Jump to content

US politics - have you no sense of decency, sir?


IheartIheartTesla

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Lol ok.  The agreement they are trying asking the unions to accept was rejected by the majority of union members.  They have to plan sick days 30 days in advance.  

Just of curiosity are you familiar with the details of this situation?  There's absolutely no reason to not give the union more, other than placating corporate interests.  

If they cared about labor they'd care about it but they don't.  Actions matter.

Others have addressed this, and I agree the situation sucks, but the choice is get something that's not good enough but still something or get nothing. I'm almost always going to be the side of getting something AND THEN continue to demand for more. The all or nothing approach is typically foolish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Expecting some legislation to be passed today telling rail workers to go fuck themselves, with the full backing of Biden and Dem leadership.  At least on the issue of workers vs huge corporate profits, Dems and Republicans agree: get back to fucking work and just be happy you have a job, rich people all over the country depend on it!

Larry of the Lake -- IKR, hahaha! I've been following this ordeal with great fascination. Given what's at stake (billions a day and harm to other industries as well as the general population), Uncle Joe doesn't have a choice but to intervene. I'm sure he'll impose some additional concessions to the unions, though; right?

And of course the politicians and wealthy have been exploiting the market -- UPS and the railroads have spiked in valuation this month! The chaos inherent here has been very exploitable, and I'm not sure it was entirely unintended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Others have addressed this, and I agree the situation sucks, but the choice is get something that's not good enough but still something or get nothing. I'm almost always going to be the side of getting something AND THEN continue to demand for more. The all or nothing approach is typically foolish. 

This isn't some situation independent of the administration.  The 'agreement' was mediated by the Secretary of Labor.  Congress could do nothing and let the unions strike.  It's possible a strike happens anyway.

Instead they essentially are getting a raise and a closer to human schedule-- but the votes might not even be in the Senate to pass anything.  

If Biden or congressional Dems wanted to do more, they would.  At least fucking make some noise.  Instead it's "I'm pro-labor, but we can't hurt The Economy".  The railroads estimate a strike would cost up to $2 billion a day.  Seems like an easy way to head that off would be to treat their workers like humans.  Seems like if you're a "pro labor" president you could act like one.  

Your initial response was to say that I was being "unfair" in my judgment of the apparently beyond reproach Dem leadership.  What's unfair is the ridiculous schedule these people are on while the companies have been doing stock buy-backs and reducing the overall workforce.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

What's unfair is the ridiculous schedule these people are on while the companies have been doing stock buy-backs and reducing the overall workforce.

Welcome to how the world works? Trust me, I want to burn it all down too, but it's not realistic. At least not right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Instead they essentially are getting a raise and a closer to human schedule-- but the votes might not even be in the Senate to pass anything.  

If Biden or congressional Dems wanted to do more, they would.  At least fucking make some noise.

The votes are almost certainly there to pass the first bill the House passed this afternoon.  McConnell is clearly on board.  It's very unlikely ten GOP Senators vote for the 7 days sick leave measure though, aye.  It seems as if Sanders - along with many other progressive Senate Dems - are only demanding a vote on that to get Republicans on the record against it.

As for making more noise, yes, again I agree Biden and the White House could have done more on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems that especially obstinate election denialism could cost the Republicans a House seat, as an Arizona county flat out refuses to certify election results. I'm wondering if these people really could be that obstinately stupid.

 

An Arizona County’s Refusal to Certify Election Results Could Cost GOP a House Seat (msn.com)

 

In court papers, Hobbs’ office said that if the county refuses to certify by Dec. 8, the ballots of more than 47,000 county residents will not be included in the final tally.

That would flip the results of the race for Arizona’s Sixth Congressional District, where Republican Juan Ciscomani holds a 5,232-vote lead over Democrat Kirsten Engel in unofficial results, as well as the race for state Superintendent of Public Instruction, where the Republican candidate has a narrow lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Most states have what is called a sore lower law, where if you go in a primary and lose you are unable to effectively run again (other than basically write-in). Not all states have this but enough big ones do that it essentially rules out the possibility, though in theory he could fuck over the other person in the states that don't have that. 

 

Ah interesting thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

Seems that especially obstinate election denialism could cost the Republicans a House seat, as an Arizona county flat out refuses to certify election results. I'm wondering if these people really could be that obstinately stupid.

 

An Arizona County’s Refusal to Certify Election Results Could Cost GOP a House Seat (msn.com)

 

In court papers, Hobbs’ office said that if the county refuses to certify by Dec. 8, the ballots of more than 47,000 county residents will not be included in the final tally.

That would flip the results of the race for Arizona’s Sixth Congressional District, where Republican Juan Ciscomani holds a 5,232-vote lead over Democrat Kirsten Engel in unofficial results, as well as the race for state Superintendent of Public Instruction, where the Republican candidate has a narrow lead.

It won't happen though; funny as the prospect is. The House has final say over its membership and it would seat Ciscomani as the winner anyway. But it won't come to even that, Arizona law doesn't actually allow the state to certify without all the county tallies (although Arizona law also doesn't allow a county to refuse to certify, but that just means a judge needs to compel them to do so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Fez said:

The House has final say over its membership and it would seat Ciscomani as the winner anyway.

Er, that's a misleading statement at best.  See Powell v McCormack (1969).  But yeah, nothing is going to come of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

Er, that's a misleading statement at best.  See Powell v McCormack (1969).  But yeah, nothing is going to come of this.

It's really not. The House could've (and debated in committee) seating Rita Hart in 2020 despite Miller-Meeks being certified by Iowa as the winner. There was no question the House had the power to do so, Democrats just didn't want to overturn the election result even though there was grounds to do so.

ETA: Another example would the 1984 IN-04 race, where Democrats actually did ignore Indiana's certification and seated the other candidate after conducting their own, independent recount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...