The Epoch Times, the mysterious publication is linked to Falun Gong. The Epoch Times is spending more than most presidential campaigns on Facebook to promote pro-Trump videos.It is an obscure publication aimed at the Chinese diaspora, was one of the top three political spenders on Facebook in the last week in April. The paper outspent every presidential candidate except Biden and Trump himself, according to an analysis by Acronym.
The Epoch Times spent this money to promote stories that Trump's attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has championed, including the New York Times story on "Spygate."
(They were not promoted by The Epoch Times primary Facebook page. Instead, they were funneled through a subsidiary page called "Coverage of the Trump Presidency by The Epoch Times." This made it harder to find the actual ads through the database.)
For example, this video features a smiling young man summarizing the New York Times story.
According to Facebook, The Epoch Times has spent almost as much on Facebook ads in the last week ($148,937) than the Trump campaign ($149,610). The Epoch Times is organized as a 501(c)(3) non-profit based in New York. That means it gets some of its funding from donors. Who are the donors? Under U.S. law, The Epoch Times is required to report them to the IRS but not required to make them public. So we don't know.
The Epoch Times is a newspaper that has long been linked to Falun Gong -- although The Epoch Times denies any official affiliation. The Epoch Times is banned in China, where Falun Gong is being persecuted, and distributed free in the United States and other locals around the world. It was founded in 2000 by John Tang and other Chinese Americans affiliated with the Falun Gong movement. It has been publishing in English since 2004.
It has also emerged as "one of the staunchest defenders of Donald Trump’s presidency," according to BuzzFeed.
The Epoch Times has also praised a new move by the pro-Trump duo Diamond and Silk, interviewed obscure Republican candidates seeking to unseat Democrats, and claimed that Trump reads the paper daily.
An Epoch Times photographer created a controversy when she passed a folder to Trump in the White House.
Many Epoch Times staffers are practitioners of Falun Gong who work for the paper part-time for little or no pay.
The Epoch Times is written by people who are persecuted by the Chinese government. Trump is destabilizing the relationship between the U.S. and China through a trade war.
On Sunday, Trump "announced in two tweets...that he would raise American tariffs on Friday to 25 percent from 10 percent for $200 billion a year in Chinese goods. The Trump administration cited what it called backpedaling by Chinese officials during talks held last week in Beijing."
Tariffs are ultimately paid by American consumers, but they could also slow Chinese economic growth and make the current Chinese government less popular. A full-blown trade war could slow Chinese GDP growth by 1.2 to 1.5 percent.
The whole world waiting for the trade talks to conclude positively, was positioned to make money from the good news; till Trump as Trumpian as he is ; tweeted that he was going to increase tariffs on China by Friday- May 10, 2019.
Our dealmaker-in chief; caused the entire world's stock markets to collapse.
The Commerce Department , said in a statement that China failed to honor some commitments as discussed in their earlier talks.
But even even before Trump took office in January 2017, many US companies had been wanting to reduce their China footprint for many reasons. The list includes: an increasingly hostile attitude toward foreign businesses (and executives), the issues with Huawei and the resulting arbitary arrests in China of American executives, more assertive China-first policies from President Xi Jinping, rising costs concerns surrounding – IP theft, concentration risk and quality control, scaling and the risk of a n authoritative Government.
However, raising tarriff on Chinese products is like punishing US consumers for problems Trump has with China.
By limiting imports, the prices of US consumers and businesses increases. High prices in turn leads to less consumer spending and less investments. This leads to negligible GDP gains and literally stunts economic growth.
Negotiations are barely done in a take or leave it attitude. In bi-lateral negotiations - clarity on what each party is willing to leave on the table to gain the advantage of working together needs to be clear to not only those two parties but the non-parties getting impacted as well.
THAT IS WHEN A NEGOTIATION BECOMES A DEAL
Because Venezuela is a Russian ally.
He knew it the day he passed the Executive Order banning the Venezuelan cryptocurrency that he had, inadvertently, stepped on Putin's toes. The Cryptocurrency called "Petro" was not only State Backed, but was also a half-hidden joint venture between Venezuelan and Russian officials and Businessmen( Time reports March 2018) .
The "Petro" was meant to link the value of the Venezuelan Oil Reserves and pictures of the inauguration ceremony was attended by Maduro's closest Russian Advisors , Denis Druzhkov and Fyodor Bogorodsky, billionaires with close ties to the Kremlin.
VENEZUELA IS A RUSSIAN STRONGHOLD.
For now, Maduro, with the help of his allies, had withstood the impact of the challenge of Guaido to overthrow his Presidency. However, he is at war with his own people. With huge oil reserves, suffering hyperinflation, shortages of food, water, medicines, the situation is precarious and may not be continue without further bloodshed. The fruadulent elections of last year, have been denounced by most of the world and Maduro is anything but a legitimate President.
Given Russia's interests, for Trump to initiate military action , would antagonize his hero, and probably , that would have been the nature of the 90-minute call between the two friends yesterday. As he has tried and successfully done in Syria, Putin will make America useless in Venezuela. There seems to be talks between Trump and Putin to let Maduro escape to Cuba as per Financial Times reporting. Will Putin snub the US again or Will Trump play a sanctions game with Russia ? China has a powerful role to play here as well. A little intervention on their part could really change the entire power play. How far will this happen without violence? This is for us to see in the next few days.
Why do democrats think Biden is the most electable candidate, when most of them agree he is not the first choice. In most public forums, there is an oath to succumb to the " electability" rule.
What are the important factors for the democratic voters for 2020
a. Beat Trump
b. Healthcare, Debt, Employment, Racial Justice and other issues
We can get an idea of what Democratic voters think an electable candidate looks like by finding polls that ask voters which 2020 presidential hopeful they think has the best chance of winning the general election, in addition to asking who they would support independent of electability concerns. At least two recent polls have asked both questions: a Quinnipiac poll of registered Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters in California and a Granite State Poll of likely New Hampshire primary voters (conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center).1 Perhaps unsurprisingly, in both cases, the percentage of voters who say each candidate is the most electable is very similar to the percentage of voters who support each candidate. But there are some telling divergences:
Some candidates widely seen as electable don’t have as much support from voters, while others who have generated a lot of voter enthusiasm aren’t seen as particularly strong general-election candidates.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, ranking after Biden in most polls of the Democratic primary thus far, has a perceived electability on par with his popularity. Beto O’Rourke's electability outstripped his popularity as a candidate, . Then come the popular candidates - Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Kamala Harris and Sen. Elizabeth Warren. They all enjoy decent voter support but were less likely to be seen as electable.
So this pattern emerges : The moderate, straight, white men score best, while the women and the man seeking to become the first openly gay president lose points on electability, as do nonwhite candidates like businessman Andrew Yang and Sen. Cory Booker. Harris ranks low considering her level of voter support. Is that because of the fact that she is both a person of color and a woman. Even Klobuchar is seen as a relatively weak general-election candidate even though her strong past electoral performances make a good case for her being electable.
Non-Biden Voters think Biden will win in the General Elections.
Electability is therefore definitely linked to RACE and GENDER and for some odd reason- the suffering you show you have been through as a "working class American".
A March poll by HuffPost/YouGov for Democrat voters how they thought a candidate’s gender and race would affect other voters’ decisions. In both cases, about a third of respondents said they expected that being male or being white would make other people more likely to vote for a candidate while a single-digit percentage thought it would make people less likely to vote for a candidate. (About 40 percent thought it would make no difference.) And being female and nonwhite were each seen, less overwhelmingly, as net negatives. Interestingly, though, the HuffPost/YouGov poll also found that respondents viewed being over the age of 70 as a serious electability problem, yet in that same poll, 64 percent of voters thought 76-year-old Biden was capable of winning the general election, and 48 percent thought 77-year-old Sanders could do so. Both candidates also had strong electability numbers in both the Quinnipiac and UNH polls.
Business Insider and SurveyMonkey have been asking voters nationwide which candidates they believe would likely win and lose an election against Trump
Business Insider’s early-April poll found that almost 56% of likely Democratic primary voters said they thought Biden would beat Trump, and just 15 percent said they thought he would lose. Just 21 % thought Warren could beat Trump.
None of these polls could be the last word into the concept of " ELECTABILITY" but is definitely a large window into the minds of those who vote and the myraid of voices that make America. We are stil laid up in knots of race and gender and cannot see the merit of a candidate for what they bring to the table. If we were a homogenous same race society- would this be any different for women ?
McConnell, the Kentucky Republican launched his campaign for a seventh term in the Senate last summer. McConnell not only holds the Senate’s most powerful job, but Democrats are still seething over McConnell’s refusal to have the Senate consider Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s 2016 Supreme Court nominee.
Democrats are eager to find a candidate to take on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in 2020, but no top tier challenger has jumped in yet.
This is perhaps the most alarming news so far. Mitch McConnell is the one of the most critical obstructionsits and supporters of destructive public policy in the current Senate.
Sometimes I think its his desperate attempt to divide the country's attention. While making sure his base is celebrating his imaginary exoneration; he masterfully has moved the conversation for the rest of the country to healthcare. We live in fear of what he may undo next. Women rights, voter rights, children's education, infrastructure and while we are still reeling from a wave of anger on one issue; he inflicts another one.
The country is not on one back foot; we need a lot of back feet here. It is an onslaught on our rights.
After 70 attempts to repeal Obama Care, you would think - he would be done. But this is what keeps his base happy; so he does not care for the rest of the country and the impact of his short sightedness on the basic human rights of the people who he serves.
Could this damage the republican party, damaging their prospects in the 2020 presidential election ?
When Republicans passed their tax bill in 2017, they nixed the “individual mandate”—the surtax Americans have to pay if they do not have health insurance. Republican-led states then sued, arguing that this meant that the entire law—which was upheld on Congress’s power to tax—was invalid and needed to be struck down. The Department of Justice (DoJ) had previously struck a more muted tone, arguing that only a few provisions—like guaranteed coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions—should be struck down. But this week the DoJ, at Mr Trump’s direction, announced that it was now in favour of striking down the entire law ahead of a hearing by the Fifth Circuit, the appellate court which will review the Texas decision.
What will happen if Obamacare were repealed successfully ?
11m people have health insurance through the public exchanges set up by the law; 12m people gained health insurance through the expansion of Medicaid, the government programme for the very poor. Young people have become used to staying on their parents’ health-insurance schemes until the age of 26; older people have become used to signing up for insurance without facing price discrimination for any pre-existing medical conditions they might have. All these people will lose their cover