Monday, April 28, 2014
Friday, October 12, 2012
2012 Vice Presidential Debate Results, Predictions for Tuesday & November
![102_7986_thumb[1]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjRcdDZhztUXx6BJHF5TMsuLCdPwpdd0kxfhBjGAcq6naGfiNinJKGAspc-EctkAA8vuHpVfoJvfzWs2CYI-Dsw4_Rkq1rWly-oQu8yGB6_zSRvYSG22LaJA3lcxbUeQKH9OXyPQ/s1600-h/102_7986_thumb%25255B1%25255D%25255B3%25255D.jpg "102_7986_thumb[1]")
I threw a lot of good links up on the Facebook page tonight, but here is my wrap up of tonight’s debate.
First of all, I think the most overlooked moment of the debate, so far, was when Paul Ryan responded to the question about what he would say to a war vet dismayed by the ugly nature of the political attack ads this year by launching into a four minute bash on everything he saw as flawed about the Obama administration.
Secondly, Bill Maher won the interwebs tonight with the tweet on the right here…
As for who won and who lost, shortly after the debate, I posted the following…
Overall, I think Biden gave a lot for people to talk about.
While they may say he was too intense, I think he did a good job of waving the bullsh... er, "malarky" flag when Ryan started confusing talking points with facts and I think this will serve the campaign well.
I think this was the only real mistake in the first debate. Team Obama figured the press would do their job and call out Romney on his factual errors and flip flops but, instead, the press got so hot and bothered at the idea that the race might end up narrowing that the facts and flip flops never really received much attention at all.
Watching the ABC coverage tonight, though, I was left thinking... If the infamous "eye roll" Gore/Bush debate was held this year, I think Gore's performance would have gone over much better than it did in 2000. Our views of what behavior is considered "Presidential" seems to have changed a bit in 12 years.
I haven’t seen anyone other than the one CNN poll and Fox declaring this a victory for Paul Ryan, and even Fox only gives it to Ryan on a technicality, saying that Biden was mean and scary. A few networks and publications are calling this a draw, but most seem to be leaning towards or declaring this a Biden victory.
I think that Biden winning will be the consensus by tomorrow morning, and for the late night comics, and as I wrote the other day, they are the ones who really count. I know the Democrats on FB are pumped up. Much more noise and chest thumping than after the first debate.
Hell, even I was getting burned out on all the Muppets. And I freaking love pissed off Muppets!
If a Biden victory is the consensus, it really doesn’t matter much what actually happened in the debate, people will be hearing that Biden won, which is good for the Obama campaign.
Of course there will be discussions on whether or not Biden was too over the top, but like I wrote earlier, I this this will just serve to draw more attention the Ryan’s factual inaccuracies and to the Romney / Ryan campaign flip flopping on issues, which is a plus for Obama.
So what does this victory mean in the long run?
While Vice Presidential debates have, arguably, never changed the course of a Presidential campaign, I do see the final battle lines being drawn out tonight, the laying out of the strategies the two campaigns will be following into Election Day, and those are pretty revealing.
The first thing I really notice is that the Romney / Ryan campaign is spending a lot of time and treasure on their big foreign policy “October Surprise.”
The GOP’s big theme heading into the final stretch is using the Libyan incident as a centerpiece to focus on what they are calling Obama’s Unraveling Foreign Policy. Ryan was all over this tonight. And it seemed to lack traction. This really seems like a losing attack for them.
One area I feel that most people are pretty happy with Obama is his foreign policy, and for all the noise Ryan made tonight, the few little pieces he had to back up his rhetoric with seemed small and nit picky. I think one area where Biden had a clear win tonight was leveling him on these attacks.
Continuing to attack the President, who got Osama bin Laden and who is ending two unpopular wars, on his foreign policy feels like a losing strategy to me.
On each attack point tonight, the result was Ryan essentially conceding that Romney wouldn’t be handling the situations any differently. And when Ryan went after Obama’s relationship with Israel, well, again, he was flattened. Badly.
In the end, I do not think anyone except for some, not even all, Fox News viewers feel like American foreign policy is in any way “unraveling” right now. This whole argument, let alone making it a centerpiece of the campaign in October, makes me feel like the Romney campaign is very out of touch with the public right now.
So, that probably leaves them running back to the economy, the deficit and tax reform, and “Obamacare.”
The economy is still tough for them, which is why they gave the foreign policy attacks a whirl in the first place. People are willing to listen to their ideas on the economy, hell, I want to hear them. But other than slogans and their vague “Five Point Plan,” they offer no real details. Until they offer details, Obama wins on the economy.
Even tonight, Ryan was spending more time talking about how Obama promised a stronger recovery and let people down, but not denying that there has been recovery. Until the GOP offers something more than vague tax breaks as a strategy for putting more people to work, Obama wins the issue. Barely.
As far as deficit reduction and tax reform goes… Well, vagueness is again killing Romney and Ryan. When asked specific questions, they shuffle, weave and dart. Without specifics, Obama wins again, though, again, barely. And after the 47% comment, I don’t think there’s much trust out there for Romney on his promises not to raise taxes on low and middle income families.
Obamacare? This is a bad issue for the GOP since it is based on Romneycare. People’s eyes glaze over when Romney darts back with, well, it’s great for states, just not at the federal level. And, overall, most people like most of it. For all the talk of panels, I think most people do just hear the old, silly, losing rhetoric of Death Panels from 2008. We’re going to keep everything that most people like except for the parts that the tea party doesn’t like seems to be Romney’s alternative to the current reforms. I don’t think people want to rebuild the wheel if it is going to look pretty much the same as before. So, Obama wins the issue. Again.
So where does this leave us.
Right now, Obama is still looking pretty strong in the electoral vote. National popular vote polls can bite me, they mean nothing.
There are some indicators coming out over the last 48 hours that Romney’s bump in the polls from the first debate may be fading. And being continually fact checked by his own campaign is going to start killing him again. The only thing that saved his tail on that this week was the fact that most of the news coverage was breathlessly heaving about the fact that the race seemed to be heating up and wondering if they could get away with awarding Romney the front runner status (Answer? No, due to that pesky, state by state way we elect our presidents). His continued battle with foot-in-the-mouth-syndrome was largely overlooked, but it won’t be for much longer.
Another thing to consider is that the polls for the last week were all over the place. It is tough to form a clear view from them, because there was a lot of noise and chaos last week mucking up the machinery.
Momentum is also a word being used a lot. Too much right now. Momentum is built over time. One win, even if the first debate was a big win for Romney, does not really change momentum.
A disastrous September, one debate win, and then a likely debate loss tonight leading, four day later, into a debate that Obama is almost certain to win (if only for the same reasons that Romney was certain to win the first one)… Well, this time next week it may be very difficult to talk about momentum in the Romney campaign with a straight face, let alone without a snicker.
The fact that the next debate is only four days away is also a win for Obama, and I do predict that he will win this one with about the same confidence that I predicted that Romney would win the last one. The pummeling that the President received after the first debate has lowered the expectations on him to the point where he will likely win if he just stays awake through the whole thing.
But this time, my prediction is not just based on expectations going in. Expectations are only the first key.
The second key to the next debate is its format: Town Hall. Romney has never been good with the one on one sessions with regular folks and now he is bringing the 47% comment into the room with him.
The third key is two debates worth of shaky truths and flip flops from the previous debates. Now I do not expect Obama to go after Romney like Biden went after Ryan tonight, but I do expect to see him using the next two debates as his platform to address some of these issues. Probably more gently on Tuesday and, unless the race has broken out one way or the other by the third debate, slightly more aggressively in the final debate, away from the town hall audience.
However, unless Romney is pulling away in the key states by the third debate, I would not expect to see Obama throwing up a hail mary and really bashing on Mitt. I still think the plan will be, for the most part, to let the Romney campaign hang itself by flip flopping everywhichway on every issue, under the national spotlights of the debate platforms, until the last remaining undecided voters are just sick of it.
Still, I do expect to see more engagement from the president on Tuesday. From the beginning I think the strategy was to stand back and to let Romney have the night the first time around and to just not make many mistakes while looking presidential and above it all. He may have missed the mark by a bit on that, but I am sure that was the plan.
Obama is playing rochambeau with Romney and he let Mitt kick first. Tuesday is Obama’s turn. He will step it up. And I think it will go well for him.
Finally, predictions for November...
Obama should have this one barring a real collapse in either of the final two debates. I think he takes it even if he does in the next two what he did in the first. Because even if he does exactly what he did in the first debate in the next debate, he will get better press. Victory in November might be by exactly the margins we are seeing right now, and he may even lose the popular vote, but he should win the electoral college and a second term.
Slight improvement in at least one of the next two debates? Then I think he wins solidly. It won’t be a landslide, it won’t even be by the margins he was running up a couple weeks ago, but we shouldn’t be having that late of a night on Election Day.
On a side note, I wanted to throw this up here…
On CNN’s poll results ("CNN/ORC poll: 48% of registered voters watching debate say Ryan won. 44% say Biden won. Sampling error is +/- 5%." – CNN), I posted this in response to a comment that the poll results reflected CNN’s viewers these days:
Over the last few years, I don't think CNN is drifting to the right, I think it is drifting to the stupid.
I used to rely on them as being somewhat centrist and fairly well balanced between MSNBC and FOX, but still "Mainstream" enough to rely on as a reasonable sample of what "typical" Americans were watching.
These days I get most of my news from NPR and, watching CNN's post debate "analysis" after the first debate, well, my head hurt a lot. Not because I disagreed with what they were saying, but because what they were saying was just meaningless drivel that really didn't have much to do with anything.
On the first debate, CNN went from draw, to Romney might have had an edge, to Romney destroyed Obama, to Romney has regained the edge and the front runner status in about five minutes and then built the rest of their analyses around this headline without any facts to support it, since it takes days for the poll numbers to roll in.
Unfortunately, most of the major news outlets did this, so people who did not actually watch the debate ended up with a pretty skewered version of what happened during the first debate.
And I will head to bed on this…
![ObamasNumbers1_thumb[1]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHW17gy5KyadvUr6B4O90oeOXNn5Uoxn6sd2MjwxWT8EVrrC75x9ZFSEiULV2ud47RI5sTL3Fng1AX0uS3kvwnOE3bJVyc2gyrRjTqmCm4A7aGQ38NoP8GAkoNtDVgLEiNlL7hGg/s1600-h/ObamasNumbers1_thumb%25255B1%25255D%25255B3%25255D.png "ObamasNumbers1_thumb[1]")
Related Posts
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Marriage Equality: President Obama & North Carolina
I think the President does a nice job of explaining his evolving position on marriage equality in the following email:
Friend --
Today, I was asked a direct question and gave a direct answer:
I believe that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.
I hope you'll take a moment to watch the conversation, consider it, and weigh in yourself on behalf of marriage equality:
http://my.barackobama.com/Marriage
I've always believed that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally. I was reluctant to use the term marriage because of the very powerful traditions it evokes. And I thought civil union laws that conferred legal rights upon gay and lesbian couples were a solution.
But over the course of several years I've talked to friends and family about this. I've thought about members of my staff in long-term, committed, same-sex relationships who are raising kids together. Through our efforts to end the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, I've gotten to know some of the gay and lesbian troops who are serving our country with honor and distinction.
What I've come to realize is that for loving, same-sex couples, the denial of marriage equality means that, in their eyes and the eyes of their children, they are still considered less than full citizens.
Even at my own dinner table, when I look at Sasha and Malia, who have friends whose parents are same-sex couples, I know it wouldn't dawn on them that their friends' parents should be treated differently.
So I decided it was time to affirm my personal belief that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.
I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines. But I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them.
If you agree, you can stand up with me here.
Thank you,
Barack
Unfortunately, President Obama’s shift on this issue, while important, does little to change actual policy. In fact, while this counts as one in the win column, in North Carolina, there is not only a set back on marriage equality, but yet another example of poorly written legislation coming out of the far right wing of the GOP.
It’s one thing to write laws that I disagree with, entirely another issue altogether to put poorly written laws in the books… One is politics, the other is incompetence.
4 Worst Media Misrepresentations of North Carolina's Anti-Gay Amendment One | Media | AlterNet:
UNC-Chapel Hill law professor Maxine Eichner has spoken extensively to delineate the definite consequences of the Amendment as well as the possible consequences. She says the Amendment definitely bars the state from passing same-sex marriage or civil union legislation, which extends rights to same-sex couples, in the future. Furthermore, it bans the State from passing domestic partnership laws, which extend legal rights to unmarried couples, no matter their sexual orientation. Not only that, but it invalidates “existing partnership benefits by municipalities for all unmarried couples,” no matter their sexual orientation. In other words, as Protect All NC Families, the coalition organization set up to fight Amendment One, explains on its website, the Amendment eliminates “health care, prescription drug coverage and other benefits for public employees and children receiving domestic partner benefits."
Of course, there is always the possibility that this new amendment does exactly what its authors want, limiting the legal rights of people who are immorally shacking up regardless of gender…
Considering the recent birth control debates, would this really be an unexpected development at this point?
| The Daily Show with Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Lord of the Rings - The Right Side of History | ||||
| ||||
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Barack Obama's Gay Blasphemy | ||||
| ||||
| The Daily Show with Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Endless Suffrage 2012 - States' Rights Edition | ||||
| ||||
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Barack Obama vs. North Carolina on Gay Marriage | ||||
| ||||
Related Posts
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Code Speak: Politics, bigotry, & the problem with Santorum
Before the Florida primary, I mistakenly believed that Rick Santorum was done.
Can’t we just be done with him? Please?
The Anyone But Romney camp has got them selves into a pickle… They have to decide between the walking contradiction of Newt Gingrich and Santorum, whose issues as a general election candidate may be just as awkward, but in a very different way...
Republicans and the Culture Wars: Why It Won't Work This Year - The Daily Beast:
Then there’s Rick Santorum, who, by all rights, should dominate the values battlefield. He’s got the loving wife, the passel of kids, the goofy-dad vibe. And, let’s face it, the man has never met a policy issue he didn’t see through the prism of family values. Tax reform? Regulatory reform? Deficit spending? As Rick tells it, the first step toward addressing any of these problems is to reinstate the ban on sodomy.
On pure piety points, no one can beat Rick. We’re talking here about a guy who has said he would use the presidential bully pulpit to warn of how contraception tempts even married couples to get busy in ways contrary to God’s will. This, of course, is part of the problem. Opposing abortion is one thing. Opposing contraception even among married folks doesn’t make Rick seem like a paragon of moral virtue so much as a refugee from the 16th century.
This excerpt touches on the real problem with Santorum without actually landing on it. It is not Santorum’s beliefs that are necessarily troubling to the far right, it is the way he communicates them. He either has made a decision at some point in his career to ignore the generally accepted code speak of the conservative social agenda, or he just doesn’t understand it.
If the former, then this is, perhaps, a bold though politically difficult approach to campaigning for him. If the latter, then he may be too stupid to be president. Not that that has stopped voters before.
What do I mean by code speak? Well, on gay rights, instead of calling them “special rights,” he focuses instead on the idea that homosexuality is a sin. Sure, a lot of non-politicians focus on the Biblical rather than the political points of this issue, but usually those are not people running in statewide elections, let alone wanting to run in a national general election.
Likewise, the new contraception debate (really, have we drifted that far to the right?)…
Instead of talking about the economics of health care, or even the questionable argument about religious freedom for faith-based organizations, Santorum, in the past, hit a straight moral line drive with the argument that contraception was bad for families. Of course, this was before the debate raised like an oily sludge to the surface of the election cycle, and at the time he said that he was not in favor of legislating this brand of morality, but times and political climates can and do change…
This sort of right wing code speak becomes very troubling to me when the President is being discussed. I know the issues that most on the right have with Obama have nothing to do with his race, but… All the claims about the President being a Muslim, a non-native citizen, and even a socialist… In a different day and age, how many of the people making so much noise about these non-issues wouldn’t bother? Instead, thirty plus years ago, they would just be making noise about getting the black man out of the White House.
Not everyone, don’t get me wrong. But I am sure that some percentage of those making these sorts of arguments about the President are just using these non-issues as code speak about his race.
While I disagree with Santorum at a fundamental level on just about every issue and take exception to almost every word that comes out of his mouth, at least he is not that kind of slime. I have no doubt that his issues with Obama have a lot more to do with wanting his job than with the color of the President’s skin.
The bigoted, racist kind of slime out there who do have that problem should be worried, though, because Santorum does not play their game and, in the unlikely event that he secures the GOP nomination, his inability to use proper conservative code speak will slay any chances at victory in November.
Only by using code speak to portray religious and moral beliefs as legitimate political issues can one who seems to believe that birth control is a refuge for loose women with low morals succeed in gaining acceptance outside of the far right conservative primaries.
Of course, Santorum’s failure to grasp the necessity of right wing code speak is not his only problem, beyond failing to understand how to discuss social issues, he really doesn’t seem to understand which aspects of these issues really engage people in the first place:
But it’s not just that the senator’s positions are out of touch with the mainstream electorate (a mere 8 percent of Americans think birth control is immoral; 84 percent of U.S. Catholics think you can use it and still be a good Catholic). It’s that the guy is simultaneously too pious and too pathetic.
Take his views on gay rights. Plenty of people object to gay marriage, but Santorum has long come across as a bit of a clown on the entire subject of homosexuality. It’s some combination of his whiny manner and his slightly-too-colorful blatherings about how “sodomy” is kinda like polygamy or incest but not quite so bad as man-on-dog action. With that kind of commentary, small wonder Dan Savage decided to execute his devastating lexical takedown of the senator.
Perhaps saddest of all, when things get uncomfortable, Santorum crumbles. Pressed recently about a section of his 2005 book, It Takes a Family, that laments “radical feminists” undermining the family by pushing women to work outside the home, the senator pleaded ignorance and claimed the bit had been written by his wife.
To be sure, this whole Serious Candidate business is new to Santorum.
Here’s to crumbling and blaming it on your wife. That sells really well in the heartland.
The problem the rest of us will have if Santorum became president should resolve itself any time now. I am just surprised he’s made it this far.
But not really. I still am not convinced that the GOP can bring itself to nominate a Mormon, er… I mean someone who flip flops on all the issues they hold dear while being responsible for the rough draft of the “anti-American” and “Socialist” Obama death panel plan.
Unfortunately, the only other sane choice they had this year was another, lesser known Mormon, er… I mean someone who endorsed the President’s anti-Amercian, Nazi Communist agenda by actually working for the guy. Ambassador to China or closet communist?
Huntsman's failure to launch and the Anyone But Romney crusade, it surely couldn’t have anything to do with faith, could it? I am sure that for most primary voters, the politics do come first. Unfortunately, I am sure that there are a few out there who obscure their true feelings with political code phrases.
A skill Santorum seems to lack.
Related Posts
Friday, February 10, 2012
Santorum & Obama: Which is worse for religion?
Some good points in this video…
What I want to know, if we are not supposed to be funding birth control with our tax dollars, we are also not funding erectile dysfunction treatments with our tax dollars, right?
That would just be crazy and hypocritical for insurance to cover one and not the other.
What? Really? One is a health issue and one is a moral issue?
Someone needs to explain that one to me.
The crazy right is always going off about how Obama is dangerous to religious freedom. I forget which one of the GOP candidates it was, they are blurring together a bit, was saying that one of his first acts upon taking office would be to overturn by executive order all of the anti-Christian acts put into place by the Obama Administration.
For the life of me, I can’t think of a single anti-religious executive order or bill signed by Obama, but maybe I am just getting my news from the wrong sources.
Watching this video, I realized they might be talking about women’s health issues. I forget that pro-woman’s health is often considered anti-Christian.
But, at least, if the GOP gains the Presidency, we can all rest assured that Islamic Sharia Laws will not be enacted in the United States. But who will protect us from these psychos wanting to write Leviticus into the U.S. Code and into the Constitution?
Well, if they do, we can rest assured that many of them will quickly be out of office, stoned to death for their sins…
Right?
To my way of thinking, these people harm religion more than Obama every would in a millions terms in office.
I suppose we do have to feel some sympathy since Christians are such a persecuted minority in this country.
ABCNEWS.com : Poll: Most Americans Say They're Christian:
Eighty-three percent of Americans identify themselves as Christians. Most of the rest, 13 percent, have no religion. That leaves just 4 percent as adherents of all non-Christian religions combined — Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and a smattering of individual mentions.
Oh, there I go again. Listening to their words instead of checking their facts. Better quit while I am ahead.
Fortunately, I do believe that these far right nut jobs are a minority, and if they feel persecuted, it is only because being surrounded by sane people must be very frustrating for them. That does give me hope and faith in my fellow Americans.
I am also pleased if, as Uygur argues, this turn back to the crazy social agenda by the GOP candidates means that they are losing confidence on running on economic issues. I agree the figures are on Obama’s side when it comes to the economy.
And the GOP loses when they run from so far to the right on the social issues.
Related Posts
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Obama Mail: Today’s Republican Talking Points
Just a quick cut and paste job on my end here…
Friend --
The Republican National Committee just unrolled their new strategy for beating President Obama this fall. They're calling it "Obama vs. Obama," and the idea is to say President Obama hasn't made good on his campaign promises.
But there's a hitch in their talking points: They're (prepare to be shocked!) not true.
For every day they try to weave a false tale about the President, we'll fight back with the facts about his record.
Check out our first piece: a video showing President Obama's victory speech in Iowa from four years ago today, along with a rundown of the promises he's kept. Take a look -- and then make sure you share it with your friends.The bottom line here is simple: This is a President who does what he says he's going to do.
Other presidents and lawmakers tried for 70 years to pass health reform -- but this president took on the insurance industry and got it done. When President Obama took office, nearly 150,000 troops were deployed in Iraq; in December, the last American troops there left. The middle class was under assault for decades, and this administration worked to make the tax code more fair and give all working families the tax cuts they deserve. And since taking office, President Obama has taken the most significant federal action ever to reduce greenhouse gases and our dependence on foreign oil -- almost doubling our fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks.
These aren't talking points. These are facts.
It's 2012. More and more people are going to start paying attention to this race, and fast. But the Republicans have apparently decided to make this easy for us -- because when the other side's strategy is to distort the record, all you need to push back with is reality.
Watch the video, get the facts, then pass it on:
http://my.barackobama.com/Iowa-Four-Years-Later
Thanks, and happy caucus day,
Stephanie
Stephanie Cutter
Deputy Campaign Manager
Obama for America
Related Posts
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
A video by Softbox : Federal Government Deficit & War: What Eats Up 53 Cents Of Every Tax Dollar?
I post this coming from neither a pro nor anti war angle, but when both sides in Washington sit around and start pointing fingers at each other about who caused the deficit and wailing about how their party is not to blame, there is one gorilla in the room everyone tends to ignore...
I'm just saying, you know... The Republicans were in office when we went in. Still, someone should have thought about how we were going to pay for this back in the day...
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Economy Has Patients Asking Docs for Freebies - Yahoo! News
 |
| From 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
Economy Has Patients Asking Docs for Freebies - Yahoo! News:
The economy is forcing some patients with pricey prescriptions to skip doses, cut pills in half or even stop taking potentially life-saving medications.
'via Blog this'
Sunday, October 09, 2011
The Final Cut - Occupy Portland - October 6, 2011: Photographs
 |
| From 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
These are done now and they all can be found here and there... Choose your prefered poison...
On Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1828154122596.71983.1802638453&l=7d5a97fa36&type=1
https://picasaweb.google.com/108292605979675424535/20111006OccupyPortland?authuser=0&feat=directlink
 |
| 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
On Photobucket:
http://s1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb394/aflitt/Occupy%20Portland%20Rally%20by%20AFL/
On Flikr:
Saturday, October 08, 2011
Friday, October 07, 2011
Occupy Portland - October 6, 2011: Photographs
 |
| From 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
Currently editing and uploading the pictures from yesterday to Picasa: https://picasaweb.google.com/108292605979675424535/20111006OccupyPortland?authuser=0&feat=directlink
|
| 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
Update: 8:00 PM - I've been working on these off and on all day. I need to break for the night before my eyeballs fall out. I'll get the rest up tomorrow.
Occupy Wall Street Protests Sprout 928 Offshoots On Meetup.com Overnight
The independent events, some simply community discussions, have been loosely tracked with Facebook, Google maps and links lists. Now, group meeting platform Meetup.com is assisting the protesters in their grassroots efforts.
“We were contacted by the good people at Meetup.com, who got in touch because they heard we were in need of some technical assistance and advice,” says a blog post on Occupy Together, a site linked by Occupy Wall Street websites and protest publication The Occupied Wall Street Journal‘s Kickstarter page. “Little did we know we’d go from listing 4-5 locations in one night to receiving hundreds of emails in a day. We were slowing the flow of information because us volunteers weren’t able to keep up.”"
'via Blog this'
Occupy Portland - October 6, 2011: Video - Police Liaison Meeting
1:23 PM - Tom McCall Waterfront Park, Portland, Oregon. Occupy Portland Rally.
Occupy Portland - October 6, 2011: Photographs
 |
| From 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
Currently editing and uploading the pictures from yesterday to Picasa: https://picasaweb.google.com/108292605979675424535/20111006OccupyPortland?authuser=0&feat=directlink
|
| 2011-10-06 Occupy Portland |
Update: 8:00 PM - I've been working on these off and on all day. I need to break for the night before my eyeballs fall out. I'll get the rest up tomorrow.
Occupy Portland - October 6, 2011: Video - Drums
2:01 PM - Tom McCall Waterfront Park, Portland, Oregon. Occupy Portland Rally.
Occupy Movement: Librarians on the March
Wednesday, October 05, 2011
Another article on suburban opiate junkies
'via Blog this'
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Suburbanites Graduate from Oxy to Smack | The Fix
'via Blog this'