SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
If you missed it - staying in the cave is so enticing - there was a vice-presidential "debate" Tuesday night. What you missed: Walz did fine, Vance lied about everything - Trump saved Obamacare, we got no abortion ban plans here - working hard not to say anything weird or hateful about women, migrants, children, house pets or cat ladies. Still, he emerged creepy as hell, because "a smooth lie is still a lie." Maddow: Vance was "much slicker," and the other guy won.
Commentators at MSNBC offered a pretty cogent analysis of what was a performance, not an actual policy discussion, and as such marginally useful. Noted Lawrence O'Donnell, "There was one person on stage who's actually capable of dealing with reality, and one who will say anything, whatever is necessary, to thread the Trump needle." Again and again, Vance declined to answer questions, dodging and weaving in service to the historic revisionism his daddy-god-king relishes. Chris Hayes was blown away by Vance's "astounding gaslighting" on health care - Trump allegedly "worked in a bipartisan way" to "salvage" Obamacare," when in fact he did everything he could to kill it and was famously thwarted by John McCain - and on Trump "peacefully handing over power," that is after "the coup failed, the cops’ brains had been bashed in, and there were dead bodies and blood on the Capitol."
Nicole Wallace described Vance “building an intricate and beautiful fort out of toothpicks. And it was perfect. And at the end, he sneezed on it, and the whole thing fell apart." The sneeze was the vital moment Walz asked Vance point-blank if Trump lost the 2020 election, he tried to squirm away by intoning, "I'm focused on the future," and Walz pounded him with, "That is a damning non-answer" - now featured in killer Harris ads. "He lost the election. This is not a debate," Walz declared, and if anyone forgot about the gallows built by rioting yahoos on Jan. 6 he added, "That's why Mike Pence isn't on this stage." Right then, Walz was a Minnesota-nice-dad, straight-talking good guy; Vance was a power-grabbing weirdo who said he was "proud" to have the support of "great leaders" like Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr., a boast, one viewer noted, "so off-the-wall crazy I startled the cat with my laugh."
Still, many felt Vance's most brazen lies came as he tried to white-wash his longstanding opposition to abortion. Thus did the "100% pro-life" guy so obsessed with American birth rates he argues child-car-seats decrease fertility, who's supported a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks, said he'd "certainly like" abortion to be banned nationally, and charged anyone who disagrees would be "making the United States the most barbaric pro-abortion regime anywhere in the entire world" - this guy dismissed the idea of a national abortion ban as "kind of a ridiculous hypothetical," much like hysterical Dems fear-mongering about the repeal of Roe v Wade, and never mind the women now bleeding out in parking lots. All he wants is a “minimum national standard." Oh, and just ignore the rabid policy declarationappearing on his website, until it was magically scrubbed in July, titled "END ABORTION."
Exacerbating his "smooth bland lies" was Vance's whining, self-righteous indignation on the (rare) occasions he was called out on them. When he persisted in peddling his racist, much-debunked fiction that Haitian "illegals" who'd invaded Springfield, Ohio were eating their neighbors' cats and dogs, CBS moderator Margaret Brennan stepped in to clarify the non-cat-and-dog-eating Haitians are legally there, with "temporary protected status.” At that, a petulant Vance bleated, "The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact-check"; when he tried to gripe and mansplain his point, moderators cut his mic with a curt, "Thank you for explaining the legal process.” Only then did he lose what Steven King called "that snotty little half-smile -the expression of a used-car salesman who just convinced a potential buyer the CHECK ENGINE light on the used Toyota he’s trying to get off the lot is a computer glitch."
Meanwhile, his Orange Highness gave a play-by-play of "the Brilliant J.D. Vance and the Highly Inarticulate ‘Tampon’ Tim Walz," which was mostly random, all-caps shrieking, perhaps with ketchup-throwing: "EVERYONE KNOWS I WOULD NOT SUPPORT A FEDERAL ABORTION BAN, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, AND WOULD, IN FACT, VETO IT,” "FULLY DEBUNKED RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA," "COMPLETE VICTORY FOR 'PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP.'” The next day the rants got even louder - "PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT!" "ELECTION INTERFERENCE!" - after "deranged" Jack Smith's bombshell, 165-page court filing was released with new details of Trump's "increasingly desperate" efforts to stay in office: "The defendant resorted to crimes." Trump also took time out to mock Jimmy Carter on his 100th birthday; Carter has said he's “only trying to make it to vote for (Harris)."
On Wednesday, Vance doubled down, refusing to concede Trump lost the 2020 election - "The media is obsessed with talking about the election of four years ago" - and vowing to uncover all the imaginary “election integrity” issues due to all the imaginary non-citizens, probably black, voting illegally. But alas, he was still weird. Not helping with the whole weird thing was a "perfected" image of Vance posted by totally normal Georgia GOP Rep. Mike Collins on Twitter. It shows the pudgy Vance "yassified" - made more feminine and glamorous - into a chiselled exemplar of a ripped, hot master race, which we don't think is what American pols are supposed to be doing with their time and our money. Responses: "I am weeping" and "Republicans are insane." But slick. Farah Stockman, a NYT editorial board writer, on the slippery truth: “Vance did an excellent job of impersonating a decent man."
The energy portfolios of over 20 top U.S. private equity firms are responsible for an estimated combined 1.17 gigatons of annual greenhouse gas emissions—more than three times as much as from the energy used to power every home in the United States, according to a report published Tuesday.
The report, titled Private Equity Risks Scorecard 2024, was published by Researchers for the Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund, Global Energy Monitor, and the Private Equity Stakeholder Project. The scorecard examines the energy portfolios of 21 leading U.S. private equity firms, which manage a combined total of over $6 trillion worth of companies.
"At the end of the day, the price we pay for private equity's greed is our health and livelihoods, for ourselves and generations to come."
"Private equity firms and their executives are making billions by investing public employees' retirement money into planet-destroying fossil fuel assets," Amanda Mendoza, senior climate research and campaign coordinator of the Private Equity Stakeholder Project, said in a statement.
"These billion-dollar companies make their profits while largely avoiding liability for the damages their fossil fuel investing causes frontline communities," Mendoza added. "At the end of the day, the price we pay for private equity's greed is our health and livelihoods, for ourselves and generations to come."
According to the report, the five biggest investors in annual climate polluters are EIG Global Energy Partners, the Carlyle Group/NGP Energy Capital, Brookfield/Oakfield Capital Management, Quantum Capital Group, and BlackRock Private Equity Partners. These five firms each funded at least 100 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) annually.
Some of these companies, most notably BlackRock, rank among the
world's biggest investors in fossil fuels.
"Private equity continues to transform the financial markets and the daily lives of communities around the globe," the report states. "With over a trillion dollars in energy investments generating high greenhouse gas emissions and minimal public visibility, private equity firms play an outsized role in accelerating the climate crisis."
"The private equity energy portfolios covered in this report are responsible for an estimated combined total of 1.17 gigatons of annual emissions," the publication continues. "This figure equals 1.17 billion metric tons CO2 equivalent (CO2e) and is limited to the three categories covered in the scope of this research: upstream, liquefied natural gas terminals, and coal plants, and do not represent the firms' entire emissions footprint from energy investments."
"In the U.S. alone, there were 28 weather and climate disasters in 2023, resulting in at least $92.9 billion in disaster damages, according to the National Centers for Environmental Information," the report notes. "The need for transparency, accountability, and a just transition to a clean energy economy has never been more urgent."
The scorecard's authors and 22 supporting organizations—including Food & Water Watch, Friends of the Earth U.S., Greenpeace USA, LittleSis, Public Citizen, Rainforest Action Network, and Sierra Club—urge sources of capital, such as public pension funds and institutional investors, to commit to a series of climate-friendly policies and practices.
These include:
"While companies like banks and oil majors face pressure over their climate risks and fossil fuel emissions, private equity firms continue to dodge the spotlight, pouring billions into fossil fuels and pushing us further from a sustainable future," said Global Emergy Monitor's Alex Hurley.
"These firms may operate in the shadows, but the public has a right to know how private equity's debt-fueled extraction of both resources and wealth threatens our climate, communities, and financial stability," Hurley added. "We call on private equity firms to adopt climate standards... and retire any fossil fuel assets in their portfolios in short order."
Dockworkers at East and Gulf Coast ports are set to go on strike after their contract expires at midnight on Monday as they seek higher pay and better job protections, in what would be the first coordinated walkout at ports from Maine to Texas since 1977.
The International Longshoremen's Association (ILA), a union, has reached an impasse with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), the port operators' group, over pay rises and protection against automation of jobs, among other benefits.
The strike is expected to have consequences across the economy: East and Gulf Coast ports bring in about half of the country's containerized goods and send out about two-thirds of them.
President Joe Biden doesn't plan to intervene to force a deal, administration officials have said, following pressure from union officials and advocates who want to ensure the dockworkers keep their right to strike.
An ILA statement on Sunday said USMX "refuses to address a half-century of wage subjugation," and another earlier in the week referred to the wages the port operators were offering as "insulting" and "a joke."
The expiring contract covers 45,000 longshoremen at about three dozen ports, including the Port of New York and New Jersey, which is the third busiest in the country.
The last strike at all of the East and Gulf Coast ports was in 1977; containerized trade is now even more essential to the U.S. economy than it was then.
West Coast dockworkers are covered under a different contract that was reached last year after many months of acrimonious negotiations.
The U.S. president has the authority to suspend a dockworkers strike under the Taft-Hartley Act, anti-union legislation passed in 1947. Presidents Richard Nixon and George W. Bush both used the act to break dockworkers strikes.
Union officials are watching the Biden administration closely in the current labor dispute. AFL-CIO President Elizabeth Shuler last week implored Congress to stay out of the process, warning that even the suggestion of federal intervention could prevent USMX from negotiating in good faith.
"Averting a strike is the responsibility of the employers who refuse to offer ILA members a contract that reflects the dignity and value of their labor," Schuler wrote.
Biden, a Democrat, angered many union members and working class advocates in 2022 by working with Congress to intervene to stop a major railworkers strike.
Some experts believe the president won't want to do that again ahead of the November election, for fear of hurting Democratic turnout.
"They just don't want to have a fight with labor going into the election," Harry Katz, an economist and labor relations expert at Cornell University, toldThe New York Times. "Because you need the unions to get out the vote."
However, the administration will also likely face pressure from certain Democrats and business interests who worry about the economic impact of a strike just before the elections. JPMorgan analysts estimated that the strike would cost the U.S. economy about $5 billion per day, roughly 6% of gross domestic product.
"There is little chance that the administration would risk jeopardizing its recent economic successes less than two months before a tightly-contested election," Bradley Saunders, an economist at Capital Economics, wrote in a note to clients last week, according toThe Washington Post.
The ILA and USMX are negotiating pay increases, healthcare benefits, and the use of automated or semi-automated terminals, which threaten jobs. Pay has reportedly emerged as a central point of contention in recent negotiations. USMX offered an hourly pay rise of $2.50 each year over the course of a six-year contract; the ILA asked for a $5 raise per year, the Times reported.
The current top pay rate for the 45,000 longshoremen is $39 an hour, but the West Coast dockworkers are set to receive just over $60 in 2027, the final year of their contract. The ILA's requested rate would mean the top rate was $69 an hour in the final year of the new contract.
USMX is made up of global shipping companies that made "windfall profits" in 2021 and 2022, according to the Times.
The shutdown, which could begin as early as 12:01 am on Tuesday, won't affect cruise ships or military cargo, which the ILA has pledged to continue transporting.
Polling results released Wednesday, less than six weeks away from November's Election Day, show that a majority of Americans want to ditch the Electoral College and "would instead prefer to see the winner of the presidential election be the person who wins the most votes nationally."
Pew Research Center surveyed 9,720 adults across the United States in late August and early September, and found that 63% want to abolish the process outlined in the U.S. Constitution and replace it with a popular vote approach, compared with just 35% who favor keeping the current system.
The Electoral College is made up of electors who are supposed to act on behalf of their state's voters. Each state gets the same number of electors as its members of Congress, and Washington, D.C. gets three electors, bringing the current total to 538. The candidate who secures 270 electoral votes becomes the next president.
D.C. and most states allocate all of their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in their state, though Maine and Nebraska give two votes to the statewide winner, and the remaining votes to the most popular candidate in each congressional district.
Pew noted Wednesday that "some Republicans have been pressing to change Nebraska's rules so that the statewide winner gets all five of its electoral votes. This would likely work to former President Donald Trump's advantage, given Nebraska's consistent support of GOP presidential candidates."
Republican Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen confirmed Tuesday that he has no plans to call a special legislative session to restore a winner-takes-all approach before the November election, in which Trump is set to face Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.
There have been just five presidential contests in which the Electoral College winner did not also win the nationwide popular vote—1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and most recently in 2016, when Trump beat Democrat Hillary Clinton by securing key "swing states."
Continuing a trend that's lasted over two decades, 8 in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents told Pew that they prefer a popular vote system for the presidential contest, while Republicans and Independents who lean toward the GOP were more divided: 53% want to retain the Electoral College and 46% would like to replace it.
"Reference sources indicate that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College," according to the National Archives. "There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject."
Among them is a joint resolution that Congressman Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) introduced just days after Trump incited a violent mob to disrupt the certification of his 2020 loss by storming the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021—for which the Republican nominee faces ongoing legal trouble.
"Americans expect and deserve the winner of the popular vote for any office to win and assume that office," Cohen said at the time. "More than a century ago, we amended our Constitution to provide for the direct election of U.S. senators. It is past time to directly elect our president and vice president. The Electoral College is a vestige of the 18th Century when voters didn't know the candidates who now appear daily on their phones and television screens."
"Last week's mayhem at the Capitol shows that attempts to manipulate the Electoral College vote by politicians employing falsehoods are a real danger," he added. "The president should always be elected by the people, not by politicians. Currently, the system allows politicians to make the ultimate decision. It is well past time to do away with this anachronistic institution and guarantee a fair and accurate vote for president."
In his first public statement since being released from prison in June, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Tuesday urged European lawmakers to take action to protect journalists from being prosecuted for their reporting work, warning that his yearslong case is directly tied to self-censorship and the chilling of press freedom.
Assange spoke to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights (PACE) at the Council of Europe, which includes members from across the continent, in Strasbourg, France, and warned that current legal protections for journalists and whistleblowers "were not effective in any remotely reasonable time," as evidenced by the 14 years he spent in prison or otherwise in confinement for his work.
"I want to be totally clear," said Assange. "I am not free today because the system worked. I am free today because after years of incarceration I pleaded guilty to journalism. I pleaded guilty to seeking information from a source."
Watch Assange's testimony below:
Assange was released from Belmarsh Prison in London in June after being incarcerated there for five years. His release was secured when he agreed to plead guilty to one felony count of illegally obtaining and disclosing national security materials in a deal with the U.S. government.
He had spent years fighting U.S. efforts to extradite him, threatening him with a sentence of up to 170 years in a federal prison, as punishment for state secrets WikiLeaks published.
The media organization reported on a series of leaks provided by former U.S. Army soldier Chelsea Manning regarding the Army's killing of unarmed civilians in Iraq, as well as publishing diplomatic cables.
"I was formally convicted by a foreign power for asking for receiving and publishing truthful information about that power, while I was in Europe," said Assange, who is Australian, on Tuesday. "The fundamental issue is simple: Journalists should not be prosecuted for doing their jobs."
Assange told PACE members that he had believed that Article 10 of European Convention of Human Rights, which protects the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media, would protect him from prosecution.
"Similarly, looking at the U.S. First Amendment to its Constitution... No publisher had ever been prosecuted for publishing classified information from the United States," said Assange. "I expected some kind of harassment legal process. I was pre-prepared to fight for that."
He continued:
My naiveté was in believing in the law. When push comes to shove, laws are just pieces of paper and they can be reinterpreted for political expediency.
They are the rules made by the ruling class more broadly. And if those rules don't suit what it wants to do, it reinterprets them or hopefully changes them... In the case of the United States, we angered one of the constituent powers of the United States. The intelligence sector... It was powerful enough to push for a reinterpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
He said he ultimately "chose freedom over unrealizable justice," as the U.S. was intent on imprisoning him for the rest of his life unless he entered the guilty plea.
Assange added that his case set a "dangerous precedent," and that since his arrest he has observed "more impunity, more secrecy, more retaliation for telling the truth, and more self-censorship."
"It is hard not to draw a line from the U.S. government crossing the Rubicon by internationally criminalizing journalism to the chilled climate for freedom of expression now," said Assange.
His comments echoed the findings of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which published its annual press freedom index in May. The group found that "in the Americas, the inability of journalists to cover subjects related to organized crime, corruption, or the environment for fear of reprisals poses a major problem."
The U.S. fell 10 places in the annual ranking, with citing "open antagonism from political officials" such as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, "including calls to jail journalists." RSF also cited the government's pursuit of Assange's extradition.
In Europe, said Assange on Tuesday, "the criminalization of news-gathering activities is a threat to investigative journalism everywhere."
On the same day that President Joe Biden said his administration and Israeli leaders are "discussing" an attack on Iranian oil infrastructure, a coalition of over 80 advocacy groups on Thursday implored the U.S. leader to "halt Israel's march toward regional war."
The National Iranian-American Council (NIAC) led the groups in a letter to Biden asserting that "it is not in the national interest for the U.S. to be led into a war with Iran" by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhu's far-right government.
The letter's signers include Just Foreign Policy, Friends Committee on National Legislation, IfNotNow, U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, CodePink, Peace Action, and the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
"The primary ask behind this letter is that the Biden administration utilize the significant leverage it has to rein in Netanyahu as he continues to proceed with a consistently failed 'deescalation through escalation' approach throughout the region that has cost countless civilian lives," NIAC explained.
As stated in the letter, "It is in the strong national interest to utilize diplomacy, backed by full American leverage—including withholding further offensive weapons transfers to Israel's military—to move all the parties back from the brink and toward a cease-fire that ends the devastation of Gaza and Lebanon and reverses the slide to regional war."
"Moreover, we urge you to recognize and respect that Congress has not authorized military force against Iran or militias backed by Iran, and that any potential military action against Iran could only proceed following a debate and passage of a war authorization before entering our troops into any imminent hostilities in the region," the groups continued.
"President Biden has recently spoken of steps he has taken to wind down America's military footprint abroad," the letter adds. "However, unless he acts quickly and decisively through diplomacy, it appears that a new endless war will be his legacy."
The U.S. provides Israel with billions of dollars worth of armed aid and diplomatic cover for its yearlong war on Gaza, which has killed or wounded more than 148,000 Palestinians and is the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case.
Fears of a full-blown regional war have mounted recently as Israel escalates hostilities by assassinating Hamas and Hezbollah leaders in Tehran and Beirut and as Israeli forces invade southern Lebanon accompanied by a bombing campaign that has left thousands of Lebanese dead and wounded.
Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based political and paramilitary group, has been engaged in limited cross-border projectile attacks on Israel in solidarity with Gaza, resulting in scores of deaths and injuries.
"The wars in the Middle East are just getting more and more dangerous, not only with Lebanon, but now with Iran," CodePink co-founder Medea Benjamin said Wednesday in a video urging Americans to call their members of Congress to demand peace. "Netanyahu has been trying to drag the U.S. into a war with Iran for years, and unfortunately, there are many members in this Congress... who are all too eager to go along with him."
Benjamin highlighted remarks by U.S. lawmakers including Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) who said Tuesday that attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities are "fair game."
"Let's remember it's Israel that has nuclear weapons, not Iran," said Benjamin, who added that attacking Iran would encourage Tehran's allies "to strike U.S. soldiers in the region."
Benjamin also noted Sen. Robert Wicker's (R-Miss.) call for regime change in Tehran—one of the latest in a long line of such calls over the past 45 years—and admonished U.S. officials for "forgetting the disastrous attempts of regime change that the U.S. did recently in Iraq, in Libya, in Afghanistan," and that "the present government in Iran is there precisely because of the U.S. overthrowing their democratically elected government in 1953."
"We want to live in peace," Benjamin added. "We want to stop supporting the genocide that Israel is carrying out... We don't want any more weapons sent to the region... We the American people don't want war with Iran. We want to live in peace."
The Israeli military announced a "new phase" of the war in Gaza while conducting its most severe airstrikes so far in Beirut.
Israeli forces stepped up attacks in both the Gaza Strip and Lebanon overnight and into Sunday.
Israeli forces bombed a mosque and a school-turned-shelter in Gaza, killing 26 and injuring dozens more, according to the Palestinian health ministry; the Israeli military described the two sites as Hamas "command and control centers" but provided no evidence.
The Israeli military also on Sunday announced a "new phase" of the war in Gaza, issuing new evacuation orders that cover most of the northern part of the enclave, The New York Timesreported. The military said it would send more soldiers and weapons to Gaza to "destroy terrorist infrastructures and undermine Hamas' capabilities until all the war's goals are achieved."
Al Jazeera's Moath al-Kahlout reported that "the situation here in northern Gaza is deteriorating as the Israeli army intensifies its bombing." He said that children, women, and journalists were among the victims.
"An entire family was killed by the Israeli army in the overnight attacks," he added.
Meanwhile, Israel conducted the "most severe" airstrikes so far on Beirut, "pounding" the city overnight, according toThe Guardian. The strikes were in southern Beirut and its suburban outskirts, which are seen as a Hezbollah stronghold and have been heavily targeted by Israeli forces for the past two weeks.
Al Jazeera journalist Ali Hashem, reporting from Beirut, described a "massive air strike" on Sunday near the city's international airport—an area that Israel has been bombarding for days. He said that daytime strikes are particularly harrowing.
"During the nights there are warnings," Hashem reported. "During the days there are no warnings."
Hashem said that emergency services have been prevented from getting into the suburban area where many of the strikes are taking place.
The Lebanese health ministry said Sunday that 23 people were killed and 93 injured in Israeli strikes on Saturday.
The Israeli military continues to advance its ground incursion in southern Lebanon. On Sunday, it ordered people in 25 villages to evacuate immediately, "signaling it's expanding its ground offensive," Al Jazeera reported
Filippo Grandi, the United Nations' high commissioner for refugees, visited Beirut on Sunday and called for a cease-fire—saying it was "desperately needed"—and international humanitarian aid.
"The polls are tight and the Electoral College is rigged to give Trump an edge, but Our Revolution can turn the tide by turning out progressive voters in key battleground states."
Just over a month away from the U.S. general election, the largest progressive political organizing group in the country announced Friday that it is aiming to encourage 5 million voters in seven battleground states to vote against former Republican President Donald Trump.
Our Revolution hopes to reach voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin via door-knocking, phone calls, and text messages ahead of the November election, in which Trump is facing Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.
The get-out-the-vote effort comes after surveying over 1,400 Our Revolution members who live in swing states. The results, the group said, "present worrying signs for the Harris campaign" and "suggest that the Trump campaign is actively engaging young and progressive voters."
Joseph Geevarghese is the executive director of Our Revolution, which grew out of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) 2016 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. The group leader said Friday that "the polls are tight and the Electoral College is rigged to give Trump an edge, but Our Revolution can turn the tide by turning out progressive voters in key battleground states."
In the 2020 election, President Joe Biden "narrowly beat Trump by less than 300,000 votes in these states four years ago, which means that our 1.2 million supporters in the swing states could be the margin of victory in 2024," Geevarghese noted.
"After hearing from progressive swing state residents and our organizers on the ground, we are sounding the alarm on the lack of enthusiasm amongst this key voting bloc," he added. "In the coming weeks, Our Revolution will continue urging the Harris campaign to release bold policy plans aimed at motivating the party's progressive base, and we are committed to doing everything we can to mobilize support against another disastrous Trump presidency."
As the group detailed Friday, its polling—first reported by Semafor—found:
Since the president passed the torch to Harris this summer following a disastrous debate performance against Trump, she has racked up endorsements from leading groups, including People's Action, Popular Democracy, and the Working Families Party. Harris won the first-ever endorsement of the youth-led gun violence prevention movement March for Our Lives and has support from various reproductive rights, labor, and climate organizations—even some that declined to back Biden.
However, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters declined to endorse for the first time since 1996, and the Uncommitted National Movement—which is critical of U.S. support for Israel's annihilation of Gaza—announced last month that "Harris' unwillingness to shift on unconditional weapons policy or to even make a clear campaign statement in support of upholding existing U.S. and international human rights law has made it impossible for us to endorse her."
Uncommitted also made clear that it "opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing," and "is not recommending a third-party vote in the presidential election, especially as third-party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country's broken Electoral College system."
Despite recent polling that suggests U.S. voter support for Harris would grow if she backed an arms embargo against the Israeli military, Harris is not making clear attempts to win over Uncommitted voters. Leaders from the movement toldReuters that they were not invited to her Friday meeting with Arab American and Muslim leaders in Flint, Michigan.
Efforts to convince Michigan voters to support Harris will continue this weekend. Sanders and United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain—whose union endorsed her this summer—have three events in the state in the coming days. They plan to talk about corporate greed, healthcare, and manufacturing in the state.
Meanwhile, Harris this weekend plans to head to North Carolina, which was just devastated by Hurricane Helene.
The Sunrise Movement—a youth-led climate group that launched a campaign to defeat Trump and reach 1.5 million young swing state voters in August—intends to boost efforts to elect Harris in the weeks ahead, specifically focusing on North Carolina.
"Young climate voters could decide the election in North Carolina and put Harris over the edge," Sunrise organizer Paul Campion said in a statement Friday. "We're focused on reaching a group of 84,000 young voters between the ages of 18 and 26 who are very concerned about climate change but aren't regular voters. We're talking with them about the devastation of Helene and how Donald Trump's Project 2025 agenda would worsen the climate crisis, making disasters like Helene more frequent and severe."
Shiva Rajbhandari, a North Carolina student organizer, said that "people are angry. We're watching homes be swept away, entire towns consumed by floodwaters, and Donald Trump is joking about how climate change will create more waterfront property."
"Big Oil just murdered 200 people," the 20-year-old declared. "People know who's responsible for the climate crisis, and we're going to hold them accountable in November."
"Numerous credible reports of gross violations of human rights by Israeli security forces have rightly placed U.S. enforcement of the Leahy Law in sharp focus."
As the death tolls from the U.S.-backed Israeli assaults on Gaza and Lebanon neared 42,000 and 2,000 respectively, a group of House Democrats this week urged the Biden administration to hold Israel accountable to human rights standards established under existing domestic law.
In a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin dated September 30 but first published Friday by HuffPost, the Democratic lawmakers—Reps. Jim McGovern (Mass.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Betty McCollum (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), and Joaquin Castro (Texas)—expressed their "deep alarm regarding the lack of U.S. enforcement of the Leahy Law as it pertains to U.S. assistance to Israel."
Named after its author, former Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the Leahy Laws were approved in two rounds in the late 1990s. The legislation built on the Foreign Assitance Act of 1961, which prohibits U.S. military aid to foreign security forces that commit gross human rights violations.
"We strongly urge you to apply the law as written and act swiftly to bar any Israeli military unit that faces credible accusations of committing a gross violation of human rights from receiving U.S. assistance or training," the lawmakers wrote in their letter.
"As longtime friends and allies of Israel, we have supported, and continue to support, security assistance to Israel for the purposes of legitimate self-defense," the letter states. "Israel continues to face serious threats from Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist groups. As it defends against these threats, Israel must ensure it is using U.S. security assistance and funding in compliance with U.S. law—whether in the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, or elsewhere."
According to the letter:Numerous credible reports of gross violations of human rights by Israeli security forces have rightly placed U.S. enforcement of the Leahy Law in sharp focus. Israeli and international human rights organizations have released credible reports of Israeli security units subjecting Palestinians in Israeli detention facilities to torture, ill-treatment, prolonged detetion without charges or trial, and rape under color of law. Extensive investigations by reputable media outlets have also documented multiple instances of civilians carrying white flags being shot and killed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in Gaza.
The letter comes ahead of the anniversary of the Hamas-led October 7 attack on Israel and that country's retaliation, which has left more than 148,000 Palestinians in Gaza dead, maimed, or missing and millions more forcibly displaced, starved, and sickened.
Israel is currently on trial for genocide at the International Court of Justice, and International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan is seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as for leaders of Hamas.
In recent weeks, Israel has also ramped up airstrikes and launched a ground invasion in Lebanon, from which Hezbollah has been launching aerial attacks on Israel since shortly after October 7. Thousands of Lebanese have been killed or wounded.
All of this is enabled by tens of billions of dollars worth of nearly unconditional U.S. military aid and diplomatic cover including multiple vetoes of United Nations Security Council cease-fire resolutions. While the Biden administration delayed shipment of a limited number of heavy bombs of a type that Israel was using to massacre civilians in densely populated areas, those shipments soon resumed, even as the Gaza death toll soared ever higher.
"The failure of the United States to consistently apply our own laws has contributed to a culture of impunity in the IDF that actively endangers the lives of U.S. citizens," the lawmakers asserted before highlighting "gross violation[s] of human rights" perpetrated by Israeli forces against several Americans.
These include Omar Assad, an elderly former Milwaukee grocer who in January 2023 was dragged from his vehicle, blindfolded, gagged, and handcuffed before falling silent while being detained in Jiljilya; renowned Al Jazeera correspondent Shireen Abu Akleh, who multiple probes found was deliberately shot dead while covering an IDF raid in the West Bank in May 2022; and, most recently, 26-year-old International Solidarity Movement (ISM) activist Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi, who was shot in the head during a September 6 demonstration against Israel's illegal West Bank settler colonies.
Israeli impunity for killing Americans far predates the examples listed in the letter. For example, in 2003, ISM activist Rachel Corrie was crushed to death by a U.S.-supplied Israeli military bulldozer while trying to stop the demolition of Palestinian homes in the West Bank. In 1967 Israeli warplanes and warships repeatedly attacked the spy ship USS Liberty in the Mediterranean Sea, killing 34 sailors and others and wounding 171 more in what numerous senior U.S. officials including the then-secretary of state and CIA director said was a deliberate act.
At least one American has also been killed by Israeli bombing in Lebanon this week. Hajj Kamel Ahmad Jawad, 56, of Dearborn, Michigan was killed in an airstrike Tuesday while in Nabatieth in southern Lebanon caring for his sick mother and volunteering to help elderly, disabled, and injured patients at a local hospital.
"When it functions properly, the Leahy Law serves two crucial purposes: It prevents U.S. complicity in gross violations of human rights, and it deters violations by incentivizing foreign governments to hold perpetrators accountable," the Democratic lawmakers wrote in their letter. "However, the Leahy Law can only serve these purposes when it is enforced."
Indeed, successive U.S. administrations have supported some of the world's worst human rights violators—including the perpetrators of genocidal mass murder in Indonesia, Paraguay, Cambodia, Guatemala, Bangladesh, East Timor, Kurdistan, and Gaza—since the passage of the Foreign Assistance Act and Leahy Laws.
"We strongly urge you to uphold the rule of law, bar assistance to any unit that is credibly implicated in a gross violation of human rights, and ensure perpetrators of crimes against American citizens face accountability and justice," the letter's signers concluded.