U.S. Elections: Will anti-Trump vote prevail?

Although many anticipated it that way, the criterion is not clearly unanimous.

Steffen W. Schmidt, professor of Political Science at Iowa University, claimed that the Democratic Party should not count on the Hispanic vote to tip November’s upcoming midterm election in their favor.   

Thus published Theconversation.com website on Sunday.  

Schmidt argues that the said possibility could be stimulated by the anti-immigrant policy followed by Trump.

So, Democrats try to court Latinos in red states such as Arizona and Florida.

But the professor adds that his investigation questions that a massive Latin vote tilts the balance towards Democrats.

He bases it, by way of example, through inaccurate surveys.

Steffen W. Schmidt considers that “2018 will be a sharp and significant test of Latin voter behaviour in U.S., regarding the 2016 presidential election”.

Now, the difference lies, among others, on the fact that many US Latinos and their families suffer the highly questioned migratory policy of President Donald Trump, as well as the cruelty against the young immigrants known as “Dreamers”.

The university professor warned that should the Latin vote moves away from Republicans in November, “Trump would have endangered the political future of his own party”.

Something is secure: the behaviour, generally, primitive of the head of state, has undermined the Republican Party and has turned the White House into a nasty casino of public dirty tricks.

  • Published in Specials

Donald Trump Threatens US Government Shutdown Over Immigration

Washington: U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday he would allow the federal government to shut down if Democrats refuse to back his demand for a wall at the Mexican border and other major changes to immigration laws his administration wants.

"I would be willing to 'shut down' government if the Democrats do not give us the votes for Border Security, which includes the Wall! Must get rid of Lottery, Catch & Release etc. and finally go to system of Immigration based on MERIT! We need great people coming into our Country!" Trump said on Twitter.

The Republican president has used the threat of a government shutdown several times since taking office in 2017 in a bid to get his priorities in congressional spending bills, especially funding for a wall along the southern U.S. border.

A disruption in federal government operations in the months before November congressional elections could backfire on Trump if voters blame Republicans, who control Congress, for the interruption in services.

Trump wants Congress to pass legislation that addresses immigration issues, including the border wall, changing the way visas are allotted and other immigration restrictions.

Although Republicans control Congress, disagreements between moderates and conservatives in the party have impeded a speedy legislative fix.

Standoffs over spending levels and immigration led to a three-day government shutdown, mostly over a weekend, in January and an hours-long shutdown in February.

The Republican president has made tougher immigration laws a centerpiece of his administration, from the first ill-fated travel ban on people from predominantly Muslim nations to the current battle raging over the separation of illegal immigrant children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

A federal judge on Friday urged the U.S. government to focus on finding deported immigrant parents so it could reunite them with their children who remain in the United States.

Trump has requested $25 billion to build the border wall and $1.6 billion has already appropriated for the project.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan said lawmakers were considering an appropriations measure seeking an additional $5 billion for the wall.

However, its passage in the U.S. Senate, where Republicans have a slim majority, is a long shot.

Lawmakers met with Trump last week to discuss the appropriations process to fund the government by the September deadline.

"We really just want to get the military funded, on time, on budget on schedule this year. And that's the primary concern," Ryan said Wednesday on Fox News.

  • Published in World

"Gave Up Nothing" At Meeting With Putin, Says Donald Trump

Washington: U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday he "gave up nothing" at last week's private meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin but remained elusive about their conversation as fellow Republicans and other critics questioned any potential deals.

Following the two leaders' summit in Helsinki, Trump previously said they discussed a range of issues, including efforts to denuclearize North Korea, the Middle East peace efforts and cyber attacks but has not given any details.

Russian officials have said Putin made concrete proposals to Trump during their one-on-one talk regarding conflict in Ukraine. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also said the two discussed the Syrian crisis.

But top U.S. intelligence officials and members of Congress have said they do not know what was discussed and have not been briefed.

"I gave up NOTHING, we merely talked about future benefits for both countries," Trump wrote on Twitter.

Despite the fierce criticism, Trump has extended an invitation for Putin to visit Washington for a second meeting this autumn.

  • Published in World

‘Absolutely not’: GOP says questioning Trump’s translator would end presidential diplomacy

Republicans in Congress rejected calls from the Democrats to summon President Donald Trump’s translator from the Helsinki summit, saying it would block future presidential diplomatic efforts.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), a frequent critic of the president, said he would “absolutely not” support having the translator testify before Congress, arguing it would have a chilling effect on future presidential meetings.

“That would be the last time you ever have a foreign leader meet with a president of the US privately,” he told Politico. “I can’t imagine how that would affect future presidents in terms of their ability to talk to foreign leaders.”

@politico "Absolutely not," Lindsey Graham said when asked if he'd support having Marina Gross, the American translator in Trump's meeting with Putin, testify before Congress.

He said that precedent could prevent foreign leaders from wanting to meet with future U.S. presidents privately

Senator Bob Corker (R-Tennessee), chair of the Foreign Relations Committee and another Trump critic, said that summoning the translator and demanding her notes would set a bad precedent.

“If we are going to start getting translator’s notes, I think we are moving to a precedent that – unless some crime has been committed – is unprecedented and just not appropriate,” Corker said on Thursday.

@ElizLanders @SenBobCorker NOT going to ask for Trump's translator's notes from Putin meeting, tells @FoxReports:

"If we are going to start getting translator’s notes, I think we are moving to a precedent that – unless some crime has been committed – is unprecedented & just not appropriate”

Following Monday’s meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Democrats insinuated that the US president could not be trusted and demanded to get an account of his two-hour meeting with Putin from the translator, who was identified as Marina Gross.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire), wanted the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to summon Gross “to determine what was specifically discussed and agreed to on the US behalf.”

Representatives Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, Democrats from California, pushed for Gross to be summoned before the House Intelligence Committee as well, but their proposal was shot down by the Republican majority.

Senate Republicans did, however, join the Democrats in unanimously denouncing Putin’s Helsinki proposal to grant US and Russian prosecutors access to suspects under a 1999 treaty.

The Senate unanimously adopted the proposal by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York), expressing the sense that the “United States should refuse to make available any current or former diplomat, civil servant, political appointee, law enforcement official or member of the Armed Forces of the United States for questioning by the government or Vladimir Putin."

Putin’s proposal would have enabled Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s prosecutors to speak with Russians they’ve accused of hacking during the 2016 US presidential election, in exchange for Russian investigators questioning US officials, such as former ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul and businessman Bill Browder, who is suspected of financial misdeeds in Russia.

  • Published in World

U.S.-Democracy: How does it work?

Nathan Larson is a self-confessed pedophile and white supremacist. And he’s currently running for Congress in Virginia.

Once again facts show how political system works in the United States. Last Tuesday, some sources described it unquestionably.

For example, ahead of the next primary elections that take place in eight states of the country, where the candidates of both parties, as well as alleged independent ones, will be nominated.

A candidate who calls himself independent, Nathan Larson, during an interview with Huffington Post daily said:

“A lot of people are tired of political correctness and being restricted by it. People prefer an outsider who has nothing to lose and is willing to say what’s on a lot of people’s minds.”

Larson, 37, is running for a congressional seat in Virginia.

Ten years ago, he ran for the House of Delegates but failed, and later he was sent to jail in 2009 for threatening to kill the then President Barack Obama.

However, this was not his biggest sin, he, father of a daughter, admitted before the press that he was the main responsible of several events via the Internet geared at advising pedophiles.  

According to the sources, the Virginia congressional candidate considers that the word pedophile is “a tag”, plays down importance to violence and dares to defend the authority of a man to beat his wife.

Another example is that of Don Blankenship, independent too, who is getting into politics now, after serving a year in prison for the death of 29 workers in 2010, because of the explosion of a coal mine, owned by the company that he managed.

Blakenship, self-defined “more Trumpist than Trump”, rejects to have a low profile while running for US Senate from West Virginia and seeks fame with statements that have been deemed disrespectful and even racist.

This controversial candidate, 68, dismissed his interest for joining the Republican Party, when he showed an electoral video accusing Mitch McConnell, its majority leader, of being a cocaine addict and benefiting himself from the money of the “Chinese family” of his wife, Elaine Chao.

Add to this scenario, Rep. Patrick Little, who previously complained of being expelled from the convention of his party held in San Diego (California) for rejecting to “serve the leadership of Israel.”

Little is self-defined as a “defender of white people”, although his possibilities for success are scarce.

This is a tight synthesis on the world of politics in the United States, country that its propaganda sells as the most democratic country on Earth,

Translated by Jorge Mesa Benjamin / CubaSi Translation Staff

USA: New destructive health plan

Millions in U.S. are closely following the prospect of the new healthcare plan, passed by the House of Representatives days ago with a very tight 217- 213 margin.

Named American Health Care Act (AHCA, by its English acronym), it was conceived by Republicans to replace Obamacare.

On this matter, analysts say that many lawmakers, including members from that party, do not endorse clauses of the aforementioned bill.

Republicans, they add, with exceptions, wish to eliminate the Affordable Care Act (ACA, by its English acronym), better known as Obamacare.

However, when they passed the so-called American Health Care Act recently, they showed how far they are willing to go.  

El Nuevo Herald editorial published on Monday explained it when writing:

“They do not like that millions of people remain without health insurance”, as well as that conditions with long treatment be stopped.

But many House Republicans voted in favor of the bill for the sake of repealing Obamacare, remarked El Nuevo Herald.

In Washington they predict that the Senate could be less drastic, although its Republican members seek to protect their vote with excuses.

Here the leading figure is far-right Senator Marco Rubio, who adopts shifting stances very easily.

Then the editorial suggests him not to forget that in 2015 his state had larger number of Obamacare supporters than in the entire country.

Also that Florida voters, as it happens to more millions in the nation, are worried because the Capitol gave green light to Trumpcare.

It also advised Rubio to remind his colleagues that it is no longer about rejecting Obama’s previous healthcare plan.

Then it put the lawmaker on the ropes, telling him that it’s about opposing the current president, “as he promised during his re-election campaign to the Senate”.

To many’s surprise, only Ros-Lehtinen, due to yet nebulous reasons, ascertained the following:

“I won’t support a bill that can cause a serious harm to the health and lives of the people from South Florida”.

If approved, she warned, “the oldest and poorest”, will find it more difficult to obtain healthcare regarding any illness.

And we are sure, the editorial stated, that she would have done the same even if she was not retiring from her post within a few months.

Obamacare is not perfect, the newspaper added, but thanks to that law, millions have received a life-saving healthcare.

Along with that it said, “House lawmakers eliminated the protection for 24 million Americans” rather than improving their shortcomings.

Finally, the Editorial Board wrote that the new policy defunds insurance coverage for planned parenthood, people with cancer, heart disease, or HIV/AIDS.

Everything is even worse with the following possibilities:

It increases the cost of insurance bonuses, cuts back Medicaid expansion, and makes Americans with insurances provided by their employers feel uncertain.

Don’t be astonished at anything, that’s the wild and harsh nature of Capitalism.

Translated by Jorge Mesa Benjamin / Cubasi Translation Staff

‘Trump’s only ideology is ‘me’, deeply authoritarian & very dangerous’ – Noam Chomsky

World-famous linguist, philosopher and political thinker Noam Chomsky has described US President Donald Trump’s ideology simply as ‘me’, adding that while it’s not fascist, it’s still “deeply authoritarian and very dangerous.”

However, there is no other option in the eyes of the people, Chomsky added in his interview to BBC.

“What is the alternative to Trump? The democrats gave up on the working class 40 years ago. It’s not their constituency, no one in the political system is. The Republicans claim to be, but they are basically their class enemy. However they can appeal to people on the basis of claims ‘We're gonna help you economically, even when we kick you in the face’?”

Noam Chomsky © Majed Jaber

In his book, Chomsky branded the Republican Party as “the most dangerous organization on Earth,” and when asked to explain, he pointed out that it’s about something they refuse to admit exists.

“Trump will do damage to the world, and it's already happening. The most significant aspect of the Trump election is not just Trump, but the whole Republican Party as they are departing from the rest of the world on climate change, a crucial issue, an existential threat,” Chomsky said.

He called the denial “an astonishing spectacle,” in which “the US, alone in the world, not only refuses to participate in efforts to deal with climate change, but is dedicated to undermining them. And it’s not just Trump – every single Republican leader is the same and it goes down to local levels.”

And US popular opinion isn’t exactly of any help, according to Chomsky.

“Roughly 40 percent of the population think it can't be a problem, because Jesus is coming in a couple of decades.”

Isn’t Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) more of a threat? It would seem so, but Chomsky isn’t sure about that.

“Is ISIS dedicated to destroy the prospects for organized human existence? What does it mean to say is Not only we're not doing anything about climate change, but we're trying to accelerate the race to the precipice. Doesn't matter whether they genuinely believe it or not, if the consequence of that is, let's use more fossil fuel, let's refuse to subsidize developing countries, let's eliminate regulations that reduce greenhouse gas emissions — if that's the consequence, that's extremely dangerous."

Noam Chomsky. © PeoplePowerTelevision

“Trump's only ideology is ‘me’, it’s not Hitler or Mussolini, but deeply authoritarian and very dangerous,” the philosopher concluded.

The process happening in the US is universal, though, and is taking place worldwide, Chomsky told BBC, due to “a massive assault on the large part of the population, an assault on democracy” which led to “not just anger, but contempt for centrist institutions.”

“A large part of the population feels that they are just not responsive to them,” and Chomsky enumerates the results of this: Trump, Brexit, Le Pen.

Nevertheless, Emmanuel Macron’s victory in the French presidential election is “by no means the end to the populism in Europe,” he said. In fact, “Macron is an example of populism, because he came from the outside, because the institutions have collapsed. The vote for him was substantially the vote against Le Pen.”

Last, but not least, Chomsky spoke out on WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange, calling his persecution and threats against him to be “completely wrong.”

“What’s keeping him in prison – and in fact he is in prison [holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London] – is the threat that the United States will go after him. Same thing that’s keeping [security whistleblower Edward] Snowden in Russia. And he is right to worry about it and it is the threat that is wrong.”

  • Published in World

Donald Trump is not Superman

Life is stubbornly showing that a country like U.S. cannot be run in the style of a large capitalist enterprise.

Thus starts to understand it, by the force of blows, who thought the opposite, its current billionaire president, Donald Trump.

Over sixty days ago, he took office, and has already faced two serious political setbacks, so deep that they’re still floating in the international public opinion.

In the first case, he decided to close the doors of the United States to travelers from six Muslim-majority nations.

Balance? That a sort of wildfire spread across the world to challenge the move.

Even in his own national territory there were demonstrations rejecting it and some turned violent.

Last week, Trump and his men could not repeal the Obamacare health plan (also known as Affordable Care Act).

It was a failure because they bombed it without knowing how to replace it properly.

Since then, the current president had turned it into one of his main banners to gain supporters, especially from the far-right.

Now they believe the time had come to, using the scenario of the House of Representatives dominated by them, remove the aforementioned plan.  

But in the face of significant clashes even with their allies in the Capitol building, they withdrew the bill.

That is, an assertive political setback that deeply hit both, President Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Another concern joins this new exhausting fact: the expensive wall to be built in the US-Mexico border.

AP journalist Alicia A. Caldwell wrote last Saturday that such a huge work “has its own obstacles”.

And she details some:

For example, Trump does not know how he would pay for that huge 30-foot-high wall and with a wonderful view for those who watch it from the north.

Caldwell also writes that Washington will have to contend with an unfavourable geography and “many legal problems”.

Then she takes a look at those obstacles:

Trump vowed that Mexico would pay for the wall, demand that the Mexican government has repeatedly rejected.

The first cost estimate sent to Congress requested $2.6 billion for the wall.

Nevertheless, an internal report prepared by Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly concluded that a wall for the whole border would cost about $21 billion.

For his part, Trump assures the cost would be around $12 billion. Chaos within the bigger chaos?

AP notices that, at this point, it is not defined yet how much money the Congress would approve in that regard.

Nearly 50 percent of the 2000-mile (3200-km) the US-Mexico border is in Texas and marked by the Bravo River.

According to AP, Trump will be forced to deal with treaties maintained by the International Boundary and Water Commission, as well as several environmental regulations that limit certain type of construction areas.

Moreover, almost the whole land on the Texas border is privately held and most of it belongs to families settled in the area for several generations.

So, observers warn, based on historical experience, that buying their land won’t be easy.

Another unfavourable sign for the Trump collection was the following:

After gathering opinions on Trump’s debacle in Congress, two AP journalists, Michael Warren and Sudhin Thanawala, wrote on Saturday:

Americans benefited with Obamacare “breathed a sigh of relief” with the failure of the Republican attempt to repeal it.

Even more importantly, what happened with the bill corroborates, so to say, that Donald Trump is not superman.

Translated by Jorge Mesa Benjamin / Cubasi Translation Staff

Subscribe to this RSS feed