Google Might Shame OEMs For Pushing Out Late Android Updates

sony-marshmallowIf there is a complaint that many Android users have, it would be how long it takes for updates to make its way to them. Chances are unless you are a Nexus handset owner, major updates to Android will probably take months before it makes its way to you, which obviously doesn’t do the platform any favors.

However Google could be putting the pressure on OEMs by shaming them if they are late. How will this work? According to a report from Bloomberg, it seems that Google has been tracking how long it takes for companies to push out Android updates to its users, and from that data they have drawn up a list that will rank smartphone makers by how up-to-date their handsets are based on security patches and operating system versions.

As it stands, that list is still private and Google has reportedly shown it to their Android partners and are discussing whether or not they should make it public. By making it public, it would be a passive-aggressive response from Google that could shame manufacturers into releasing updates earlier in order to avoid being seen as a laggard.

The public list could also allow consumers to decide what brand to go for if they want more timely updates. This actually sounds like a great idea because even though Android 6.0 Marshmallow was released last year, only 7.5% of Android devices are reported to be running the operating system, versus Apple’s iOS 9 in which 84% of iOS devices have the update installed, but what do you guys think? Is this list a good idea?

Google Might Shame OEMs For Pushing Out Late Android Updates , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Meizu M3 Sports A Metal Variant

meizu-3-metalIt does seem as though China smartphone manufacturer, Meizu, are all stoked to release their Meizu m3 smartphone some time next month – the 13th of June, if one were to be exact. This new variant will be different from the vanilla version for the very simple fact that it will boast of a metallic design. Apart from that, it will be powered by the Android 5.1 Lollipop mobile operating system version as opposed to the YunOS which will keep the standard version running.

I suppose it would not be too far out of the park to call this upcoming device as the Meizu m3 Metal, as it has been spotted on TENAA not too long ago, too. TENAA happens to be the FCC’s equivalent over in the world’s second largest economy, and basically whatever you see approved on TENAA would eventually make its way over to the market.

Hardware specifications of this m3 Metal will be similar to that of the vanilla version, including an octa-core processor, a 5” 720p display, 2GB of RAM or 3GB of RAM and 16GB or 32GB storage options, in addition to a 5MP front-facing camera and a 13MP camera behind. There will also be a 3,000mAh battery to keep things up and running just fine. There is also an upcoming Meizu MX6 smartphone in the works, too.

Meizu M3 Sports A Metal Variant , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Paul Ryan Says He Isn't Any Closer To Endorsing Trump, But Come On

WASHINGTON — Following reports that an endorsement was imminent, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Wednesday that he wasn’t any closer to publicly backing Donald Trump. But if you ask Ryan’s Republican colleagues, it’s a question of when, not if.

“I don’t have a timeline in my mind, and I have not made a decision,” Ryan told reporters gathered in his office Wednesday.

Ryan said it was important that Republicans discuss “the principles that we all share in common, and the policies that come from them.” He suggested he wants to be sure that Trump understands those points.

“That’s the kind of conversations we’re having,” Ryan said, noting that his and Trump’s staffs talk “virtually every day.”

Ryan and Trump will also talk by telephone late Wednesday night.

Late Tuesday night, there were reports that Ryan was telling confidants he was ready to endorse Trump. Trump’s own campaign leaked word to ABC that Ryan’s endorsement was imminent. (That ABC story has since been updated to scrub the endorsement predictions, but sections of the original story, noting that Trump’s staffers said an announcement from Ryan could come this week, can be found here.)

Of course, it’s entirely possible the reports were right that Ryan was about to declare his support. Ryan could have just delayed the happy event so as not to appear as though Trump had cornered him into an endorsement.

Either way, the smart money says Ryan is headed toward backing Trump.

It’s not that Trump has really changed his ways. Just this week, he attacked New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) for “not doing the job.”

Ryan, who noted on Wednesday that Martinez was a friend of his, was stuck in the difficult but familiar position of disagreeing with Trump on a foundational level and still trying to avoid a direct rebuke.

“I’ll just leave it at this: Susana Martinez is a great governor,” Ryan said.

It’s clear Ryan doesn’t want a GOP civil war. And he’s evidently placed that political desire over any philosophical or stylistic misgivings he might have about the presumptive nominee.

Asked on Wednesday if he wanted to call out Trump for dismissing the service of prisoners of war, mocking the physically disabled or insulting various women’s appearances, Ryan said he wasn’t going to “litigate this stuff.”

You could argue that maybe Ryan doesn’t want to address Trump’s never-ending stream of offensive comments because doing so could turn into a full-time job. But Ryan also knows he’s in a politically untenable position. Presented with a choice between what makes sense (not supporting a candidate who says despicable things) and what makes sense politically (supporting the nominee of your party), Ryan seems to be opting for the latter.

The speaker has tried to introduce a bit of daylight between himself and Trump by holding out on an endorsement. But most House Republicans seem to think such an endorsement is inevitable.

“I can’t see how he doesn’t,” Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) said.

The Huffington Post conducted more than a dozen interviews — on-record, off-record and everything in between — with various House Republicans, almost all of whom said that Ryan not immediately jumping into bed with Trump is a good idea, from both a practical standpoint and a political one.

“I think he’s kind of threading the needle the way he feels he has to,” Salmon said, adding that Ryan truly does want Trump to adopt a more conservative view.

Even Rep. Tom Marino (R-Pa.), one of the earliest members of Congress to hop aboard the Trump train, said he understood Ryan’s hesitation, though he added that his “gut feeling” is that Ryan will endorse in the next week or so.

And that’s how GOP members generally think this will play out. As Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) said, “The party’s coming together.”

There are Republicans who privately expressed reservations about Trump. Two members noted that, publicly, their position was that they’d support the GOP nominee — but both expressed concern that Republicans were nominating a racist and a xenophobe.

Private reservations be damned, though — in the public eye, at least, Republicans are coalescing.

Sure, plenty of House Republicans have concerns about Trump. There’s a large swath of vulnerable Republicans who refuse to speak his name, saying only that they’ll support “the Republican nominee” — if they’ll say anything at all.

Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-Maine) wouldn’t say a word for over 40 seconds when HuffPost asked him about whether he was supporting Trump.

But House Republicans aren’t lining up in opposition to the real estate mogul. They’re just going along. Although they might prefer that reporters not ask about it.

The irony with these vulnerable Republicans is that Trump is expected to raise millions of dollars for them. According to Politico, Trump will soon set up joint fundraising committees with the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Another joint fundraising committee, one between the Republican National Committee and Trump, was set up on Wednesday.

A rift at the top of the Republican Party could cost members piles of money, and Ryan appears to understand that. He seems to think that standing up to Trump would be more politically damaging than standing with him — at least in this election.

Still, when every passing day brings some new exposed falsehood or attack on a Republican governor, there’s an outside chance Ryan could withhold his endorsement. There’s that chance Trump says or does something so beyond the pale that no one could blame the speaker for not getting behind Trump, if anyone could be blamed for such a thing at all.

But the more likely scenario is that Trump will maintain his normal regimen of off-the-cuff insults and caustic late-night tweeting, a routine that apparently hasn’t crossed enough lines yet. And then Ryan will just throw up his hands and say he doesn’t want to “litigate this stuff.”

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophoberacistmisogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Preparing to Abdicate Her Chess Crown

2016-05-25-1464220317-1219254-Hou570.jpg
Hou Yifan after winning the Women’s World Chess Championship in March. Photo by Vitaly Hraber from the official site of the match.

Hou Yifan is the Women’s World Champion, but her reign may not last much longer.

The World Chess Federation, also known as FIDE (for Fédération Internationale des Echecs), has said that there will be an elimination tournament this October to select a new champion and, at the moment, Hou has no plans to participate.

Hou has also quit the Women’s Grand Prix, according to an interview on the Web site Chessbase.com. The Grand Prix is an important part of the cycle to select the Women’s World Champion. Hou has said she will no longer participate in the cycle unless the process is reformed.

Hou, 22, who is Chinese, is far-and-away the best woman player in the world (after the retirement of Judit Polgar of Hungary in 2014) and the only woman among the world’s top 100 players.

Hou has won the World Championship several times since 2010 and the reasons that she lost the title and the obstacles she had to overcome to regain it each time are the basis of her current discontent with the process.

She won the title in 2010 in an elimination tournament in Turkey. She was 16 at the time — the youngest World Champion, male or female, in history.

In 2011, Hou successfully defended the title by easily beating Humpy Koneru of India, 5.5 to 2.5, in a best-of-ten game match in Albania. Hou was supposed to play the winner of the 2009-2011 Women’s Grand Prix, but since Hou had won that as well, she played the runner-up in the standings – Koneru.

A year later, FIDE held another elimination championship tournament, this time in Khanty-Mansiysk, Russia. Hou lost the title as she was knocked out in the second round. The eventual winner was Anna Ushenina of Ukraine, who was the No. 30 seed at the start.

Hou immediately earned a shot at regaining the title because she had won the 2011-2012 Grand Prix, which gave her the right to play Ushenina in a best-of-ten-game match in 2013. Once again, she won easily, 5.5-1.5.

2016-05-25-1464220464-6905978-Hou2570.jpg
Hou Yifan during Game 9 of the 2016 Championship, which she won to clinch the title. Photo by Vitaly Hraber from the official site of the match.

Hou was prepared to play in the 2014 elimination tournament for the championship, but after FIDE was initially unable to find the financial backing and site needed to stage the tournament, it was rescheduled for 2015. That conflicted with another tournament in Hawaii that Hou had already promised to play, so she lost the title again, this time by not playing. The tournament was won by Maria Muzychuk of Ukraine, the eighth seed, who thus became champion.

Since Hou had won the Grand Prix a third straight time, she had yet another opportunity to regain the title, once again in a best-of-ten-game match against Muzychuk. The match was held in March 2016 in Lviv, Ukraine, and Hou again outclassed her opponent, winning by the score of 6-3.

The difference in the two players’ strengths was never more evident than in Game 2 of their match when Muzychuk played well in the opening, when she was still following her pre-match preparation, but then became totally flummoxed when she began to think on her own.

Now Hou, facing yet another elimination tournament later this year to retain the title, has said, “Enough.”

She wants the Women’s World Championship to be like the overall championship, which is only decided in a match between two players – the reigning champion and a challenger. The problem with the elimination format is that there are too many things that can go wrong, so the best player does not always win, as happened in the last two tournaments. Hou says that that makes it more like a lottery. It also devalues the prestige of the World Championship title, as does having such frequent championships in two completely different formats.

Hou’s criticism is nothing new. They are the same arguments that were used against elimination tournaments when the federation used them to decide the championship in 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004. Eventually, the federation yielded to the criticism and went back to a match format, beginning in 2008. Now the elimination format is only used in the World Cup, with the players in the final being seeded into the Candidates tournament to select a challenger for the World Championship.

Something like that is what Hou would like to see happen. She has said to the federation that if it wants to keep the elimination format, make the winner of the tournament the challenger for the title, rather than the champion, with the title being settled in a match.

So far, despite repeated requests from Hou, the federation has refused to change. Its argument is that an elimination tournament is very popular with players and sponsors and it is much harder to promote and organize such a tournament if it is not for the title. (Ironically, the Federation has not yet announced where the championship tournament will be, which may be a sign that it is having trouble organizing the competition, yet again.)

If things do not change, Hou seems unlikely to play anytime soon for the Women’s World Championship. Or perhaps ever. If so, she would end up following in Polgar’s footsteps as Polgar refused to play in women-only competitions. If Hou does follow Polgar than, just as during the era when Polgar was active, the best women player in the world would not be Women’s World Champion.

Mr. McClain is editor-in-chief of WorldChess.com, the official site of the World Chess Championship.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Mi Derecho a la Dignidad – Feliza Alí

El 23 de septiembre de 1995 fue un día decisivo para Lilí, pues ese día murió y volvió a nacer como Feliza, su nombre de bautizo. Dejó una identidad que no le correspondía y asumió una vida que un vidente no le quiso contar, cuando días antes de su accidente le cerró la palma de su mano antes de decirle lo que el destino le deparaba. “¿Qué has visto? ¡Si me voy a morir que sea en un accidente!” le dijo al adivinador, medio en chiste, medio en serio, sin saber que estaría sentenciando su futuro.

2016-05-20-1463722249-6187726-FelizaAli1.jpg
Feliza en la Caravana que recorrió 370 km en su silla de ruedas desde Cochabamba a La Paz.

Fidelia Feliza Alí Ramos nació en octubre de 1970 en Río Grande, a dos horas y media de Uyuni, en esos años no había más de 20 familias y la única manera de llegar era en tren una vez por semana. Pronto su familia se mudó a Uyuni para establecerse y dejar crecer ocho hermanos.
Su papá fue a la escuela hasta quinto básico, mientras que su mamá solo hasta segundo. A la mamá de Feliza, la regalaron a un pariente porque en su familia eran demasiado pobres. Recibió un trato indignante y no la dejaron cumplir su sueño de ser profesora, por eso juró que sus hijas estudiarían.

Ella sabía que de grande no quería vender, oficio que realizó casi toda su juventud para ayudar a su mamá, pero que detestaba. “Rapidito entendía todo” aunque le costó entender por qué su madre estaba siempre enojada con su padre. Cuando tuvo 18 y lo encontró infraganti con otra mujer recién pudo dejar de juzgarla. El papá de Feliza, no veía mas futuro que el de la cocina para sus seis hijas mujeres, su mamá al contrario, contra viento y marea, cumplió su promesa y ayudo a todas sus hijas a ser profesionales. Feliza se fue a Potosí, para estudiar una carrera que recién se había abierto: Trabajo social, aunque no tenía mucha idea a lo que se estaba metiendo. Cuando estuvo a punto de dejar la universidad, porque no era algo que realmente le apasionara en esos años. Fue el amor de su madre que la impulsó. Todas las semanas le mandaba encomiendas llenas de frutas y hasta las verduras picadas, mientras que a sus compañeras tal vez les llegaba algo una vez al mes.

En la universidad, encontró su vocación de líder, estaba dentro del centro de estudiantes, “No me había dado cuenta hasta ahora, que desde niña siempre fui corajuda” piensa para sí misma al relatar cómo fue la mejor alumna de su clase.

Dos días después de egresar ya tenía trabajo, se fue a las minas de Huanuni aunque no estaba muy conforme, no pasaban muchas cosas por allá, ella quería seguir estudiando, Feliza quería ser como Miriam Gamboa, una docente que conoció cuando hacía prácticas en el sector de la salud “¡Qué capisima, le discutía a los doctores en plenos eventos, ella no se dejaba. Era consultora de la OEP, yo quería ser como ella y salir del país para seguir formándome, esa era mi meta”. Recuerda y su mirada se pierde en la memoria.

2016-05-20-1463722399-3786979-Feliza_Japon.jpg
Feliza llegando al Japon, 2011.

La cadena de eventos antes del accidente que sufrió el 23 de septiembre de 1995, en el que cinco personas murieron en el camino de Tupiza a Potosí, empezó con Erli, su enamorado de cinco años que le había pedido que se vaya a vivir a Potosí con él. Ella tenía que ir a un congreso en el que aprendería sobre el Che Guevara en Tupiza, cuando llegó no había nada, Erli le había pedido que se queden ese día pero ella no quiso y emprendió su vuelta a Potosí. Compró un pasaje en una flota, cuando subió, el asiento que le correspondía estaba ocupado, y la fecha del ticket estaba equivocado. Fueron a hablar con la encargada quien les pidió que no le avisen a su supervisora. “Vas a ir cómoda en otro asiento, la flota está vacía” le dijo, ella aceptó y bajó a comprar refresco, en el trajín perdieron la flota. Ella es bajita, mide 1, 48 mts, por eso siempre andaba con tacos de 10 cm. Razón por la que no podía correr, fue Erli quien hizo detener la flota para que se suba, sin saber que la embarcaría al cambió más drástico de su vida.

Una vez en la flota, leía la historia de una mujer que había perdido toda la movilidad de su cuerpo y con ella descubrieron la enfermedad Guille-Barren, acongojada por semejante relato se durmió sobre el libro. Lo siguiente que escuchó fueron gritos, el movimiento brusco cada vez era más estrepitoso. Las ventanas se habían roto, su cabello largo se enredaba con las piedras que arrastraba el camino “me he tenido que arrancar el pelo desde el cuero cabelludo y así poderme liberar” Feliza fue expulsada del bus y quedó boca abajo. Solo sintió sangre en su mentón, todavía tiene la herida que es perceptible cuando la muestra, no podía mover sus piernas, estaban entumecidas.

Cuando llegó al hospital necesitaba la firma de un pariente para que la operen de inmediato, no había nadie. Sus papas, tardaron tres días en llegar hasta donde estaba, ya le habían hecho radiografías a pesar del dolor increíble que sentía y sus suplicios para que no la muevan. Hubo mucha negligencia médica, la que hizo que pierda la oportunidad de volver a caminar. Sus vértebras presionaban su médula, y ella sabía que esa células jamás se regenerarían.

A los cuatro años de condenar a su hermanito a ser su asistente personal trató de suicidarse tomando medicamentos e inyectándose porque sentía que nunca más encajaría en este mundo. Su hermanito tenía el labio leporino y al verla a Feliza haciendo eso le dijo que ella estaba sufriendo lo que él había padecido toda su vida. Ese fue el detonante que hizo que su incansable espíritu de lucha dejé el lugar del accidente y vuelva a su cuerpo, porque el destino le exigía a Feliza continuar con más luchas.

2016-05-20-1463723160-2688352-FelizaFamilia.jpg
Feliza en dia de su matrimonio, con su hermanito que la empuja, a lado se su mamá y papá.

Entonces fue cuando leyó la ley 106 que le pareció magnifica porque era inclusiva, fue hasta La Paz para saber cómo hacer respetar esa ley. Buscó la COBOPDI (Confederación boliviana de personas con discapacidad) Le dijeron que tenía que primero existir una federación, entonces organizó a otras personas con discapacidad en Sucre y volvió a ser la líder que siempre fue. Por un tiempo de nuevo tuvo que volver a Uyuni con su familia, no lo soportó, necesitaba su libertad, amaba su libertad, no soportaba que le digan que hacer y qué no hacer. ¡Quería su libertad!

A los dos años del accidente Erli la dejó presionado por su familia y amigos por que le decían que qué iba a hacer con una mujer fallada, que si tenían hijos él tendría que cuidar al bebé, que él ya iba a sacar su profesión y un montón de mujeres querrían estar con él. Con esa decepción Feliza nunca más pensó en una pareja, sin sospechar que en 2003 conocería a Marcelo, un abogado con secuela de polio con quien se casó en 2014.

Lo más inaudito en esta historia que aparenta ser de solo lucha, es que Feliza ganó. Ella logró cumplir sus sueños, fue consultora y viajó por 19 países: México, Perú, Panamá, Cuba, Irlanda y Japón son solo algunos de los países que ha visitado, muchas veces invitada, realizó talleres de vida independiente, se despojó de los prejuicios sobre ella misma, se empoderó y empezó a ayudar a aceptarse a si mismos a los demás. Este año Feliza fue reconocida por el defensor del pueblo, como una de las doce lideresas, que aportaron a la lucha por los derechos de las mujeres en Bolivia.

La vida de Feliza, después de haber terminado su tesis y hacer maestrías, haber trabajado para el gobierno inglés y tener una entrada económica que jamás pensó obtener, pudo haberse mantenido sin ningún problema, ella planificaba un programa de turismo para personas con discapacidad. Pero fue cuando el gobierno japonés la invitó a participar de un nuevo taller de vida independiente que le abrió los ojos: Ella podía hacer que la vida de otras personas mejoren, entonces dejó de lado sus proyectos personales y ahora está a cargo de generar proyectos de vida independiente para personas con discapacidad en Sucre.

2016-05-20-1463723295-8179017-FelizayMarcelo2.jpg Feliza y Marcelo el 2013.

¿Pero y que pasó con Marcelo? Pues Feliza quiere ser madre, y Marcelo quiere ser padre, pero debido a la edad y su condición de discapacidad es difícil que puedan procrear naturalmente, entonces fueron a hacer un tratamiento in vitro, pero la marcha de las personas con discapacidad que empezó el 21 de marzo los encontró en el medio, dejando de lado, quizá su última oportunidad para ser padres. “No hay que forzar las cosas, si no se puede, no se puede, pero yo creo que si voy a poder, pero después que acabe todo esto, esta lucha es la más importante de mi vida declara mientras desde afuera de su tienda de campaña a unas cuadras de la plaza Murillo, otras personas le vienen a pedir consejos y ayuda, o informar lo que está sucediendo con otros compañeros.

Tal vez así el vidente no le dijo parte de su destino por miedo a que se cumpla, pero si le dijo algo que mantiene su esperanza, le aseguró que tendría dos hijos. Feliza sonríe, Feliza es feliz por qué aprendió a serlo, porque es una mujer consecuente con su lucha. “Tengo miedo que me metan a la cárcel, pero voy a seguir hasta el final, porque se que mi lucha es justa, las personas con discapacidad tenemos el derecho a vivir con dignidad en este país y la renta mensual es el primer paso” Feliza, es feliz porque se demostró a si misma, que es capaz de cambiar una sociedad que siempre le tenía pena o le decía que no podía hacer cosa.

2016-05-20-1463723347-7003248-Feliza_Policia.jpg Feliza fue agredida por la Policia el Jueves 12 de Mayo, 2016.

*Parte de una serie de retratos de las personas con discapacidad en Bolivia que llevan 130 días luchando en las calles, exigiendo una renta mensual de $us 70, un cuarto del salario mínimo nacional, durante esta lucha las personas con discapacidad han sido gasificadas por la policia y muchas de sus protestas han sido reprimidas violentamente. El Gobierno Boliviano ha levantado un muro de dos metros y lo tiene resguardado por 400 policias y dos tanques de agua que no permite a las personas con discapacidad ejercer su derecho democratico de ingresar a la iconica Plaza Murillo.
Este retrato ha sido coescrito por la periodista Boliviana Andrea Monasterios.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Elizabeth Warren's Veep Audition

Is Senator Elizabeth Warren actively auditioning for the role of Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential pick? At this point, it’s rather hard to come to any other conclusion, since Warren has been so outspoken of late on the subject of how horrible Donald Trump would be as president.

The traditional role for the vice presidential candidate is, of course, to be just such an attack dog. The presidential candidate is supposed to have self-imposed limits on what they can say about their opponent, but the veep candidate isn’t as constrained by appearing “presidential” and is thus able to unleash stinging attacks against the other party’s candidate. This year, however, the Republican candidate is not exactly traditional in this regard (or any other, for that matter), since it would be so hard to imagine any other Republican outdoing Donald Trump in the “attack dog” category.

But the Democrats are on the brink of nominating a much more conventional presidential candidate, so they’ll also likely be looking for a more conventional role for the vice presidential candidate as well. And Elizabeth Warren seems to be putting herself front and center for this consideration. Other Democrats have taken political shots at Donald Trump over the past few weeks, but Warren is definitely the most prominent and the most fervent of all the Trump critics. Who else has gotten into an open Twitter war with Trump, after all?

Would Warren be a good selection for Hillary Clinton’s running mate? Well, there are pros and cons to making such a pick. Let’s run through these, briefly.

 

Pros

Warren’s biggest asset is that she comes with her own built-in fan base. That is no small thing in the world of presidential politics. Few Democrats are going to have to learn who Elizabeth Warren is, because for the most part they already know her. In fact, before Bernie Sanders arrived on the scene, there was a huge popular movement dedicated to convincing Warren to make her own run for president. If she had, it is likely that Sanders wouldn’t have gotten anywhere near the support he has, since he’d be dividing it with Warren. Both appeal to the same ideological group within the Democratic base.

This is Warren’s second biggest asset, in fact. She would be the best possible person to bridge the divide between the Sanders populists and the supporters of Hillary Clinton within the Democratic Party. She would be seen as a person who could influence Clinton during the general election campaign, by making sure Clinton didn’t tack too far away from populism. That would help Clinton enormously with Democrats who don’t fully trust her now.

Clinton/Warren would be the first all-female ticket in American history. That a major party is even considering running two women on their ticket is a big measure of success for feminism, and would rightly be seen so by many voters.

Warren would add some much-needed excitement to the ticket. Warren is already a masterful orator, for many reasons. She knows how to explain very complicated subjects in language everyone can understand and relate to. She does not sound lawyerly when speaking. And she fires up audiences better than even Bernie Sanders, at times. All of this would go a long way towards shoring up Clinton’s obvious weaknesses.

Warren has so far not endorsed either Clinton or Sanders. By holding out, she now can avoid being seen as a turncoat if she joins up with Clinton. She would bring anti-Wall Street credibility onto the ticket, she could reach out in a big way to disgruntled Sanders supporters, and she has already proven she’ll be a great attack dog towards Donald Trump. What’s not to love about a Clinton/Warren ticket?

 

Cons

Well, there would be a few drawbacks. The biggest of these is out of Warren’s control, because if she were to run and if the Democrats went on to win the White House, then she wouldn’t be a senator from Massachusetts anymore. This means the governor would get to appoint her replacement — and the current governor of Massachusetts is a Republican. The Democrats are fighting hard to retake control of the Senate, and they’ll already have to flip at least four seats to do so. If Warren is replaced by a Republican, that means they’ll need at least five pickups to control the Senate. And no matter who is in control, we might see the return of Senator Scott Brown (whom Warren defeated to win her seat). That is a very big drawback indeed.

As already mentioned, a Clinton/Warren ticket would be the first all-female ticket in American history. But this is a drawback as well as an asset. Sure, it will be inspiring for women voters. But it also might repel some male voters as well. Clinton is already beating Donald Trump among women voters by a large margin. Adding Warren likely wouldn’t improve that margin all that much. But Clinton is also losing to Trump among male voters already, and adding Warren might make that margin even larger. It is a definite risk.

Warren lacks experience, although in this particular election that might not be all that big a deal. Warren has little foreign policy experience, and even her Senate experience doesn’t reach back all that far (she’s in the middle of her first term). Clinton is so extremely qualified and experienced, though, that this may not be that big of a drawback. After Republicans nominated Sarah Palin to their own ticket — and since they’re nominating Donald Trump at the top of their ticket this time around — it’ll be very hard for them to play the “inexperience” card against Warren. Still, people do weigh whether the veep pick would be qualified to take over when making up their minds.

In traditional terms, Warren wouldn’t make a lot of political sense when it comes to balancing the ticket geographically. Massachusetts isn’t exactly in doubt for the Democrats this November. And Hillary Clinton is now seen as a New Yorker, so naming Warren would mean two Northeasterners on the same ticket. Not a lot of balance there, when using the traditional “pick someone to help you in a swing state” metric.

Warren has already been vetted to some extent by running for the Senate, but her mini-“scandal” will reappear with a vengeance if she becomes Clinton’s running mate. Trump is already calling her “Pocahontas” (although he has yet to use the more-popular online right-wing taunt “Faux-cahontas”). But the whole “she claimed Native American ancestry to get ahead” slam will only get worse. Warren already debunked the claim while running for the Senate, but that won’t stop Trump from repeating it endlessly. This is not likely to change a whole lot of voters’ minds, it bears mentioning, but at the same time the ridicule will be relentless from Trump.

 

Weighing the pros and cons shows that Warren would bring a lot to a Clinton ticket, although not without drawbacks (Senator Scott Brown, especially). But then no vice presidential candidate is going to be perfect. It’s already been suggested that Warren might want a different role in a Clinton administration — perhaps heading Clinton’s transition team, or accepting a cabinet position (“Treasury Secretary Warren” has a nice ring to it, don’t you think?).

But it certainly is unusual for any politician to actively campaign to be a vice presidential pick. Historically, before Andrew Jackson’s time, presidential candidates were never supposed to campaign, never supposed to even hint that they wanted the job, and the only speeches that were deemed acceptable (and not denounced as “electioneering”) were literally given from the candidate’s own front porch, to whomever happened to wander into their front yard that day. Jackson changed all of that forever, but the coy “Oh, I couldn’t possibly ever think of running” expectation still lives on for the vice presidential role (at least, until they’re actually named at the convention). Warren seems to be bucking this tradition in a big way. She is now all but holding a sign up at a Clinton rally which reads: “Hey, Hillary, I’d make a dandy veep pick!”

But then this is certainly the election where many traditions are being tossed aside with abandon. If Warren truly does want the job, why shouldn’t she actively audition for it? There’s really no reason for all the traditional coyness, at this point. On the Republican side, Newt Gingrich is already actively drooling over the prospect he’ll be tapped by Trump for the GOP ticket. So there’s nothing inherently wrong about a Democrat taking the fight to the Republicans in a big way, early on.

Warren would be a great attack dog. She’s already shown the biggest skill necessary for the job this particular year: the ability to get under Trump’s skin. Naming Warren would also be the best possible olive branch Clinton could offer to the millions of fervent Bernie Sanders supporters who harbor major doubts about backing Hillary. If Warren ran and won, she’d position herself perfectly for her own presidential run in the future, too.

There are plenty of other possible choices to balance a Hillary Clinton ticket, of course. There are choices which make better sense geographically (Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio springs to mind). But when the Clinton team sits down to make their pick, it’s a pretty sure bet that Elizabeth Warren will be somewhere near the top of the short list, through her own efforts. If Warren is auditioning for the vice presidential role, she’s certainly doing a bang-up job of showing she is ready, willing, and able to attack Donald Trump on a daily basis. And this year, that’s exactly what is going to be needed.

 

Chris Weigant blogs at:

ChrisWeigant.com

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Empathy for the Young Black Men in Chicago

2016-05-26-1464224301-4828016-chicagogunviolenceyouth.jpg

Friday, May 20, 2016 a little before 4pm, a 49 year old Chicago woman was tragically shot and killed while exiting Starbucks two blocks away from Chicago Police Department Headquarters. Yvonne Nelson, a city employee with the Office of Emergency Management and Communications, was killed by a gunman allegedly targeting a young man near the Starbucks door who was also shot several times. She was the 1,284th person shot in Chicago this year, and the 241st fatality. This story is incredibly sad, and I send my deepest condolences to Yvonne’s family.

When I saw this news story on Facebook, I clicked to read the comments below the article. Many people offered condolences and remarked on how alarming the gun violence rate in Chicago has become. One particular comment thread caught my eye.
2016-05-26-1464222340-8775129-CommentFromFB.jpg

I had many thoughts after reading this comment and the thread of replies below it sharing similar sentiments. My first that was, “what young men are you talking about?” I posed this question to the commenter and didn’t get a response. I doubt that she is afraid when young white men are walking near her in downtown Chicago or on the north side of the city. It isn’t hard to assume what kinds of young men she has a fear of being near. Sadly, the “dangerous thugs” stereotype is one that young men of color, Black men in particular, have had to battle for decades. The fact that this particular subset of young men is most often the victim of gun violence in Chicago doesn’t help.

My next, and most important thought, was “imagine how they feel!” As a former teacher, every day I’m afraid that I’ll get a call or text stating one of my former students has been shot, a fear that was sadly realized a couple of weeks ago. As a Black woman with many Black male relatives and friends living and working in the city, I’m always afraid that my brother, uncles, cousins, or friends will be killed. Every single time there’s a shooting in Chicago, I read articles and watch the news praying that I don’t recognize the name of the victim. And yet, I know my fear is nothing comparing to what young Black men must feel every single day.

If people are afraid to walk near young Black men for fear of being an unintended victim of gun violence, imagine how afraid these young Black men must be to walk around in Chicago at all. Almost every day, they face news of someone who looks like them being shot in Chicago. Sadly, many of these victims are innocent bystanders or unintended targets. Imagine waiting for the bus or train to get to school like my students do each day, hoping you’re not mistaken for someone else and shot. Imagine walking to the store, hoping no one assumes you’re in a gang that you’re not in and shoots you. Walking home from a basketball game, going to the mall, riding a bike down the street, the list could go on and on. Every day, these young men have to wake up and walk through a world where people assume they’re gang-affiliated because they’re young and Black, lock car doors or clutch their purses tighter as they walk down the street, and follow them through stores to ensure they don’t shoplift. Now, in Chicago and elsewhere, there’s the additional fear of being shot over a case of mistaken identity, erroneous assumptions, or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You fear being near them, but imagine being them. We live in a society so obsessed with self and social media that both empathy and sympathy are severely lacking. Everything has become so self-centered that sometimes we don’t consider how our comments will affect others. People often post, react, and respond without thinking about the impact of their words or actions. Next time you’re walking near a young Black man on the street and feel tempted to move away from him out of fear, imagine the fear he must face each day. They’re young, scared, and often ignored.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

The Person With One Of Washington's Most Thankless Jobs Is Likely To Keep It

WASHINGTON — Grumblings over Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s tenure as chair of the Democratic National Committee crescendoed this week, with chatter growing inside the party that she may not survive through her current term.

But as votes of confidence are fewer and further between, Wasserman Schultz continues to enjoy significant leverage with respect to her future at the committee. There is neither an obvious mechanism to make her go, nor, in all likelihood, is there enough time to execute a tidy switch.

“The fact that people are talking replacement is pretty unprecedented,” said one top Democratic official who consults closely with the committee and who, like others, would speak only on condition of anonymity. “But I would be shocked if she’s replaced at this point. It’s just so late.” 

Multiple top Democratic officials on Wednesday said they fully expect Wasserman Schultz to remain at the helm of the DNC, despite calls from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to see her gone. The worry is that replacing the DNC chair just two months before the convention could be chaotic, and doing so afterward would be a self-inflicted headache.

But even some of Wasserman Schultz’s defenders acknowledge that she’s in a vulnerable position. Her role at the committee has been gradually downsized, with fewer fundraising and managerial responsibilities, according to sources there. Amid talk of her potential exit, she sent a note to staffers on Wednesday encouraging them to remain united and focused on the campaign. But sources in the building say the mood is dour. They’ve had trouble filling roles in the past, and there is a sense that staffing changes are coming in the future.

Wasserman Schultz’s management of the primary has only galvanized calls for fresh leadership. The party remains at a divisive and messy phase, while Donald Trump has consolidated Republican ranks. And that’s even after Wasserman Schultz’s handling of the debate schedule, her showdown with Sanders’ campaign over voter file access, and a controversial fundraising agreement the DNC struck with Clinton left the impression that she was tipping the scales for a preferred candidate.

Privately, top Democratic lawmakers are now pushing for Wasserman Schultz to step aside. But a key variable remains whether Hillary Clinton’s campaign would go along. Other Democrats can create an opening, but ultimately Clinton has the authority to ask her to resign — and her campaign on Wednesday re-emphasized its support.

“From our viewpoint, Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a very dedicated leader for our party,” Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon told CNN. 

Still, senators have begun tossing around potential names of Wasserman Schultz replacements, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, according to one Democratic aide. A separate senior Democrat suggested that finding a new chair might be used as a means of addressing “Sanders’ supporters’ concerns as part of the process of wooing him and his voters.”

In that vein, someone like Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) is seen as a possibility, since he endorsed Sanders, has media savvy and has a national profile — though he’d likely clash with officials over what role lobbyists and corporate money should play in the party.

One other scenario discussed in private settings is for Wasserman Schultz to “voluntarily” leave her post to turn her attention to her first-ever primary challenger: law professor Tim Canova, a progressive newcomer who picked up an endorsement from Sanders and has been pulling in serious cash. Into that void would step an interim chair — someone like Donna Brazile, the committee’s first vice chair, who previously played this role when former DNC Chair Tim Kaine (D-Va.) decided to run for Senate.

DNC officials dismiss the name-floating as nothing more than a time-honored Washington tradition of baseless but entertaining chatter. And, indeed, for all the big-name Democrats who sidestepped questions about Wasserman Schultz’s future on Wednesday, a number of party luminaries offered their support.

“The real story is you have a bunch of notable U.S. senators and members of Congress, and the Vice President, on the record expressing support for the strong leadership Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has provided at the party, and some anonymous disagreement,” Luis Miranda, the DNC’s communications director, said. “The Chair and the DNC are going to continue to focus on uniting Democrats and on being an asset to help elect them up and down the ballot in November, just as we’ve done for many in both chambers.”

Within the DNC, meanwhile, Wasserman Schultz retains a close cadre of allies. One DNC fundraiser said calls for her resignation amounted to scapegoating from both the Sanders campaign and, earlier, Martin O’Malley’s campaign.

“Both candidates have realized going after the DNC is a good way to energize their base and their grassroots donors,” the fundraiser said. “But the irony is that is actually not DWS, but those very campaigns, that are misleading people. It’s very frustrating to watch, and I can only imagine how DWS must feel. Being the party leader is a thankless job.”

Even if she maintains her post, Wasserman Schultz is likely to cede power in the coming months. The expectation is that once the nomination is in hand, Clinton — much as Barack Obama did in 2008 and 2012 — will install an executive director within the staff to effectively run the committee. But even before that moment arrives, Wasserman Schultz has moved to ensure she remains, at least, in a ceremonial post. Earlier this week, Sanders won big victories in staffing the DNC’s platform committee with sympathetic voices. The senator’s top aides viewed it as a welcome concession from the chair and a potential thawing of their relationship.

“We can find ways to work together like we did on the platform drafting committee,” said Sanders’ top adviser, Tad Devine. “With DWS we will see what happens. She is going to have to make her decisions. But as long as she is in a position of authority we expect to be treated fairly. … I think everyone should step back and look at [the final vote tally] numbers and say that’s going to be reflected on the floor of the convention and dealt with fairness and respect. And if we do that, we can be positive going forward.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Donald Trump's Top Adviser: 'This Is Not A Hard Race'

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Paul Manafort looks the part of a chairman: 67, well-coiffed, bespoke-suited and appropriately Rolexed. In the world of Donald Trump, that’s his title: campaign chairman and chief strategist.

And as chairmen do, Manafort assured us that his enterprise will be crowned with success: Trump will beat Hilary Clinton soundly in November.

“He’s gonna win,” Manafort said over breakfast at a local diner called The Royal in Old Town Alexandria. “He gonna win unless we — meaning people like me — screw it up. This is not a hard race.”

Why? In Manafort’s summary: Trump will remain Trump.

He may moderate a few views — think Muslims — but he won’t and doesn’t need to back down on anything. He probably won’t pick a woman or a member of a minority group as a running mate because that would be “pandering.” He won’t win George W. Bush’s levels of Latino support, but he will pick up enough Hispanic votes in key swing states. He won’t get the Bush family’s support and doesn’t want it. Trump just has to be presidential enough in the first debate (no body parts mentioned), pick an experienced running mate, and run Clinton into the ground as a corrupt version of Barack Obama.

He’ll win with white men and women, plus just enough of everyone else. Simple.

You don’t change Donald Trump. You don’t ‘manage’ him.
Paul Manafort

Handlers usually undersell, but not Manafort and not now. Extra infusions of optimism are helpful to Trump at a time when some Republican leaders remain dubious, mega funders are scared by Trumpismo, and The Donald has the highest negatives of any party nominee in memory.

Manafort’s sunny vision may be a little skewed. Having made millions as an image crafter for foreign tyrants, he can’t help but see Trump as an easy lift by comparison. And his analysis deserves an extra measure of caution because no one ultimately speaks for Trump — a point Manafort was quick to stress.

“You don’t change Donald Trump,” he said. “You don’t ‘manage’ him.”

TrumpWorld is, in fact, a seething mosh pit of ambitious egos vying to influence Trump, who keeps them all at bay, milking them for advice, until he decides everything on his own — often on a whim or in an odd-hour tweet.

But to the extent that there is a theory of and a plan for victory, it’s up to Manafort to devise them. He laid out his thinking for The Huffington Post between bites of egg-white omelet.

A Ban On Muslims: Democrats and many Republicans have hammered Trump on his call to bar Muslims from entering the U.S. until some unspecified future time when he deems it safe to do so.

“He’s already started moderating on that,” Manafort said. “He operates by starting the conversation at the outer edges and then brings it back towards the middle. Within his comfort zone, he’ll soften it some more.”

“He’ll still end up outside of the norm, but in line with what the American people are thinking.”

Within his comfort zone, he’ll soften it some more.
Manafort on Trump’s Muslim strategy

That Wall: “He is going to build a wall. That is a core thing with him,” Manafort said. “He will push it strongly, and he will push for the immigration changes just as strongly.”

His Tax Returns: “I will be surprised if he puts them out. I wouldn’t necessarily advise him to. It’s not really an issue for the people we are appealing to. His tax returns are incredibly complicated. I wouldn’t understand them, so how are the American people going to? The financial disclosure he put out gives the salient points,” Manafort said.

“The only people who want the tax returns are the people who want to defeat him.”

The only people who want the tax returns are the people who want to defeat him.
Manafort on why Trump doesn’t need to release his returns

The GOP: It was never as divided, Manafort said, as it might have looked on the night Trump locked up the nomination with a primary victory in Indiana.

“That was all B.S.,” he said. “It was overblown. His negatives were going to drop when Republicans came home, and they are. The level of GOP support for Trump now is between 82 and 87 percent, and it is going to get to 90, 93.”

“I’ve made three trips to the Hill and most of the people up there are getting with us, if they weren’t already,” he said. “There are some Senate candidates who aren’t sure Trump is in their interest yet, but they’ll come along.”

“The ‘never Trump’ movement was never going anywhere.” He’s right.

Latino Voters: The conventional view, espoused by the Bush family and its retainer Karl Rove, is that a GOP presidential candidate needs 40 percent of the nationwide Hispanic vote to win. Trump is at roughly 20 percent.

“The national polls are distorted,” Manafort said. “To get a national sample they rely too much on Hispanics from New York and California, which is where large populations are, but also where most of the radical Hispanics are.”

“But if you look at Hispanics in states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and even Florida, you see a different picture. We’re going to target Hispanic voters in those and other swing states.”

“The message is going to be jobs, national security, terrorism, family values and education,” he said. “In that order.”

“Their concerns are the same as the white working families.”

So his candidate doesn’t need 40 percent of Latino voters nationwide. “If we get into the high 20s in those states with Hispanics, we will win them, and in Florida we can do even better if we do what we need to do in the Cuban community.”

The Women: “Our numbers even now are not that far out of whack,” Manafort said. “We’re down 12 among women, but up 20 among men.”

“Hillary is the one who’s got a gender gap. And while we are behind among women over all, we’re ahead among white women even now. We’ll get some black and Hispanic women as we go along.”

How He’ll Campaign: “We’ll continue the rallies. That is Trump’s brand. We’ll do the broad themes at the big rallies. No one wants to change that.”

But, Manafort added, the campaign will assemble a state-of-the-art social media and on-the-ground operation.

“He doesn’t want to spend the money on a big national campaign structure. He hears a figure like $500 million and says, ‘These are all people who are going to get rich.’ But I have reassured him that it will be a very lean operation.”

‘Filling The Chair’: “There are two main challenges. One is to make the American people look at him and say, ‘He can fill the chair.’”

“Does he know enough? Yes, because he knows he has more to learn. And he is constantly doing that.”

Trump doesn’t read briefing papers, but he is a magnet for information, Manafort said. “He reads the newspapers, and he talks on the phone and to office visitors in a never-ending stream. You’re sitting there in his office and you realize that he is constantly picking up stuff as he goes.”

“We have all this survey research, but he does his own soundings all the time, all day every day. And he’s more accurate,” Manafort said.

The first presidential debate will be key. Needless to say, Trump won’t hesitate to attack Clinton in that and other debates. Attack is and has always been his only mode.

“The idea of going at her doesn’t have to change,” said Manafort. “But it will matter how he says it.”

He needs an experienced person to do the part of the job he doesn’t want to do.
Manafort on Trump’s veep pick

The vice presidential pick will also be part of the process of proving he’s ready for the White House, Manafort said.

“He needs an experienced person to do the part of the job he doesn’t want to do. He seems himself more as the chairman of the board, than even the CEO, let alone the COO.”

“There is a long list of who that person could be,” Manafort added, “and every one of them has major problems.”

The campaign probably won’t choose a woman or a member of a minority group, he said. “In fact, that would be viewed as pandering, I think.”

Attacking Hillary: The second challenge is to showcase Clinton’s flaws in a way that doesn’t drive away the independents. 

There is little reason to worry that Trump’s abrasive attacks will backfire, Manafort insisted. “He’s not going to fundamentally change, though you have to say it right,” he said.

The main message about Clinton will be that as president, she would be “Obama Three” but with worse ethics. The prospect of another term for the current administration will be enough to convince voters, the president’s relatively strong recent job approval numbers notwithstanding. 

No Bushes: “I think we’ll get other people coming aboard eventually, but probably not the Bushes — and Trump can leave them alone,” said Manafort. “And we’re going to be above 90 percent Republican support without them.”

“People don’t want dynasties. They want change.” 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Hillary Clinton Will Air TV Ads In California To Compete With Bernie Sanders

Hillary Clinton is poised to start airing her first television commercials in California on Friday, a campaign official tells CNN, a sign she is taking seriously her challenge with Bernie Sanders in the state’s June 7 primary.

While Clinton is fewer than 100 delegates away from clinching the Democratic nomination, according to a CNN estimate of delegates and super delegates, she is still urging California voters to send a message in the primary. The initial advertising buy is less than $1 million, aides said, which is a modest sum to break through in this large state.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.