With the Voter Protection Act gutted, civil rights groups are battling voter suppression

In many ways, election observers are a first line of defense against lingering Jim Crow-era voter suppression tactics that date back to the end of slavery. Black voters are still especially vulnerable to strict ID requirements at the polls, reductions in early voting periods and onerous voter registration deadlines, experts say. Election observers have said these tactics increase fears among minority and elderly voters that someone is trying to take away their right to vote.

Wilson, who is black and teaches about the intersection of race and the law, remembered one 20-year-old black voter remarking to her, as he walked into a campus polling station to vote on primary day: “I better get in here and vote, before they put us back in slavery.”

That might sound like hyperbole. But that sentiment has been echoed among voting rights advocates, ever since the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013. The VRA, enacted in 1965 to prohibit racial discrimination in electoral laws, no longer includes federal oversight needed to stop discrimination before it happens.

follow @the-movemnt

i knew it i knew it  iw was just saying this !

hillary is gonna try to guilt by association Trump (she was already mentioning Alex Jones and I’m sure she’ll be provided with a regular rogues gallery of federal agents provocateur “fringe elements” who trump never met but who made a blog post saying they like him or something) in order to say something to the effect of the following:

“I, as a good and morally wonderful tolerant person, cannot share a stage with Trump, who is definitely a literal klansman/911 truther/ conspiracy nut/neonazi/fill-in-the-blank-scary-bad. Therefore, I will not sully my pristine reputation by “debating” this monster.”

you watch, the media will already start laying the groundwork for the idea that somehow, a debate between the two major party presidential candidates is some kind of crazy idea and that trump is so uniquely vile that it would actually be dangerous and “irresponsible” for hillary to debate him.

You fucking watch.


How are people still defending Amber? It’s actually hilarious me, this whole situation. Just a few days ago people were praising Amber for saying she was going to donate all of her $7000000 divorce settlement to charity. Since she said this, Johnny Depp did the right thing and sent the money directly to the people that she claimed se was going to give all the money to. Now all the sudden she wants him back in court, and wants double the money! Her excuse is that he isn’t a charitable man??? For one, shit excuse because it’s what she said was going to do, that should’ve been the end of it. Two, he’s been donating money for years and always goes to children hospitals dressed as his characters. If it wasn’t obvious that she was a gold digger, this should make it quite obvious. Yet the stupid fucking media and tumblerinas are defending her because she’s a woman.

Pew study: Majority of Americans still oppose Trump’s wall


Donald Trump has vowed that there will be a wall on the United States’ border with Mexico if and when he is president — “100 percent,” as he put it to Sean Hannity on Tuesday.

But the percentage of Americans backing the edifice in a new Pew Research Centerstudy on attitudes about immigration released Thursday is far lower: 36 percent.

More than six in 10 — 61 percent — of the thousands of adults surveyed, said they oppose the construction of a wall along the entire border with Mexico, as Trump has proposed throughout his campaign. And 34 percent of voters identifying themselves as Republican or leaning toward the GOP said they opposed the wall, with 63 percent supporting.

The results are statistically unchanged from earlier this year, when a 10-day Pew survey in March found that 62 percent of all Americans opposed the erection of the wall and 34 percent favor the idea.

Read more here

Watch on politico.tumblr.com

Clinton charges Trump with craven bigotry

‘He’s taking hate groups mainstream and helping a radical fringe take over one of America’s two major political parties,’ she says.


Launching perhaps her most loaded charge yet at Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton painted a picture of the Republican nominee as a dangerous candidate who has granted the GOP’s “radical fringe” a powerful voice with his campaign rhetoric.

“From the start, Donald Trump has built his campaign on prejudice and paranoia,” Clinton said on Thursday at a speech in Nevada. “He’s taking hate groups mainstream and helping a radical fringe take over one of America’s two major political parties.”

She called him “profoundly dangerous.”

“A man with a long history of racial discrimination, who traffics in dark conspiracy theories drawn from the pages of supermarket tabloids and the far reaches of the internet, should never run our government or command our military,” she said.

Read more here

All Mosques and Muslim schools are to be closed and the Koran banned.

Be afraid: Geert Wilders released his platform for next year’s election – Medium

I translated Geert Wilders’ new political platform, which he released for the general elections next March, into English.

Another salient point in his platform: Preventive incarceration of radical Muslims. Needless to say, he doesn’t clarify what exactly “radical” means. Knowing his ideology, existing while Muslim is generally enough.

Happy 100th Birthday, National Parks! Sorry You’re Falling Apart.

Thursday marks the 100th anniversary of the National Park System, which has been described as “America’s best idea.”

Today the National Park Service oversees 409 sites, 23 national trails and 60 “wild and scenic” rivers. These parks are among the country’s most prized assets ― enjoying high public regard and record attendance last year, with 307 million visitors.

But they also face a nearly $12 billion backlog on maintenance.

Read more.

The AP’s defense of its bad Clinton Foundation story is also bad

The response from the AP after backlash about the Clinton story

As AP wrote, our reporting was based on Mrs. Clinton’s calendars covering the entirety of her tenure as secretary of state and on more detailed schedules of meetings and phone calls covering roughly half that period. AP first requested Mrs. Clinton’s calendars and schedules in 2010 and again in 2013 but was unsuccessful. AP then sued the State Department in federal court to obtain the schedules it has received so far. AP expects to receive the remaining files before Election Day and will continue to examine them and report on their contents.

On a human level, this makes the prosecutorial tone of AP’s story much more understandable. It is trying to gain access to public records relating to Clinton’s schedule, and it is meeting resistance. It is frustrated by the resistance and naturally feels that it raises the question of what Clinton has to hide. I get it.

That said, frustration with difficulty unearthing factual information doesn’t change the fact that AP’s math appears to be based on incomplete records. And it certainly doesn’t change the fact that its reporting thus far has not, in fact, managed to unearth any misconduct.

— Vox’s Matt Yglesias