SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Chelsea Manning eyes U.S. Senate seat for Maryland
Chelsea Manning, the transgender U.S. Army soldier who served seven years in military prison for leaking classified data, is seeking the Democratic Party's nomination for the U.S. Senate seat from Maryland, according to Federal election filings seen on Saturday.
[...] Democratic Senator Ben Cardin was elected in 2006 to that seat and is expected to run for re-election this year. He is the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Cardin was easily re-elected in 2012, beating his Republican challenger by 30 points in the heavily-Democratic state.
Previously: Chelsea Manning Released from Prison, Remains on Active Duty Pending Appeal
Harvard Dean Rescinds Chelsea Manning's Visiting Fellow Invitation, Calling It a 'Mistake'
(Score: 4, Insightful) by beckett on Monday January 15 2018, @03:40AM (19 children)
This is what is going to propel Oprah to become president one day. It's just so short sighted for both US tribes, red and blue, to compromise so hard on basic qualifications of leadership just so they WIN.
What's most concerning is as Trump rolls back and makes best efforts to erase Obama's legacy, the incoming Deomcratic president will just deal reverse to the right wing. the US will be mired in this cyclical legislate-recind-legislate-recind pattern for decades to come. The one thing that is guaranteed is the level of discourse, as well as the long term progress on many social, economic issues will go by the wayside because Hey, Better Than Trump!
Pax Americana will not endure, but fade within our lifetimes with such a sophomoric approach to governance. These are as much signs and portents for other countries headed down the same path as it is a dire warning for the US right now.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @03:45AM (3 children)
I've been feeling and thinking the exact same things, but what can we do? The two party system has a stranglehold on the US's elections, and when Sanders, who would probably have been the best choice and would have kicked Trump's fat ass up and down the eastern seaboard, tried to run, the Democratic party machine stabbed him in the back.
Until we get money out of politics, until Citizens United is reversed, there is no hope. Money has strangled the election system to death.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:50AM
And either resettle somewhere else, or create a new country of your own.
Neither will be easy choices, but the problem is that right now there are essentially no choices in American Politics.
In order to gain choices we need people to stop campaigning as either Democrats or Republicans, and we need citizens to stop voting FOR Democrats or Republicans on the principle of the matter, regardless of which partisan side they normally would follow.
If both of those choices among the potential electees and the voting base can be pushed to happen, then we can move on to what is required to actually *FIX* the system, which at this point is either abolishing the electoral college, OR eliminating the voting positions and simply making the votes given based on the states final vote results (has the same effect and eliminates the possibility of the electors voting against their constiuents) while protecting the 'all 50 states are not equal population-wise. Following that is removing first past the post, and choosing either a point pool and points based system, or voting tiers and iterating through each tier until a candidate has a clear win, ideally of either 51 or 67 percent majority, which ensures the candidate elected should recieved a majority approval rating at least until he begins acting on (or against the) behalf of the United States of America.
Those changes could also provide the necessary push to see more of the inactive voter base to reregister and actually feel their vote makes a difference, since an official who might not pass in FPTP voting may find that the second or third tier of votes pushes them way ahead of the other candidates, who were only popular amongst their party-base while broader approval was gained by a third party candidate across multiple ideological groups.
Personally I have lost whatever faith in America I might have once held and am going to try and do a better job wherever I end up. Perhaps the rest of you can elicit some change that will make me regret that decision, but as it stands there is nothing for me to lament losing here.
(Score: 2) by beckett on Monday January 15 2018, @11:02AM (1 child)
i think you have the overall strategy corralled: get the money out of poiltics. On a direct action level, work through the existing infrastructure on a municipal and state level. Use the Tenth Amendment leverage States' Rights for something other than a dog whistle for segregation and against gay marriage.
I agree somewhat with the AC that replied to you: move elsewhere not to turn tail, but to find venues that are more ripe for change. Use the Constitutions right to free movement; don't occupy a park, but move to places where the change you want to see is more possible. Forward thinkers should not keep concentrating in California or New York; the bravest of you should establish footholds and find fellow travelers in Tennessee, Louisiana, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, and Alabama. municipal politics has even less inertia than either federal or state level politics.
By no means would it be easy or quick. But the Supreme court ruling against North Carolina redistricting policy is as potent and promising as Citizens United is discouraging. Lets see what happens in Wisconsin next with regards to gerrymandering.
Above all, people have to be motivated to get involved, and increase voter turnout more than polarization and anger over the other tribe have consumed the larger conversation. There has to be more effort for bipartisan collaboration; devolving into further polarization only will exacerbates the crass tribalism that has shaped the last two decades of federal US politics.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:47PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_State_Project [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @03:59AM (8 children)
Trump actually has a history of getting shit done. What other president had that?
Looking back, I suppose Teddy Roosevelt might qualify. Eisenhower might. Mostly, we have along history of electing people whose primary skill is bullshitting.
Trump of course has the bullshitting skill, since you can't get elected without it. Unlike the others though, he has a clue about operating a business. That is a step up.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday January 15 2018, @04:15AM (2 children)
He's also a warmonger and an awful authoritarian who is continuing many unconstitutional policies of previous presidents, such as the NSA's mass surveillance. I don't want to hear about how the vast majority of politicians are corrupt authoritarians, since that just means they are evil along with Trump. There are no excuses here.
Only valuable if he tries to do things that are actually good. Tell me when he ends all the wars, when he abolishes the TSA, when he stops the drug war, when he stops police asset forfeiture (theft), when he pardons Snowden, when he ends the NSA's unconstitutional mass surveillance, etc. As the president, he could at least speak vehemently against those things even if he can't unilaterally stop all of them, and since you said he has a history of "getting shit done", he should be able to accomplish this. All of those things are part of the swamp, and he said he would drain it, so where is he? Oh, wait, he's actually said he's in favor of many of those policies, and is silently continuing the rest.
Really, it seems to me that the only people who could possibly praise Trump at this point are people who are stupid, ignorant, authoritarian, or some combination of those.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @11:46AM (1 child)
Remind me, what wars has Trump started so far?
Syria is at the calmest it's been for years, after the proxy war with Russia was stopped.
North Korea is now talking directly with the South, after years of international antagonism and effective inaction (through successive US presidencies) over the North's nuclear development.
Trump's a sabre-rattler, for sure, but the only fights he's started have been political.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday January 16 2018, @01:46AM
He's continued the 7+ different interventions from previous presidents. That is bad enough, and there are no excuses. He doesn't need to start any new wars to be a warmonger; continuing previous wars is bad enough.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @06:07AM (1 child)
Are you really this stupid? There is no history. No legislation, except for a disastrous tax bill that Republican Greedy Bastards have been pushing forever. And in the private sector? Trump went bankrupt on a Casino, veritably a license to print money, and he couldn't get it done. Trump Steaks, Trump University? All failures. And Trump Billionaire? Highly suspect. I infer that Trump has never gotten anything done, except promoting the Donald. Housing for Seniors? Civic improvement? Economic Development? No, more like banging pron actresses and getting hair plug implants, and beating his first lady. Total loser! And, New Yorker, the object of derision and scorn of every decent rural American everywhere, until now. Oh, and a pious "pussy-grabbing" Christian as well. Let's "Git 'er done!" Amerika!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @07:57PM
I see you left out the ice rink. President Trump wrote about it in one of his books. You should buy all his books.
That tax bill is a disaster... for rich people in high-tax states. Can't we tax Madonna a bit more? I think so. I think it's a fine idea. Middle class people are struggling, and they need the tax cut.
The golf courses and hotels are pretty sweet. Not every business will be a success. People like Obama and Hillary, who never even tried running a business, are failures by default.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @06:38AM (2 children)
Does it hurt to be this completely, utterly, fractally wrong? Because if not, that's a good argument for atheism or maltheism right there...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @07:46PM (1 child)
I could do without the prayer, but Trump has to give it lip service. Even Obama pretended to be Christian.
I voted for Trump. I figured he wouldn't try to keep his promises, but Hillary would, and her promises were pure evil.
Much to my delight, Trump has been getting promises fulfilled.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @08:39PM
Are you sure you're an atheist? Remember, you can worship something and not be religious in the traditional sense, but still have a God. Even if it's money, power, or "haha take that, everyone who doesn't think like me."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @05:56AM
Republicans drew first Blood! So no mercy! We will run Oprah! We will run PeeWee Herman! We will run Justin
BieberTimberlake! All because the Republicans aspired to Dynasty, and they could not find out who killed JR, so they elected W! An ignorant man, an easily controlled man, the type of idiot that would invade Afghanistan, the graveyard of Empires. And then they elect a clown, mostly because Mike Pence has had sex with animals, and that the rest of the stable was not more insane than W. So when your Grandkids ask you, who destroyed American, you can just say, "Republicans". Them and Rand Paul. And Paul Ryan. And Ayn Rand and Paul Ryan. And Ron Paul. And Nixon. And Reagone. And Bill O'Really. And Shawn Hankerchief. And Milo Holdmydickabit. And Runaway1956.(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 15 2018, @07:46AM (4 children)
The only qualifications for US president are a few constitutional provisions (35 years or older, "native born". etc) and winning the electoral college. That is it. As for Oprah, she would be more successful a businessperson than anyone who has been in the office ever. That's a pretty significant qualification right there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:31AM (3 children)
What really matters is policy. The fact that she supported the Iraq war, among other horrendous things, does not give me confidence in her ability to oppose the military industrial complex or the surveillance state.
Too bad there aren't real penalties for violating the Constitution, like prison time. I would think 'respecting the Constitution' would be a requirement to remain in office, but nope.
(Score: 2) by beckett on Tuesday January 16 2018, @05:43AM (2 children)
Do you have access to her voting history as a senator from the future?
If this is what really matters, then i'd advise giving her an opportunity to write policy before passing any kind of judgement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 16 2018, @07:51PM (1 child)
We have access to clips from her television show from the past. Bill Moyers selected a few about Iraq for Buying the War: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlDwzb0tp8 [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 16 2018, @08:02PM
Wikipedia has an article about her series of shows on Iraq: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oprah%27s_Anti-war_series [wikipedia.org]