2020 Democratic Nominee

[bad_teammate 13524]

4 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Have you ever served on a board? If you have, you'd see why this is a shitty idea. Smart businesses listen to their employees without having to be told to do so. That doesn't mean Sally from payroll has any fucking clue on what the 5 year growth strategy in the Asian market looks like or switching our inventory from LIFO to FIFO.

Just continually doubling down on how stupid and useless the serfs are... wow.

Yes, I have (and do) serve on boards. Corporate boards, school boards (public and private), church boards, non-profit boards...

When workers have representation on boards, they don't just pull someone randomly out of a hat to sit in. Do you seriously think that's how it works? Jesus Christ.

[JimmyJames 12271]

10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Stupid ideas are stupid regardless of party.

Have you ever served on a board? If you have, you'd see why this is a shitty idea. Smart businesses listen to their employees without having to be told to do so. That doesn't mean Sally from payroll has any fucking clue on what the 5 year growth strategy in the Asian market looks like or switching our inventory from LIFO to FIFO.

I have served on a board and think it’s at least worth looking at and no it wouldn’t be “sally from payroll” on the board and if she voted like a dumbass she would get outvoted anyway. I don’t know how it would be implemented exactly but to just dismiss it because you apparently think labor is dumb is elitist and ignorant.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6597]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Just continually doubling down on how stupid and useless the serfs are... wow.

Yes, I have (and do) serve on boards. Corporate boards, school boards (public and private), church boards, non-profit boards...

When workers have representation on boards, they don't just pull someone randomly out of a hat to sit in. Do you seriously think that's how it works? Jesus Christ.

Oh, OK.  You serve on multiple corporate boards and spend your days posting on Surly all day long about how great Bernie Sanders is. At least act like a good troll and try and be believable. 

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

I have served on a board and think it’s at least worth looking at and no it wouldn’t be “sally from payroll” on the board and if she voted like a dumbass she would get outvoted anyway. I don’t know how it would be implemented exactly but to just dismiss it because you apparently think labor is dumb is elitist and ignorant.

You obviously didn't read this part:

Smart businesses listen to their employees without having to be told to do so.

It's elitist and ignorant to create a BS board position and pretend you are listening to their ideas.

 

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, I have (and do) serve on boards. Corporate boards, school boards (public and private), church boards, non-profit boards...

[Voldemort86 2259]

1 hour ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I've seen this suggested a few times. What about Bernie do you think makes it harder for Dems down ballot? Why would Bloomberg be better for maintaining/picking up House seats? 

Republicans game plan will be to try and tie everyone to Bernie. They’re going to try to nationalize everything and try to let Trump pull everyone over the line by throwing out generic attacks on socialism and saying every democrat is socialist.

 

it is a danger. The hard work of Mark Kelly in Arizona could be undone simply by him appearing under Bernie on the ticket. We just don’t know the extent of the down ballot danger. Moderate Dems and independents could break for trump hard they fear Bernie.

 

i think we could at least count on Bloomberg or Biden to duplicate Hilary’s performance. That is probably their floor. Hilary was a deeply flawed candidate who never campaigned in Wisconsin or Michigan. The dem nominee won’t make that same mistake. A moderate like Biden or Bloomberg wouldn’t endanger the house majority because the worst possible outcome for democrats is a very close election loss. 
 

the worst possibly outcome for Bernie could be a huge rejection of socialism where candidates down ballot are wiped away because people vote straight ticket R to send a message to Bernie and the hard left.

im still going to show up and support the democrats of Texas no matter what, but even I would think about voting 3rd party in the presidential race if it was Bernie vs trump.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Voldemort86

[bad_teammate 13524]

6 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Oh, OK.  You serve on multiple corporate boards and spend your days posting on Surly all day long about how great Bernie Sanders is. At least act like a good troll and try and be believable. 

I don't serve on multiple corporate boards currently.

And how often do you think corporate boards meet?

2 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

You obviously didn't read this part:

Smart businesses listen to their employees without having to be told to do so.

It's elitist and ignorant to create a BS board position and pretend you are listening to their ideas.

Why would the workers' representatives necessarily be ignored?

[Hank Kingsley 21785]

Seems pretty clear to me that Pete is a way better candidate than Amy, but Twitter hatred of Pete blinds even the best of us. She needed to be taken down, and it sounds like Pete did the job. 

Bernie might double up the 2nd place finisher in Nevada. Then I think SC will actually be pretty competitive and bunched up, which is terrible news for Joe.

Start feeling the Bern, folks. 

 

 

 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

Just continually doubling down on how stupid and useless the bad asses are... wow.

Yes, I have (and do) serve in all branches of the military. Navy seal, Army ranger, Delta Force, Israel Defense Force...

I’m also the first commander of special elite group in Space Force, and am consultant to the next Rambo movie.

When badasses have representation on elite badass forces, they don't just pull someone randomly out of a hat to sit in. Do you seriously think that's how it works? Jesus Christ.

[GSU&UT 1799]

8 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Smart businesses listen to their employees without having to be told to do so.

 

Dude, no offense, but the only place I felt listened to was when I worked for a non-profit and got paid less than 30,000 a year. This is some "invisible hand" kind of crap that doesn't reflect reality.

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

14 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Dude, no offense, but the only place I felt listened to was when I worked for a non-profit and got paid less than 30,000 a year. This is some "invisible hand" kind of crap that doesn't reflect reality.

Fair. And no offense taken.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

I don't think too many on corporate boards are really relied on for any particular expertise, rather, their sort of general wisdom as to running a corporation.  It only matters in the most general sense that one board member is a lawyer and another a CPA/CFO type, and another an engineer.  They can and do get advice on specific issues from management and shareholders/groups.  In that regard, a "labor" background is as valid a qualification as any other.  They don't put "quants" on corporate boards and ask them to do research, for fucks sake.  Or have the lawyers actually represent the company.  Or the engineers reviewing product designs.

Not sure the "labor" board members actually have to come from labor in that they used to run a press brake or work an assembly line.  They are nominated by labor.

I think it's an interesting and valid idea.

One thing that is generally true of corporate board members:  they are in the "c-suite" at some other corporation.  That gives them a degree of tunnel vision.  And, worst case, a bias in favor of protecting enrichment of the c-suite at most costs.

[wildcat09 29579]

1 hour ago, NoRagrets said:

This regarded idea is just another example of a stupid populist vote bait that has no chance of ever passing as law through congress, and would certainly never hold up in the courts.

Why wouldn’t it hold up in courts?

[wildcat09 29579]

51 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Oh, OK.  You serve on multiple corporate boards and spend your days posting on Surly all day long about how great Bernie Sanders is. At least act like a good troll and try and be believable. 

...what exactly do you think members of corporate boards do?

[Bozo_Casanova 26851]

34 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Dude, no offense, but the only place I felt listened to was when I worked for a non-profit and got paid less than 30,000 a year. This is some "invisible hand" kind of crap that doesn't reflect reality.

That's false. There are good employers, large and small, that have a culture and management philosophy of listening to their workforce. They are less common than those that don't, but they aren't rare. 

[GSU&UT 1799]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That's false. There are good employers, large and small, that have a culture and management philosophy of listening to their workforce. They are less common than those that don't, but they aren't rare. 

My entire point is that people, especially working and lower middle-class people, shouldn't have to rely on the hopes that their employer is going to truly listen to their thoughts and concerns, many of them don't have the luxury of looking for that perfect job.

[bad_teammate 13524]

The only people who think being on boards is impressive are toads. Unsurprised by GW's choice of metaphor.

As Twice says, they are not a meritocratic assembly of wise geniuses. It's generalized and social and political. Climbers and old guys and favorites and whoever agreed to do the boring task and sundry.

If you find it impressive, my advice is to just be the type of person who acts like they belong and most people will just go with it.

Look at Bloomberg's pathetic performance and inability to read a room and tell me how your bosses are actually deserving geniuses who are better people than you.

[bad_teammate 13524]

Again, the actual plan is stealing 20% of the economy from people who invested their money for those stakes.   The board seat thing is a red herring (although he wants to give workers 45% of the board, too, because I guess the 20% they would own isn’t sufficient).

Workers are more important to the success of a company than investors, toad.

[Thrawn 540]

I know the board of my current company doesn’t do shit. Just rubber stamp everything our CEO wants. Hell, they can’t put more than 40 hours of effort annually into our company. Is that a good example?  No. Admittedly we are a but dysfunctional. Still, there are plenty of boards where it doesn’t take much effort to serve on them. I serve on non-profit boards where I put in more time in a month than some of our board members do in a year at my company.

[bad_teammate 13524]

...what exactly do you think members of corporate boards do?

Old guys in suits who meet quarterly to formalize things worked out in advance are like SEAL TEAM SIX to the bootlickers.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13731]

Dems are going to shoot themselves in foot by nominating Bernie. Without a doubt he has the most passionate supporters but even if he pulls in Warren's supporters, he's topping out at 40-45% of the Democratic vote if the other centrists are still in the race.   The progressives are a minority in the party EVEN when you limit that population to core democratic voters. Expand it to the wider democratic voters, and progressives are even a smaller minority.

not to mention that offering more recess is popular in 6th grade school council elections, it ain't going to fly in a general election for president.

[bad_teammate 13524]

"Stealing" Christ what Libertarian emotional fragility.

[wildcat09 29579]

Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Dems are going to shoot themselves in foot by nominating Bernie. Without a doubt he has the most passionate supporters but even if he pulls in Warren's supporters, he's topping out at 40-45% of the Democratic vote if the other centrists are still in the race.   The progressives are a minority in the party EVEN when you limit that population to core democratic voters. Expand it to the wider democratic voters, and progressives are even a smaller minority.

not to mention that offering more recess is popular in 6th grade school council elections, it ain't going to fly in a general election for president.

Love to pontificate on how serious campaigns need to be in general elections to win after 2016.

[GSU&UT 1799]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Dems are going to shoot themselves in foot by nominating Bernie. Without a doubt he has the most passionate supporters but even if he pulls in Warren's supporters, he's topping out at 40-45% of the Democratic vote if the other centrists are still in the race.   The progressives are a minority in the party EVEN when you limit that population to core democratic voters. Expand it to the wider democratic voters, and progressives are even a smaller minority.

not to mention that offering more recess is popular in 6th grade school council elections, it ain't going to fly in a general election for president.

We've been told all along the most important thing is to not reelect Donald Trump. Almost sounds like that isn't the case and everyone saying that who is scared of Bernie is bloviating and shouldn't be taken seriously.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Just now, longhornmatt said:

You’re diluting them by 20%.  You think everyone is cool with their retirement savings getting slashed by 1/5?

And yet this requirement is required for large companies in many European countries and somehow they keep on truckin' lol.

[Biff Tannen 46168]

53 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Seems pretty clear to me that Pete is a way better candidate than Amy, but Twitter hatred of Pete blinds even the best of us. She needed to be taken down, and it sounds like Pete did the job. 

So much this.  Klobuchar is a bully.  Pete put her in her place.  She was shaking with rage and it was glorious.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Just now, longhornmatt said:

Which ones?  I know a few require board representation for workers.  Which countries require that 20% of ownership be transferred?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_representation_on_corporate_boards_of_directors

Germany, Sweden, Norwary, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands all have the strictest based on company size.

[Thrawn 540]

Not sure I’m buying all of this Bernie will get killed by Trump rhetoric that I keep hearing on the news channels this morning. Bernie was able to get this strong base for a reason. Even though he is a pretty far left progressive (yes, a democratic socialist) he doesn’t come off as crazy. He comes off as someone who cares deeply for the subject matter he is discussing and he comes across as trustworthy. Pretty much the exact opposite of Trump. Who is a lying, mush brain, POS.

Bernie isn’t ideal, but to automatically write him off in the general may be a huge mistake. He can make inroads with the many more moderate voters who are disgusted by the dotard. Suburban women would be a good start. There are lots of issues on which he could find common ground with them.

For the record, I’m voting for whoever wins the Democratic nomination in the general. No matter what.

 

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

42 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

...what exactly do you think members of corporate boards do?

Smoke cigars and drink scotch, if it's a decent company.

[TXSG8R 3362]

18 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_representation_on_corporate_boards_of_directors

Germany, Sweden, Norwary, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands all have the strictest based on company size.

To his point, which of those require ownership shares to be given to the employees?  Unless I'm misreading, those are just representative seats.  

[Hank Kingsley 21785]

Let's look at the state of the race right now: 

Bernie - Good showings in Iowa and NH, but expected stronger showings in more diverse states. Has a rock solid 20-35% of the vote (depending on the state) from loyal voters that will not switch to another candidate. 

Pete - Pretty much has zero chance to accumulate enough votes/delegates with Biden, Bloomberg, and Klobuchar still in the race as Super Tuesday nears. 

Warren - Has the talent and organization to make a comeback, but doubtful she'll peel away any Bernie voters. She'll need to gobble up a lot of moderate voters which will be tough with so little time before Super Tuesday. 

Biden - I think he's done. The South Carolina firewall that he hoped for will not happen. He might win the state, but it will be much closer than originally expected. 

Bloomberg - Horrific candidate but people are dumb and he will continue to money whip. Still a wild card. 

Klobuchar - No chance. Bye, Amy. 

 

Bernie wins simply because there are too many candidates. If this was Bernie vs. Pete, Bernie vs. Liz, Bernie vs. Biden, then it would be a real battle. 

The only way this can become interesting is if 2 or more candidates out of Biden, Bloomberg, Pete, and Klobuchar drop out after NV or SC. 

 

[Skipper 6411]

47 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

I just want to clarify that Bernie’s plan per his website, and reiterated both in the debate and in bad_teammate’s talking points, is that he wants to give workers a 20% ownership stake.   Not just 20% of the board seats.  He literally wants to take away 20% of the ownership and have that owned by “employees”.   He will do this by forcing companies to dilute shareholders and divert profits to an employee ownership fund until the fund has 20% of the company’s market cap.  
 

 

It's beyond ridiculous.  And would never pass, not to mention illegal. Bernie is a disaster.  It's becoming obvious nobody on that stage will beat Trump because the Democratic party isn't even remotely unified with Bernie's socialist branch hijacking 30% and splits among the pragmatic candidates with nobody appearing to back down anytime soon.  I'll be in Vegas for business next week - can I bet on the election?  Because if it's still Trump -200 or so I will load up. 

[GSU&UT 1799]

11 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

To his point, which of those require ownership shares to be given to the employees?  Unless I'm misreading, those are just representative seats.  

The only thing I've seen is that this is stipulated by the following by Bernie's plan,

Quote

Under the proposal, all publicly traded companies, corporations with $100 million in annual revenue or with a $100 million balance sheet would be required to provide 2 percent or more of company stock to workers each year, until 20 percent of the company is employee-owned.

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-employee-ownership-plan-policies-democratic-presidential-primary-1465085

 

  

6 minutes ago, Skipper said:

It's beyond ridiculous.  And would never pass, not to mention illegal. Bernie is a disaster.  It's becoming obvious nobody on that stage will beat Trump because the Democratic party isn't even remotely unified with Bernie's socialist branch hijacking 30% and splits among the pragmatic candidates with nobody appearing to back down anytime soon.  I'll be in Vegas for business next week - can I bet on the election?  Because if it's still Trump -200 or so I will load up. 

You aren't even voting for Warren, just so everyone knows where you stand.

Edited February 20, 2020 by GSU&UT

[TXSG8R 3362]

Just now, GSU&UT said:

The only thing I've seen is that this is stipulated by the following by Bernie's plan,

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-employee-ownership-plan-policies-democratic-presidential-primary-1465085

Yea, that was his original question.  What countries have shifted 20% of a companies ownership to employees?  That's vastly different than just having employee representative seats on the board.  

[Cheeseweasel 26439]

6 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Bernie wins simply because there are too many candidates. If this was Bernie vs. Pete, Bernie vs. Liz, Bernie vs. Biden, then it would be a real battle. 

The only way this can become interesting is if 2 or more candidates out of Biden, Bloomberg, Pete, and Klobuchar drop out after NV or SC. 

And I feel like every campaign (except for Bloomberg & Bernie) is waiting for the others to blink. They are all thinking "if candidates x&y drop out, I can get their votes". 

But this is all allowing them to think they can stay in & it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy & leads to a brokered convention. 

[TwiceHorn 32079]

1 hour ago, longhornmatt said:

I just want to clarify that Bernie’s plan per his website, and reiterated both in the debate and in bad_teammate’s talking points, is that he wants to give workers a 20% ownership stake.   Not just 20% of the board seats.  He literally wants to take away 20% of the ownership and have that owned by “employees”.   He will do this by forcing companies to dilute shareholders and divert profits to an employee ownership fund until the fund has 20% of the company’s market cap.  
 

https://berniesanders.com/issues/corporate-accountability-and-democracy/

Don’t fall into the trap of letting b_t whitewash this with some nonsense about this just being for board seats.  Bernie’s actual plan is absurd and would outright steal 20% of the publicly traded stock market (and mid to large private companies) from current investors.   

But he’s not a socialist!  No different than FDR!
 

 

Yeah, I support the idea of a "labor" presence on boards.  This is a shitty idea and may reveal his true colors.

Not only is it confiscatory and probably unconstitutional, but giving labor shares doesn't guarantee or even create a tendency to change corporate behavior.  THAT would require labor to vote those shares in concert, which probably ain't happening.

Edited February 20, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Skipper 6411]

1 minute ago, GSU&UT said:

You aren't even voting for Warren, just so everyone knows where you stand.

As long as she's running on nonsense like eliminating all student debt and a 'wealth tax' that is practically impossible, that's correct.  But she's toast so it's a moot point.

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

Pounding my fist on the table as I weep tears of rage just thinking about investors having their shares diluted. 

[Bateshorn 9991]

The Twitter comment I saw that the candidates would kick the shit out of Bloomberg, then each other, while Bernie stuffed delegates in his sack basically occurred.

[GSU&UT 1799]

http://www.efesonline.org/Annual Economic Survey/2017/Survey 2017.pdf

Dig through the numbers there, I found that roughly the average public company in Germany has employees owning around 13%-14%.

[Jive Turkey 13005]

 

[Zonahorn 8079]

6 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

The Twitter comment I saw that the candidates would kick the shit out of Bloomberg, then each other, while Bernie stuffed delegates in his sack basically occurred.

California alone gonna give Bernie an insurmountable lead.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Just now, Jive Turkey said:

 

Yes, Bernie Bros getting into arguments with MAGA shitheads is going to be good for Trump.

[Zonahorn 8079]

 

[TexEx15 17951]

I am starting to believe that Bernie and his Bros will ultimately lead to Trump’s re-election One way or another.  Note I’m not opining on whether this is good bad or indifferent.  Rather I’m just thinking out loud to were this is headed based on events to date.

Scenario 1) Bernie wins the nomination.  His core support is undeniable but I don’t think he can build a coalition to beat Trump.  His policies are simply too extreme for a lot of folks and ultimately that turns them away whether that is a vote for Trump or simply sitting out the election.

Scenario 2) Bernie does not win the nomination. The Bros refuse to vote for the nominee thereby handicapping the race in Trump’s favor.

[Thrawn 540]

Alarming? I thought you were supposed to fight fire with fire? The lady with the fire extinguisher didn’t work last time.

[bad_teammate 13524]

 

Just no logic provided at all.

[Ghost of LL 15698]

Looking at Bernie last night, I'm not at all convinced he's going to live to see the convention.  His purple nose and under-eye bags didn't exactly bespeak good health.

[Skipper 6411]

4 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

I am starting to believe that Bernie and his Bros will ultimately lead to Trump’s re-election One way or another.  Note I’m not opining on whether this is good bad or indifferent.  Rather I’m just thinking out loud to were this is headed based on events to date.

Scenario 1) Bernie wins the nomination.  His core support is undeniable but I don’t think he can build a coalition to beat Trump.  His policies are simply too extreme for a lot of folks and ultimately that turns them away whether that is a vote for Trump or simply sitting out the election.

Scenario 2) Bernie does not win the nomination. The Bros refuse to vote for the nominee thereby handicapping the race in Trump’s favor.

Yep. It's pretty simple really.

[wildcat09 29579]

14 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, I support the idea of a "labor" presence on boards.  This is a shitty idea and may reveal his true colors.

Not only is it confiscatory and probably unconstitutional, but giving labor shares doesn't guarantee or even create a tendency to change corporate behavior.  THAT would require labor to vote those shares in concert, which probably ain't happening.

I think it could probably be implemented in a constitutional manner, but the devil would certainly be in the details. I'm not sure how I feel about requiring that labor have a share of ownership, haven't put much thought into it. I guess one could argue that if you're going to give them voting power you need to tie their votes to a financial incentive, but I don't particularly like that argument. It seems like that would have the same short-term focus that's already way too prevalent and really diminish the benefits of giving labor voting power that isn't directly tied to stock price.