Social Democrats consider entering race, first since 2016
Anne Shields speaking at a Labor Day rally in Boston last year
New York May 17
The Social Democratic Party is reportedly gearing up to launch a presidential bid this year, aiming to compete with the American Labor Party and New National Liberals. The SDP last competed in 2016, under nominee Phil Marshall, where it placed fourth.
Several SDP candidates have expressed interest over the past few weeks, including former Massachussets Gov. Anne Shields, New Jersey Representative Param Singh, Maryland Representative Stephen Hernandez, and activist and former State department official Selma Machado.
If entered, the SDP would be competitive for third place, edging out the Chrisitan Democrats in several Western and Northeastern states.
A recent FOX news poll tested a possible ALP vs. NNL vs. CDP vs. SDP match. The poll showed a close race nationally between Labor and National Libs. However, the SDP remained very competitive for third place, edging out the Christian Dems narrowly.
Joanne Hurt (NNL) - 36% Veronica Short (ALP) - 33% Generic SDP - 15% Steven DiFalco (CDP) - 13%
FOX also polled specific candidates and found the following results. Hernandez and Shields polled best, likely due to name recognition. Singh and Machado performed worse.
Param Singh in Edison, NJ
Joanne Hurt - 35% Veronica Short - 32% Stephen Hernandez - 17% Steven DiFlaco - 12%
Hurt - 36% Short - 33% Anne Shields - 15% DiFalco - 13%
The SDP has an opportunity to shake up the race by offering a socialist or social democratic platform. Many left-leaning voters in the West and Northeast have shown interest in voting for the SDP, finding the American Labor Party to be too socially moderate and the National Liberals to be too pro-business. SDP candidates have a lane with socially liberal and pro-worker voters, as well as secular, well-educated voters who may be tempted away from Hurt.
New York Governor Veronica Short and American Labor nominee is considering a number of people to be her partner in the 2024 Presidential Election. Many commentators consider it likely that Short picks Missouri Senator Chris Wisnewski, who would shore up her support in the Show Me State. Wisnewski, a St. Louis native, could also help Short perform better in southern Illinois and tip the state to her favor. Wisnewski is a noted social progressive, which could contrast with Short's moderate image. Picking him could shore up some socially liberal voters in the Northeast and West.
Another possibility is former Virginia Senator Harris Warren, who could assist Short in capturing voters in the populated Hampton Roads region as well as increasing margins in Arlington and Alexandria.
The names considered are:
Sen. Harris Warren (VA) Sen. Chris Wisnewski (MO) Fmr. Sen. Andy Calistano (NJ) Fmr. Gov. Tom Burgess (WA) Rep. Alison Wood (TX) Fmr. Rep. Joshua Crespo (FL)
This follows the trend of Biden being toxic and downballot Dems doing okay. Biden needs to drop out, then we’ll have a blue wave.
You are pretty lucky that Kari Lake is such a weak Candidate. Let's be serious here: Rep. Ruben Gallego is a totally, leftist, progressive radical, former Member of the Democratic Progressive House Caucus and if Republicans had fielded a decent Candidate like Kimberly Yee or Mark Brnovich Gallego would be toast. He is too the left of Senator Mark Kelly and given Arizonas Status as "Maverick State" where the share of the Independent Electorate has expotentially grown over the last Decade I thought he would be a bridge too far for the State. Only Lake makes this possible that he can win.
But I can tell you this: If he doesn't moderate his Positions when in the Senate next year he will have this Seat only for the "Rent of 6 years" and will be badly beaten in 2030.
"Speaking to POLITICO, a French intelligence official granted anonymity to discuss sensitive issues of national security, said that “we’ve detected activities from Russia and Azerbaijan in New Caledonia for weeks, even a few months. They’re pushing the narrative of France being a colonialist state.”"
"Azerbaijan has even founded the Baku Initiative Group, bringing together 14 political movements across the former French Empire in the name of decolonization. The group issued a statement Thursday in which they accused Paris of “infringing upon the Kanak people’s right to self-determination by expanding the electorate to keep them a minority in their own homeland.”"
Hurt did not disclose $1000 worth of gifts from Spanish Deputy PM
New York, May 17.
According to recent reporting from the New York Times, it has been discovered that 2024 NNL Nominee and Minnesota Senator Joanne Hurt failed to disclose $1000 worth of gifts she received from the Deputy Prime Minister of Spain in 2022. At the time, Hurt was visiting Europe on a tour to bolster US-EU relations.
Some of the gifts included artwork, clothing, and smart phone accessories. The NYT reached out to the Hurt campaign for comment but no response has been issued.
ALP nominee Veronica Short quickly seized upon the issue. "$1000 is not pocket change. This was a clear violation of ethics codes and represents a serious issue with Hurt's judgment." She said to reporters at a campaign stop in Pennsylvania. "Do we want a President in the Oval Office who fails to disclose lavish gifts from foreign powers? I know I don't."
Hurt is slated to speak to Meet the Press tomorrow evening, where the question will surely arise.
This article is by far the most detailed that I have seen to date and I have been checking on almost a daily basis. What is missing it detailed on the ground reporting of that the actual impact is, in part perhaps due to security concerns.
He'd need the military to back him and they aren't going to do that. Once a President's term expires the military can legally ignore the former President and not be in violation of their oath. He could make up his own shadow government but it would be meaningless.
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (LHL) has submitted his formal resignation effective may 15th and advised President Tharman Shanmugaratnam to appoint finance minister Lawrence Wong as his replacement. After more than 19 years in office, LHL has resigned a mostly successful prime ministership, though he lacked the same kind of international presence as his father he has kept the model stable, accepting necessary liberalisation and making appropriate u-turns when public sentiment bubbled up(like in 2011 against immigration), as well as allowing the existence of a formal parliamentary opposition(something his father has never accepted). His Singapore is clearly a freer place than that of his fathers, though he was also never afraid of suing a critic into bankruptcy using the country's strict libel laws. Singapore today is a richer, and most would agree better place to live than when he first took office though critics will point to a lack of focus on welfare and an increasing obsession with GDP metrics, along with a rising cost of living, as well as start of a possible housing crisis as week points.
Didn't see the first post in this thread at first, reminds me of the Singapore political compass you posted here maybe 3 years ago.
As many people have said: housing costs. However, I think this is really more important than a lot of people realize.
Just to preface this, I am a foreigner on an employment pass, so there is some obvious bias. Also, I'm going to oversimplify things a bit, because of course it's more complicated than I'm making it out to be--but I'm going to give the broad strokes.
Spoiler alert! Click Show to show the content.
Why is housing so expensive? At the core, it's land availability (but of course there are other factors at play). Singapore is a small country with almost no natural resources, so what space there is goes towards either business or residential purposes. No real farming/mining/plantations/etc to speak of. This leads to a very densely populated society that makes large dwellings prohibitively expensive.
Because housing, a basic need, is so expensive, a HUGE emphasis is placed on competition for high-paid jobs. This means that parents encourage their children to pursue one of 3 different career industries: finance, business, and science (especially in chemical technologies). The educational entry-points for these positions are very competitive and are largely based upon results from a variety of standardized tests. Because the educational system is so competitive, parents tend to have a very strict and narrow definition of what is acceptable behavior and leisure-time-pursuits for their children, which can, in time, lead to the children having a fairly myopic view of what is acceptable as well.
Because so much emphasis is placed on a few industries, the other local industries suffer. This means lower wages for lower-skilled workers who don't want to be there anyway. This is especially true of engineering and IT. As a result, companies will often choose to import foreign workers for the most "undesirable" jobs (read: manual labor) that many people are unwilling to do or unable to provide for their family at the offered wages while doing. These foreign workers are often from very poor neighboring countries and are sending money home while staying in dormitories (cutting costs quite a bit).
This leads a culture clash and a bit of resentment from the local population. These foreign workers aren't really integrated into society as they are kept (out of financial necessity) in cloisters of other foreign workers. For many Singaporeans, travel is not financially prudent, and when they do get the chance, they don't often choose locations that are impoverished. As a result, a bias against poor, foreign workers develops as they are seen as "unsafe" and "untrustworthy" (to be fair, however, this is a very common phenomenon that appears in most similar situations--so it is not specific to Singapore). I'll not get into this too much, as it is a very delicate issue, but we should look to the recent Little India incident as evidence of the volatility of this situation on both sides.
Because the big businesses that people aspire to be part of are often multinational corporations, these businesses often have practices and standards that they feel are incompatible with local customs. They will often look inward (towards their home country) for hires rather than outward (towards the Singaporeans). Again, this is very much an oversimplification, as there are a lot of factors that complicate this. However, because many of the highly-sought-after jobs are going to "foreign talent", this also breeds resentment from Singaporeans towards foreigners of the high-income bracket. This leaves locals in a bit of a tight spot because the jobs they don't want to do (and couldn't make a livable wage off of) are taken by foreigners and the jobs they DO want are also often taken by foreigners. To make matters worse, many of the high-paid "foreign talents" are often given very attractive "expat packages" that provides for housing in condominiums--further driving up the cost of housing as it is easier to price-gouge somebody who can put it down as business expenses.
Because competition for these jobs is so intense and is fought on an international level and not just among themselves, Singaporeans also find that the stress of the workplace does not lend itself very well towards more "romantic" lifestyles. Not only that, but Singaporeans tend to be quite pragmatic, and when people in their entry-level, very competitive, high-stress finance jobs living in a 2-bedroom flat look at the housing costs and the cost of extra tutoring for children (seen as a necessity for kids sometimes as young as 4 or 5 to keep their educational edge)--they often decide to have only one child (if any). This leads to an aging population.
Because there is an aging population, more resources need to be devoted towards keeping the elderly active and productive. Combined with the fact that the cultural norm of filial piety is highly-stressed, there is a large feeling of obligation to bring one's elderly parents into their household--further cramping the already small, expensive flats. Again, driving up the cost of larger dwellings as they are more sought-after. EDIT: To make matters worse (in the eyes of the populace), an aging population has a dramatically negative effect on the nation's economy as the local workforce shrinks and leads to less productivity and a reduced consumer-culture. In order to offset this, the government has proposed to increase immigration in order to grow the population. Given the already tense atmosphere surrounding the "foreigner" issue, this will likely exacerbate the "us versus them" mentality that many locals have adopted.
So, in the end, you have a population that is very stressed out, working jobs they don't really enjoy for salaries that don't cover the costs of maintaining the previous and next generations. Mixed in all of this, you have easy scapegoats of "foreign workers" and "foreign talent" because they are seen as an "other" and tend to keep to themselves in their foreigner bubbles. Most of these things can be directly or indirectly attributed to the cost of housing. It is not the only problem in Singapore, of course, and there are obviously plenty of exceptions to this explanation--however, it is probably the most visible and tangible problem that most people can easily feel the effects of.
Every residence (and/or the land these flats are built on) is on a 99 year lease from the government- not that different from the PRC's land use policy but in the context of city-state governance.
Singapore's "solarpunk" landscaping is VERY resource intensive (e.g. extensive pesticide application in a tropical rainforest climate)