Focused Agenda
The personal IS political.
Focused Read, excerpted, in about 3 minutes
"Exclusive Poll: Women 50 and Older Could Decide the 2020 Election
Almost all plan to vote and a wide majority are still undecided
The path to victory for candidates in the 2020 elections will run through women age 50 and older,
according to a new AARP poll that finds 95 percent of older women plan to cast a ballot in November.
The survey shows that these voters are engaged, motivated and plan to closely scrutinize the positions of those seeking their support on such pivotal issues as health care and the economy.
“We think this poll is important because it shows women are going to be a decisive voice in the 2020 election,” says Nancy LeaMond, AARP executive vice president and chief advocacy and engagement officer.
“This tells us that the candidates better be focused on what older women care about in this election.” And the data clearly shows, LeaMond adds, that “we’ve moved to an era in this election where the old ‘It’s the economy, stupid’ axiom has given way to: ‘It’s health care, stupid.’”
The Harris Poll conducted the survey for AARP.
It’s the first in AARP’s “She’s the Difference” series that will continue through the 2020 election season.
This research proves that “women are coming out,” says Tawny Saez, senior strategist at Harris, who says the response that 95 percent of women age 50 and over plan to vote “is one of the highest I’ve ever seen.
Women 50-plus have been an overlooked group you cannot overlook any longer.”
According to April, 2019 U.S. Census data, women over the age of 50 comprise 28 percent of all registered voters.
Among the 95 percent of women voters who say they are likely to vote, 87 percent say they are very likely.
Only 1 percent say they do not plan to vote.
This obvious interest in the 2020 election tracks with other recent polls and the analyses of election experts who are predicting that the 2020 turnout will be one of the highest in American history.
The poll was conducted online from Nov. 8 to Nov. 25 among 3,151 registered voters age 50 and over, including 1,924 women. Here is a look at some of the other key findings of this survey.
1. Women age 50+ are mostly undecided
“The fact that so many women are still undecided goes to show how important this election is for them,” says Saez. The current candidates have not convinced women age 50 and older that they’ll make sufficient progress on the issues they care about, she says, especially health care and the economy. “There’s almost a fear of electing another leader that is not going to move the needle on issues that will affect their daily lives.” ...
2. Many cannot afford health care
...Twenty-six percent of women polled say they skipped medical care because it was too expensive and 14 percent say they went into debt because of high health care costs. Women also believe older Americans are being taken advantage of when it comes to health costs. Nearly 7 in 10 feel older people pay too much for health care compared to others, and 85 percent say people with preexisting conditions should not have to pay more for their health care coverage.
3. Women 50+ most value ethics and trust in their leaders
“The whole question of values is increasingly important to voters,” says LeaMond. “People want to be represented by people they can trust and people who they believe are operating in their interests, and that’s apparent in this data.” This is particularly important to women, LeaMond says, “particularly as they have all this economic anxiety. And that economic anxiety drives a whole set of questions about which candidate is really delivering for me, not just saying something, but doing something.” ...
4. Almost half say elected leaders are failing on health care
“Over and over we’re seeing a lot of conflict in elected leaders’ ability to address this issue,” says Saez. Women have such a high standard in terms of expectations of change, and there has been little movement on the cost of health care and prescription drugs.” Women, she says, “haven’t seen change in their households.” ...
5. Nearly half of 50+ women also think the economy is on the wrong track
The poll shows that 50-plus women are not optimistic about their personal economic prospects. Of those surveyed, only 24 percent expect their personal financial situation to improve in the next 12 months versus 38 percent of men. This lack of confidence in the economy is also dragging down women’s prospects for retirement. While 62 percent of men over age 50 polled are confident they will live comfortably in retirement, only 47 percent of woman have that same belief. ...
6. They’re down on drug companies
AARP research has found that older adults take between four and five medications each day and that many have to decide between taking their drugs as prescribed and affording such daily necessities as food and lodging. In this poll, 13 percent of women 50 and over report rationing their medications because of the cost.
That 65 percent of women have an unfavorable opinion on pharmaceutical companies “says to me that health care costs are top of mind and that women as the family navigators of the health care system know where those high costs are,” says LeaMond. ...
7. Women 50+ are the chief health care officers of their families
“Women are the deciders and the CEO of the household,” says LeaMond. “They are making most of the economic decisions and most of the health care decisions.” ... "
You can read more here
Focused Thought in 30 seconds
The fully informed are not so easily conned.
A preponderance of evidence says: Putin attacked America to install Trump and GOP blessed and covers up.
Focused Action shared in 30 seconds
Part I
Part II
You can retweet my Tweet here
It's long but, being an informed citizen is critical to our Republic!
Focused Point of Interest, excerpted, in about 14-minutes
"The Virtue of an Educated Voter
The Founders believed that a well-informed electorate preserves our fragile democracy and benefits American society as a whole
(By Alan Taylor September 6, 2016)
Almost everyone praises education, but consensus dissolves over who should pay for it. This dilemma runs deep in our history, back to the founders who led the American Revolution and designed a more participatory form of government, known as a republic.
They declared that Americans needed more and better education to preserve their state and national republics from relapsing into tyranny.
A governor of Virginia, William H. Cabell, asserted in 1808 that education “constitutes one of the great pillars on which the civil liberties of a nation depend.” More than a mere boon for individuals, education was a collective, social benefit essential for free government to endure.
They declared that Americans needed more and better education to preserve their state and national republics from relapsing into tyranny.
A governor of Virginia, William H. Cabell, asserted in 1808 that education “constitutes one of the great pillars on which the civil liberties of a nation depend.” More than a mere boon for individuals, education was a collective, social benefit essential for free government to endure.
Those founders worried that their 13 state republics, loosely tied in a new union, were vulnerable to internal divisions and external manipulation. ...
... How then could an immense and growing union of diverse states sustain a form of government that had always failed in the past?
The American political experiments seemed especially threatened by contentions over balancing power between the states and the nation and between the regions: North and South, East and West.
... Lacking a strong national identity, the people of 1787 identified with their states and distrusted outsiders.
That pervasive distrust, rather than any common sense of nationalism, led the founders to craft the federal union as a “peace pact” meant to avert wars between the states.
The American political experiments seemed especially threatened by contentions over balancing power between the states and the nation and between the regions: North and South, East and West.
... Lacking a strong national identity, the people of 1787 identified with their states and distrusted outsiders.
That pervasive distrust, rather than any common sense of nationalism, led the founders to craft the federal union as a “peace pact” meant to avert wars between the states.
American leaders worried that their imperial neighbors—French, Spanish, and especially British—would exploit the new nation’s internal tensions to break up the tenuous union of the states.
Poorly educated voters might also elect reckless demagogues who would appeal to class resentments and promote the violent redistribution of wealth.
In such a nightmare scenario, a military despot—an American Caesar—ultimately would seize power and restore order at the expense of free government.
John Adams warned the people, “When a favourable conjuncture has presented, some of the most intrigueing and powerful citizens have conceived the design of enslaving their country, and building their own greatness on its ruins.
Philip and Alexander are examples of this in Greece—Caesar in Rome … and ten thousand others.”
Though a blessing for common people, a republic seemed dangerously fragile.
Poorly educated voters might also elect reckless demagogues who would appeal to class resentments and promote the violent redistribution of wealth.
Republican political theory of the day held that empires and monarchies could thrive without an educated populace.
Indeed, kings and nobles could better dominate and dazzle the ignorant and credulous.
But republics depended on a broad electorate of common men, who, to keep their new rights, had to protect them with attentive care.
These citizens, theorists insisted, needed to cultivate a special character known as “virtue”: the precious capacity to transcend their diverse self-interests by favoring the common good of the political community.
If everyone merely pursued his private interest, a republic would succumb to the perverse synergy of demagogues and tyrants.
To override the selfishness assumed to be innately human, people had to be taught the value of virtue. Thomas Jefferson noted, “I have looked on our present state of liberty as a short-lived possession, unless the mass of the people could be informed to a certain degree.”
Indeed, kings and nobles could better dominate and dazzle the ignorant and credulous.
But republics depended on a broad electorate of common men, who, to keep their new rights, had to protect them with attentive care.
These citizens, theorists insisted, needed to cultivate a special character known as “virtue”: the precious capacity to transcend their diverse self-interests by favoring the common good of the political community.
If everyone merely pursued his private interest, a republic would succumb to the perverse synergy of demagogues and tyrants.
To override the selfishness assumed to be innately human, people had to be taught the value of virtue. Thomas Jefferson noted, “I have looked on our present state of liberty as a short-lived possession, unless the mass of the people could be informed to a certain degree.”
(Emphasis is mine.)
... Having grown up in colonies ruled by an empire committed to monarchy, the founders wanted the next generation of Americans to master a new culture of republicanism.
Schools needed to produce well-informed protectors of republican government.
“If the common people are ignorant and vicious,” Rush concluded, “a republican nation can never be long free.” A physician and reformer from Philadelphia, he sought to use education “to convert men into republican machines” in order to “fit them more easily for uniform and peaceable government.”
Putting revolutionary turmoil behind them, citizens had to become orderly supporters of the new state and federal governments.
They also needed enough education to distinguish worthy from treacherous candidates for office—lest the republics succumb to those reckless demagogues or would-be aristocrats. As Jefferson put it, “Ignorance and despotism seem made for each other.”
Schools needed to produce well-informed protectors of republican government.
“If the common people are ignorant and vicious,” Rush concluded, “a republican nation can never be long free.” A physician and reformer from Philadelphia, he sought to use education “to convert men into republican machines” in order to “fit them more easily for uniform and peaceable government.”
Putting revolutionary turmoil behind them, citizens had to become orderly supporters of the new state and federal governments.
They also needed enough education to distinguish worthy from treacherous candidates for office—lest the republics succumb to those reckless demagogues or would-be aristocrats. As Jefferson put it, “Ignorance and despotism seem made for each other.”
(Emphasis is mine.)
Reformers wanted more and better schools to endow young Americans with the cultural resources needed to protect the common good.
During the colonial era, only New England’s towns had sustained public grammar schools...
Throughout the states, the children of wealthy families could learn Latin, advanced mathematics, and some science by going on to private academies. Colleges were even more expensive and exclusive.
Neither women nor African Americans were permitted to attend, and few young white men could afford to...
Throughout the states, the children of wealthy families could learn Latin, advanced mathematics, and some science by going on to private academies. Colleges were even more expensive and exclusive.
Neither women nor African Americans were permitted to attend, and few young white men could afford to...
... A third of adults could not read or write.
Wealthy planters dominated the counties that constituted the new state.
Loath to pay higher taxes to educate common whites, the gentry preferred to hire tutors to prepare their sons for private colleges in another state or in Britain.
Jefferson regarded the county elites as self-perpetuating cabals of unworthy men, so he sought a more meritocratic and public educational system.
Wealthy planters dominated the counties that constituted the new state.
Jefferson regarded the county elites as self-perpetuating cabals of unworthy men, so he sought a more meritocratic and public educational system.
He distinguished between the old “artificial aristocracy” of inherited privilege and a new “natural aristocracy” of virtue and talents.
Despite having inherited both wealth and slaves, Jefferson considered himself a natural rather than an artificial aristocrat because, he asserted, his commitment to serve common men proved his superior virtue.
Through education, people could learn to think as active democrats, forsaking the passive deference that had elected old-style aristocrats to govern.
“Worth and genius” should be, Jefferson preached, “sought out from every condition of life and compleately prepared by education for defeating the competition of wealth & birth for public trusts.”
Despite having inherited both wealth and slaves, Jefferson considered himself a natural rather than an artificial aristocrat because, he asserted, his commitment to serve common men proved his superior virtue.
Through education, people could learn to think as active democrats, forsaking the passive deference that had elected old-style aristocrats to govern.
“Worth and genius” should be, Jefferson preached, “sought out from every condition of life and compleately prepared by education for defeating the competition of wealth & birth for public trusts.”
Jefferson wanted to weaken the old Virginia elite by broadening educational access for ordinary folk. He favored taxing the rich to educate the poor as essential for the common good.
Jefferson assured George Washington, “It is an axiom in my mind that our liberty can never be safe but in the hands of the people themselves, and that too of the people with a certain degree of instruction.
This it is the business of the state to effect, and on a general plan.” Government had to act to reshape society.
His friend and future president, James Monroe, agreed: “Being a high public concern, [education] ought to be provided for by the government itself.”
Jefferson assured George Washington, “It is an axiom in my mind that our liberty can never be safe but in the hands of the people themselves, and that too of the people with a certain degree of instruction.
This it is the business of the state to effect, and on a general plan.” Government had to act to reshape society.
His friend and future president, James Monroe, agreed: “Being a high public concern, [education] ought to be provided for by the government itself.”
(Emphasis is mine.)
In 1778, Jefferson proposed a radical educational system meant to transform Virginia along republican lines.
... With the bluntness of a natural aristocrat, Jefferson explained that, under his three-tiered system, “the best geniuses will be raked from the rubbish annually.”
His program had two goals, both political: to train for republican leadership “a few subjects in every state, to whom nature has given minds of the first order,” and to enable every common man “to read, to judge & to vote understandingly on what is passing.”
His program had two goals, both political: to train for republican leadership “a few subjects in every state, to whom nature has given minds of the first order,” and to enable every common man “to read, to judge & to vote understandingly on what is passing.”
Radical for his time, if limited by our standards, Jefferson’s proposal provided scant education for girls and none for African Americans, either free or enslaved.
A practical politician, he knew that neither white voters nor leaders would spend a penny on educating blacks, who accounted for two-fifths of Virginia’s people.
Although Jefferson disliked slavery, he did not expend any political capital to challenge it in his home state, and he rebuffed a Quaker abolitionist who proposed to raise charitable funds to educate slaves.
In vain, Jefferson argued that “the tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests, and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance.”
(Emphasis is mine.)
The failure of Jefferson’s proposal distressed the small pool of well-educated Virginians.
In 1804, William Wirt, later the attorney general of the United States, praised the “astonishing greatness” of the plan to rescue genius from “obscurity, indigence, and ignorance” while giving “stability and solid glory to the republic!”
Wirt worried that Virginia lacked “the animating soul of a republic. I mean, public spirit. … There seems to me to be but one object throughout the state: to grow rich.”
In 1809, the state’s governor, John Tyler (the father of the future president), rebuked the legislators:
“There cannot be a subject of more importance, in a free government … and yet so fatal is that apathy which prevails, or so parsimonious a policy has insinuated itself among us, that year after year is permitted to pass away without a single attempt to attain so great and so indispensable an object.”
As a result, Tyler traveled about the state and reported, “Scarcely a common country school is to be found capable of teaching the mother tongue grammatically.”
In 1804, William Wirt, later the attorney general of the United States, praised the “astonishing greatness” of the plan to rescue genius from “obscurity, indigence, and ignorance” while giving “stability and solid glory to the republic!”
Wirt worried that Virginia lacked “the animating soul of a republic. I mean, public spirit. … There seems to me to be but one object throughout the state: to grow rich.”
In 1809, the state’s governor, John Tyler (the father of the future president), rebuked the legislators:
“There cannot be a subject of more importance, in a free government … and yet so fatal is that apathy which prevails, or so parsimonious a policy has insinuated itself among us, that year after year is permitted to pass away without a single attempt to attain so great and so indispensable an object.”
As a result, Tyler traveled about the state and reported, “Scarcely a common country school is to be found capable of teaching the mother tongue grammatically.”
Jefferson was half-right to blame county oligarchs, but it was state legislators who had passed the buck to the counties rather than raise state taxes to fund public education.
And those legislators answered to voters who also did not like paying taxes.
David Watson, a friend of Jefferson’s, supported public education as a member of the Virginia General Assembly, but he lost his bid for reelection.
Watson blamed common voters for “being so ignorant as they are, that our gentlemen are not more anxious to get learning and knowledge.”
In a satirical essay, Watson insisted that common Virginians preferred to buy new boots for their sons, peach brandy for themselves, and bonnets for their wives rather than fund education.
He doubted that there was “sense enough among the great bulk of the people to prevent a few cunning, ambitious men from taking our houses and land and every thing else away from us; and then how shall we get boots, bonnets and brandy?”
And those legislators answered to voters who also did not like paying taxes.
David Watson, a friend of Jefferson’s, supported public education as a member of the Virginia General Assembly, but he lost his bid for reelection.
Watson blamed common voters for “being so ignorant as they are, that our gentlemen are not more anxious to get learning and knowledge.”
Governor Tyler agreed: “He who can go back from the assembly and tell his constituents he has saved a penny secures his popularity against the next Election.”
Tyler expressed this lament in a confidential letter to Jefferson, likening the public to a patient in denial: “It is sometimes necessary to conceal the healing medicine from the patient, lest his sickly appetite may reject that which alone can bring him health and life.”
Here then was the rub.
But a republic depended on common voters who lacked schooling and often balked at paying for it, preferring to spend their money on consumer goods.
As farmers, they also wanted to keep their children at work on the farm.
To justify their preferences, they invoked a populist distrust of the educated.
A rustic republican from North Carolina insisted, “College learned persons give themselves great airs, are proud, and the fewer of them we have amongst us the better.” Preferring “the plain, simple, honest matter-of-fact republicanism,” he asked, “Who wants Latin and Greek and abstruse mathematics at these times and in a country like this?”
Distrustful of all aristocrats, natural and artificial, he insisted that they should pay to educate themselves, and the poor could make do without book learning; thus, he would vote for candidates who kept taxes low.
Common voters in the southern states often did not regard education as essential to preserving their republic.
In old age, after retiring as president of the United States, Jefferson sought to revive at least half of his educational program in Virginia...enhanced revenue sufficed to fund a new state university or a broad system of local, public schools for common people—but not both. Jefferson and his legislative allies favored a university and located it in his hometown of Charlottesville, sucking up almost all of the state’s available funds for education.
He reasoned that the new university would train a natural aristocracy for Virginia, and during the next generation, the graduates would (he hoped) belatedly create the public system of common schools.
His wishful thinking faltered, for the new university educated the sons of wealth and privilege, who perpetuated those advantages when they became the state’s legislators and governors.
By compromising his full vision for education, Jefferson unwittingly delayed the creation of educational opportunity for most Virginians for half a century.
His wishful thinking faltered, for the new university educated the sons of wealth and privilege, who perpetuated those advantages when they became the state’s legislators and governors.
By compromising his full vision for education, Jefferson unwittingly delayed the creation of educational opportunity for most Virginians for half a century.
A different model of reform emerged in the northern states, where slavery was vanishing and society sustained a larger middle class...(state legislator) Peck promoted social mobility and equality by demanding state funding for a new system of public education.
He wanted to “bring improvement within the reach and power of the humblest citizen” because, Peck emphasized, true liberty required educated citizens: “In all countries where education is confined to a few people, we always find arbitrary governments and abject slavery.”
He wanted to “bring improvement within the reach and power of the humblest citizen” because, Peck emphasized, true liberty required educated citizens: “In all countries where education is confined to a few people, we always find arbitrary governments and abject slavery.”
In the legislature, he kept pushing for appropriations for common country schools, and in 1812, New York became the first state outside New England to adopt a comprehensive system for educating all children in grammar schools.
Such public systems gradually spread throughout the middle-Atlantic and midwestern states during the 1820s and 1830s but not in the South, which had none until after the Civil War.
The conviction that freedom required education flourished only where slavery had been disavowed.
Northerners paid for the expansion of educational opportunity with their tax dollars because they anticipated economic benefits.
The conviction that freedom required education flourished only where slavery had been disavowed.
Northerners paid for the expansion of educational opportunity with their tax dollars because they anticipated economic benefits.
The growth of colleges and universities followed, accelerating over the generations, particularly in the North...The growth reflected an economic transformation...
...Until the 1970s, voters supported increased investment in education as a political priority.
In the process of that expansion, education gradually became redefined as an economic good, rather than a political one.
The proponents of higher education promised economic growth, not political virtue, as the prime goal.
It became quaint at best to raise an alarm about demagogues and aristocrats as the dangerous consequence of an ignorant electorate.
Many students valued economic and social mobility over the responsibilities of civic leadership.
And only a political fool would seek virtue in an electorate bombarded by advertising that urged Americans to keep score of winners and losers by the consumer goods that they could buy and display.
Today, we have more boots, bonnets, and brandy than ever before and are now expected to pursue our self-interest as voters much as we do as consumers.
The proponents of higher education promised economic growth, not political virtue, as the prime goal.
It became quaint at best to raise an alarm about demagogues and aristocrats as the dangerous consequence of an ignorant electorate.
Many students valued economic and social mobility over the responsibilities of civic leadership.
And only a political fool would seek virtue in an electorate bombarded by advertising that urged Americans to keep score of winners and losers by the consumer goods that they could buy and display.
Today, we have more boots, bonnets, and brandy than ever before and are now expected to pursue our self-interest as voters much as we do as consumers.
The shift to an economic justification for education has led to its redefinition as a private, individual benefit instead of a public good.
... “A typical college graduate can expect to make over half a million dollars more than a nongraduate over a lifetime,” Quoctrung Bui recently wrote in The New York Times.
Indeed, it now sounds fuzzy and naïve to speak of any other benefits of higher education, such as knowledge for its own sake, increased happiness, an enhanced appreciation of art, or a deeper understanding of human nature and society.
Along the way, we also have shunted into the background the collective, social rewards of education: the ways in which we all, including those who do not attend college, benefit from better writers and thinkers, technological advances, expanded markets, and lower crime rates.
Above all, we need to return to Jefferson’s emphasis on rational inquiry built on evidence—or risk the republic’s fate on politicians who appeal to our emotions and prejudices.
(Emphasis is mine.)
Above all, we need to return to Jefferson’s emphasis on rational inquiry built on evidence—or risk the republic’s fate on politicians who appeal to our emotions and prejudices.
Those prejudices have led to a comparable assault on public funding for K-12 schools, ominously rebranded “government schools” by critics who seek to discredit them.
These critics associate public education with a demonized concept of all government, even state and local, as undemocratic.
In the process, legislators disproportionately reduce funding for schools in the poorest districts with the greatest numbers of immigrants and people of color.
... We have come to think and speak of education as primarily economic (rather than political) and individual (rather than social) in its rewards.
These critics associate public education with a demonized concept of all government, even state and local, as undemocratic.
In the process, legislators disproportionately reduce funding for schools in the poorest districts with the greatest numbers of immigrants and people of color.
... We have come to think and speak of education as primarily economic (rather than political) and individual (rather than social) in its rewards.
As a consequence, growing numbers of voters care only for the education of their own children.
These conceptual and rhetorical shifts lead legislators to wonder why taxpayers should pay for the education of others—particularly those of poorer means, different culture, or darker color.
If only the individual, rather than society as a whole, benefits from education, let the student bear the cost of it: so runs the new reasoning.
... Increasingly reliant on loans to cover the cost of higher education, students have assumed alarming levels of debt: an estimated $1.3 trillion owed by 42 million Americans. According to the August issue of Consumer Reports, graduates this year average $37,000 in debt per student. The debt burden puts a drag on the overall economy and society, as thousands of graduates delay buying a home or having children. Increasingly, young people from middle-class families question whether attending college is worth the cost.
As a country, we are in retreat from the Jefferson and Peck dream of equal educational opportunity for all.
And the future social costs will be high.
Proportionally fewer Americans will benefit from higher education, inequality will increase, and free government will become a stage set for opportunists to pander to the prejudices and fears of the poorly educated.
And the future social costs will be high.
Proportionally fewer Americans will benefit from higher education, inequality will increase, and free government will become a stage set for opportunists to pander to the prejudices and fears of the poorly educated.
Although the current definition of education is relentlessly economic, the source of the crisis is political.
Just as in Jefferson’s day, most legislators and governors believe that voters prefer tax cuts to investments in public education.
Too few leaders make the case for higher education as a public good from which everyone benefits.
But broader access to a quality education pays off in collective ways: economic growth, scientific innovation, informed voters and leaders, a richer and more diverse culture, and lower crime rates—each of which benefits us all.
Few Americans know the political case for education advanced by the founders.
Modern politicians often make a great show of their supposed devotion to those who founded the nation, but then push for the privatization of education as just another consumer product best measured in dollars and paid for by individuals. This reverses the priorities of the founders.
Just as in Jefferson’s day, most legislators and governors believe that voters prefer tax cuts to investments in public education.
Too few leaders make the case for higher education as a public good from which everyone benefits.
But broader access to a quality education pays off in collective ways: economic growth, scientific innovation, informed voters and leaders, a richer and more diverse culture, and lower crime rates—each of which benefits us all.
Modern politicians often make a great show of their supposed devotion to those who founded the nation, but then push for the privatization of education as just another consumer product best measured in dollars and paid for by individuals. This reverses the priorities of the founders.
(Emphasis is mine.)
Americans lost something valuable when we forsook “virtue” as a goal for education and a foundation for free government.
In 1950, a Harvard committee published an influential report titled General Education in a Free Society. The authors wrote that “our society, like any society, rests on common beliefs and … a major task of education is to perpetuate them.”
But the report struggled to define the “common beliefs” best taught by modern American universities.
... We need to revive the founders’ definition of education as a public good and an essential pillar of free government.
We should also recover their concept of virtue, classically defined, as a core public value worth teaching.
That, in turn, would enable more voters to detect demagogues seeking power through bluster and bombast and pandering to the self-interest of members of the electorate.
At the end of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, a woman in Philadelphia is said to have asked Benjamin Franklin what sort of government the delegates had created for the people. He supposedly replied, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.”
We should also recover their concept of virtue, classically defined, as a core public value worth teaching.
That, in turn, would enable more voters to detect demagogues seeking power through bluster and bombast and pandering to the self-interest of members of the electorate.
At the end of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, a woman in Philadelphia is said to have asked Benjamin Franklin what sort of government the delegates had created for the people. He supposedly replied, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.”
Alan Taylor is a historian at the University of Virginia. He has twice been awarded the Pulitzer Prize in history, most recently in 2014 for The Internal Enemy: Slavery and War in Virginia, 1772–1832. His latest book, American Revolutions: A Continental History, 1750–1804, has just been published.
You can read the article in full here
Alexander Hamilton!
Focused Monthly Inspiration
( #itsNovember2020Now )
.
.
.
Just my random thought this week!
MORE, if you want more!: See blogger's choice of sources/resources
↓↓↓↓↓↓
→ Some of my favorite Direct sources & resources for Democrats:
* ( My personal favored and most informative follows are also shared here, below, with the understanding that readers will always apply their own critical thinking to any information provided anywhere by anyone. #StrongerTogether does not share sources of information lightly but -- no one is perfect! -- so always #DistrustAndVerify -- even if it's me. I am using a "star" rating that is strictly based on my situational experience with the work of the media personality specifically in relation to issues of interest to me. )
The Democratic National Committee has been scaling up since January 2017 and becoming more "rank and file friendly
The new Democratic Party Chair (DNC), Tom Perez, came in in early 2017. During his election and during the year long Democratic Party
Unity Reform Commission I advocated for my personal wish list, with a particular focus on making it easier for single moms to be active participants in the Party.
Of course, I did not hear back from anyone,
directly, but there have been responses and everyone needs to know, the DNC has been and continues to work at being responsive to rank and file Democrats.
Some of my wish list, but not limited to, was...
ONE: A simple, main calendar that lives on the Democratic National Party website with all relevant dates and include links to state and local committees, clubs, etc. -- they've done that by expanding their events calendar and making it members friendly. You can find the calendar and engage here
ONE: A simple, main calendar that lives on the Democratic National Party website with all relevant dates and include links to state and local committees, clubs, etc. -- they've done that by expanding their events calendar and making it members friendly. You can find the calendar and engage here
TWO: A newsletter, where members could get a big picture view of happenings across the nation -- they've done that by creating the DNC "Battleground Brief", which
can be found under their press release tab here
THREE: A safe place for members to share thoughts
and ideas with leadership --they've
done that by creating a private community on Facebook: "Democratic
National Community" ... you can request to join here
Engage!
Engage!
Democratic Party Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, representative of The People at home & abroad while the President of the United States is MIA... #Go2TheSource
You can find the Speaker's Twitter feed here
You can find the Speaker's Facebook Page here
The Democratic Party Website
Also, NOT exactly a Democratic Party specific source under a GOP majority but a good place to hear and to watch speeches & hearings directly, i.e. #Go2TheSource C-SPAN
+
→ Some of my favorite, most active organizations:
Michelle Obama's initiative ...
"Who We Are
When We All Vote is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization that is on a mission to increase participation in every election and close the race and age voting gap by changing the culture around voting, harnessing grassroots energy, and through strategic partnerships to reach every American.
Launched in 2018 by co-chairs Michelle Obama, Tom Hanks, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Janelle Monae, Chris Paul, Faith Hill and Tim McGraw, When We All Vote is changing the culture around voting using a data-driven and multifaceted approach to increase participation in elections.
In the months directly before the 2018 midterm elections, When We All Vote organized 2,500 local voter registration events across the country, engaged 200 million Americans online about the significance of voting, and texted nearly four million voters the resources to register and get out to vote.
And we’re just getting started. We’re helping bring even more people into the voting process because when we all vote, we all do better. ... "
"Mission: National Security Action is dedicated to advancing American global leadership and opposing the reckless policies of the Trump administration that endanger our national security and undermine U.S. strength in the world. ... "
You can learn more here
(Full disclosure, I am a member!)
"Women are already the majority. Now Let's build a Supermajority.
Women are on the cusp of becoming the most powerful force in America. But to fundamentally transform this country, we need to work together. That’s where Supermajority comes in.
LET’S GET ORGANIZED
We’re building an inclusive, national membership of women who are connected, empowered, and taking action—from increasing their level of civic engagement and advocacy to voting in record numbers.
"Meet the people behind the politicians.
You can email your two Senators and your Representative in Congress in one email here
"Postcards to Voters are friendly, handwritten reminders from volunteers to targeted voters giving Democrats a winning edge in close, key races coast to coast.
What started on March 11, 2017 with sharing 5 addresses apiece to 5 volunteers on Facebook...
Now, we consist of over 20,000+ volunteers in every state (including Alaska and Hawaii) who have written close to 3 million postcards to voters in over 100+ key, close elections."
You can find Postcards to Voters here
Town Hall Project empowers constituents across the country to have face-to-face conversations with their elected representatives. We are campaign veterans and first time volunteers. We come from a diversity of backgrounds and live across the country. We share progressive values and believe strongly in civic engagement. We research every district and state for public events with members of Congress. Then we share our findings to promote participation in the democratic process.
This movement is diverse, open source, and powered by citizens. We are proud to be a part of it.
You can find Town Hall Project here
"Born from conversations between Governor Howard Dean and Secretary Hillary Clinton in the aftermath of the 2016 election, Onward Together was established to lend support to leaders — particularly young leaders — kicking off projects and founding new organizations to fight for our shared progressive values." here
Organizing for America and the Democratic National Redistricting Committee have merged in "All On The Line":
"Barack Obama Throws All His Weight Behind ‘Issue Of Singular Importance’
You can find "All On The Line" on Twitter here
" Since #StandOnEveryCorner has grown, it’s become a stand by all of us to protect our democracy from corruption and treason...A stand not at your State Capitol, but in your own backyard. Not once every few months, but as often as you can here "
→ Fact checking organizations courtesy of the Society of Professional Journalists
in alphabetical order...
→ Some of my favorite, most informative
follows on Twitter include:
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ US Intelligence | Author | Navy Senior Chief | NBC/MSNBC
⭐⭐⭐ Federal Government Operations | Vanity Fair | Newsweek | MSNBC Contributor | Author
⭐⭐⭐⭐ NBC News' chief foreign correspondent
⭐⭐ Foreign correspondent for @MSNBC and @NBCNews based in London
→ Some of my favorite, highly credible media -- at the moment:
→ Some of my favorite Talking Heads -- at the moment -- and their Twitter handles:
→ Some of my favorite media panelists -- at the moment -- and their Twitter handles:
✅✅✅✅ Joan Walsh national affairs correspondent for The Nation; CNN political contributor
✅✅✅✅ Heidi Przybyla USA TODAY Senior Political Reporter
✅✅✅✅ Jennifer Rubin Conservative blogger at @ WashingtonPost's Right Turn,MSNBC contributor
Intel community. @ NBCNews/@ MSNBC contributor
✅✅✅✅ Betsy WoodruffSwan Daily Beast reporter, federal law enforcement.
→ Some of my favorite legal analysts in the context of Putin attacked America to install Trump investigations, primarily seen on MSNBC:
🗒️ 🗒️ 🗒️ 🗒️ Katie Phang
🗒️ 🗒️ 🗒️ 🗒️ Glenn Kirschner
→ Some of my favorite national security & foreign policy analysts/media, primarily seen on MSNBC:
✅✅✅✅✅ Wendy Sherman Director, Harvard Center for Public Leadership and Professor of Practice, Kennedy School Senior Counselor
Albright Stonebridge Group; Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs
✅✅✅✅✅ Samantha Power Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N./Obama Administration
✅✅✅✅ Richard Engel Chief Foreign Correspondent for NBC News
→ Some of my favorite Democrat Party Leaders to follow on Twitter, not in elected office but proving knowledge & experience are positives & not negatives are:
Former First Lady Michelle Obama
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Former Labor Secretary/Today's DNC Chair Tom Perez
Note: I rarely get involved in primary races -- outside of those in my own area and unless there is a glaring reason that can not be ignored, I support Democratic Party nominees in general elections. I don't support bashing Democrats.
→ PARTY Informational
(Full disclosure, I am a life-long, registered Democrat!)
"To Whom It May Concern: By authority of the Democratic National Committee, the National Convention of the Democratic Party is hereby scheduled to convene on July 13-16, 2020 in TBD at an hour to be announced, to select nominees for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States of America, to adopt and promulgate a platform and to take such other actions with respect to such other matters as the Convention may deem advisable. ... "
"PREAMBLE We, the Democrats of the United States of America, united in common purpose, hereby rededicate ourselves to the principles which have historically sustained our Party. Recognizing that the vitality of the Nation's political institutions has been the foundation of its enduring strength, we acknowledge that a political party which wishes to lead must listen to those it would lead, a party which asks for the people's trust must prove that it trusts the people and a party which hopes to call forth the best the Nation can achieve must embody the best of the Nation's heritage and traditions. What we seek for our Nation, we hope for all people: individual freedom in the framework of a just society, political freedom in the framework of meaningful participation by all citizens. Bound by the United States Constitution, aware that a party must be responsive to be worthy of responsibility, we pledge ourselves to open, honest endeavor and to the conduct of public affairs in a manner worthy of a society of free people. Under God, and for these ends and upon these principles, we do establish and adopt this Charter of the Democratic Party of the United States of America."
"What is the CPD? The Commission on Presidential Debates (the “CPD”) is a private, nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization. As a 501(c)(3) organization, it is eligible under federal law so serve as a debate sponsor. The CPD's primary mission is to ensure, for the benefit of the American electorate, that general election debates are held every four years between and among the leading candidates for the offices of President and Vice President of the United State. The CPD is an independent organization. It is not controlled by any political party or outside organization and it does not endorse, support, or oppose political candidates for parties. It receives no funding from the government or any political party, political actions committee or candidate. The CPD has sponsored general election presidential debates in every election since 1988. Although its plans for 2020 are in the developmental stage, it looks forward to bringing high quality, educational debates to the electorate in 2020 ... "
You can read more here
.
.
.
(Linked) "...is our 2016 platform...a declaration of how we plan to move America forward. Democrats believe that cooperation is better than conflict, unity is better than division, empowerment is better than resentment, and bridges are better than walls.
It’s a simple but powerful idea: We are stronger together."
Owned, Created and Curated by Gail Mountain, this blog curates is often gently edits and/or excerpts select material for quick reading, with occasional personal commentary in the form of the written word and/or in the form of emphasis noted. Network For #StrongerTogether ! is not affiliated with The Democratic Party. in any capacity. This is an independent blog and the hope is you will, at a glance, learn more about the Party and you will, with a click or two, also take action on its behalf as it is provided!
( * As a privately owned blog, I reserve the right to edit or remove inappropriate comments such as hate, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, spam, advertising or personal/abusive attacks on other users.)
A long time Democratic Party activist, Gail Mountain is a former community organizer, journalist & personal planning coach with a focus on single moms working toward careers able to support them & their families, while working toward changing the systems that once served them through leadership training. She is a former Affordable Health Care for America Act advocate (2009!); a Hillary supporter who volunteered as a Grassroots Tweeter for Hillary, a Women's Outreach for Hillary member; an OFA Truth Team member; & a DNC Factivist member...currently a media influencer, digital activist/strategist, blogger and head of curation, editor and co-Founder of The People for Kamala Harris; an editor for Progress for Democrats on Facebook; a member of a closed group supporting Speaker Pelosi & her agenda, a member of Supermajority and a volunteer for Kamala Harris for the 2020 Democratic Party Nomination for President of the United States.
You can follow her Blog
at https://networkstrongertogether.blogspot.com & you can follow her on Twitter at GKMTNtwits
( find her on Twitter
*** Sometimes life gets in the way, and it has for me right now, delaying the release of my updated ebook but "How to Influence Media in Real Time!"is coming soon and in time to begin your conversation with media and is scheduled to arrive as we head into serious primary season.
What's in the book?:
( My updated ebook, "How to Influence Media in Real Time," will be ready soon. It will include updated examples of the conversations I have with some of my “media friends” and some updated indications that media can hear us! If you have left a donation toward my effort to help Democrats win in 2020, I will send you an updated copy as soon as it is ready. New donors who leaves a name and an email on my GoFundMe Page will get one as soon as it is ready to go! Thanking you in advance for your interest. I hope you will join me in helping media be the best they can be -- by being a media influencer, too, in your own way and at your own pace. )
*
*
...for Networking for Democrats today!
g. (Unapologetic Democrat)
✊ Resisting "Fake News"
No comments:
Post a Comment