Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
9 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Ummmm. Thanks but no thanks. I have seen Mick Jagger. I have listened to Mick Jagger. Mr. Bloomberg, you are no Mick Jagger. (plus, I may be older, but I know the lyrics to that song and well, that's just weird for a candidate)

Posted

Was this posted?  I'm not gonna go back 40 pages or more.

I will say I'm not a big Pete supporter but I think this clip says some things about his character.  He is content with being a team player, not stealing the spotlight, trying hard not to fuck up, and he's paying attention to what's going on around him.  I firmly believe we can tell a lot about a person by observing them in a "team" setting like this:

 

Posted
25 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

This guy.

 

 

wow, twice in three posts, it must be really bad.  or maybe it's the 11 millionth example of twitter and context speeding past each other on the freeway.

 

skip to 47:40 if you want the entire quote, and summary of the exact same health care platform he's been pitching for a year.

funny how "the principle at stake is not making sure the government is delivering your health insurance, the principle at stake is making sure that you have health insurance, without cost ever being a barrier, and that there's no such thing as an uninsured american" never made it onto anyone's feed.  sigh.

 

Posted

On this issue, every little hurdle, no matter how well-intentioned, will literally kill people. Every means test will kill people. Every additional bit of paperwork will kill people. Every required pre-authorization phone call will kill people. Every shred of difficulty finding out which doctors are in or out of network will kill people.

Americans will die, and for what?

"Coverage" is not enough. "Coverage" means basically nothing.

Pete's plan still allows for in-network and out-of-network distinctions. That is going to kill people. For what?

  • Like 1
Posted

Yeah, he pointed out the massive real estate error made by the postal service and is being chastised for pointing out shit like maths?  Why is that bad again?  

 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, he pointed out the massive real estate error made by the postal service and is being chastised for pointing out shit like maths?  Why is that bad again?  

 

Second sentence...

In 2010, the agency hired private consultants who advised it to cut back operation days, increase mail delivery times, automate postal services and replace unionized labor with non-unionized labor.

"real estate error" lol

 

Posted

yeah, "automate postal services."  Your local massive 10,000 square foot post office is a waste of real estate.  They're paying $25k/month so you can come in and use the 10 square feet that is the label machine and drop box.  You can just stick those around town like ATMs or RedBox's and be just fine.  Automatic services means cutting back on real estate which means cheaper costs. It's called Maths.  

Now, the union/non-union thing for federal employees, yeah---that's a third rail topic for Democrats.  He's in trouble on that item.  

Posted

Ah, so the existence of post offices themselves is the "real estate error", cool. That's not at all what the phrase implies, but right-wingers and centrists (right-wingers who aren't bigots) are good at using misleading language and euphemisms to cover their actual intentions, which is the destruction of public services and jobs.

Very cool.

PETE! PETE! PETE! PETE! PETE!

Posted (edited)

So Pete is a right-winger, now?   And yes, we don't need that many post offices, many post offices don't need to be that large, and many post offices are in locations that are too expensive.  So those are largely functions of real estate.  

Not sure where this "destruction of public service jobs" thing comes from.  The federal government, under the Executive Branch, employs roughly the same number of people today as it did 50+ years ago.  Now overall people getting a federal paycheck is down because we have far fewer people in the military than we did at the height of the Cold War/Selective Service.  But this exhausting narrative that evil corporations and Republicans are slashing government jobs is bullshit.  It's about the same number as it's always been.  Now, obviously the percentage of total population is down as our nation grows, but as Pete points out---that may be a function of redundancy or jobs made obsolete by technology as opposed to some vast right-wing/McKinsey conspiracy to cut jobs just to cut jobs.  

Edited by Lobo
Posted

Watching the Bobs work in Office Space and nodding sagely when they say, "We just fixed the glitch, it'll work itself out naturally."

Just now, Lobo said:

So Pete is a right-winger, now? 

An advocate for the destruction of public institutions certainly qualifies one as a "right-winger" in my mind, absolutely.

Quote

And yes, we don't need that many post offices, many post offices don't need to be that large, and many post offices are in locations that are too expensive.  So those are largely functions of real estate.  

The idea that our public services and institutions should be run like private businesses and ruthlessly slashed to maximize short-term revenue is kind of the hallmark of right-wing thinking.

Post offices are vital. We should expand the services offered to include banking.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Didn’t realize the Dude had an evil twin brother. 

Posted
6 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Socially woke. Economically right-wing.

He's a centrist.

For a lot of folks, there's nothing wrong with that.  The GOP continuing to move far right doesn't demand an equal and opposite reaction on the left.  

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, sasquatch69 said:

For a lot of folks, there's nothing wrong with that. 

You're right. There are a lot of centrists.

Quote

The GOP continuing to move far right doesn't demand an equal and opposite reaction on the left.  

Enjoy your centrist candidate. I hope he makes you happy.

 

Edited by bad_teammate
Posted
6 minutes ago, sasquatch69 said:

For a lot of folks, there's nothing wrong with that.  The GOP continuing to move far right doesn't demand an equal and opposite reaction on the left.  

Maybe not, but "I trust you to figure out how to ration your own insulin" sure as fuck does.

Posted

Why can't we just go back to the good 'ole days where we still had mass deportation, 15M uninsured Americans, multiple forever-wars, very little progress towards a carbon-neutral future, but a POLITE president???

It's so sad that the left wants us to abandon that wonderful world. :(

  • Like 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Maybe not, but "I trust you to figure out how to ration your own insulin" sure as fuck does.

show me where he said that and i'll send money to bernie today.

do i mail a check, or can i just go deposit cash at the post office?

Posted (edited)

Lots of handwringing and investment of emotions for a guy who will not matter when the rubber meets road and it’s Biden/Kamala vs Trump_Pence_v2

Save the vitriol for 2024 when Pete, after the MacArthurs fellowship funded autobiography phase, he re-emerges from a sabbatical from a cave where he was lost in Jesuit prayer and meditation and evolves into being so super gay that he is actually into chicks now and he comes down from the mountain with a transcendent PPT etched into two MST Surface Pros (because he’s too centrist to own a Mac Book).

Edited by Rougarou
Posted
6 hours ago, BradInATX said:

There really is nothing worse than old, rich, white people with liberal guilt who run around telling everyone else they're not liberal enough, is there?

you'll get lectured and guilted and like it!



×
×
  • Create New...