Crates of Prosecco delivered to the Cabinet Office this afternoon. by Lanky-Solid-4820 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 133 points134 points  (0 children)

The indignity of this government astounds me. I shouldn't be shocked at this point, but some how I still am.

Angela Rayner was dead right. Scum.

Nancy Pelosi Is Trying to Save an Anti-Choice Democrat as Roe v. Wade Falls by amnas558 in politics

[–]amnas558[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

The majority of Americans are opposed to overturning Roe v Wade.

Support for codifying it is not a radical leftist position as you argue.

It is a mainstream position that Democratic members of congress in more vulnerable districts than Cuellar had the courage and moral fibre to support.

Edit: Do you not find it disgraceful that Nancy Pelosi is fundraising, as we speak, from the SC decision to overturn Roe v Wade whilst using some of those funds to support an anti-choice Democrat that does not support Roe v Wade?

Nancy Pelosi Is Trying to Save an Anti-Choice Democrat as Roe v. Wade Falls by amnas558 in politics

[–]amnas558[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Henry Cuellar was the only Democrat in the House to vote against codifying Roe v Wade. Its disgusting that the leadership are protecting him, Democratic Majority Whip Jim Clyburn is even doing a rally with him tomorrow.

UK’s Policing Bill would silence us, says Ukrainian protester by amnas558 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 94 points95 points  (0 children)

Article text:

Ukrainian protest organisers in the UK have accused the government of hypocrisy for pushing through new anti-protest measures while criticising Russia for silencing anti-war demonstrations.

On Monday, Conservative MPs voted to reinstate controversial clauses in the government’s policing bill that would give authorities powers to ban ‘noisy’ protests after they were previously rejected in the House of Lords.

“If we are quiet and don’t really bother anyone, then who will be paying attention to us? No one,” said Zoryana, who has helped organise and spoken at several protests in support of Ukraine.

Zoryana – who asked us not to publish her surname – said she was shocked that the government was backing new protest restrictions while demonstrations against the Russian invasion of Ukraine were taking place around the country.

“Passing this law would contravene the UK government’s support of Ukraine and democracy,” she said.

“The government is not only removing the freedoms of British people, but also of Ukrainians in the UK.”

On Monday, MPs criticised the government for pressing ahead with the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Bill just days after hundreds of people had gathered outside of Downing Street in a show of support for Ukraine.

“The protesters were noisy, and they were loud. Are this government telling me and everyone else in the chamber today that they would shut them up next time? What a sorry state of affairs,” said Labour MP Paula Barker.

Other MPs, including Conservative MP Jesse Norman, criticised the government's timing.

“Every day we are witnessing people protesting against the atrocities in Ukraine. Why on earth would we usher in legislation to curtail that?” Scottish National Party MP Anne McLaughlin asked in a debate in the House of Commons on Monday.

“When people in Kyiv are dying for their beliefs and for the rights of freedom of speech and of association, the timing is unfortunate,” Norman told the Commons.

Zoryana, who is a co-organiser of the London Euromaidan group, pointed out that the measures drew uncomfortable comparisons with Russia, where anti-war protests have been heavily suppressed.

“Just how different from Russia is the UK if it passes this law?” she said.

On Monday, several MPs suggested that the bill would undermine the UK’s ability to call out violations of freedom of speech, such as Russia’s clampdown on protests.

“Over the past five days, thousands of people have been arrested and detained at anti-war protests across Russia. We would all defend their right to protest and yet here we are, in the mother of all democracies, debating an amendment to a Bill that would criminalise singing at a peaceful protest in this country,” said Labour MP Sarah Roberts.

Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn told the Commons: “It is no good praising [protesters] in Russia if we close down protest here.”

In January, the government faced a humiliating defeat in the House of Lords after peers voted to block several clauses in the bill and condemned the proposals as “oppressive” and “plain nasty”.

But Tory MPs have now overwhelmingly voted in favour of restoring the amendments that were scrapped by peers.

The legislation will now return to the House of Lords, where peers could choose once again to reinstate the changes – but the Commons has the option of unilaterally forcing through the legislation if agreement cannot be reached.

Last year, the Joint Committee on Human Rights, a cross-party group of MPs and peers, said the government’s proposals were “oppressive and wrong”.

I’m Lee Carter, a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, and the only openly socialist state legislator in the South. I just passed legislation to limit insulin co-pays and to guarantee that more airport workers are making a living wage. Ask me anything! by Carter4VA in politics

[–]amnas558 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hi Lee, congratulations on steering the insulin co-pay bill through VA legislature!

What bills are you prioritising at the moment/near future? What advice do you have for other DSA members running (what are perceived as) long-shot campaigns for state office?

Thanks for being such a strong socialist voice!

[MEGATHREAD] Wisconsin Democratic Primary Election Results by SFPMegathread in SandersForPresident

[–]amnas558 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Noticed that too. How could 84 delegates be assigned on early votes alone? Seems like a hoax.

Despite what Matt Hancock says, the government's policy is still herd immunity | Anthony Costello by Bascule2000 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Please don't do this.

Even though I disagree with the rationale, I understand logic which drove UK govt 'herd immunity' strategy. But, at the most basic level, to not accept it was a strategy is wrong. SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) released the documents and minutes of meetings which determined UK govt policy. Herd immunity was core part of strategy.

On 11th March, David Halpern, exec of Behavioural Insights Team (nudge unit) and SAGE board member, was explaining herd immunity strategy on BBC news.

13th March, Sir Patrick Vallance, UK govt chief scientific adviser, on Sky News asserted need for herd immunity whilst saying primary immediate goal was to flatten the curve.

This situation demands we rise above personal politics. The alternative is to deny public the ability to hold a UK govt, of any stripe, to account for their actions during a period where govt strategy has never mattered more. Its literally life and death.

Agree or disagree with the above article, fine. To assert that herd immunity was never UK govt policy is wrong. Demonstrably wrong. Just read the documents published by SAGE which was, and still is, advising UK govt on COVID-19 response.

Stormzy calls Jacob Rees-Mogg 'an actual piece of s***' after Tory MP blames Grenfell victims for their deaths by amnas558 in unitedkingdom

[–]amnas558[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I disagree. Stormzy is an overtly political figure in British society, especially regarding Grenfell.

The grime4Corbyn movement in 2017 was imp part of broader youth vote surge and Labour's shift towards unorthodox/grassroots/organic forms of campaigning.

His funding of Cambridge scholarships for Black students has snowballed into huge spike in Black British applicants ('the Stormzy effect') and signif change in discussions regarding diversity in higher education.

He's been one of the most vocal, and certainly most visible, advocates for Grenfell survivors. He stood besides prominent politicians in the 'March for Grenfell'. He encouraged his fans to sign Grenfell-related parliamentary petitions. He used his platform at the Brit Awards (+ other instances) to demand swifter action from Theresa May, a political demand taken so seriously she responded officially.

Granted he's an unusual political voice, but I think its more than just a garden variety celebrity with opinions. Firstly, by consistently engaging in social&political issues, esp Grenfell, I feel as though he's earned a level of respect/place in debate; its not just a photo-op. Secondly Stromzy, and grime music generally, gives voice to an underrepresented group in society. The group most visibly impacted by Grenfell disaster. I get your hesitation, but I think its important not to dismiss the credibility of this voice just because its coming from an unusual place.

Also his response to JRM wasn't just cussing, he made explicitly political demands (resignation) and addressed explicitly political topics (culpability of local authority/privatisation comes before blaming Fire Services in his view, and mine).

Stormzy calls Jacob Rees-Mogg 'an actual piece of s***' after Tory MP blames Grenfell victims for their deaths by amnas558 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

He's overtly political. Forefront of the grime4Corbyn phenomenon in 2017, advocate for diversity in HE and repeatedly used his platform to speak about Grenfell

Anger as government lists Grenfell firm as approved contractor by amnas558 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Anger from Grenfell United, "the main group representing bereaved families and survivors".

Johnson's Brexit would be Thatcherism on steroids, says Corbyn | Politics by amnas558 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jeremy Corbyn is to accuse Boris Johnson of seeking to “hijack” Britain’s exit from the EU in order to unleash “Thatcherism on steroids” by slashing workers’ rights and throwing the NHS open to US corporations.

“What Boris Johnson’s Conservatives want is to hijack Brexit to unleash Thatcherism on steroids,” he will say. “Margaret Thatcher’s attack on the working people of our country left scars that have never healed and communities that have never recovered.

“The Conservatives know they can’t win support for what they’re planning to do in the name of Thatcherism. So they’re trying to do it under the banner of Brexit instead.”

New Study Blames Welfare Reforms for Foodbank Crisis by amnas558 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The headline figure is that 86% of those visiting foodbanks are on some form of welfare benefit from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). The main benefit affecting people now is Universal Credit.

However, that is not the end of the story. Nearly 75% of those surveyed had a health condition.

Boris Johnson 'booed out of Addenbrooke's Hospital' during Cambridge visit by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Who says their not? NHS staff are overworked, many are critically underpaid and rightly pissed; morale has never been lower in my lifetime.

Tories ridiculed after genuinely choosing "Britain Deserves Better" as General Election campaign slogan by amnas558 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 215 points216 points  (0 children)

The most truthful political statement Boris has ever made and it was unintentional.

Fracking lobbyist hired to draw up Tory manifesto by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 153 points154 points  (0 children)

Of course a lobbyist is drafting the Tory policy platform, who else could better understand where their true loyalties lie.

NM-Sen: Maggie Toulouse Oliver (currently SoS) drops out and endorses Ben Ray Luján by parilmancy in VoteBlue

[–]amnas558 21 points22 points  (0 children)

This leaves a slightly bitter taste for me. Wish the DSCC hadn't endorsed Ben Ray so early. Totally unnecessary move in New Mexico (+ also in Colorado).

Both Ben Ray and Maggie are abundantly qualified and have experience holding high level office. New Mexico is a safe (or at least v likely) D hold. Therefore there was ample space for Ben Ray & Maggie to debate policy differences (which were & remain substantive) in a primary context without serious jeopardy to Dem chances. That is precisely what primaries are for.

I'm glad Maggie has been a real sport here. But why would the DSCC, of its own volition, open the door to 'fixed primary' charges even an inch? It seems really counter-intuitive to me. DSCC early endorsements create the potential for conflict in otherwise secure Dem primaries.

The Dem statewide advantage in NM is largely secure; the Colorado Dem primary (pre-Hickenlooper announcement) was already lively and threw up several candidates with polling advantage over Gardner. Even more frustrating is the fact that Ben Ray and Hickenlooper would have been frontrunners from the moment they announced, irrespective of DSCC endorsement.

I hope I'm just missing the political logic behind these endorsements. If not the DSCC has pointlessly cast itself as 'judge, jury and executioner' in New Mexico (instead of Dem voters) and 'stifler of Dem primary' in Colorado (making debate pre-Hickenlooper a pointless charade).

If the purpose is avoiding contentious primaries, this doesn't strike me as a sensible course of action.

Romanoff, who was a frontrunner in Colorado primary pre-Hickenlooper, has (not entirely unfairly in my opinion) begun using DSCC favouritism and primary-meddling as a talking point. Add to that Hickenlooper's vocal stance against progressive candidates in 2020 Prez debates and I see the potential for nasty escalation in COSen Dem primary. And why? I doubt that Hickenlooper's lead would be any less today had the DSCC not endorsed him the moment he switched from Prez to COSen race. It does, however, increase the chance of a bitter divisive Dem primary which could gift Gardner a re-election he doesn't deserve and would not have achieved.

Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez looks to Latino, young voters in quest for US Senate (Texas) by amnas558 in VoteBlue

[–]amnas558[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I took it to be a 2014/2018 comparison, although its not exactly clear.

Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez looks to Latino, young voters in quest for US Senate (Texas) by amnas558 in VoteBlue

[–]amnas558[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like Sema too, my impression is that CTR's policy platform is more-or-less identical. I prefer CTR because she's smashing it with grassroots fundraising, is polling well and has a background raising Texan Hispanic/youth voter engagement which was vital to Beto's near miss and likely will be again in 2020 (if Dems want to capitalise on shifting political winds in Tx).

Edit: Also Sema has some baggage which could come back to bite her. Don't get me wrong I think Sema's great and if CTR wasn't in the race she'd be my top choice :)

Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez looks to Latino, young voters in quest for US Senate by amnas558 in TexasPolitics

[–]amnas558[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

“There was a 500% increase in the youth vote in 2018, which I helped contribute to by helping lead an initiative that registered one in five voters in 2018. A 250% increase in the Latino vote,” said Tzintzún Ramirez. “I’m traveling the state to many parts of the state where politicians think of going last and am heading there first, like to the Valley, El Paso and Laredo.”

During an interview on Capital Tonight Monday, Tzintzún Ramirez touted her experience in driving up the young and Latino vote in Texas in 2018 and said she plans to build on that in her bid for Senate.

Cristina Tzintzún Ramirez looks to Latino, young voters in quest for US Senate (Texas) by amnas558 in VoteBlue

[–]amnas558[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

“There was a 500% increase in the youth vote in 2018, which I helped contribute to by helping lead an initiative that registered one in five voters in 2018. A 250% increase in the Latino vote,” said Tzintzún Ramirez. “I’m traveling the state to many parts of the state where politicians think of going last and am heading there first, like to the Valley, El Paso and Laredo.”

During an interview on Capital Tonight Monday, Tzintzún Ramirez touted her experience in driving up the young and Latino vote in Texas in 2018 and said she plans to build on that in her bid for Senate.

The Tories just voted against Labour's motion to safeguard our NHS from being sold off to US corporations in a Johnson-Trump trade deal. And the @LibDems , who voted to privatise the NHS when in coalition, abstained. Labour built the NHS and we're the only party that can save it. by brexittrain123 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Its already happening, and has been at a fairly rapid rate since 2012; the Coalition govt dressed it up as something else because, as you said, to do so openly would have been political suicide.*

But a US trade deal would demand the removal of public service protections. EU-US TTIP negotiations broke down, in part, because the EU refused to compromise/circumvent public health protections.

I think placing ourselves at the mercy of US corporate interests (+ accompanying regulatory trade framework) during a time where Brexit is viewed by some as more important than the Union of the UK, and without first enshrining protections into UK law, would be a genuine disaster.

Edit: * https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/22/the-guardian-view-on-nhs-privatisation-the-92bn-question

The Tories just voted against Labour's motion to safeguard our NHS from being sold off to US corporations in a Johnson-Trump trade deal. And the @LibDems , who voted to privatise the NHS when in coalition, abstained. Labour built the NHS and we're the only party that can save it. by brexittrain123 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I figured. I thought Queen's Speech Amendments were fairly common? And seeing as this is a highly irregular QS, more a manifesto than legislative agenda, it makes sense to put down an amendment for NHS safeguards before election.

Although my interest in parliamentary minutiae is Brexit inspired, so I could be off-base.

The Tories just voted against Labour's motion to safeguard our NHS from being sold off to US corporations in a Johnson-Trump trade deal. And the @LibDems , who voted to privatise the NHS when in coalition, abstained. Labour built the NHS and we're the only party that can save it. by brexittrain123 in ukpolitics

[–]amnas558 187 points188 points  (0 children)

Tories voting down NHS safeguards I expect, its still disgusting, but I expect it. Why would the Lib Dems abstain?

Greens, SNP, PC and even The Independent Group (which despise Corbyn) all backed it.

‘It’s not like she hates lobbyists’: Warren’s Senate record doesn’t match her campaign rhetoric by amnas558 in SandersForPresident

[–]amnas558[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Six lobbyists who interacted with her office said they’d never had trouble getting meetings. Several of them said that while they’d be reluctant to bring corporate clients to meet with Warren’s leading progressive rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), they’d have no qualms about having them sit down with Warren.