I wanted to share this version of CNN Hillary concession speech because it shows how this speech went around the world----this is the Phillipines. What Hillary said was this: she did a quick concession FOR CONSTITUTIONAL REASONS----DEMOCRATIC TRANSFERENCE OF POWER. Hillary spoke of this being what Rule of Law nations do. Hillary said she stood with citizens in protecting their rights to vote into office the representative they choose.THIS WAS THE MESSAGE HEARD FROM US 2016 ELECTIONS.
What really occurred-------a far-right, authoritarian, militaristic, dictatorship-style governance is the next stage bringing US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones. The Clinton/Obama neo-liberals POSED SOCIALLY PROGRESSIVE to make world citizens seem as though they are working for freedom and civil rights when they are the worst of offenders of both. We knew years ago that someone like Trump was to be installed next. The American people have known from 2000-----Bush/Gore that our election process was rigged. This is how we got the Robber Baron Presidents----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and it is how these elections were rigged to give us a Trump and two houses of Congress with Republican majorities. Know what global 1% Wall Street wanted with this coming economic crash from massive US Treasury and municipal bond debt? It wanted A CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT PUSHING FOR THE MOST EXTREME AUSTERITY. Now, they didn't want a far-right 1 %Wall Street global corporate neo-liberal like Hillary doing that---THIS WOULD HAVE KILLED ALL THAT TAG TEAM SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE POSING THAT IS GLOBAL POLITICS---
"Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don't just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things: the rule of law, the principle that we are equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them."
There was no Constitutional exchange of power happening in these 2016 elections----there was no Rule of Law in how these elections were conducted. The American people did not get the candidates or politicians they wanted to represent them ----SO ALL OF HILLARY'S CONCESSION SPEECH WAS A LIE. Russian President Putin always comes on global media to say thank you after jailing and/or killing his opponents. So too Saddam Hussein both passing laws FORCING CITIZENS TO COME TO THE POLLS TO VOTE FOR THE LEAST WORST.
Hillary Clinton delivers painful concession speech
By Stephen Collinson, Dan Merica and Jeff Zeleny, CNN
Updated 08:41 AM PHT Thu, November 10, 2016
New York (CNN) — "I'm sorry."
With those simple words, Hillary Clinton, who thought she would wake up Wednesday as the first woman president-elect but crashed to a stunning election defeat to Donald Trump, ended her White House quest and likely her political career.
The Democratic nominee unequivocally conceded the presidential race, and said that the Constitution requires a peaceful transfer of power.
"Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans," Clinton said.
"Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and a chance to lead," said Clinton, who was composed and dignified even as she admitted how painful her defeat was in her first public comments on the result of the election.
"This is not the outcome that we wanted and we worked so hard for, and I am sorry that we did not win this election," Clinton told supporters and campaign workers in New York.
Clinton also addressed the historic achievement for which she twice strived in losing presidential campaigns.
"I know we have still not shattered that highest and hardest glass ceiling, but someday, someone will, and hopefully sooner than we might think right now."
"And to all the little girls who are watching this, never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world to pursue and to achieve your own dreams."
Clinton's speech was devoid of bitterness and seemed at times to be an attempt to inspire her supporters about the virtues of public service and of fighting for what they believe.
But she also put Trump on notice that the core American values which many Democrats believe Trump abhors, citing his proposals for a ban on Muslim immigration and rhetorical assaults on female journalists during his campaign, would not be forgotten.
"Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don't just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things: the rule of law, the principle that we are equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them."
Tears flowed
Much of the seating at Clinton's remarks was for staff and aides and the campaign was treating it as a farewell to the people who have spent the better part of two years working on her behalf, an aide said.
Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine also was on hand. The Virginia senator was not with Clinton Tuesday night.
"I'm proud of Hillary, because she loves this country," said Kaine, who had tears in his eyes, as he delivered introductory remarks.
Aides throughout the ballroom were sobbing during Clinton's remarks. Quiet moments in the speech were filled with tears, sniffles and some sobs. Clinton's top aides, seated in the front row, were almost all crying.
Robby Mook, Clinton's campaign manager, was wiping away tears. Nick Merrill, Clinton's traveling press secretary, was weeping.
The most somber moment in Clinton's speech was when she specifically noted her impact to women and girls.
"To all the women and especially the young women who put their faith in this campaign and in me, I want you to know that nothing has made me prouder than to be your champion," Clinton said, her voice breaking with emotion.
OH REALLY?????? WHAT MOTHER WANTS HER LITTLE GIRL BECOMING A LYING, CHEATING STEALING SOCIOPATH!
There were audible cries — and some sobs — throughout the room.
Bill Clinton, while working the ropeline, wiped away tears.
Human Abedin cried during the speech but kept a stoic face during much of the ropeline.
Clinton worked the ropeline after the event, moving from tearful conversation to tearful conversation.
She first spoke with Anastasia Somoza, the 32-year old woman diagnosed with cerebral palsy and spastic quadriplegia who interned for Clinton's Senate office.
Bending down to hug Somoza, Clinton told her, "You were so wonderful in every way. I love you."
"Thank you for all your work," Clinton told Somoza's mother.
She hugged Joel Bennenson and John Anzalone, two of her pollsters, who acknowledged to other aides last night that they didn't see the Trump wave coming.
She hugged Jim Margolis and Mandy Grunwald, who created many of the campaign's television ads.
Clinton left somewhat unceremoniously, departing through a blue curtain to the left of the room and later to her motorcade.
End of a campaign
Her speech marked a bitter conclusion to a campaign that will be remembered for failing to fully energize Democratic voters and for squandering the party's traditional heartlands in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
It also marked what could be the final act on the national stage of the Clinton double act, the political partnership between Bill Clinton and the former first lady and secretary of state that had seemed poised for a remarkable comeback, 16 years after they left the White House.
Campaign staffers had spoken throughout Clinton's presidential bid of the extreme pressure many of them felt in facing Trump, whom Clinton argued was temperamentally and intellectually unfit for the presidency and to be in charge of the US nuclear arsenal.
Now she is under pressure to call on a nation, split almost exactly down the middle, to unite behind the next president.
Jason Miller, a Trump campaign spokesman, lauded her speech.
It was not the first time Clinton has tasted the pain of ending a defeated presidential campaign. In 2008, she folded her primary bid against Barack Obama in Washington and bemoaned her failure to break the "highest and hardest glass ceiling" by becoming the first female president. That was to be her fate again in 2016, though the personal recriminations are likely to be even more intense this time given that Trump is seen by many Democrats as antithetical to American values.
Clinton called Trump in the early hours of Wednesday to concede defeat after he shattered her Democratic firewall in the Midwest and swept to victory after the most vitriolic general election in generations.
But she did not appear at her election night party in New York. At the time, her campaign chairman John Podesta explained that the campaign wanted to ensure that every vote in still undeclared states was counted -- though her position already seemed hopeless.
Trump's campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said Wednesday that she was with Trump when Abedin, called to say her boss wanted to talk to the president-elect.
"I handed him the phone and they had a maybe one-minute conversation, very gracious, very warm. I heard Mr. Trump's side of it," Conway told CNN's Alisyn Camerota on "New Day. "He commended her for being smart and tough and running a very hard-fought campaign. And I am told Secretary Clinton congratulated Donald Trump on his victory, and conceded to him," Conway said.
________________________________________________
Even as the focus was on Democratic primary and DNC convention and all the election fraud and rigging......the Republican voters have had these same Republican primary rigging schemes favoring Bush neo-conservatives over old-school conservative Republicans. This is why we have a Congress ignoring all US Constitutional and Federal anti-trust and monopoly laws----moving to create complete capture of US economies with foreign global corporations.
THE DEMOCRATIC BASE OF LABOR AND JUSTICE IS A SUPER-MAJORITY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. IT HAS SINCE 2000----BEEN TOLD TO VOTE FOR THE LEAST WORST. We have gone through 8 or more election cycles allowing global 1% Wall Street to restructure our government to global Wall Street with open election fraud. NO CITIZEN IS MARCHING IN THE STREET FOR THAT----This is why REAL left-social Democrats are mad about the lack of protest during the Democratic primary election frauds. If we do not force pols out of office and fix elections locally----and statewide---we will never have a real left candidate for whom to vote---we will always have that LEAST WORST----ATTILA THE HUN VS GENGHIS KHAN----HITLER VS STALIN.
Hawaii DNC delegate 'not sorry' about making obscene gesture on TV
Wednesday, July 27th 2016, 12:49 pm ESTWednesday, July 27th 2016, 11:52 pm EST
By HNN Staff
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA (HawaiiNewsNow) - A Hawaii delegate is defending her decision to make an obscene gesture on national television during the Hawaii roll call vote at Tuesday's Democratic National Convention.
Delegate Chelsea Lyons Kent was seen on national TV sticking up her middle finger when the votes for presidential nominee Hillary Clinton were announced.
"My intention 100 percent was to flip the bird to the DNC," Kent said by phone.
“When the opportunity came and it was not planned and there was no one else involved, I flipped the finger to the DNC because the DNC had flipped the finger to us since day one and it was about time that somebody flipped it back."
The U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders supporter defied her own candidate by refusing to be respectful and quiet while Clinton was chosen as the nominee.
After the incident, her convention credentials were revoked.
But the images of Lyons making the obscene gesture have been circulated widely, generating both anger and support.
Gov. David Ige, who described Clinton's nomination for president as historic and electrifying, says the incident is not reflective of Hawaii's spirit of aloha.
"Both the Hillary supporters as well as Bernie supporters were outraged by the gesture," he said. "It truly was unfortunate that the gesture is not representative of all the work that has been done by the Hawai'i delegation here at this convention."
Other Sanders supporters say they were especially embarrassed and offended because they felt Kent's choice hurt their efforts to spread Sanders' message.
“I personally understand her frustration as to what is going on, but that was not the appropriate way to express it,” said state Rep. Joy San Buenaventura, whose district includes Puna.
Dylan Hooser, a pledged Bernie Sanders Hawaii delegate, said the moment was supposed to be special.
"It was ruined a little bit," he said. "I strongly support the right to protest and the freedom of speech, but there's a time and a place. And I don't think that was it."
The chairman of the Democratic Party of Hawaii says officials agreed to revoke Kent's floor pass for the evening and gave her the chance to apologize in exchange for being allowed to attend the rest of the convention, but she refused. That's when Kent was removed from the delegation.
"It was quite frankly immature and ridiculous. Very unfortunate. And overshadowed what has been an excellent convention so far,” said Tim Vandeever, the Democratic Party of Hawaii chairman.
Meanwhile, Kent stands by her decision and says she's not the only Sanders supporter whose DNC credentials were revoked.
“We are still told to sit in our seats and achieve unity, but Hillary Clinton is not the candidate I chose and she's not the candidate that I feel good about supporting in good conscience," she said.
"The American people are sick of being offered the choice of a lesser between two evils. Bernie Sanders was the only candidate who was not the lesser of two evils, so you cannot tell us to sit down quietly while you give us these two options."
Kent says she will not vote for Clinton or Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. It's unclear what her role in the Hawaii Democratic Party will be moving forward.
_______________________________________
If one followed BREXIT-----and UK MOVING FORWARD ----you would see LONDON as an independent global CITY STATE---it is no longer the old-school England. English citizens are ex-pats----the population is majority immigrant-----the global 1% and their 2% fill London. The several centuries of modern England are gone. UK banking as with Wall Street was central in all these global banking frauds. UK banks were central again with this decade's global US/UK Treasury bond and municipal bond frauds sending all of each nations' assets overseas. UK is a small nation about the size of Alabama. So, having London as a Foreign Economic Zone has taken the English countryside as well.
BREXIT occurred when it did because UK did not want to be part of this coming economic crash and the effects upon Europe---
UK /US PEDALED THESE BOND FRAUDS AND THEN UK RAN.
What were original British citizens have absolutely no rights or voice. The majority of immigrants have absolutely no rights or voice. The only ones in England having that voice is that global 1% and their 2%.
This is what Texas and California is now moving towards and it is not being driven by citizens. It is being driven by global Google---Global Hollywood----global private defense industry---and the global 1% and their 2% located in these Foreign Economic Zones. Texas and California under Bush and Reagan were the earliest to install US cities as Foreign Economic Zones. South Calif around San Diego is almost completely global defense industry. LA is global Hollywood----San Fran is global Google. In between is what will be desert as California HAS NO WATER. We have read in pubic policy the goal of breaking CAlifornia into 3 or 4 independent Foreign Economic Zones. This is nothing new and yes Brown----far-right 1% Wall Street global neo-liberal will push this. Same happening in Texas--Houston/Austin are Foreign Economic Zones that will break from the US to be independent tied to ONE WORLD. Texas and California main export----its citizens.It's major import----global immigrants---SAME AS UK. If California and Texas BREXIT from US those citizens will no longer have WE THE PEOPLE OF THE US TO SUPPORT THEM. They will have no power.
THIS IS THE GOAL AND THIS IS HOW US CITIES BECOME GLOBAL 1% AND THEIR 2%. TX and CA are a few decades ahead of the rest of US cities now deemed Foreign Economic Zones. A Baltimore Foreign Economic Zone once installed will do the same.
Brexit inspires Texas, California secession movements
SearchSearch Keyword:
California Gov. Jerry Brown may have inadvertently inspired supporters of Calexit by joking in March that if presumptive Republican presidential nominee is elected in November, “we’d have to build a wall around California to defend ourselves from the rest of ...
By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times -
Sunday, June 26, 2016 Within hours of the Brexit vote, Texas independence activist Daniel Miller was flooded with messages from people in other states with one question: How can we do this?
The United Kingdom’s vote Thursday in favor of severing ties with the European Union has invigorated secession movements across the pond from California to New England by showing “there is a choice for people out there,” said Mr. Miller, who heads the Texas Nationalist Movement.
“Even since the Brexit vote, what we’ve seen is we’ve been contacted by people in other states that are looking to us for advice about how they can begin the process of asserting the independence of their states,” he said. “We’re looking across the Atlantic and witnessing what to many is this surprising Euroskeptic movement, although it’s not really surprising if you pay attention over there. What’s the most surprising is now the rearing of its head of the Ameroskeptic movement, or the federal skeptic movement.”
In the hours after the British election, social media exploded with Brexit-inspired hashtags such as #Texit, #Calexit and #NHexit. Although it’s safe to assume some of those posts were made in jest, the surge in interest garnered enough attention to make its way into the presidential campaign.
The issue came up at a press conference Saturday in Scotland, where presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump was asked what he thought about a Texas secession. He chalked up the effort to dissatisfaction with the federal government.
“Texas would never do that if I’m president,” said Mr. Trump, who visited Scotland as part of a tour of his golf courses.
____________________________________________
When the Democratic majority chooses to not vote for Hillary or not vote period it is because we KNOW if the Democratic primary election is rigged and fraudulent so too will be the general election. The question across the nation---why are university students coming out for a losing Hillary and not for a fraudulent Democratic primary loss of Bernie---when a majority of students supported Bernie?
The answer is THE CLINTON INITIATIVE HAS SET UP OFFICES ON US UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES ACROSS THE NATION. These university offices recruit students to lead these protests. Here in Baltimore Clinton Initiative offices are on MICA----and TOWSON----and those offices INFECT our other university campuses. California has Clinton Initiative offices in more universities than most states---it was a huge, strong public university system that has been privatized, defunded, and made into vocational career college status.
The issues the 5% to the 1% of university students come to protest are not bad-----protesting black lives matter is good-----failure to protest the complete dismantling of MLK'S LEGACY BY OBAMA-----WAS BAD.
We talked about global CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA neo-liberalism and empire-building with Foreign Economic Zones in Asia and Latin America. DESTABILIZATION AND FACTIONING OF POPULATION is key. That is what the Trump campaign had as a goal. It wasn't Trump---it was global Wall Street creating that Trump image and it was Clinton/Obama Wall Street neo-liberals creating all that FEARMONGERING. Women had to fear Trump-----immigrants had to fear Trump-----Muslims had to fear Trump----GBLT had to fear Trump----labor had to fear Trump---it was identical to what global Wall Street does in Middle-East---Asia ---Latin America.
Those same Clinton Initiative university campuses will be the ones bringing out protests supporting CALEXIT. This is a very, very, very, very bad policy for 99% of Californians---but that 5% to the 1% of students will be out there scared to death of this TRUMPED TRUMP PRESIDENCY.
Californians are calling for a 'Calexit' from the US — here's how a secession could work
A fringe political group in California wants to opt out of a Donald Trump presidency by leaving the union.
The Yes California Independence Campaign aims to hold a referendum in 2018 that, if passed, would bring California one step closer to becoming an independent country.
Far-fetched as it may sound, the plan started gathering steam after Tuesday night's surprising presidential vote. The movement has an impressive backer in Shervin Pishevar, a well-known angel investor who offered to bankroll a campaign to secede.
"As the sixth-largest economy in the world, California is more economically powerful than France and has a population larger than Poland. Point by point, California compares and competes with countries, not just the 49 other states," Yes California wrote in a statement.
Louis Marinelli, an outspoken political activist and president of Yes California, envisions California as a sovereign entity within the US, much like Scotland in the United Kingdom:
There is no clear path for how California might appeal to the federal government so that it may leave. The US Constitution lays out procedures for how a new state may enter the union, but there are no protocols for a nation to exit.
Marinelli, however, sees a workaround — with a ballot measure passed by California voters.
In 2015, Marinelli paid $200 each to get nine initiatives related to secession on a statewide ballot, according to The Los Angeles Times. None garnered the nearly 400,000 signatures necessary to appear on the ballot. So Marinelli and his followers are forced to start over.
Yes California now aims to gather enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot in 2018, when Californians will choose their next governor, for a referendum in 2019.
Californians across the state marched in protest of President-elect Donald Trump.Noah Berger/Reuters
Should a clear majority declare their support for a Brexit-style departure, the group may follow one of two paths. Both lean on a significant case argued before the US Supreme Court in 1869 — Texas v. White — which touched on a state's ability to secede.
Here's option 1, as described in a statement from Yes California:
"A member of the California federal delegation to Washington would propose an Amendment to the US Constitution allowing the State of California to withdraw from the Union. The Amendment would have to be approved by 2/3 of the House of Representatives and 2/3 of the Senate. If the Amendment passed it would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered (to satisfy the 'consent of the states' requirement in Texas v. White). It would need to be accepted by at least 38 of the 50 state legislatures to be adopted."
Alternatively:
"California could call for a convention of the states (which is currently being organized to tackle other constitutional amendments as we speak) and the Amendment granting California its independence would have to be approved by 2/3 of the delegates to this convention. If it passed, the Amendment would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered and 38 of the 50 states would have to approve the measure in order for it to be adopted."
No state has ever seceded from the union, despite Texas' best efforts earlier this year.
"The legality of seceding is problematic," Eric McDaniel, associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin, told The Texas Tribune in June, at the height of Brexit hysteria. "The Civil War played a very big role in establishing the power of the federal government and cementing that the federal government has the final say in these issues."
Marinelli acknowledges the road ahead is long.
"What's going on in the US politically and culturally is so different from what's happening here," Marinelli told The LA Times in 2015. "I want California to be all it can, and our group feels the political and cultural connection to the US is holding us back from our potential."
__________________________________
While Clinton/Obama are sending that 5% to the 1% of university students scared to death of a Trump Presidency-----here is Texas and Bush neo-conservatives doing the same. Now, do we really think Republican voters would be as scared and angry over issues like women's rights, labor rights, GBLT, Muslims, immigrants and black racism if THEIR LEADERS AND MEDIA HAD NOT PLANTED THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN? So, now we have the right wing bringing out KKK, ARYAN NATION, SOVEREIGN CITIZEN MILITARY GROUPS. Who caused this?
It was CLINTON, BUSH, OBAMA breaking down our US Constitution and loading the nation with a global labor pool with the goal of building US cities as Foreign Economic Zones.
These tensions may have always been there---but they SOARED when Bush/Obama with Congress passed all the laws weaken our US sovereignty and allowing massive corporate fraud and government corruption----
THIS IS HOW GLOBAL WALL STREET CREATES CIVIL INSTABILITY.
Again, it is very, very, very, very bad policy for Republican voters to TXEXIT. Republicans are PROTECTOR OF REPUBLIC for goodness sake.
After Brexit, #Texit Trends for Texas
by Lana Shadwick24 Jun 2016698
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
After the Brits voted for their “Independence Day” and to leave the EU (European Union), #Texit is trending on Twitter.“June 23rd will be the day that the British people filed their papers to divorce a global bureaucracy that buried national sovereignty in bureaucratic red tape. After constant failures that left many Brits without jobs and living in a nation being colonized by migrants with no attachment to British culture, enough was enough,” reported Breitbart News’ Joseph Murray.
Now Texans are tweeting about their own independence. Tweets that “#Texit” was trending were abundant the morning after the Brexit leave vote was announced.
Keith Clock tweeted, “Just looked to see if #Texit was trending. And of course it is.”
____________________________________________
What is wrong with American civil rights and governance-----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA used Executive Order illegally to ignore all US Constitutional rights and Federal laws---dismantled all oversight and accountability in our Federal agencies---INCLUDING OUR FEDERAL ELECTION OVERSIGHT----looted the nation----and allowed systemic election fraud to undermine our ability to vote for our chosen representative-----sure, the electoral college is a problem---sure the Democratic National Committee being able to install SUPER-DELEGATE policies is a problem----the GORILLA IN THE ROOM PROBLEM IS OPEN BALLOT BOX FRAUD.
This article shows the movement pushed by GLOBAL 1% WALL STREET AND IT'S 5% TO THE 1%-----TO REWRITE A BETTER CONSTITUTION. Know what? A Congress full of rich, corrupt, global Wall Street Robber Baron pols are not going to work for WE THE PEOPLE. Everyone understands this so any movement to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION NOW-----are WALL STREET PLAYERS.
Below we see Maine-----home of Bush COMPOUND----pushing the same policies already tried and rejected by California. This is called CREATING A MODERATE, COMPROMISING political electorate----this is the same CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA called CENTER LEFT AND RIGHT MODERATES---know what? Neither were center------they both were far-right. This Maine policy as with the California is meant to marginalize the right and left voters----you know what has happened these few decades of global Wall Street CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.
Global 1% Wall Street say they are rewriting the US Constitution because our US youth are disillusioned. Isn't that what they have been saying in third world developing nations for decades?
'Some states are already showing the way. Virtually no one was paying attention on election day, given the scale of Trump’s victory, but Maine voters approved a potentially far-reaching change by passing a referendum on ranked-choice voting, an innovation geared to encouraging candidates who are “more open to moderation, compromise, and building governing coalitions,” as scholar Larry Diamond put it in a Democracy Lab article a few weeks ago'.
Let’s Face It: The U.S. Constitution Needs a Makeover
The 2016 election shows that it’s time to start a national conversation about fundamental political reform.
The experts have been throwing around a lot of numbers in the wake of the U.S. presidential election. But there’s one statistic that hasn’t been getting its due. It turns out that 43.5 percent of the electorate chose not to vote at all. Out of 231 million eligible voters, only 130.8 million decided to show up. How can we seriously claim that the winner — or, for that matter, the other candidate, who won the popular vote — represents the will of the nation as a whole?
There are undoubtedly a variety of reasons for this shocking figure. Long lines and strict new voter identification laws in many locations — as well as some Republican Party voter suppression efforts — appear to have dissuaded some. But that isn’t really enough to explain why 100 million Americans opted out of exercising their democratic rights. As is so often the case, the simpler explanation is the more likely one:
These people didn’t vote because they didn’t believe that their votes would have any effect on the outcome.
This undoubtedly has a lot to do with peculiar nature of this year’s presidential campaign. Both of the major party candidates on offer had the highest negative ratings in recent history. A deeply polarizing campaign alienated vast swathes of the electorate. Small wonder that many folks decided to stay home. (And for what it’s worth, I would have written this column even if Hillary Clinton had won.)
The problem here is more fundamental. Officially, the United States has a one-person, one-vote system. In fact, though, some votes count far more than others. That’s because of the skewed nature of the Electoral College system anchored in the U.S. Constitution. Thanks to this mechanism, voters in battleground states are far more important in determining the outcome than those in others. According to the Voter Power Index of pollster Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight website, a vote cast by someone in New Mexico on November 8 was about five times more likely to determine the Electoral College winner than the one I cast in my home state of Maryland. I did go to the polls — but more out of a sense of civic city than the belief that my vote would actually affect who ended up becoming president.
The Founding Fathers designed the Constitution precisely in order to create a buffer between the leaders and the citizenry. Traditionalists never tire of pointing out that the designers of the Constitution aimed to create a republic, not a direct democracy. The Founders wanted to ensure that empowered states would create a powerful counterweight to the central government -- one of the many checks and balances built into the system. And they succeeded in doing so. But under today’s conditions, this has the effect of giving immense and disproportionate power to people in low-population rural areas and a handful of swing states.
Don’t get me wrong: The Constitution is a magnificent achievement. Its elaborate safeguards offer the best guarantee against the unchecked exercise of presidential power — something we may well have cause to be grateful for over the next four years. These are the parts of the document worth saving, and which truly make it a work of genius.
But let’s be frank: It’s an 18th-century work of genius.
We’ve reached a point where our outmoded political architecture is betraying the ideals it was designed to protect.
We’ve reached a point where our outmoded political architecture is betraying the ideals it was designed to protect.
Judging by my recent conversations on the subject, many political experts in this country acknowledge that the Constitution is deeply out of step with the times. But the admission is usually accompanied by a fatalistic shrugging of the shoulders: The Constitution, after all, is the centerpiece of our civic religion, so it’s pointless to talk about changing it in any fundamental way. Better, they say, to concentrate on more easily achievable reforms.
Some states are already showing the way. Virtually no one was paying attention on election day, given the scale of Trump’s victory, but Maine voters approved a potentially far-reaching change by passing a referendum on ranked-choice voting, an innovation geared to encouraging candidates who are “more open to moderation, compromise, and building governing coalitions,” as scholar Larry Diamond put it in a Democracy Lab article a few weeks ago.
The Harvard legal scholar Lawrence Lessig suggests concentrating efforts on two fronts. Campaign finance reform should focus on reducing the outsized role of the wealthy “1 percent” in political campaigns. And rolling back rampant gerrymandering — which creates safe districts for candidates of a particular party — would go a long way towards reducing political polarization.
He’s absolutely right, and we should pursue these changes wholeheartedly. But we shouldn’t stop there. There are plenty of other democracies in the world that routinely indulge in substantial constitutional engineering — probably because they’re less sentimental about their basic laws.
It’s time for us to follow suit. We need to start a national discussion about transforming our political system. We need to think hard, as a nation, about how to make our democracy more responsive to the needs of the people. Eliminating the Electoral College and introducing a direct election for the presidency would be a good start. (For what it’s worth, none other than Hillary Clinton herself proposed as much back in 2000. Donald Trump himself referred to the electoral college as a “disaster for democracy” in 2012.)
I know that fixing the Constitution sounds utopian – and it certainly isn’t going to happen within the next four years, given the Republicans’ pending domination of the machinery of government. It’s worth noting, though, that passing a constitutional amendment to eliminate the Electoral College would require ratification by 38 states — which is about the same number that are effectively disenfranchised by their status as non-battleground states. And I somehow suspect that by the end of President Trump’s first term, the nation may find itself poised to consider some fairly radical solutions to our present political malaise.
Even so, changing the way our current system works will be a generational task. But we’ve got to start somewhere. I’m encouraged by the fact that younger Americans — disillusioned by recession and student loans and navel-gazing baby boomers -- appear to be far more willing to resort to a fundamental rethinking of how our country should work. What looks utopian to us may turn out to be an urgent priority for them.
What really occurred-------a far-right, authoritarian, militaristic, dictatorship-style governance is the next stage bringing US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones. The Clinton/Obama neo-liberals POSED SOCIALLY PROGRESSIVE to make world citizens seem as though they are working for freedom and civil rights when they are the worst of offenders of both. We knew years ago that someone like Trump was to be installed next. The American people have known from 2000-----Bush/Gore that our election process was rigged. This is how we got the Robber Baron Presidents----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and it is how these elections were rigged to give us a Trump and two houses of Congress with Republican majorities. Know what global 1% Wall Street wanted with this coming economic crash from massive US Treasury and municipal bond debt? It wanted A CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT PUSHING FOR THE MOST EXTREME AUSTERITY. Now, they didn't want a far-right 1 %Wall Street global corporate neo-liberal like Hillary doing that---THIS WOULD HAVE KILLED ALL THAT TAG TEAM SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE POSING THAT IS GLOBAL POLITICS---
"Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don't just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things: the rule of law, the principle that we are equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them."
There was no Constitutional exchange of power happening in these 2016 elections----there was no Rule of Law in how these elections were conducted. The American people did not get the candidates or politicians they wanted to represent them ----SO ALL OF HILLARY'S CONCESSION SPEECH WAS A LIE. Russian President Putin always comes on global media to say thank you after jailing and/or killing his opponents. So too Saddam Hussein both passing laws FORCING CITIZENS TO COME TO THE POLLS TO VOTE FOR THE LEAST WORST.
Hillary Clinton delivers painful concession speech
By Stephen Collinson, Dan Merica and Jeff Zeleny, CNN
Updated 08:41 AM PHT Thu, November 10, 2016
New York (CNN) — "I'm sorry."
With those simple words, Hillary Clinton, who thought she would wake up Wednesday as the first woman president-elect but crashed to a stunning election defeat to Donald Trump, ended her White House quest and likely her political career.
The Democratic nominee unequivocally conceded the presidential race, and said that the Constitution requires a peaceful transfer of power.
"Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans," Clinton said.
"Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and a chance to lead," said Clinton, who was composed and dignified even as she admitted how painful her defeat was in her first public comments on the result of the election.
"This is not the outcome that we wanted and we worked so hard for, and I am sorry that we did not win this election," Clinton told supporters and campaign workers in New York.
Clinton also addressed the historic achievement for which she twice strived in losing presidential campaigns.
"I know we have still not shattered that highest and hardest glass ceiling, but someday, someone will, and hopefully sooner than we might think right now."
"And to all the little girls who are watching this, never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world to pursue and to achieve your own dreams."
Clinton's speech was devoid of bitterness and seemed at times to be an attempt to inspire her supporters about the virtues of public service and of fighting for what they believe.
But she also put Trump on notice that the core American values which many Democrats believe Trump abhors, citing his proposals for a ban on Muslim immigration and rhetorical assaults on female journalists during his campaign, would not be forgotten.
"Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power and we don't just respect that, we cherish it. It also enshrines other things: the rule of law, the principle that we are equal in rights and dignity, freedom of worship and expression. We respect and cherish these values too and we must defend them."
Tears flowed
Much of the seating at Clinton's remarks was for staff and aides and the campaign was treating it as a farewell to the people who have spent the better part of two years working on her behalf, an aide said.
Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine also was on hand. The Virginia senator was not with Clinton Tuesday night.
"I'm proud of Hillary, because she loves this country," said Kaine, who had tears in his eyes, as he delivered introductory remarks.
Aides throughout the ballroom were sobbing during Clinton's remarks. Quiet moments in the speech were filled with tears, sniffles and some sobs. Clinton's top aides, seated in the front row, were almost all crying.
Robby Mook, Clinton's campaign manager, was wiping away tears. Nick Merrill, Clinton's traveling press secretary, was weeping.
The most somber moment in Clinton's speech was when she specifically noted her impact to women and girls.
"To all the women and especially the young women who put their faith in this campaign and in me, I want you to know that nothing has made me prouder than to be your champion," Clinton said, her voice breaking with emotion.
OH REALLY?????? WHAT MOTHER WANTS HER LITTLE GIRL BECOMING A LYING, CHEATING STEALING SOCIOPATH!
There were audible cries — and some sobs — throughout the room.
Bill Clinton, while working the ropeline, wiped away tears.
Human Abedin cried during the speech but kept a stoic face during much of the ropeline.
Clinton worked the ropeline after the event, moving from tearful conversation to tearful conversation.
She first spoke with Anastasia Somoza, the 32-year old woman diagnosed with cerebral palsy and spastic quadriplegia who interned for Clinton's Senate office.
Bending down to hug Somoza, Clinton told her, "You were so wonderful in every way. I love you."
"Thank you for all your work," Clinton told Somoza's mother.
She hugged Joel Bennenson and John Anzalone, two of her pollsters, who acknowledged to other aides last night that they didn't see the Trump wave coming.
She hugged Jim Margolis and Mandy Grunwald, who created many of the campaign's television ads.
Clinton left somewhat unceremoniously, departing through a blue curtain to the left of the room and later to her motorcade.
End of a campaign
Her speech marked a bitter conclusion to a campaign that will be remembered for failing to fully energize Democratic voters and for squandering the party's traditional heartlands in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
It also marked what could be the final act on the national stage of the Clinton double act, the political partnership between Bill Clinton and the former first lady and secretary of state that had seemed poised for a remarkable comeback, 16 years after they left the White House.
Campaign staffers had spoken throughout Clinton's presidential bid of the extreme pressure many of them felt in facing Trump, whom Clinton argued was temperamentally and intellectually unfit for the presidency and to be in charge of the US nuclear arsenal.
Now she is under pressure to call on a nation, split almost exactly down the middle, to unite behind the next president.
Jason Miller, a Trump campaign spokesman, lauded her speech.
It was not the first time Clinton has tasted the pain of ending a defeated presidential campaign. In 2008, she folded her primary bid against Barack Obama in Washington and bemoaned her failure to break the "highest and hardest glass ceiling" by becoming the first female president. That was to be her fate again in 2016, though the personal recriminations are likely to be even more intense this time given that Trump is seen by many Democrats as antithetical to American values.
Clinton called Trump in the early hours of Wednesday to concede defeat after he shattered her Democratic firewall in the Midwest and swept to victory after the most vitriolic general election in generations.
But she did not appear at her election night party in New York. At the time, her campaign chairman John Podesta explained that the campaign wanted to ensure that every vote in still undeclared states was counted -- though her position already seemed hopeless.
Trump's campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said Wednesday that she was with Trump when Abedin, called to say her boss wanted to talk to the president-elect.
"I handed him the phone and they had a maybe one-minute conversation, very gracious, very warm. I heard Mr. Trump's side of it," Conway told CNN's Alisyn Camerota on "New Day. "He commended her for being smart and tough and running a very hard-fought campaign. And I am told Secretary Clinton congratulated Donald Trump on his victory, and conceded to him," Conway said.
________________________________________________
Even as the focus was on Democratic primary and DNC convention and all the election fraud and rigging......the Republican voters have had these same Republican primary rigging schemes favoring Bush neo-conservatives over old-school conservative Republicans. This is why we have a Congress ignoring all US Constitutional and Federal anti-trust and monopoly laws----moving to create complete capture of US economies with foreign global corporations.
THE DEMOCRATIC BASE OF LABOR AND JUSTICE IS A SUPER-MAJORITY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. IT HAS SINCE 2000----BEEN TOLD TO VOTE FOR THE LEAST WORST. We have gone through 8 or more election cycles allowing global 1% Wall Street to restructure our government to global Wall Street with open election fraud. NO CITIZEN IS MARCHING IN THE STREET FOR THAT----This is why REAL left-social Democrats are mad about the lack of protest during the Democratic primary election frauds. If we do not force pols out of office and fix elections locally----and statewide---we will never have a real left candidate for whom to vote---we will always have that LEAST WORST----ATTILA THE HUN VS GENGHIS KHAN----HITLER VS STALIN.
Hawaii DNC delegate 'not sorry' about making obscene gesture on TV
Wednesday, July 27th 2016, 12:49 pm ESTWednesday, July 27th 2016, 11:52 pm EST
By HNN Staff
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA (HawaiiNewsNow) - A Hawaii delegate is defending her decision to make an obscene gesture on national television during the Hawaii roll call vote at Tuesday's Democratic National Convention.
Delegate Chelsea Lyons Kent was seen on national TV sticking up her middle finger when the votes for presidential nominee Hillary Clinton were announced.
"My intention 100 percent was to flip the bird to the DNC," Kent said by phone.
“When the opportunity came and it was not planned and there was no one else involved, I flipped the finger to the DNC because the DNC had flipped the finger to us since day one and it was about time that somebody flipped it back."
The U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders supporter defied her own candidate by refusing to be respectful and quiet while Clinton was chosen as the nominee.
After the incident, her convention credentials were revoked.
But the images of Lyons making the obscene gesture have been circulated widely, generating both anger and support.
Gov. David Ige, who described Clinton's nomination for president as historic and electrifying, says the incident is not reflective of Hawaii's spirit of aloha.
"Both the Hillary supporters as well as Bernie supporters were outraged by the gesture," he said. "It truly was unfortunate that the gesture is not representative of all the work that has been done by the Hawai'i delegation here at this convention."
Other Sanders supporters say they were especially embarrassed and offended because they felt Kent's choice hurt their efforts to spread Sanders' message.
“I personally understand her frustration as to what is going on, but that was not the appropriate way to express it,” said state Rep. Joy San Buenaventura, whose district includes Puna.
Dylan Hooser, a pledged Bernie Sanders Hawaii delegate, said the moment was supposed to be special.
"It was ruined a little bit," he said. "I strongly support the right to protest and the freedom of speech, but there's a time and a place. And I don't think that was it."
The chairman of the Democratic Party of Hawaii says officials agreed to revoke Kent's floor pass for the evening and gave her the chance to apologize in exchange for being allowed to attend the rest of the convention, but she refused. That's when Kent was removed from the delegation.
"It was quite frankly immature and ridiculous. Very unfortunate. And overshadowed what has been an excellent convention so far,” said Tim Vandeever, the Democratic Party of Hawaii chairman.
Meanwhile, Kent stands by her decision and says she's not the only Sanders supporter whose DNC credentials were revoked.
“We are still told to sit in our seats and achieve unity, but Hillary Clinton is not the candidate I chose and she's not the candidate that I feel good about supporting in good conscience," she said.
"The American people are sick of being offered the choice of a lesser between two evils. Bernie Sanders was the only candidate who was not the lesser of two evils, so you cannot tell us to sit down quietly while you give us these two options."
Kent says she will not vote for Clinton or Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. It's unclear what her role in the Hawaii Democratic Party will be moving forward.
_______________________________________
If one followed BREXIT-----and UK MOVING FORWARD ----you would see LONDON as an independent global CITY STATE---it is no longer the old-school England. English citizens are ex-pats----the population is majority immigrant-----the global 1% and their 2% fill London. The several centuries of modern England are gone. UK banking as with Wall Street was central in all these global banking frauds. UK banks were central again with this decade's global US/UK Treasury bond and municipal bond frauds sending all of each nations' assets overseas. UK is a small nation about the size of Alabama. So, having London as a Foreign Economic Zone has taken the English countryside as well.
BREXIT occurred when it did because UK did not want to be part of this coming economic crash and the effects upon Europe---
UK /US PEDALED THESE BOND FRAUDS AND THEN UK RAN.
What were original British citizens have absolutely no rights or voice. The majority of immigrants have absolutely no rights or voice. The only ones in England having that voice is that global 1% and their 2%.
This is what Texas and California is now moving towards and it is not being driven by citizens. It is being driven by global Google---Global Hollywood----global private defense industry---and the global 1% and their 2% located in these Foreign Economic Zones. Texas and California under Bush and Reagan were the earliest to install US cities as Foreign Economic Zones. South Calif around San Diego is almost completely global defense industry. LA is global Hollywood----San Fran is global Google. In between is what will be desert as California HAS NO WATER. We have read in pubic policy the goal of breaking CAlifornia into 3 or 4 independent Foreign Economic Zones. This is nothing new and yes Brown----far-right 1% Wall Street global neo-liberal will push this. Same happening in Texas--Houston/Austin are Foreign Economic Zones that will break from the US to be independent tied to ONE WORLD. Texas and California main export----its citizens.It's major import----global immigrants---SAME AS UK. If California and Texas BREXIT from US those citizens will no longer have WE THE PEOPLE OF THE US TO SUPPORT THEM. They will have no power.
THIS IS THE GOAL AND THIS IS HOW US CITIES BECOME GLOBAL 1% AND THEIR 2%. TX and CA are a few decades ahead of the rest of US cities now deemed Foreign Economic Zones. A Baltimore Foreign Economic Zone once installed will do the same.
Brexit inspires Texas, California secession movements
SearchSearch Keyword:
California Gov. Jerry Brown may have inadvertently inspired supporters of Calexit by joking in March that if presumptive Republican presidential nominee is elected in November, “we’d have to build a wall around California to defend ourselves from the rest of ...
By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times -
Sunday, June 26, 2016 Within hours of the Brexit vote, Texas independence activist Daniel Miller was flooded with messages from people in other states with one question: How can we do this?
The United Kingdom’s vote Thursday in favor of severing ties with the European Union has invigorated secession movements across the pond from California to New England by showing “there is a choice for people out there,” said Mr. Miller, who heads the Texas Nationalist Movement.
“Even since the Brexit vote, what we’ve seen is we’ve been contacted by people in other states that are looking to us for advice about how they can begin the process of asserting the independence of their states,” he said. “We’re looking across the Atlantic and witnessing what to many is this surprising Euroskeptic movement, although it’s not really surprising if you pay attention over there. What’s the most surprising is now the rearing of its head of the Ameroskeptic movement, or the federal skeptic movement.”
In the hours after the British election, social media exploded with Brexit-inspired hashtags such as #Texit, #Calexit and #NHexit. Although it’s safe to assume some of those posts were made in jest, the surge in interest garnered enough attention to make its way into the presidential campaign.
The issue came up at a press conference Saturday in Scotland, where presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump was asked what he thought about a Texas secession. He chalked up the effort to dissatisfaction with the federal government.
“Texas would never do that if I’m president,” said Mr. Trump, who visited Scotland as part of a tour of his golf courses.
____________________________________________
When the Democratic majority chooses to not vote for Hillary or not vote period it is because we KNOW if the Democratic primary election is rigged and fraudulent so too will be the general election. The question across the nation---why are university students coming out for a losing Hillary and not for a fraudulent Democratic primary loss of Bernie---when a majority of students supported Bernie?
The answer is THE CLINTON INITIATIVE HAS SET UP OFFICES ON US UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES ACROSS THE NATION. These university offices recruit students to lead these protests. Here in Baltimore Clinton Initiative offices are on MICA----and TOWSON----and those offices INFECT our other university campuses. California has Clinton Initiative offices in more universities than most states---it was a huge, strong public university system that has been privatized, defunded, and made into vocational career college status.
The issues the 5% to the 1% of university students come to protest are not bad-----protesting black lives matter is good-----failure to protest the complete dismantling of MLK'S LEGACY BY OBAMA-----WAS BAD.
We talked about global CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA neo-liberalism and empire-building with Foreign Economic Zones in Asia and Latin America. DESTABILIZATION AND FACTIONING OF POPULATION is key. That is what the Trump campaign had as a goal. It wasn't Trump---it was global Wall Street creating that Trump image and it was Clinton/Obama Wall Street neo-liberals creating all that FEARMONGERING. Women had to fear Trump-----immigrants had to fear Trump-----Muslims had to fear Trump----GBLT had to fear Trump----labor had to fear Trump---it was identical to what global Wall Street does in Middle-East---Asia ---Latin America.
Those same Clinton Initiative university campuses will be the ones bringing out protests supporting CALEXIT. This is a very, very, very, very bad policy for 99% of Californians---but that 5% to the 1% of students will be out there scared to death of this TRUMPED TRUMP PRESIDENCY.
Californians are calling for a 'Calexit' from the US — here's how a secession could work
- Melia Robinson
- Nov. 9, 2016, 5:45 PM
A fringe political group in California wants to opt out of a Donald Trump presidency by leaving the union.
The Yes California Independence Campaign aims to hold a referendum in 2018 that, if passed, would bring California one step closer to becoming an independent country.
Far-fetched as it may sound, the plan started gathering steam after Tuesday night's surprising presidential vote. The movement has an impressive backer in Shervin Pishevar, a well-known angel investor who offered to bankroll a campaign to secede.
"As the sixth-largest economy in the world, California is more economically powerful than France and has a population larger than Poland. Point by point, California compares and competes with countries, not just the 49 other states," Yes California wrote in a statement.
Louis Marinelli, an outspoken political activist and president of Yes California, envisions California as a sovereign entity within the US, much like Scotland in the United Kingdom:
There is no clear path for how California might appeal to the federal government so that it may leave. The US Constitution lays out procedures for how a new state may enter the union, but there are no protocols for a nation to exit.
Marinelli, however, sees a workaround — with a ballot measure passed by California voters.
In 2015, Marinelli paid $200 each to get nine initiatives related to secession on a statewide ballot, according to The Los Angeles Times. None garnered the nearly 400,000 signatures necessary to appear on the ballot. So Marinelli and his followers are forced to start over.
Yes California now aims to gather enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot in 2018, when Californians will choose their next governor, for a referendum in 2019.
Californians across the state marched in protest of President-elect Donald Trump.Noah Berger/Reuters
Should a clear majority declare their support for a Brexit-style departure, the group may follow one of two paths. Both lean on a significant case argued before the US Supreme Court in 1869 — Texas v. White — which touched on a state's ability to secede.
Here's option 1, as described in a statement from Yes California:
"A member of the California federal delegation to Washington would propose an Amendment to the US Constitution allowing the State of California to withdraw from the Union. The Amendment would have to be approved by 2/3 of the House of Representatives and 2/3 of the Senate. If the Amendment passed it would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered (to satisfy the 'consent of the states' requirement in Texas v. White). It would need to be accepted by at least 38 of the 50 state legislatures to be adopted."
Alternatively:
"California could call for a convention of the states (which is currently being organized to tackle other constitutional amendments as we speak) and the Amendment granting California its independence would have to be approved by 2/3 of the delegates to this convention. If it passed, the Amendment would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered and 38 of the 50 states would have to approve the measure in order for it to be adopted."
No state has ever seceded from the union, despite Texas' best efforts earlier this year.
"The legality of seceding is problematic," Eric McDaniel, associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin, told The Texas Tribune in June, at the height of Brexit hysteria. "The Civil War played a very big role in establishing the power of the federal government and cementing that the federal government has the final say in these issues."
Marinelli acknowledges the road ahead is long.
"What's going on in the US politically and culturally is so different from what's happening here," Marinelli told The LA Times in 2015. "I want California to be all it can, and our group feels the political and cultural connection to the US is holding us back from our potential."
__________________________________
While Clinton/Obama are sending that 5% to the 1% of university students scared to death of a Trump Presidency-----here is Texas and Bush neo-conservatives doing the same. Now, do we really think Republican voters would be as scared and angry over issues like women's rights, labor rights, GBLT, Muslims, immigrants and black racism if THEIR LEADERS AND MEDIA HAD NOT PLANTED THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN? So, now we have the right wing bringing out KKK, ARYAN NATION, SOVEREIGN CITIZEN MILITARY GROUPS. Who caused this?
It was CLINTON, BUSH, OBAMA breaking down our US Constitution and loading the nation with a global labor pool with the goal of building US cities as Foreign Economic Zones.
These tensions may have always been there---but they SOARED when Bush/Obama with Congress passed all the laws weaken our US sovereignty and allowing massive corporate fraud and government corruption----
THIS IS HOW GLOBAL WALL STREET CREATES CIVIL INSTABILITY.
Again, it is very, very, very, very bad policy for Republican voters to TXEXIT. Republicans are PROTECTOR OF REPUBLIC for goodness sake.
After Brexit, #Texit Trends for Texas
by Lana Shadwick24 Jun 2016698
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
After the Brits voted for their “Independence Day” and to leave the EU (European Union), #Texit is trending on Twitter.“June 23rd will be the day that the British people filed their papers to divorce a global bureaucracy that buried national sovereignty in bureaucratic red tape. After constant failures that left many Brits without jobs and living in a nation being colonized by migrants with no attachment to British culture, enough was enough,” reported Breitbart News’ Joseph Murray.
Now Texans are tweeting about their own independence. Tweets that “#Texit” was trending were abundant the morning after the Brexit leave vote was announced.
Keith Clock tweeted, “Just looked to see if #Texit was trending. And of course it is.”
____________________________________________
What is wrong with American civil rights and governance-----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA used Executive Order illegally to ignore all US Constitutional rights and Federal laws---dismantled all oversight and accountability in our Federal agencies---INCLUDING OUR FEDERAL ELECTION OVERSIGHT----looted the nation----and allowed systemic election fraud to undermine our ability to vote for our chosen representative-----sure, the electoral college is a problem---sure the Democratic National Committee being able to install SUPER-DELEGATE policies is a problem----the GORILLA IN THE ROOM PROBLEM IS OPEN BALLOT BOX FRAUD.
This article shows the movement pushed by GLOBAL 1% WALL STREET AND IT'S 5% TO THE 1%-----TO REWRITE A BETTER CONSTITUTION. Know what? A Congress full of rich, corrupt, global Wall Street Robber Baron pols are not going to work for WE THE PEOPLE. Everyone understands this so any movement to AMEND THE CONSTITUTION NOW-----are WALL STREET PLAYERS.
Below we see Maine-----home of Bush COMPOUND----pushing the same policies already tried and rejected by California. This is called CREATING A MODERATE, COMPROMISING political electorate----this is the same CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA called CENTER LEFT AND RIGHT MODERATES---know what? Neither were center------they both were far-right. This Maine policy as with the California is meant to marginalize the right and left voters----you know what has happened these few decades of global Wall Street CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.
Global 1% Wall Street say they are rewriting the US Constitution because our US youth are disillusioned. Isn't that what they have been saying in third world developing nations for decades?
'Some states are already showing the way. Virtually no one was paying attention on election day, given the scale of Trump’s victory, but Maine voters approved a potentially far-reaching change by passing a referendum on ranked-choice voting, an innovation geared to encouraging candidates who are “more open to moderation, compromise, and building governing coalitions,” as scholar Larry Diamond put it in a Democracy Lab article a few weeks ago'.
Let’s Face It: The U.S. Constitution Needs a Makeover
The 2016 election shows that it’s time to start a national conversation about fundamental political reform.
- By Christian Caryl
- November 11, 2016 - 3:07 pm
The experts have been throwing around a lot of numbers in the wake of the U.S. presidential election. But there’s one statistic that hasn’t been getting its due. It turns out that 43.5 percent of the electorate chose not to vote at all. Out of 231 million eligible voters, only 130.8 million decided to show up. How can we seriously claim that the winner — or, for that matter, the other candidate, who won the popular vote — represents the will of the nation as a whole?
There are undoubtedly a variety of reasons for this shocking figure. Long lines and strict new voter identification laws in many locations — as well as some Republican Party voter suppression efforts — appear to have dissuaded some. But that isn’t really enough to explain why 100 million Americans opted out of exercising their democratic rights. As is so often the case, the simpler explanation is the more likely one:
These people didn’t vote because they didn’t believe that their votes would have any effect on the outcome.
This undoubtedly has a lot to do with peculiar nature of this year’s presidential campaign. Both of the major party candidates on offer had the highest negative ratings in recent history. A deeply polarizing campaign alienated vast swathes of the electorate. Small wonder that many folks decided to stay home. (And for what it’s worth, I would have written this column even if Hillary Clinton had won.)
The problem here is more fundamental. Officially, the United States has a one-person, one-vote system. In fact, though, some votes count far more than others. That’s because of the skewed nature of the Electoral College system anchored in the U.S. Constitution. Thanks to this mechanism, voters in battleground states are far more important in determining the outcome than those in others. According to the Voter Power Index of pollster Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight website, a vote cast by someone in New Mexico on November 8 was about five times more likely to determine the Electoral College winner than the one I cast in my home state of Maryland. I did go to the polls — but more out of a sense of civic city than the belief that my vote would actually affect who ended up becoming president.
The Founding Fathers designed the Constitution precisely in order to create a buffer between the leaders and the citizenry. Traditionalists never tire of pointing out that the designers of the Constitution aimed to create a republic, not a direct democracy. The Founders wanted to ensure that empowered states would create a powerful counterweight to the central government -- one of the many checks and balances built into the system. And they succeeded in doing so. But under today’s conditions, this has the effect of giving immense and disproportionate power to people in low-population rural areas and a handful of swing states.
Don’t get me wrong: The Constitution is a magnificent achievement. Its elaborate safeguards offer the best guarantee against the unchecked exercise of presidential power — something we may well have cause to be grateful for over the next four years. These are the parts of the document worth saving, and which truly make it a work of genius.
But let’s be frank: It’s an 18th-century work of genius.
We’ve reached a point where our outmoded political architecture is betraying the ideals it was designed to protect.
We’ve reached a point where our outmoded political architecture is betraying the ideals it was designed to protect.
Judging by my recent conversations on the subject, many political experts in this country acknowledge that the Constitution is deeply out of step with the times. But the admission is usually accompanied by a fatalistic shrugging of the shoulders: The Constitution, after all, is the centerpiece of our civic religion, so it’s pointless to talk about changing it in any fundamental way. Better, they say, to concentrate on more easily achievable reforms.
Some states are already showing the way. Virtually no one was paying attention on election day, given the scale of Trump’s victory, but Maine voters approved a potentially far-reaching change by passing a referendum on ranked-choice voting, an innovation geared to encouraging candidates who are “more open to moderation, compromise, and building governing coalitions,” as scholar Larry Diamond put it in a Democracy Lab article a few weeks ago.
The Harvard legal scholar Lawrence Lessig suggests concentrating efforts on two fronts. Campaign finance reform should focus on reducing the outsized role of the wealthy “1 percent” in political campaigns. And rolling back rampant gerrymandering — which creates safe districts for candidates of a particular party — would go a long way towards reducing political polarization.
He’s absolutely right, and we should pursue these changes wholeheartedly. But we shouldn’t stop there. There are plenty of other democracies in the world that routinely indulge in substantial constitutional engineering — probably because they’re less sentimental about their basic laws.
It’s time for us to follow suit. We need to start a national discussion about transforming our political system. We need to think hard, as a nation, about how to make our democracy more responsive to the needs of the people. Eliminating the Electoral College and introducing a direct election for the presidency would be a good start. (For what it’s worth, none other than Hillary Clinton herself proposed as much back in 2000. Donald Trump himself referred to the electoral college as a “disaster for democracy” in 2012.)
I know that fixing the Constitution sounds utopian – and it certainly isn’t going to happen within the next four years, given the Republicans’ pending domination of the machinery of government. It’s worth noting, though, that passing a constitutional amendment to eliminate the Electoral College would require ratification by 38 states — which is about the same number that are effectively disenfranchised by their status as non-battleground states. And I somehow suspect that by the end of President Trump’s first term, the nation may find itself poised to consider some fairly radical solutions to our present political malaise.
Even so, changing the way our current system works will be a generational task. But we’ve got to start somewhere. I’m encouraged by the fact that younger Americans — disillusioned by recession and student loans and navel-gazing baby boomers -- appear to be far more willing to resort to a fundamental rethinking of how our country should work. What looks utopian to us may turn out to be an urgent priority for them.
RSS Feed
