To view Week or Agenda (list) format, click at top right. To see details, click on event; to close, click on x or (Agenda view) click again on event. If you can’t see the calendar above, click here. Plans can change; check before attending. Submit changes or other events organized by CCDC and its zones, campaigns and elected officials here. (See separate progressive calendar here.)
[And sad to say, 28% would be good news, compared to past midterm elections. Voters under the age of 30 should reflect that elected officials know which demographics vote. Why does Pennsylvania underfund state universities while not taxing retirement income? Because students vote a lot less than retirees. If there is ever a time, this is the year for younger voters to show they know and care what their government does. As the article goes on to show, “young voter turnout could make the difference in 2018.”]
By Tara Golshan, Vox, Jul 18, 2018
Millennials are pretty reliable Democrats, but unreliable voters.
Democrats are winning over younger voters by huge numbers, but as a highly contentious, voter turnout-dependent midterm election inches closer, there’s a serious question of whether these young Democrats will come to the polls.
A recently released poll from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Atlantic conducted in June showed only 28 percent of young adults ages 18 to 29 say they are “absolutely certain” they’ll vote in midterms, compared to 74 percent of seniors.
In a year when Democrats are hoping an energized base can deliver them massive gains in Congress — and possibly the majority in one or both chambers — this poll, on its face, should give Democrats some pause.
Of course, this is only one poll. There are other surveys with varied results; a recent poll conducted by the Associated Press and University of Chicago’s NORC found that 32 percent of young voters would certainly vote and 56 percent were likely to. Another poll by Cosmopolitan magazine and SurveyMonkey found that 48 percent of young voters were “absolutely certain” they’d vote in the midterms.
And it’s actually a big improvement for Democrats compared to past midterms….
keep reading and see links at Vox
By Doug Muder, The Daily Sift, 7/16/18
Monday night, Trump named his second Supreme Court nominee: Brett Kavanaugh.
Immediately, legal and political pundits began speculating on how Kavanaugh’s appointment, if the Senate approves it, would affect abortion rights. Will Kavanaugh be the fifth vote to reverse Roe v Wade, allowing either states or the federal government to make abortion illegal? Or could he perhaps gut Roe while leaving it technically valid, perhaps by letting states regulate abortion in ways that make it practically unavailable, even if still theoretically legal? Or does he really believe in the principal of stare decisis, in which the Court leaves a precedent in place unless it proves unworkable?
Important as that issue is, it would be a shame if it sucked all the oxygen out of the room, leaving no space for discussion of the other implications of Kavanaugh joining the Court. Let’s look at a few of those issues.
Partisanship. One of the worst developments for the Supreme Court as an institution over the last two decades is the loss of its non-partisan image. Beginning with Bush v Gore in 2000, and going on through Citizens United (which destroyed campaign finance controls) and Shelby County (which gutted the Voting Rights Act), the public has gotten used to the idea that judges represent the party that appointed them. What the laws or the Constitution says is less important than which party a decision would benefit.
Kavanaugh is not going to improve that image. He first came to public attention as a main author of the Starr Report. While ostensibly non-partisan, the investigation into President Clinton lead by Kenneth Starr was transparently political. (Anyone who thinks the Mueller investigation is a “partisan witch hunt” has amnesia. Unlike the Mueller probe, Starr’s investigators regularly leaked damaging information to the press and timed their official announcements for maximum political effect. The Starr Report was written to be as sexually scurrilous as possible. Impeachment was a dim fantasy at that point, but at least the report could do political damage to the Clinton administration and embarrass Clinton personally.)
He subsequently was a lawyer for the Bush campaign during Bush v Gore, and then worked for Bush’s White House Counsel Alberto Gonzalez….
keep reading and follow links at The Daily Sift
If you missed that memorable rally, or even if you were there, your time will be well spent listening to the video of the rally, courtesy of Chester County Community TV Live, on YouTube.
For three other posts on the rally, search “Families” in the Search box in the right sidebar of this site or click here.