tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6699877111237643553.comments2020-09-22T20:48:28.170-04:00VoterMarch, by Louis PosnerLouis Posnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02810425407151848173noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6699877111237643553.post-50248614750301707662012-02-26T23:29:56.180-05:002012-02-26T23:29:56.180-05:00"If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Libera..."If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front" should still bask in its glory of having been nominated for an Oscar for Best Documentary film. However, it is an insult that the winning documentary, "Undefeated" is a football film. A story about a black inner city high school winning a football trophy is not a social justice issue. If anything, it is a subliminal message to young black males that a career in professional sports is a cure for racial income inequality in the inner cities. <br /><br />With all of the pressing social justice issues, one would expect that the Academy could find one documentary film that addresses social justice issues. However, it is not surprising that this football documentary was chosen as the average Academy Member is a 62 year old, white male. Perhaps we need to change the composition of the Academy, or have two awards for Best Documentary, with one award specifically designated for Best Social Justice Documentary.Lou Posnerhttp://www.louisposner.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6699877111237643553.post-12246257075239768672012-02-20T01:26:14.148-05:002012-02-20T01:26:14.148-05:00Hollywood Reporter, FEINBERG FORECAST: Scott's...Hollywood Reporter, FEINBERG FORECAST: Scott's Final Projections for the 84th Academy Awards,<br />Feb. 19, 2012, @ http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/oscar-predictions-the-artist-academy-awards-292628 Prediction for BEST DOCUMENTARY FILM (FEATURE):<br />"This wide-open race ... will go to Marshall Curry’s polished, even-handed look at “eco-terrorism,” a subject of the same social scope and significance as most previous winners."Louis Posnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02810425407151848173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6699877111237643553.post-22821294690288509302010-11-22T17:08:15.966-05:002010-11-22T17:08:15.966-05:00The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the...The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).<br /><br />Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn’t be about winning states. No more distorting and divisive red and blue state maps. Every vote, everywhere would be equal and counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.<br /><br />Now 2/3rds of the states and voters are ignored — 19 of the 22 smallest and medium-small states, and big states like California, Georgia, New York, and Texas. The current winner-take-all laws (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state) used by 48 of the 50 states, and not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution, ensure that the candidates do not reach out to all of the states and their voters. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. Voter turnout in the “battleground” states has been 67%, while turnout in the “spectator” states was 61%. Policies important to the citizens of ‘flyover’ states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.<br /><br />The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).<br /><br />The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. It does not abolish the Electoral College, which would need a constitutional amendment, and could be stopped by states with as little as 3% of the U.S. population. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.<br /><br />The bill has been endorsed or voted for by 1,922 state legislators (in 50 states) who have sponsored and/or cast recorded votes in favor of the bill.<br /><br />In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). The recent Washington Post, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard University poll shows 72% support for direct nationwide election of the President. Support for a national popular vote is strong in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO-- 68%, IA --75%, MI-- 73%, MO-- 70%, NH-- 69%, NV-- 72%, NM-- 76%, NC-- 74%, OH-- 70%, PA -- 78%, VA -- 74%, and WI -- 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE --75%, ME -- 77%, NE -- 74%, NH --69%, NV -- 72%, NM -- 76%, RI -- 74%, and VT -- 75%; in Southern and border states: AR --80%, KY -- 80%, MS --77%, MO -- 70%, NC -- 74%, and VA -- 74%; and in other states polled: CA -- 70%, CT -- 74% , MA -- 73%, MN – 75%, NY -- 79%, WA -- 77%, and WV- 81%.totohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12247335901450384827noreply@blogger.com