PAUL JAY: So, something like 23 million bucks was spent on the Ossoff campaign in a district where the median income is about $84,000. It’s been a Republican stronghold for decades since Newt Gingrich held office. True, Hillary Clinton did much better there, and Trump’s … during the presidential election than Democrats usually do, Trump’s ratings there, about 35 percent of people say they actually approve of the Trump presidency.
But still, in a district that sees lower taxes as the number one priority for them, and traditionally are wedded to Republican quote-unquote “values,” why pick this state to spend so much money? Like I said, 23 million bucks spent on Ossoff’s candidacy.
NINA TURNER: Only God knows. That really is a good question when the Democrats had a very real opportunity to invest some of that money into the race in Montana, for example. It just really makes no sense. And as you stated, I think Republicans have been winning that particular district, Georgia’s 6th district, since 1979. Romney won that district by about 23 points. So even though Mr. Trump … Governor Romney, let me just say that … even though Mr. Trump did much worse, that district is very much a Republican stronghold.
I think also the message was that people are not looking for folks to run “Republican lite.” Either you are going to run on the values of the Democratic party, be authentic about those principles and those values, or you’re not. But people don’t want a substitute for the real thing, and that is what Mr. Ossoff was doing. He was being a substitute for what a real Republican is, and that district is a very strong Republican stronghold, no doubt about it.
Under Corbyn’s leadership, Labour won a bigger portion of the popular vote than it has in the past 15 years. Turnout was the highest it’s been over the past 20 years. The improvement over the prior result is the best for Labour since the post-war 1945 election. YEAR LABOUR TORIES LIB (DEM) * Turnout LAB DELTA UNEMP 1964 48.0% 41.9% 8.5% 75.8% + 3.9% 2.3% 1970 43.1% 46.4% 7.5% 72% – 4.9% 2.8% 1974 37.2% 37.9% 19.3% 78.8% – 5.9% 2.7% 1974 39.2% 35.8% 18.3% 72.8% + 2.0% 2.7% 1979 36.9% 43.9% 13.8% 76% – 2.3% 6.0% 1983 27.6% 42.4% …Continue reading →
Bernie Sanders, the former US presidential election candidate, has congratulated Jeremy Corbyn, saying the election result is a sign of the world “rising up against austerity”.
Prime Minister Theresa May was fighting to hold on to her job on Friday as British voters dealt her a punishing blow.
With no clear winner emerging from Thursday’s parliamentary election, the wounded prime minister signalled she would fight on, despite losing her majority in the House of Commons. Her rival Jeremy Corbyn said she should step down.
“I am delighted to see Labour do so well,” Mr Sanders told the Washington Post. “All over the world people are rising up against austerity and massive levels of income and wealth inequality.
“People in the UK, the US and elsewhere want governments that represent all the people, not just the 1%.
“I congratulate Jeremy Corbyn for running a very positive and effective campaign.”
I know we’re all focused on the Comey hearing, but there is another major political event underway. The UK snap general election is today! It’ll determine the composition of the 650 member House of Commons. Since Theresa May called the election on April 19, she has seen the Conservative party’s lead over Labour collapse by 10-15%, with a small rebound last week. As always, final result will depend on turnout. Exit polls have been historically accurate in the UK, so we should have a good idea right after polls close, as to whether or not Labour has been able to make up …Continue reading →
Donald Trump’s so-called infrastructure plan is a huge giveaway to Wall Street that fails to create the millions of jobs we need to modernize our roads, bridges, water systems, rail, airports, levees and dams.
At a time when the American Society of Civil Engineers says we need to spend $2 trillion above current spending levels just to get our infrastructure back to a state of good repair, Trump actually cuts direct federal spending on our crumbling infrastructure by nearly $145 billion over the next decade. This would force state and local governments to shoulder more of the financial burden for our infrastructure needs at a time when they can least afford it.
Just like Trump’s “health care” bill is actually a $231 billion tax cut for the top 2 percent, his infrastructure plan would create $200 billion in new tax loopholes and other giveaways for wealthy investors, and it would reward corporations that have stashed their profits overseas with huge tax cuts.
Under Trump’s proposal, billionaires on Wall Street, wealthy campaign contributors and even foreign governments would receive hundreds of billions in tax breaks to purchase our highways, airports, and water treatment plants. They would then be allowed to impose huge new tolls and fees on the backs of American commuters and homeowners.
The reality is that Trump’s plan to sell off our nation’s highways, bridges, and other vital infrastructure to Wall Street, private investors, and foreign governments is an old idea that does not work.
Happy Weekend Everyone! How are my friends here doing on this lovely (but cool) Saturday? I have two things to contribute before getting back at chores, baking, and all that weekend stuff. I’m sure you heard that Chelsea Manning was sentenced to some solitary confinement time for attempting suicide (like that’ll be helpful to a suicidal person), but I only learned today that the other punishable offense Chelsea was dinged for was……being found in possession of an objectionable book! I read that hours ago and am still somewhat amazed. Manning also faced a Prohibited Property charge as a result of an improperly …Continue reading →