progressives

Good Morning, News: Trump's Horror Show Returns, City Council Results Explained (with Emojis), and Portland Progressives Rule the Day

by Wm. Steven Humphrey

If you’re reading this, you probably know the value of the Mercurys news reporting, arts and culture coverage, event calendar, and the bevy of events we host throughout the year. The work we do helps our city shine, but we can’t do it without your support. If you believe Portland benefits from smart, local journalism and arts coverage, please consider making a small monthly contribution, because without you, there is no us. Thanks for your support!

GOOD MORNING, PORTLAND. 

As we wake to face a repeat of authoritarian rule, I wanted to share something I wrote last night during our election live blog:

We can look into the darkness and choose to hide there, or we can do like we did in 2016 and rise up. You can bet that’s what we here at the Mercury will be doing. We consider it a privilege to be able to stand up for the voiceless and fight against the rising tide of hatred. We’ve been doing it for the past 24 years, and there is absolutely no way we’re going to stop now.

But we will need your help, because now there are millions of people across the country who will need your assistance as well. We can do it together, because we’ve done it before and we know what it takes. Cry, scream, yell, and grieve—and then get a good night’s sleep. Because tomorrow, we’re going to need that roaring fire that burns inside each of us to continue protecting those who need it most. We believe in you. You are strong enough to face the road ahead, and we’ll be right there beside you. 

Now, let's look at the news.

IN LOCAL ELECTION NEWS:

• While we can expect more results to drop from Multnomah County elections, the current leader for mayor of Portland (and by a wide margin) is trucking company owner Keith Wilson. That said, Multnomah County officials say that up to 50 percent of the votes have yet to be counted, which could throw a lifeline of hope to second place candidate Carmen Rubio, and probably won't be any help at all to distant third place challenger Rene Gonzalez, har-har hardy-har-har. (While we may fear for the intelligence of half the country, at least the majority of Portland knew enough to "#Don't Rank Rene.")

Per prelim results Tues (subject to change):

Wilson got 36% of 1st-choice votes, nearly 2x that of Gonzalez or Rubio.

Our Oct poll (30% undecided) showed RG 23% of 1st-choice, Wilson 18%.

Many thought RG would get up to 35%.

Instead, he cratered.https://t.co/05C4hPAi6J https://t.co/kOJ4jLaBVO

— Shane Dixon Kavanaugh (@shanedkavanaugh) November 6, 2024

• In the race for a new—and hopefully greatly improved—Portland City Council, here are the current leaders (expect another ballot drop from the county at 6 pm tonight) in each district... as described with emojis:

DISTRICT 1 (East Portland): Candace Avalos ????, Loretta Smith ????, and Jamie Dunphy ????.

DISTRICT 2 (North Portland): Current City Commissioner Dan Ryan ????, along with candidates Sameer Kanal ????, and Elana Pirtle-Guiney ????.

DISTRICT 3 (Central and Southeast Portland): Angelita Morillo ????, Tiffany Koyama Lane ????, and Steve Novick ????.

DISTRICT 4 (West Portland/Downtown/Sellwood): Olivia Clark ????, Mitch Green ????, and Eric Zimmerman ????.

In short, our newest city council so far has a progressive majority, which will be especially helpful in facing the next four years of YOU KNOW WHO ????.

• Meanwhile there were two races of note for Multnomah County Commissioners: Megan Moyer was elected as commissioner for District 1 and Shannon Singleton will represent District 2 on the County Board of Commissioners. Moyer defeated Vadim "I'll run for any office that will have me... what do you mean they won't have me?" Mozyrsky, while Shannon Singleton (who is soundly beating Sam "Second most unlikable politician in town" Adams) will most likely represent District 2. Another big progressive win.

• And how did the state measures fare? As of this morning, Measure 115 (allowing the Oregon state legislature to impeach and remove awful elected politicians) is winning big, 63 percent to 37 percent. Measure 116 (giving an independent commission the power to set salaries for some state lawmakers) is most likely a "no," and is leading the "yes" vote count by 10 percent. Measure 117 (implementing ranked-choice voting for state and federal offices) is sadly a big "NO" after being defeated 60 to 40 percent. The nice, but misguided Measure 118 (establishing a minimum tax on certain corporations, with the proceeds going toward a $1600 tax rebate for all Oregonians) went down in flames 79 to 21 percent, and Measure 119 (making it easier for cannabis workers to unionize) is also a probable "YES," currently leading the "no thank you's" by ten percent.

• As expected, it was a good night for Democrats running for state office, with Tobias Read winning Oregon Secretary of State, Elizabeth Steiner taking the state treasurer position, and Dan Rayfield snapping up the Attorney General spot. And while Dems Maxine Dexter, Andrea Salinas, Val Hoyle, and Suzanne Bonamici won their races for US Representative, the most closely watched federal contest in the state is still nail-bitingly close: Dem Janelle Bynum currently leads GOP darling Lori Chavez-DeRemer by two percentage points.

Stay tuned to the Mercury over the next few days, as more election results are solidifying! And don't forget to check out our Election Night Live Blog for all the blow-by-blows from last night's rollercoaster of events.

IN OTHER LOCAL NEWS THAT IS ALSO IMPORTANT:

• Well, this is some bullshit: In a blatant attempt at impotent, political grandstanding, Commissioner (and mayoral loser) Rene Gonzalez and fellow stooges Mingus Mapps and Dan Ryan are scheduled to vote tomorrow to sink the current homelessness agreement it has with Multnomah County—and even more inexplicably insane—they don't even have a backup plan to replace it. Oh, but wait... there's more: This ridiculous, thoughtless stunt will cost the city $40 million that we don't have. (The new city council cannot arrive soon enough.) Our Courtney Vaughn has the infuriating details

• In a very different way to spend election night, two people were arrested and their cars towed following a street racing takeover event in North Portland. (Apropos of nothing, I voted for Tokyo Drift as my fave Fast & Furious movie.)

IN NATIONAL ELECTION NEWS:

• Well fartz, here we go again: Convicted felon and twice impeached former president Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris (in case you didn't hear). And while the GOP also held on to the Senate (Jeeeeesus Ch-rist!), the House is still a toss-up and we won't hear for awhile about who won the presidential popular vote—though cash money says it'll be Kamala. And while I'm certain we'll all be hearing a lot of "blame game" antics today, try to resist pointing fingers at fellow Dems. The blame lies alone with those who refuse to educate themselves or be educated, and who let fear and racism rule their existence. Don't be one of them.

Donald Trump — the twice impeached former president, Jan. 6 coup leader, convicted felon, adjudicated sexual abuser, and man who mismanaged the 2020 economic implosion and coronavirus disaster that killed more than 1 million people in this country — has convinced American voters… pic.twitter.com/9cd0luvTFF

— Rolling Stone (@RollingStone) November 6, 2024

• Abortion was also on the ballot last night, with pro-abortion activists winning in seven states (Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Montana, Nevada, New York, and possibly Missouri), while three other states (Florida, Nebraska, and South Dakota) kept their draconian bans in place.

• The best headline of the day so far: "Sarah McBride becomes the first out transgender person elected to Congress." ????????????????

• In less-than-optimal election headlines: "Texas Sen. Ted Cruz will win reelection and defeat Democrat Colin Allred, CNN projects." "The world's right-wing leaders celebrate Trump's win — but America's allies hint unease." "Trump legal team planning to move swiftly to get all criminal cases brought to a halt." And possibly the most obvious headline of the day: "Racism, sexism partly to blame for Harris defeat."

They want you to feel powerless and surrender and let them trample everything and you are not going to let them. You are not giving up, and neither am I. The fact that we cannot save everything does not mean we cannot save anything and everything we can save is worth saving.

— Rebecca Solnit/joy is a strategy (@RebeccaSolnit) November 6, 2024

• And finally... let's cleanse that timeline with some good news that—a new baby hippo is in town! (Cold comfort... but right now I'll take it.)

Moo Deng? Who deng? Introducing… Haggis ????????????????????????????

Otto and Gloria have welcomed an ADORABLE pygmy hippo calf! She is doing well, but we’ll be keeping the hippo house closed for the time being so that our expert keepers can keep a close eye on mum and baby at this sensitive time ???????? pic.twitter.com/ceGtARuzyR

— Edinburgh Zoo (@EdinburghZoo) November 4, 2024




progressives

Progressives Are Hoping That Justice Stephen Breyer Steps Down At The End Of The Term

Progressive activists are watching the end of the Supreme Court session for a possible retirement announcement from Stephen Breyer, the court's oldest current justice. Breyer will turn 83 in August.; Credit: Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP/Pool

Susan Davis | NPR

For Erwin Chemerinsky, this is a familiar feeling: Seven years ago, the dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law publicly called for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire from the Supreme Court because he reasoned too much was at stake in the 2016 elections.

Ginsburg didn't listen then, but he's hoping Justice Stephen Breyer will listen now — but Breyer has given no indication whether he plans to stay or go.

"If he wants someone with his values and views to take his place, now is the time to step down," Chemerinsky told NPR.

Progressive activists are hoping that Breyer, who will turn 83 in August, will announce he is retiring Thursday, the same day the Supreme Court delivers its final two opinions of the term. But a justice can decide to retire at any time — though both Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor announced their respective retirements at the end of the court's session.

Chemerinsky is part of a growing rank of progressives who are breaking with the polite, political norms of the past when it comes to questioning service on the Supreme Court. Ginsburg's death last year and the subsequent appointment of Amy Coney Barrett to deliver a conservative supermajority on the court had a lot to do with that.

"I think a lot of people who thought that silence was the best approach in 2013 came to regret that in the aftermath of [Ginsburg's] untimely passing last year," said Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice. "I think it would be foolish of us to repeat this same mistake and to greet the current situation passively and not do everything we can to signal to Justice Breyer, that now is the time for him to step down"

Since Democrats took control of the Senate in January, Demand Justice has organized public demonstrations, billboard and ad campaigns, and assembled a list of scholars and activists to join their public pressure campaign for Breyer to retire.

The risk, as Fallon sees it, is twofold. The first is the perils of a 50-50 Senate.

"The Democrats are one heartbeat away from having control switch in the Senate," he said. "There's a lot of octogenarian senators, many of whom have Republican governors that might get to appoint a successor to them if the worst happened."

The second is the 2022 midterms when control of the Senate will be in play.

"If [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell reassumes the Senate majority leader post, at worst, he might block any Biden pick, and at best, Biden is going to have to calibrate who he selects in order to get them through a Republican-held Senate."

Both Chemerinsky and Fallon concede the public campaign is not without some risk.

"I've certainly heard from some that this might make him less likely to retire, perhaps to dig in his heels," Chemerinsky said.

The campaign has also not caught fire on Capitol Hill, where only a small handful of progressive senators have — tactfully — suggested they'd like to see Breyer retire of his own accord.

Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., told CNN this month he did not support any Senate-led pressure campaigns on the court, but he added: "My secret heart is that some members, particularly the 82-year-old Stephen Breyer, will maybe have that thought on his own, that he should not let his seat be subject to a potential theft."

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., also distanced himself from the public retirement push, telling NPR: "I'm not on that campaign to put pressure on Justice Breyer. He's done an exceptional job. He alone can make the decision about his future. And I trust him to make the right one."

Absent any change in the status quo, Democrats will control the Senate at least until 2023. If the court's session ends without a retirement announcement, Fallon said he expects the calls for Breyer's retirement will grow louder. It's all part of what he said is a new, more aggressive position on the Supreme Court from the left.

"In some way, we are trying to make a point that progressives for too long, have taken a hands-off approach to the court," he said. "And they've been sort of foolish for doing so because the other side doesn't operate that way."

Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.




progressives

Progressives thought voters loved their climate agenda, but Trump’s victory suggests it didn’t sell

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/left-thought-voters-loved-climate-agenda-trumps-victory-suggests-its-not By Kevin Killough Kamala Harris hoped to secure the White House with a platform that vaguely appeared moderate on one hand, while cozying up to radical climate activists on the other. Donald Trump has repeatedly called climate change a “hoax,” something Democrats hammered the Republican candidate on for years, and promised voters America would “drill, baby, drill” if […]




progressives

Biden Bows to Pressure From Progressives on Evictions, But Tensions Remain

The Biden administration issued a new eviction moratorium, responding to pressure from progressive Democrats. WSJ’s Gerald F. Seib explains how this friction exposed a rift between the White House and some Democrats that could affect future legislation. Photo illustration: Adam Falk




progressives

Democrats’ Tax Plan a Balancing Act Between Moderates, Progressives

The Democrats’ plan to pay for President Biden’s $3.5 trillion Build Back Better initiative will need to strike the right balance to appeal to progressives without alienating moderates. WSJ’s Gerald F. Seib discusses with tax policy reporter Richard Rubin. Photo illustration: Todd Johnson




progressives

A jobs guarantee — progressives’ latest big idea

But cynicism about politics means we should be wary of making promises we cannot keep




progressives

Annapolis Coalition of Black Progressives Pac Launches to Help Elect More People of Color in Annapolis, Maryland

With no African Americans in the top offices in Annapolis and Anne Arundel County, a group of young black progressives hopes to change that in the upcoming elections.




progressives

City Visions: E.J. Dionne: How progressives and moderates can unite America

Will progressives and moderates feud as the country burns? Or will they unite to defeat President Trump and usher in a new era of reform?




progressives

Bernie Sanders was never a real candidate but was merely this election’s sheepdog for Hillary Clinton to herd progressives back into the corral of the Democratic Party.

Bernie Sanders and Jane Sanders are mere actors serving as pressure valves which release from time to time all excess heat emanating from failed policies, scandals, and the worsening economic conditions, so that a catastrophic systems’ collapse can be prevented. They are sheepdogs for Hillary Clinton, preventing progressives from supporting a third party progressive candidate and to herd them back into the corral of the Democratic Party. Continue reading




progressives

Bernie Sanders just sold out Progressives once again but this time to Chuck Schumer

Grow a spine. Bernie Sanders, when are you going to risk losing your friendship with the Democrats to help your country? When are you going to risk doing that? You had a stupid secret agreement not to attack Hillary Clinton, and you stayed by it, and then when the country needed you to do something with your movement, you told them to go work for the Machine. And now you're telling them to back Chuck Schumer. Continue reading




progressives

Bernie Sanders is not the revolutionary leader for whom progressives have been waiting

Bernie Sanders' voting record is not progressive. It has been reported on Facebook that Bernie has voted 98% of the time in agreement with Senate Democrats and 93% of the time in agreement with Hillary Clinton. And here is Bernie Sanders' illustrious "progressive" voting record...LOL. Show this to all his crazed cult followers who claim he is a progressive and has done so much for us...LOL. Continue reading



  • Accountants CPA Hartford
  • Articles
  • Bernie Sanders
  • Bernie Sanders has voted 98% in agreement with Senate Democrats
  • Bernie Sanders is not a progressive
  • Bernie Sanders is not the revolutionary leader for whom progressives have been waiting
  • Bernie Sanders votes to fund the military
  • Bernie Sanders voting record
  • bills authoring military funding
  • defense authorization bills
  • George Soros
  • Hillary Clinton
  • military authorization bills acts
  • Sanderistas

progressives

Independent senator defects to the Progressives as senators spar over committee seats

Manitoba Sen. Patricia Bovey has left the Independent Senators Group (ISG) and will now sit as a member of the Progressive caucus, a group composed of former Liberal senators.




progressives

Who says progressives and conservatives can’t compromise?


Americans often think of our country as being one of great opportunity – where anyone can rise from very modest circumstances, if they work hard and make good choices. We believe that often remains true.

But, for children and youth growing up in poverty, such upward mobility in America is too rare. Indeed, just 30 percent of those growing up in poverty make it to middle class or higher as adults. Though we’ve made progress in reducing poverty over the past several decades, our poverty rates are still too high and our rate of economic advancement for poor children has been stuck for decades. That is an embarrassment for a nation that prides itself on everyone having a shot at the American Dream.

What can we do to reduce poverty and increase economic mobility? In our polarized and poisoned political atmosphere, it is hard to reach consensus on policy efforts. Both progressives and conservatives want lower poverty; but progressives want more public spending programs to improve opportunity and security for the poor, while conservatives generally argue for more responsibility from them before providing more help.

Even so, progressives and conservatives might not be as far apart as these stereotypes suggest. The two of us—one a conservative Republican and the other a progressive Democrat—were recently part of an ideologically balanced group of 15 scholars brought together by the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution. Our charge was to generate a report with policy proposals to reduce poverty and increase upward mobility. An additional goal was simply to see whether we could arrive at consensus among ourselves, and bridge the ideological divide that has so paralyzed our political leaders.

Together we decided that the most important issues facing poor Americans and their children are family, education and work. We had to listen to each other’s perspectives on these issues, and be open to others’ truths. We also agreed to be mindful of the research evidence on these topics. In the end, we managed to generate a set of policy proposals we all find compelling.

To begin with, the progressives among us had to acknowledge that marriage is a positive family outcome that reduces poverty and raises upward mobility in America. The evidence is clear: stable two-parent families have positive impacts on children’s success, and in America marriage is the strongest predictor of such stability. Therefore marriage should be promoted as the norm in America, along with responsible and delayed child-bearing.

At the same time, the conservatives among us had to acknowledge that investing more resources in the skills and employability of poor adults and children is crucial if we want them to have higher incomes over time. Indeed, stable families are hard to maintain when the parents – including both the custodial mothers and the (often) non-custodial fathers – struggle to maintain employment and earn enough to support their families. Investing in proven, cost-effective, education and training programs such as high-quality preschool and training for jobs in high-growth economic sectors can improve the skills and employability of kids from poor families and lift them out of poverty through work.

Another important compromise was that progressives acknowledged that expecting and even requiring adults on public assistance to work can reduce poverty, as we learned in the 1990s from welfare reform; programs today like Disability Insurance, among others, need reforms to encourage more work. And reforms that encourage innovation and accountability would make our public education programs for the poor more effective at all levels. We need more choice in public K-12 education (through charter schools) and a stronger emphasis on developing and retaining effective teachers, while basing our state subsidies to higher education institutions more heavily on graduation rates, employment, and earnings of their graduates.

Conservatives also had to acknowledge that requiring the poor to work only makes sense when work is available to them. In periods or places with weak labor markets, we might need to create jobs for some by subsidizing their employment in either the private or public sector (as we did during the Great Recession). We agreed that no one should be dropped from the benefit rolls unless they have been offered a suitable work activity and rejected it. And we also need to “make work pay” for those who remain unskilled or can find only low-wage jobs – by expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit (especially for adults without custody of children) and modestly raising the minimum wage.

We also all agreed on other topics. For instance, work-based learning—in the form of paid apprenticeships and other models of high-quality career and technical education—can play an important role in raising both skills and work experience among poor youth and adults.  And, if we raise public spending for the poor, we need to pay for it—and not increase federal deficits. We all agree that reducing certain tax deductions for high-income families and making our retirement programs more progressive are good ways to finance our proposals.

As our report demonstrates, it is possible for progressives and conservatives to bridge their differences and reach compromises to generate a set of policies that will reduce poverty and improve upward mobility. Can Congress and the President do the same?

Editor's Note: this piece first appeared in Inside Sources.

Downloads

Publication: Inside Sources
      
 
 




progressives

Who says progressives and conservatives can’t compromise?


Americans often think of our country as being one of great opportunity – where anyone can rise from very modest circumstances, if they work hard and make good choices. We believe that often remains true.

But, for children and youth growing up in poverty, such upward mobility in America is too rare. Indeed, just 30 percent of those growing up in poverty make it to middle class or higher as adults. Though we’ve made progress in reducing poverty over the past several decades, our poverty rates are still too high and our rate of economic advancement for poor children has been stuck for decades. That is an embarrassment for a nation that prides itself on everyone having a shot at the American Dream.

What can we do to reduce poverty and increase economic mobility? In our polarized and poisoned political atmosphere, it is hard to reach consensus on policy efforts. Both progressives and conservatives want lower poverty; but progressives want more public spending programs to improve opportunity and security for the poor, while conservatives generally argue for more responsibility from them before providing more help.

Even so, progressives and conservatives might not be as far apart as these stereotypes suggest. The two of us—one a conservative Republican and the other a progressive Democrat—were recently part of an ideologically balanced group of 15 scholars brought together by the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution. Our charge was to generate a report with policy proposals to reduce poverty and increase upward mobility. An additional goal was simply to see whether we could arrive at consensus among ourselves, and bridge the ideological divide that has so paralyzed our political leaders.

Together we decided that the most important issues facing poor Americans and their children are family, education and work. We had to listen to each other’s perspectives on these issues, and be open to others’ truths. We also agreed to be mindful of the research evidence on these topics. In the end, we managed to generate a set of policy proposals we all find compelling.

To begin with, the progressives among us had to acknowledge that marriage is a positive family outcome that reduces poverty and raises upward mobility in America. The evidence is clear: stable two-parent families have positive impacts on children’s success, and in America marriage is the strongest predictor of such stability. Therefore marriage should be promoted as the norm in America, along with responsible and delayed child-bearing.

At the same time, the conservatives among us had to acknowledge that investing more resources in the skills and employability of poor adults and children is crucial if we want them to have higher incomes over time. Indeed, stable families are hard to maintain when the parents – including both the custodial mothers and the (often) non-custodial fathers – struggle to maintain employment and earn enough to support their families. Investing in proven, cost-effective, education and training programs such as high-quality preschool and training for jobs in high-growth economic sectors can improve the skills and employability of kids from poor families and lift them out of poverty through work.

Another important compromise was that progressives acknowledged that expecting and even requiring adults on public assistance to work can reduce poverty, as we learned in the 1990s from welfare reform; programs today like Disability Insurance, among others, need reforms to encourage more work. And reforms that encourage innovation and accountability would make our public education programs for the poor more effective at all levels. We need more choice in public K-12 education (through charter schools) and a stronger emphasis on developing and retaining effective teachers, while basing our state subsidies to higher education institutions more heavily on graduation rates, employment, and earnings of their graduates.

Conservatives also had to acknowledge that requiring the poor to work only makes sense when work is available to them. In periods or places with weak labor markets, we might need to create jobs for some by subsidizing their employment in either the private or public sector (as we did during the Great Recession). We agreed that no one should be dropped from the benefit rolls unless they have been offered a suitable work activity and rejected it. And we also need to “make work pay” for those who remain unskilled or can find only low-wage jobs – by expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit (especially for adults without custody of children) and modestly raising the minimum wage.

We also all agreed on other topics. For instance, work-based learning—in the form of paid apprenticeships and other models of high-quality career and technical education—can play an important role in raising both skills and work experience among poor youth and adults.  And, if we raise public spending for the poor, we need to pay for it—and not increase federal deficits. We all agree that reducing certain tax deductions for high-income families and making our retirement programs more progressive are good ways to finance our proposals.

As our report demonstrates, it is possible for progressives and conservatives to bridge their differences and reach compromises to generate a set of policies that will reduce poverty and improve upward mobility. Can Congress and the President do the same?

Editor's Note: this piece first appeared in Inside Sources.

Downloads

Publication: Inside Sources
     
 
 




progressives

The free-world strategy progressives need

      
 
 




progressives

Should "Progressives" Boycott Whole Foods Over CEO's Statements on Health Care?

I am constantly amazed at the level of political discourse in the US. So a debate about health care degenerates into scares about "death panels" and boycotts of Whole Foods because their CEO is against it. It is all a bit much, and a complete mystery




progressives

AOC calls Joe Biden's Medicare olive branch to progressives 'almost insulting'

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she's never spoken to Joe Biden - nor has his campaign reached out to the progressive congresswoman, who was a surrogate for Bernie Sanders.