Thread Like Summary
FATE, MemphisBrownie, mgh888
Total Likes: 4
Original Post (Thread Starter)
#2077014 08/13/2024 3:18 AM
by superbowldogg
superbowldogg
Here is the interview.

I really hope Elon interviews Kamala the same way he interviewed Trump




Liked Replies
by oobernoober
oobernoober
Originally Posted by FATE
Amen to that. "The crash" is where I went off the rails in hoping there was any real chance of fixing this perverted system. Sometimes people get to bogged down in details to see the simplicity of some of the things that happen. It's an easy bait n' switch when we were basically pat on the head and told it's too complex for us to understand.

Part of the perversion is clear as day to me. You had a real estate market whose true value was around 1 trillion being traded to the tune of 7 trillion. Evidence enough right there that this was all "Monopoly money". Yet when AIG was deemed "too big to fail", they, and subsequently, those they insured, were bailed out dollar for dollar. So these criminals traded in their Monopoly money for real dollars at the taxpayer's expense. And then, to celebrate, laughed out loud and stuck a big middle finger in our faces when they all paid themselves huge bonuses.

If that's not clear evidence that "they" don't even care that we know this game is fixed, I don't know what is.

The crazy part about this (especially when you look at how we choose to debate things like the health of our economy) is that the run-up to the crash, the crash itself, and the "clean-up" were overseen by both parties. Both parties (at one point or another) were in the WH and had control of House/Senate and greenlit laws that contributed to that crash. And bailout (IIRC) was drafted up by one president (GWB) and executed by the next one (Obama).

Side note: stuff like this is why I get all pissy when we argue the economy the way we do during election years
2 members like this
by FATE
FATE
Originally Posted by Rishuz
You’re in the auto industry correct? Is your take due to having some knowledge of being in that industry?

I always wonder too when the head of an organization backs a candidate. Doesn’t mean that every member of that organization doesn’t vote the other way. I mean if unions are to protect people and their compensation, wouldn’t the economy be a big policy item they’d want to get behind. Have no idea why this guy would align himself with a party that has given the American people the last four years and has no plan for the economy.

My wife works in the industry, I just make noise.

Shawn Fain is the first union boss to be elected under the "one member, one vote" system. That was a huge step in the right direction and away from a delegate system that saw the union at it's most corrupt in history... and a lapdog for the corps. However, this power quickly gave him some "rock star" mentality that had workers looking at each other in disbelief by the time negotiations (and the inevitable strike) came around.

Once in the spotlight, he began demanding 32 hour work weeks and other gibberish that workers didn't even care about, and largely ignored the basic things long-time workers have been begging for decades. Again, making a mockery of the auto workers that willingly break their bodies making cars by making them look like spoiled brats. Fain is all about the fame, power and photo op at this point (or at least it seems that way). I could go on for paragraphs about the disastrous results of telling members to sign on the dotted line before details were worked out, but the nutshell is a mirror image of Pelosi explaining (with a straight face) that in order to understand what's in the bill, you have to pass the bill.

Auto Unions have been supporting democrats since 1935. They've never supported a republican candidate. Workers just laugh when they start getting spammed with all the political nonsense months before every election. It's not unlike the perpetual push to vote democrat in the inner-city, despite the history of results. So when you ask "why" specific to any given issue, understand that there is not and never was any reasonable answer.

Fain vocally supported Biden long past the point of everyone around him telling him "tone it down, dude's lost his marbles". Why? Because he showed up on a picket line. He supports Kamala, and plainly says it's because she showed up on a picket line (I mean, what else can he say? She has no policies other than a magic wand to end inflation).

If you have a chance watch Sean O'Brien, Teamsters president's speech at the RNC. The first Teamsters boss to speak at the RNC in 121 years. He doesn't endorse Trump, and Trump knew he wouldn't when he invited him, but he makes the voice of millions heard without the usual ass kissing. His message is clear -- you're no longer getting our support by making an appearance when we have to fight tooth and nail for everything with very little support from the top.
1 member likes this
by Jester
Jester
Originally Posted by EveDawg
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
The difference which you obviously haven't noticed is that people who support trump ignore everything he does and says while those on the other side actually engage in what is said about Kamala.

Since when? All libtards say is But Trump any time Kackelas many flaws are brought up. So stop lying.

Do you not understand that this election comes down to a choice between trump and harris?
Everything between the two of them needs to be compared to the other.
And then you make the choice on who you are going to vote for.
1 member likes this
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5