Why are Americans so angry? Angrier? Republicans (61%) and white people (54%)

Latinos Rock! Iowa’s Latino voter turnout scored a victory

iowa

SOURCE by David J. Dent, associate professor of journalism and social and cultural analysis at New York University, edits the blog, bushobamaamerica.com, and is the author of a forthcoming book on swing counties. His is also the author of “In Search of Black America: Discovering the African-American Dream.”


Last Monday, a group dedicated to boosting Iowa’s Latino voter turnout scored a victory far more certain than Hillary Clinton’s win over Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

More than 10,000 Latinos caucused, up from roughly 1,000 eight years ago. And the group, The League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa, has Donald Trump’s rhetoric on immigration to thank.

The overwhelming majority of Latinos caucused as Democrats, but it was that notorious Republican who motivated many of them to caucus at all.

“I decided to caucus, because I don’t want Donald Trump to become the president,” said Tania Fonseca, 23, a Mexican American who caucused in Marshall County, a swing county in central Iowa that voted for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 and President Obama in 2008 and 2012. “I want to learn a lot more about what the presidential timeline looks like.”

Fonseca, like many Mexican Americans, has voted in general elections, but caucusing always sounded a bit intimidating, especially for registered Democrats. The Democratic caucuses require everyone to publicly announce their choices, while the Republican votes are private.

However, Fonseca could not resist the lobbying calls from Latino community leaders to caucus, thanks largely to a Trump rally at Marshalltown High School, located about 50 miles northeast of Des Moines.

It was just one week before the caucus that school officials closed the school early to make room for Trump and his supporters. Fonseca helped organize and advise the student protests that greeted Trump when he arrived. Every Latino voter I spoke to in Marshalltown mentioned the rally and the fear it created among Latinos in this small town of 27,727.

“It’s terrifying but not surprising, because I feel like the tension has always been there.” — Veronica Guevara

“To me, it’s terrifying but not surprising, because I feel like the tension has always been there,” says Veronica Guevara, 24, who grew up in Marshalltown but moved to Des Moines months ago to serve as director of Latino Outreach for the Iowa Coalition on Domestic Violence. “I feel like now, the more front and center it becomes, the more chances we have of actually confronting these issues straight on.”

When Tasnia and her husband, Erich, entered the cafeteria at Fisher Elementary School in Marshalltown, Iowa, on Monday night, they felt like they were confronting a new world. They saw two big crowds huddled together — one side sporting Sanders paraphernalia and the other with Clinton signs.

Then there were the two other small pockets of people in corners of the room who were undecided voters or supporters of former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who finished third and dropped out of the race the next day.

Erich and Tasnia joined the Sanders crowd. In fact, of the 207 caucus goers at the precinct, 26 were Mexican Americans. They all stood with Sanders, helping him win the precinct with 103 votes to Clinton’s 102 and carry Marshall County.

“Bernie’s track record on immigration is great, and Hillary is not the best on that issue,” said Jacqueline Guevara, a first-time, Mexican American caucus goer who supported Sanders.

Like many Mexican Americans with citizenship, Guevara has relatives who are undocumented and live in fear of being deported — a concern that has only gone up in response to Trump and the GOP primary field’s rhetoric on immigration. “We can no longer sit out on any part of the process,” Guevara said.

Iowa and New Hampshire Do Not Look Like America

white

The Iowa caucuses give white people outsize power over the presidency

SOURCE by  on February 1, 2016, 6:20 p.m. ET  

Iowa exerts a huge amount of power over the American presidency. A 2011 study by economists Brian Knight and Nathan Schiff found that caucus-goers in Iowa (and their counterparts in New Hampshire) carry the same influence in determining their party’s ultimate nominee as five voters from Super Tuesday states put together.

So it’s concerning that the states selected to start the primary season, and wield this disproportionate influence, are among the least diverse in America:

iowa

A whopping 88.7 percent of Iowans and 92.3 percent of New Hampshirites are non-Hispanic whites; only 63.7 percent of Americans as a whole are.

Only 3.4 percent of Iowans are black; 13.2 percent of Americans are.

Unlike the rest of the country, Iowa and New Hampshire do not have particularly large immigrant populations. Only 4.7 percent of Iowans and 5.6 percent of New Hampshirites are foreign-born, compared with 13.1 percent nationwide. Only 7.2 percent of Iowans and 8 percent of New Hampshirites speak a language other than English at home; 20.7 percent of American families do.

New Hampshire and Iowa are also markedly less urban than the rest of the country; they have cities, but none are particularly big. Des Moines, Iowa’s biggest city, has only 209,220 people; Manchester, New Hampshire’s largest, only has 110,448.

By putting Iowa and New Hampshire first, the Democratic and Republican parties are effectively saying that disproportionate power and influence should go to a small group of overwhelmingly white people in rural areas and small cities. That influence shouldn’t go to a state or region with a large Hispanic population. It shouldn’t go to a state or region with a large black population. It shouldn’t go to a state with large cities and a strong interest in urban issues. It should go to these people instead.

That does a profound disservice to the millions of Americans living in diverse, densely populated areas. Or, to put it more bluntly, it gives white people outsize power in determining nominees, and disenfranchises black, Hispanic, Asian Americans, and Native Americans relatively speaking.

PLAGIARISM: Marco Rubio STEALS President Obama’s Speech, Any New Ideas?

steals

SOURCE by KINSLEY RYAN

Marco Rubio, in his land of make-believe where people can’t remember what happened 8 years ago, claims he can run the country, however his staff can’t even write original speeches! Rubio is being accused of plagiarism after his speech last night in Iowa. It started off really well until he had to use his own words and no longer pick from an old speech by President Obama.

Rubio gave his victory speech last night, his victory of coming in THIRD place behind both Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. His speech began:

‘So this is the moment they said would never happen. For months, for months they told us we had no chance. For months they told us because we offer too much optimism in a time of anger, we had no chance. For months they told us because we didn’t have the right endorsements or the right political connections, we had no chance. They told me that we have no chance because my hair wasn’t gray enough and my boots were too high.’

This opening is almost word for word Obama’s victory speech he gave at Iowa caucus from 2008, which he WON, the similarities are astounding.

Obama’s speech began with:

‘They said this day would never come. They said our sights were set too high. They said this country was too divided, too disillusioned to ever come together around a common purpose. But on this January night, at this defining moment in history, you have done what the cynics said we couldn’t do.’

As with every knock-off, Rubio’s speech was not nearly as powerful and inspiring as Obama’s. The President’s glorious speech stomps all over Rubio’s substandard attempt at stealing the glory. It is apparent Rubio has never had to live in the real world where people aren’t allowed to steal intellectual property from others; a world where people can’t just plagiarize and get by with bulls****ting.

The Republican party is big on trying to make the Democratic party look bad, and spreading lies about President Obama. There will not be a time when Rubio will publicly admit taking Obama’s speech and attempting to make it his own. Obama’s speech writer tweeted in regards to Rubio’s speech, “He could’ve at least thanked Obama for his opening line.”

Obama wowed the crowd with his powerful speech, appealing to people of all ages. Rubio was hoping to do the same piggy-backing off of Obama’s work. Rubio may aspire to be Obama and lead in his footsteps, but Rubio will never be anything like Obama. He is lacking the wow factor, his speeches have no power, and he often fades into the background. How can Rubio lead a country when he can’t even lead his own speeches?

Watch the knock-off of Obama’s speech below:

Billionaire Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Trolls Trump: ‘I Bailed You Out Twice’

TRUMP

‘GOOGLE IT’: Donald Trump promotes conspiracy theory, fake photo of Megyn Kelly and Saudi prince

 

A Saudi prince may have just beaten Donald Trump at a game of Twitter trolling.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal said on Twitter that he’s bailed the billionaire out twice — and suggested the GOP presidential frontrunner might need his help a third time.

The exchange was initiated by Trump, who had retweeted a badly Photoshopped image showing the prince with Fox News host Megyn Kelly, calling him a co-owner of the network:

The reply from Bin Talal:


The prince’s tweet included news stories showing that he bought Trump’s yacht in 1991, which had been turned over to creditors when he was $900 million in debt, according to Buzzfeed.

He also included a link to a story showing that he was part of the group that bought New York City’s Plaza Hotel from Trump in 1995. As part of the deal, bin Talal paid off Trump’s debt on the hotel in what the New York Times said was “a defeat for the real estate developer.”

Trump’s tweet also claimed bin Talal is “co-owner” of Fox News. While the prince is an investor in News Corp, his stake is worth 1 percent, according to CNN.

Trump and bin Talal also tangled on Twitter last month.

After the candidate’s incendiary call to ban Muslims from entering the United States, bin Talal urged him to quit the race:


Trump responded:


Note to our readers: Donald Trump is a serial liarrampant xenophoberacistmisogynistbirther and bully who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

(h/t Mediaite)

 

SOURCE

Drumroll please! Robert Gates: Republicans’ grasp of national security is at a child’s level

childs-level

Former defense secretary condemns media for failing to challenge presidential candidates on promises he believes are unaffordable, illegal or unconstitutional

Robert Gates, a Republican stalwart and former US defence secretary who served under eight presidents, has derided the party’s election candidates for a grasp of national security issues that “would embarrass a middle schooler”.

An ex-CIA director who first joined the White House under Richard Nixon, Gates joked that if frontrunner Donald Trump wins the presidency, he would emigrate to Canada. He condemned the media for failing to challenge candidates from both parties on promises he believes are unaffordable, illegal or unconstitutional.

“The level of dialogue on national security issues would embarrass a middle schooler,” Gates said of the Republican contenders at a Politico Playbook event in Washington on Monday. “People are out there making threats and promises that are totally unrealistic, totally unattainable. Either they really believe what they’re saying or they’re cynical and opportunistic and, in a way, you hope it’s the latter, because God forbid they actually believe some of the things that they’re saying.”

Gates is among Republican elders dismayed by the way this year’s campaign is unfolding, with establishment figures such as Jeb Bush, whose father he served as director of central intelligence, failing to gain traction against mavericks with unusual prescriptions for keeping America safe.

Trump suggested “closing parts of the internet” to prevent Islamic State attracting recruits, Ted Cruz pledged to “carpet bomb them into oblivion”, Chris Christie proposed flying Air Force One over disputed Chinese islands and Carly Fiorina boasted of having had “a private meeting” with Russian leader Vladimir Putin when in fact they met in a green room at a conference.

Gates, promoting a new book, A Passion for Leadership, said: “One of the greatest, most appealing aspects of Ronald Reagan was his optimism about this country and about the future, and these guys all make it sound like we’re going down the drain.” All the candidates, he argued, should “try to communicate better to the American people that these are complicated, difficult problems that are going to be difficult to solve and are probably going to require some sacrifice”.

The 72-year-old declined to comment on specific candidates but was pressed by interviewer Mike Allen on the prospect of Trump reaching the White House. After a pause, he replied: “Well, I live about 50 miles from Canada.”

As the audience erupted in laughter, Gates continued philosophically: “I’ve been around a long time. There are a lot of people who have run for president where people have said, ‘Oh my God, if he’s elected, it’s the end of the world!’ And the truth of the matter is, it wasn’t, and so I’m not prepared to be overly dramatic and believe me, the comment I just made was very sarcastic and humorous, not meant seriously. Somebody out there will write a story that I’m going to Canada. It’s totally not true; I intend to remain within the United States.”

Gates was the only defence secretary in American history to be asked to remain in that office by a newly elected president. Working under Barack Obama, he was alongside Hillary Clinton when she was secretary of state and praised her as “tough minded” with “a lot of common sense” but admitted they began to disagree on issues towards the end, notably the intervention in Libya.

He did not mention Bernie Sanders by name but did suggest both Democratic and Republican candidates are being given an easy ride by the media. “Frankly, I think that the press needs to be more aggressive,” he said. “A lot of people in both parties are making huge promises and commitments.

“In some cases, the things they’re saying they’re going to do are unconstitutional or merely against the law and others are, from a budgetary standpoint, inconceivable, and so it seems to be that the press has not hammered hard enough and been relentless in saying, ‘How the hell are you going to do that?’”

Gates condemned National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden as a traitor, called on tech companies to put security ahead of business interests and cooperate with intelligence agencies on encrypted data, and repeated his past description of Putin as a “stone-cold killer”, which, in the light of the Alexander Litvinenko inquiry, “the British now seem to reaffirm”.

The intelligence veteran of nearly 27 years also spoke about the danger of leaks and recalled the 2011 raid in Pakistan that killed terrorist Osama bin Laden. A friend later emailed him a Photoshopped version of the famous picture in the situation room with the occupants wearing superhero costumes: Obama as Superman, Joe Biden as Spider-Man, Clinton as Wonder Woman and Gates himself as the Green Lantern.

“And we all had a good laugh, and then I said, ‘Mr President, this is the reason the photographs of the dead Bin Laden must never be released, because somebody will Photoshop them and it will anger every Muslim in the world, even those that hated Bin Laden, because of being disrespectful of the dead, and it will create greater risk for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and for all Americans, especially in the Middle East.’ And to the best of my knowledge, those photographs are the only things about that raid that have never leaked.”

He added: “The Defense Department wrote the book on leaking. They know how to do this. But the Defense Department leaks about policy and budget and weapons programmes and stuff like that. They do not leak about military operations because they know lives are at stake. So the leaks about the Bin Laden raid for the first couple of weeks came from the White House and CIA, and I just thought that was a disgrace.”

SOURCE