources are already identified as to their political leanings and that should be part of a disclaimer associated with their stories. All other website posts should simply be labeled as personal opinion. Many of the comments on here, facebook, twitter, and most other social sites are personal opinion and should be labeled as such.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Wed 05/15/19 04:34 AM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions. We already can see the suppression of free speech by various platforms. They determine what the public should be or not be exposed to. They have started to block certain individuals and other sources they consider objectionable. Where they draw that line determines if we get to hear opposing viewpoints or all get fed what the platform supports. This can rapidly spread to the destruction of free speech. The appropriate approach should be the separation and identification of commonly accepted facts from opinion. Most everything posted in this forum topic is opinion by someone. It is easy to assume what is posted is fact when no disclosure is required!! That is different to me though oldkid. Websites are numerous. Owners put time and resources and money into them. Those rules SHOULD be up to them, instead of government, as long as no one is inciting violence. I think it would be too much work to read all posts and qualify them as fact or fiction. I am not sure if that is what you mean though. I rather would have an education system that TEACHES people a bit better how to discern for themselves and encourages them to research things that are on public non discretionary type sources or venues. I agree with you on the education part. I wasn't suggesting that each website should make a judgement on the accuracy and honesty of a story. Most media sources are already identified as to their political leanings and that should be part of a disclaimer associated with their stories. All other website posts should simply be labeled as personal opinion. Many of the comments on here, facebook, twitter, and most other social sites are personal opinion and should be labeled as such. how do you see such labeling working, out of curiosity? Do you mean the site itself should have some disclaimer on a home page stating its purpose to share ideas and opinions, which may or may not be factual, type thing?

oldkid46 Joined Fri 02/09/18 Posts: 1719	Wed 05/15/19 08:07 AM
That is a scary thought, breaking up free speech venues. I would be advocating for better education, so such free speech venues don't have as much impact, but are still free to operate as a place for people to comment and share opinions. We already can see the suppression of free speech by various platforms. They determine what the public should be or not be exposed to. They have started to block certain individuals and other sources they consider objectionable. Where they draw that line determines if we get to hear opposing viewpoints or all get fed what the platform supports. This can rapidly spread to the destruction of free speech. The appropriate approach should be the separation and identification of commonly accepted facts from opinion. Most everything posted in this forum topic is opinion by someone. It is easy to assume what is posted is fact when no disclosure is required!! That is different to me though oldkid. Websites are numerous. Owners put time and resources and money into them. Those rules SHOULD be up to them, instead of government, as long as no one is inciting violence. I think it would be too much work to read all posts and qualify them as fact or fiction. I am not sure if that is what you mean though. I rather would have an education system that TEACHES people a bit better how to discern for themselves and encourages them to research things that are on public non discretionary type sources or venues. I agree with you on the education part. I wasn't suggesting that each website should make a judgement on the accuracy and honesty of a story. Most media sources are already identified as to their political leanings and that should be part of a disclaimer associated with their stories. All other website posts should simply be labeled as personal opinion. Many of the comments on here, facebook, twitter, and most other social sites are personal opinion and should be labeled as such. how do you see such labeling working, out of curiosity? Do you mean the site itself should have some disclaimer on a home page stating its purpose to share ideas and opinions, which may or may not be factual, type thing? MSN news does that with any article they consider opinion. Basically the disclaimer states: the opinions expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of MSN. The other possibility I see would be with standard media and their political leanings. Most of us recognize that FOX news tends to have a conservative bias while The Washington Post has a liberal bias. That information should be required for any article they publish. Just some type of disclosure for the uninformed to recognize the bias and opinion of the author.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Wed 05/15/19 08:20 AM
hmm. That's an interesting idea.

... Joined Sat 09/26/15 Posts: 1932	Wed 05/15/19 01:18 PM
I think the problem there is that most bias is just not recognised. Those who are biased believe they are not biased! Here are some websites useful to those interested in media bias: www.criticalinformation.org.uk/ www.atlanticcouncil.org/ www.bellingcat.com/ www.edelman.com/trust-barometer and publications like The Conversation (online), The Week and Associated Press.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Wed 05/15/19 01:23 PM
I wonder if recognizing bias when we read it would negate the need for those who post to recognize their own bias. I can read something like "In a show of weak leadership, Bill said that we should try to negotiate with other countries." And I know that the words 'weak leadership' have a particularly negative bias against Bill. EVen if the author does not recognize those words as showing bias, I can recognize that they do. And I can then research for the actual quote of what Bill said to decide for myself what I think about it. I do think many people just take something like that and keep repeating that it was weak, without ever caring to know what was actually said or making their own judgment.

oldkid46 Joined Fri 02/09/18 Posts: 1719	Wed 05/15/19 09:03 PM
I wonder if recognizing bias when we read it would negate the need for those who post to recognize their own bias. I can read something like "In a show of weak leadership, Bill said that we should try to negotiate with other countries." And I know that the words 'weak leadership' have a particularly negative bias against Bill. EVen if the author does not recognize those words as showing bias, I can recognize that they do. And I can then research for the actual quote of what Bill said to decide for myself what I think about it. I do think many people just take something like that and keep repeating that it was weak, without ever caring to know what was actually said or making their own judgment. One of the problems of group think. Especially an issue with social media in that most of your feeds are from friends who have the same background and beliefs you do. "It must be true, all my friends believe it"

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Thu 05/16/19 01:59 PM
'Farm Aid' 2020: Warren, Sanders propose rescue plans for family farmers "By nearly any metric, life for the American family farmer has become increasingly difficult if not impossible over recent years. Farm bankruptcies are soaring, up 30 percent in six Midwestern states in 2018, according to Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. The First Midwest Bank in Chicago reported in March that past-due agricultural loans were up by 287 percent year over year. Overall, farm income has dropped about 50 percent since 2013". http://news.yahoo.com/farm-aid-2020-warren-sanders-propose-rescue-plans-for-family-farmers-090000437.html Kamala Harris Says She’s ‘Open’ to Expanding Supreme Court "(Bloomberg) -- Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris said Wednesday she’s open to expanding the U.S. Supreme Court, accusing Republicans of creating a “crisis of confidence” in the nation’s highest court". http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-15/kamala-harris-supreme-court Kamala Harris flips the 'sexist' script on Biden: 'He would be a great running mate' "Kamala Harris has flipped the script on chatter that she would be a good vice president to Joe Biden, saying that her Democratic primary opponent has already proven himself adept at that role. Ms. Harris told reporters in New Hampshire that she thinks Mr. Biden would make a fine running mate for her, should she win the Democratic nomination". http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/kamala-harris-vice-president-2020-candidates-joe-biden-flips-script-a8917111.html Kamala Harris says she'll ban assault-style weapon imports if she wins White House "Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris announced Wednesday she would take executive action to ban the importation of AR-15-style weapons into the U.S. if she’s elected president. Harris, a California senator, made the pledge during a campaign event in Nashua, N.H., where she detailed how she'd use executive order to pause imports of the firearm until the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives can analyze whether the ban should be permanent". http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/05/15/kamala-harris-wants-assault-weapons-import-ban-if-she-wins-white-house/3678525002/ U.S. presidential contender Kamala Harris favors look at breaking up Facebook "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris said on Sunday that U.S. officials should consider breaking up Facebook Inc, the world's largest social media company, saying it is a utility that has gone unregulated". http://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-harris/u-s-presidential-contender-kamala-harris-favors-look-at-breaking-up-facebook-idUSKCN1SI0K5 Biden expands lead over rivals for 2020 U.S. presidential nomination despite lack of support from millennials: Reuters/Ipsos poll "NEW YORK (Reuters) - Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden has expanded his lead over a wide field of candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination by 5 percentage points since he entered the race in late April, according to a monthly Reuters/Ipsos poll. " https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll/biden-expands-lead-over-rivals-for-2020-us-presidential-nomination-despite-lack-of-support-from-millennials-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1SL1XI Kamala Harris likes the idea of Biden running — as her vice president "Kamala Harris is tired of playing second fiddle. Campaigning in New Hampshire, the junior senator from California and Democratic presidential candidate was asked if she had grown tired of hearing speculation that she might make a good vice presidential candidate on a ticket with current frontrunner Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders". https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-likes-the-idea-of-biden-running-as-her-vice-president-184730276.html?.tsrc=jtc_news_index Presidential hopeful Warren unveils bill to protect U.S. military from climate change "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Elizabeth Warren said on Wednesday she is introducing a bill to toughen the U.S. military against future climate change damage and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions at certain bases in a little over 10 years". http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climate-warren/presidential-hopeful-warren-unveils-bill-to-protect-u-s-military-from-climate-change-idUSKCN1SL2CR Elizabeth Warren unveils plan to stop 'corruption' at the Pentagon "WASHINGTON — Sen. Elizabeth Warren released a four-point plan on Thursday to combat what she described as “an intense coziness between giant defense corporations and our Department of Defense.” Warren, who is running for president, announced the proposal in a blog post, saying it would help shut the “revolving door” between the federal government and military contractors while trimming our “bloated defense budget". http://news.yahoo.com/elizabeth-warren-pentagon-reform-120000683.html 'He is a JOKE': Trump blasts Bill de Blasio's 2020 bid “The Dems are getting another beauty to join their group,” the president tweeted. “Bill de Blasio of NYC, considered the worst mayor in the U.S., will supposedly be making an announcement for president today. He is a JOKE, but if you like high taxes & crime, he’s your man. NYC HATES HIM!" "Donald Trump is playing a big con on America,” de Blasio said. “I call him Con Don. Every New Yorker knows he’s a con artist. We know his tricks. We know his playbook. I know how to take him on. I’ve been watching him for decades. He’s trying to convince working Americans he’s on their side. It’s been a lie from day one". http://news.yahoo.com/trump-mocks-de-blasios-presidential-bid-134831982.html Donald Trump loves NY … but New York refuses to love him back "The president is making his first return trip since taking office to the city where he has lived nearly his entire life. He may be expecting a hostile reception". http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/03/donald-trump-new-york-unpopularity

Charles1962150 Joined Tue 03/13/12 Posts: 3403	Thu 05/16/19 09:19 PM
FOX's file "This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by Fox, Fox News and Fox Business personalities and their pundit guests. Rulings do not include statements made on air by politicians or paid spokespeople". http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/

oldkid46 Joined Fri 02/09/18 Posts: 1719	Fri 05/17/19 06:51 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/retirement/joe-biden-has-called-for-social-security-cuts-3-times/ar-AABuQbg?li=BBnb7Kz A centrist position by a democrat on social security.