2024 elections Congressional & State

[BDKJMU]

So according to your logic, if someone publicly declared they are going to only hire or appoint someone of a certain race and sex, say a white male, there’s nothing wrong with that, and wah wah if anyone complained. Got it.

They said that for hundreds of years. You’re butt hurt because the tables have been turned and they’re attempting to redress past wrongs.

So you’re ok with racism and sexism today because of past racism and sexism. Got it.

[GannonFan]

Wah wah wah. She's a female, that's more than half the population. She's more than representative of the electorate. Focus more on the being from Maryland more than her race and sex.

So according to your logic, if someone publicly declared they are going to only hire or appoint someone of a certain race and sex, say a white male, there’s nothing wrong with that, and wah wah if anyone complained. Got it.

For a replacement candidate who's going to serve out a term and not run for re-election. Sure, I can get over it. More important hills to die on there.

[UNI88]

They said that for hundreds of years. You’re butt hurt because the tables have been turned and they’re attempting to redress past wrongs.

So you’re ok with racism and sexism today because of past racism and sexism. Got it.

So you were ok with racism and sexism in the past but now have a problem with it. Got it.

I think it's disingenuous to treat people like sh!t for hundreds of years and then pretend to support equality for all when the balance of power shifts.

Because of those hundreds of years of oppression, African Americans haven't had the opportunities to build wealth that they can pass on to their children that white people have. Racists then use the poverty and crime that afflicts African Americans more than whites as some kind of proof that they're inferior.

[kalm]

So you’re ok with racism and sexism today because of past racism and sexism. Got it.

So you were ok with racism and sexism in the past but now have a problem with it. Got it.

I think it's disingenuous to treat people like sh!t for hundreds of years and then pretend to support equality for all when the balance of power shifts.

Because of those hundreds of years of oppression, African Americans haven't had the opportunities to build wealth that they can pass on to their children that white people have. Racists then use the poverty and crime that afflicts African Americans more than whites as some kind of proof that they're inferior.

Great post.

[BDKJMU]

So you’re ok with racism and sexism today because of past racism and sexism. Got it.

So you were ok with racism and sexism in the past but now have a problem with it. Got it.

I think it's disingenuous to treat people like sh!t for hundreds of years and then pretend to support equality for all when the balance of power shifts.

Because of those hundreds of years of oppression, African Americans haven't had the opportunities to build wealth that they can pass on to their children that white people have. Racists then use the poverty and crime that afflicts African Americans more than whites as some kind of proof that they're inferior.

Translation: You’re ok with racism and sexism today to make up for past racism amd sexism.

And if black peopke are African American, then white people are European American.

Or if white people are white, then black people are black.

[UNI88]

So you were ok with racism and sexism in the past but now have a problem with it. Got it.

I think it's disingenuous to treat people like sh!t for hundreds of years and then pretend to support equality for all when the balance of power shifts.

Because of those hundreds of years of oppression, African Americans haven't had the opportunities to build wealth that they can pass on to their children that white people have. Racists then use the poverty and crime that afflicts African Americans more than whites as some kind of proof that they're inferior.

Translation: You’re ok with racism and sexism today to make up for past racism amd sexism.

And if black peopke are African American, then white people are European American.

Or if white people are white, then black people are black.

Is everything really equal if we just say everything is equal but don't do anything about the different circumstances caused by the hundreds of years of oppression?

Read the Color of Law by Rothstein and then tell me that racism and discrimination haven't been a significant factor in the higher poverty and crime rates among African Americans.

I use African American and white because I know it triggers you. I could care less which term you use as long as it isn't racist.

FTR I believe that whatever we do to level the playing field needs to have an expiration date.

[BDKJMU]

Translation: You’re ok with racism and sexism today to make up for past racism amd sexism.

And if black peopke are African American, then white people are European American.

Or if white people are white, then black people are black.

Is everything really equal if we just say everything is equal but don't do anything about the different circumstances caused by the hundreds of years of oppression?

Read the Color of Law by Rothstein and then tell me that racism and discrimination haven't been a significant factor in the higher poverty and crime rates among African Americans.

I use African American and white because I know it triggers you. I could care less which term you use as long as it isn't racist.

FTR I believe that whatever we do to level the playing field needs to have an expiration date.

Tbat was in the past. After all the richest man in America is African American.

And wrong. You were using it on here before I ever commented on it. After all, I couldn’t have 1st commented on it unless you had 1st used it prior..

[UNI88]

Is everything really equal if we just say everything is equal but don't do anything about the different circumstances caused by the hundreds of years of oppression?

Read the Color of Law by Rothstein and then tell me that racism and discrimination haven't been a significant factor in the higher poverty and crime rates among African Americans.

I use African American and white because I know it triggers you. I could care less which term you use as long as it isn't racist.

FTR I believe that whatever we do to level the playing field needs to have an expiration date.

Wrong. You were using it on here before I ever commented on it.

After all, I couldn’t have 1st commented on it unless you had 1st used it prior..

Change "I know it triggers you" to "I knew it would trigger you" and then find something else to be fauxraged about. You're as thin skinned and sensitive as an illiberal wokehodist.

[houndawg]

So you’re ok with racism and sexism today because of past racism and sexism. Got it.

So you were ok with racism and sexism in the past but now have a problem with it. Got it.

I think it's disingenuous to treat people like sh!t for hundreds of years and then pretend to support equality for all when the balance of power shifts.

Because of those hundreds of years of oppression, African Americans haven't had the opportunities to build wealth that they can pass on to their children that white people have. Racists then use the poverty and crime that afflicts African Americans more than whites as some kind of proof that they're inferior.

Trut so pure.

[kalm]

Sounds just like the type of unified party to get behind in ‘24.

[houndawg]

Sounds just like the type of unified party to get behind in ‘24.

"...... Come in my office and have a debate mother------!"

A tough talkin' Texas tornado like thim should be named "Buck" or "Spike" or "Butch".... "Chip" detracts from the image he's trying to project.

I bet he could whup Gaetz's ass, though.

[kalm]

To partially support BDK’s opinion on Newsom’s senate appointment…here’s how the left feels about it. This is why Democrats cant have nice things…

Before becoming president of EMILYs List she was director of public policy and campaigns at Airbnb, a multibillion-dollar corporation that has come under increased scrutiny for its role in pushing up rents and fueling the housing shortage.

More egregiously, in 2019, Butler worked as a consultant for SCRB Strategies and helped Uber to pass Proposition 22 in California. The bill exempts app-based gig companies from classifying their workers as employees. This allows them to bypass essential worker rights like a minimum wage, time-and-a-half for overtime, expenses reimbursement, and benefits like unemployment compensation.


Uber and other companies including Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates, and Instacart dumped $205 million in their “Yes on Prop 22” campaign. It was the most expensive ballot measure in US history.

The propaganda campaign, which Butler helped to orchestrate, plastered the airwaves and social media with misleading talking points, like claiming that Proposition 22 would actually increase workers’ rights. This certainly played a role in the measure’s passage, as a survey of California voters found that 40 percent of yes voters thought they were voting for gig workers to have a living wage.

The app companies promised that workers would get generous benefit packages in exchange for not being labeled employees. This also proved to be a lie. A study found that in order to get a health care stipend, workers needed to buy a policy in advance and work enough hours to even qualify. Surveys show that only 15 percent of workers even bothered applying.

As usual, the companies claimed that this continued misclassification of their workforce was needed to keep prices low. But after Prop 22 passed, they raised prices anyway.

Workers misclassified as independent contractors are legally barred from forming or joining a labor union. Therefore, it is an existential issue for labor that will surely be a pivotal legal battleground in the years to come. When faced with a choice, Butler chose to actively help Uber squash basic workers’ rights and set a terrible precedent for the labor movement going forward.

Butler’s career, with her slow drift from labor leader to corporate advocate, is a perfect metaphor for the Democratic Party’s decades-long retreat from pro-labor policies. In a conscious decision dating back to the 1990s, Democrats have chosen to ditch labor in favor of a rising class of professionals now exemplified by the tech industry.

This new brand of Democrats is diligently progressive on cultural issues while fundamentally reactionary on issues of economic inequality. In this sense, Butler, whose credentials as a person of color and and LGBTQ person are apt to distract from her pro-corporate record, is the perfect embodiment of the modern Democratic Party.

It is no surprise that Newsom would make this move either. The California governor, who clearly has presidential ambitions of his own, recently vetoed a bill that would give unemployment pay to workers on strike.

He also vetoed a bill that would have banned self-driving trucks from operating in the state without a safety operator aboard. As a fundamental issue of jobs and safety, the Teamsters union rallied and lobbied to get it passed. They even led a convoy of truckers to the state capital in support of the bill. Newsom’s veto was just one more sign that when it really matters the leaders of the state’s Democratic Party are more beholden to big tech than labor.

The Butler appointment also demonstrates another feature of the modern Democratic Party: a misguided notion that high-level race-based appointments will satisfy and cohere racial voting blocs. Before Feinstein’s death, Newsom had already committed to appointing a black woman to the seat, a move that echoed President Joe Biden’s promise of appointing a black vice president.

It’s barely hidden that part of the goal of these appointments is to gin up desperately needed enthusiasm among black voters. However, it’s not clear there is always an inherent connection between the presence of black candidates and the support of black voters. Kamala Harris struggled with black voters during the 2020 primary, trailing behind Biden, Senator Bernie Sanders, and even Senator Elizabeth Warren in some cases.

https://jacobin.com/2023/10/california- ... -feinstein

[GannonFan]

Good article, kalmie. Yes, the change in the Democratic Party since the 90's to almost an oligarchy of the rich while pandering with cultural issues has been only just slightly less interesting than the GOP's descent into abject chaos during much of the same time.

Not directly related to the topic but since they show up in the article (and I wasn't aware of these before)...

The California governor, who clearly has presidential ambitions of his own, recently vetoed a bill that would give unemployment pay to workers on strike.

He also vetoed a bill that would have banned self-driving trucks from operating in the state without a safety operator aboard. As a fundamental issue of jobs and safety, the Teamsters union rallied and lobbied to get it passed. They even led a convoy of truckers to the state capital in support of the bill. Newsom’s veto was just one more sign that when it really matters the leaders of the state’s Democratic Party are more beholden to big tech than labor.

There was really a bill to give unemployment benefits to striking workers? And it got through the legislature? I get it that strikes are generally bad outcomes for workers - most never make back the money they lose by being on strike. But why try to encourage more strikes with this legislation? I always thought work slowdowns were the better work action to take to encourage more progress at the bargaining table. Strikes just piss people off and screw the people out on strike.

And if we're going to need people on self-driving trucks doesn't that kinda eliminate the reason to have self-driving trucks in the first place? And who really thinks this "safety operator" is going to be so attentive all the time that they would be able to intervene always when and if a self driving vehicle goes bad?

[Pwns]

To partially support BDK’s opinion on Newsom’s senate appointment…here’s how the left feels about it. This is why Democrats cant have nice things…

Before becoming president of EMILYs List she was director of public policy and campaigns at Airbnb, a multibillion-dollar corporation that has come under increased scrutiny for its role in pushing up rents and fueling the housing shortage.

More egregiously, in 2019, Butler worked as a consultant for SCRB Strategies and helped Uber to pass Proposition 22 in California. The bill exempts app-based gig companies from classifying their workers as employees. This allows them to bypass essential worker rights like a minimum wage, time-and-a-half for overtime, expenses reimbursement, and benefits like unemployment compensation.


Uber and other companies including Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates, and Instacart dumped $205 million in their “Yes on Prop 22” campaign. It was the most expensive ballot measure in US history.

The propaganda campaign, which Butler helped to orchestrate, plastered the airwaves and social media with misleading talking points, like claiming that Proposition 22 would actually increase workers’ rights. This certainly played a role in the measure’s passage, as a survey of California voters found that 40 percent of yes voters thought they were voting for gig workers to have a living wage.

The app companies promised that workers would get generous benefit packages in exchange for not being labeled employees. This also proved to be a lie. A study found that in order to get a health care stipend, workers needed to buy a policy in advance and work enough hours to even qualify. Surveys show that only 15 percent of workers even bothered applying.

As usual, the companies claimed that this continued misclassification of their workforce was needed to keep prices low. But after Prop 22 passed, they raised prices anyway.

Workers misclassified as independent contractors are legally barred from forming or joining a labor union. Therefore, it is an existential issue for labor that will surely be a pivotal legal battleground in the years to come. When faced with a choice, Butler chose to actively help Uber squash basic workers’ rights and set a terrible precedent for the labor movement going forward.

Butler’s career, with her slow drift from labor leader to corporate advocate, is a perfect metaphor for the Democratic Party’s decades-long retreat from pro-labor policies. In a conscious decision dating back to the 1990s, Democrats have chosen to ditch labor in favor of a rising class of professionals now exemplified by the tech industry.

This new brand of Democrats is diligently progressive on cultural issues while fundamentally reactionary on issues of economic inequality. In this sense, Butler, whose credentials as a person of color and and LGBTQ person are apt to distract from her pro-corporate record, is the perfect embodiment of the modern Democratic Party.

It is no surprise that Newsom would make this move either. The California governor, who clearly has presidential ambitions of his own, recently vetoed a bill that would give unemployment pay to workers on strike.

He also vetoed a bill that would have banned self-driving trucks from operating in the state without a safety operator aboard. As a fundamental issue of jobs and safety, the Teamsters union rallied and lobbied to get it passed. They even led a convoy of truckers to the state capital in support of the bill. Newsom’s veto was just one more sign that when it really matters the leaders of the state’s Democratic Party are more beholden to big tech than labor.

The Butler appointment also demonstrates another feature of the modern Democratic Party: a misguided notion that high-level race-based appointments will satisfy and cohere racial voting blocs. Before Feinstein’s death, Newsom had already committed to appointing a black woman to the seat, a move that echoed President Joe Biden’s promise of appointing a black vice president.

It’s barely hidden that part of the goal of these appointments is to gin up desperately needed enthusiasm among black voters. However, it’s not clear there is always an inherent connection between the presence of black candidates and the support of black voters. Kamala Harris struggled with black voters during the 2020 primary, trailing behind Biden, Senator Bernie Sanders, and even Senator Elizabeth Warren in some cases.

https://jacobin.com/2023/10/california- ... -feinstein

California neoliberalism is the fakest, most sanctimonious horseshit brand of liberalism there is. I would write in Angela Davis' name before I vote for that slimy skink Gavin Newsom in a presidential race.

[kalm]

To partially support BDK’s opinion on Newsom’s senate appointment…here’s how the left feels about it. This is why Democrats cant have nice things…



https://jacobin.com/2023/10/california- ... -feinstein

California neoliberalism is the fakest, most sanctimonious horseshit brand of liberalism there is. I would write in Angela Davis' name before I vote for that slimy skink Gavin Newsom in a presidential race.

Although it’s likely the same everywhere. Hillary Clinton, anyone?

But I’d brace for Newsom. I think there’s a decent chance he’ll be the next President.

Blegh.

[GannonFan]

California neoliberalism is the fakest, most sanctimonious horseshit brand of liberalism there is. I would write in Angela Davis' name before I vote for that slimy skink Gavin Newsom in a presidential race.

Although it’s likely the same everywhere. Hillary Clinton, anyone?

But I’d brace for Newsom. I think they’re a decent chance he’ll be the next President.

Blegh.

If Hillary wasn't so brazenly corrupt I would've voted for her - I didn't think her brand of liberalism was that fake.

I don't know enough about Newsom to really have much of an opinion. I don't see him moving Biden aside nor do I see him beating Trump, so unless those guys exit the scene before the '24 election (prison, death, mental decline that they just forget to run) then he's looking at '28.

[UNI88]

Good article, kalmie. Yes, the change in the Democratic Party since the 90's to almost an oligarchy of the rich while pandering with cultural issues has been only just slightly less interesting than the GOP's descent into abject chaos during much of the same time.

Not directly related to the topic but since they show up in the article (and I wasn't aware of these before)...

The California governor, who clearly has presidential ambitions of his own, recently vetoed a bill that would give unemployment pay to workers on strike.

He also vetoed a bill that would have banned self-driving trucks from operating in the state without a safety operator aboard. As a fundamental issue of jobs and safety, the Teamsters union rallied and lobbied to get it passed. They even led a convoy of truckers to the state capital in support of the bill. Newsom’s veto was just one more sign that when it really matters the leaders of the state’s Democratic Party are more beholden to big tech than labor.

There was really a bill to give unemployment benefits to striking workers? And it got through the legislature? I get it that strikes are generally bad outcomes for workers - most never make back the money they lose by being on strike. But why try to encourage more strikes with this legislation? I always thought work slowdowns were the better work action to take to encourage more progress at the bargaining table. Strikes just piss people off and screw the people out on strike.

And if we're going to need people on self-driving trucks doesn't that kinda eliminate the reason to have self-driving trucks in the first place? And who really thinks this "safety operator" is going to be so attentive all the time that they would be able to intervene always when and if a self driving vehicle goes bad?

Isn't going a strike a voluntary decision, like quitting your job? You can't collect unemployment if you quit your job why should you collect it when you and/or your union votes to go on strike? The union should be responsible for helping striking workers.

[houndawg]

Good article, kalmie. Yes, the change in the Democratic Party since the 90's to almost an oligarchy of the rich while pandering with cultural issues has been only just slightly less interesting than the GOP's descent into abject chaos during much of the same time.

Not directly related to the topic but since they show up in the article (and I wasn't aware of these before)...

The California governor, who clearly has presidential ambitions of his own, recently vetoed a bill that would give unemployment pay to workers on strike.

He also vetoed a bill that would have banned self-driving trucks from operating in the state without a safety operator aboard. As a fundamental issue of jobs and safety, the Teamsters union rallied and lobbied to get it passed. They even led a convoy of truckers to the state capital in support of the bill. Newsom’s veto was just one more sign that when it really matters the leaders of the state’s Democratic Party are more beholden to big tech than labor.

There was really a bill to give unemployment benefits to striking workers? And it got through the legislature? I get it that strikes are generally bad outcomes for workers - most never make back the money they lose by being on strike. But why try to encourage more strikes with this legislation? I always thought work slowdowns were the better work action to take to encourage more progress at the bargaining table. Strikes just piss people off and screw the people out on strike.

And if we're going to need people on self-driving trucks doesn't that kinda eliminate the reason to have self-driving trucks in the first place? And who really thinks this "safety operator" is going to be so attentive all the time that they would be able to intervene always when and if a self driving vehicle goes bad?

They'll be gone when the self-driving system are up to snuff. Freight trains used to have a caboose at their back end too

[GannonFan]

Good article, kalmie. Yes, the change in the Democratic Party since the 90's to almost an oligarchy of the rich while pandering with cultural issues has been only just slightly less interesting than the GOP's descent into abject chaos during much of the same time.

Not directly related to the topic but since they show up in the article (and I wasn't aware of these before)...



There was really a bill to give unemployment benefits to striking workers? And it got through the legislature? I get it that strikes are generally bad outcomes for workers - most never make back the money they lose by being on strike. But why try to encourage more strikes with this legislation? I always thought work slowdowns were the better work action to take to encourage more progress at the bargaining table. Strikes just piss people off and screw the people out on strike.

And if we're going to need people on self-driving trucks doesn't that kinda eliminate the reason to have self-driving trucks in the first place? And who really thinks this "safety operator" is going to be so attentive all the time that they would be able to intervene always when and if a self driving vehicle goes bad?

They'll be gone when the self-driving system are up to snuff. Freight trains used to have a caboose at their back end too

If it's anything like how the trains were we'll have folks twiddling their thumbs in self-driving trucks for a few decades longer than necessary.

[houndawg]

They'll be gone when the self-driving system are up to snuff. Freight trains used to have a caboose at their back end too

If it's anything like how the trains were we'll have folks twiddling their thumbs in self-driving trucks for a few decades longer than necessary.

not necessarily a bad thing as long as they keep spending

[GannonFan]

If it's anything like how the trains were we'll have folks twiddling their thumbs in self-driving trucks for a few decades longer than necessary.

not necessarily a bad thing as long as they keep spending

Wasted work and inefficient work isn't a good thing in the long run. It's akin to propping up businesses and industries that are no longer competitive but we prop them up because we don't want to see them go. Japan and China have some good examples of the dangers of doing that and it's not necessarily a good thing either.

[Caribbean Hen]

Translation: You’re ok with racism and sexism today to make up for past racism amd sexism.

And if black peopke are African American, then white people are European American.

Or if white people are white, then black people are black.

Is everything really equal if we just say everything is equal but don't do anything about the different circumstances caused by the hundreds of years of oppression?

Read the Color of Law by Rothstein and then tell me that racism and discrimination haven't been a significant factor in the higher poverty and crime rates among African Americans.

I use African American and white because I know it triggers you. I could care less which term you use as long as it isn't racist.

FTR I believe that whatever we do to level the playing field needs to have an expiration date.

If you really cared about African-Americans you would take a close look at failed democratic policies. They go a long way in holding them back. It’s called the “lifestyle” my friend. A Win win for the Dems, as on the emotional surface it makes it look like they care but really the sinister Dems have them locked in at 94%. That’s an abuse for a demographic to be so locked in.

For the record I’m not totally against reparations of some kind and you really sound like an idiot when you say things like…. I use the word African-American because I know it triggers you….. You have wild misconceptions Payback in some way shape or form had already commenced long ago

I commend you though when you say they need to have an expiration date, African American leaders need to start holding their people accountable as well, and for the most part they won’t do it yet

[Caribbean Hen]

So you were ok with racism and sexism in the past but now have a problem with it. Got it.

I think it's disingenuous to treat people like sh!t for hundreds of years and then pretend to support equality for all when the balance of power shifts.

Because of those hundreds of years of oppression, African Americans haven't had the opportunities to build wealth that they can pass on to their children that white people have. Racists then use the poverty and crime that afflicts African Americans more than whites as some kind of proof that they're inferior.

Trut so pure.

The welfare state is not really about the welfare of the masses. It is about the egos of the elites.

Thomas Sowell

[UNI88]

Is everything really equal if we just say everything is equal but don't do anything about the different circumstances caused by the hundreds of years of oppression?

Read the Color of Law by Rothstein and then tell me that racism and discrimination haven't been a significant factor in the higher poverty and crime rates among African Americans.

I use African American and white because I know it triggers you. I could care less which term you use as long as it isn't racist.

FTR I believe that whatever we do to level the playing field needs to have an expiration date.

If you really cared about African-Americans you would take a close look at failed democratic policies. They go a long way in holding them back. It’s called the “lifestyle” my friend. A Win win for the Dems, as on the emotional surface it makes it look like they care but really the sinister Dems have them locked in at 94%. That’s an abuse for a demographic to be so locked in.

For the record I’m not totally against reparations of some kind and you really sound like an idiot when you say things like…. I use the word African-American because I know it triggers you….. You have wild misconceptions Payback in some way shape or form had already commenced long ago

I commend you though when you say they need to have an expiration date, African American leaders need to start holding their people accountable as well, and for the most part they won’t do it yet

I don't disagree with your take on failed democratic policies. They haven't worked and we need to try something different.

I "really sound like an idiot when you say things like…. I use the word African-American because I know it triggers you" but trump is just standing up to people when he calls them juvenile names? This is a message board, trash talking and getting peoples hackles up is standard MO.

Enlighten me, what wild misconceptions do I have?

As I stated in another thread, I lived in the Austin neighborhood of Chicago when I first moved there. Majority African-American, poor with high crime rates. My son played summer league soccer with a team in the Belmont Cragin neighborhood of Chicago. Majority Latino, poor with high crime rates. He was the only gringo on a team where the coaches didn't speak English and he didn't speak Spanish. I was a substitute teacher for 5 years in a Chicago suburb that was majority Latino, poor with high crime rates. I've put my time and my money where my mouth is and I think I have a pretty good grasp on problems that poorer communities of color face and with the so-called solutions presented by both parties. More accountability and taking responsibility for your own choices are definitely needed.

[houndawg]

not necessarily a bad thing as long as they keep spending

Wasted work and inefficient work isn't a good thing in the long run. It's akin to propping up businesses and industries that are no longer competitive but we prop them up because we don't want to see them go. Japan and China have some good examples of the dangers of doing that and it's not necessarily a good thing either.

....part and parcel of our system....Exhibit A would be trillions in subsidies for big oil.