Just now, Alpha_TATEr said:

so did biden, obama & clinton. 

Is this your way of saying it won't happen just because previous presidents didn't do it?

Just now, Mike030270 said:

Is this your way of saying it won't happen just because previous presidents didn't do it?

It's probably his way of saying it's what every Dem president has wanted to do for the last 40 years but that it's completely impossible, since, ya know, it's completely impossible.

3 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Is this your way of saying it won't happen just because previous presidents didn't do it?

well, has it happened? 

maybe it's just another example of a campaign slogan used to grab the fringe vote, knowing full well it will never happen. 

4 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

so did biden, obama & clinton. 

The assault weapons ban was enacted under Clinton, but once it expired, there has been little traction at passing any other forms of gun control. Well technically, Trump was the first to do it since then when he banned bump stocks but his SCOTUS overturned that even. So yeah, given the precedent that they couldn't even ban bump stocks, it's pretty clear that there's no actual threat at banning assault rifles.

3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

It's probably his way of saying it's what every Dem president has wanted to do for the last 40 years but that it's completely impossible, since, ya know, it's completely impossible.

 

2 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

well, has it happened? 

maybe it's just another example of a campaign slogan used to grab the fringe vote, knowing full well it will never happen. 

I was genuinely asking as I had no idea what your post meant

2 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

 

I was genuinely asking as I had no idea what your post meant

sorry, my sarcasm meter is a little off today. 

1 minute ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

sorry, my sarcasm meter is a little off today. 

I'm not great at reading sarcasm even though I'm very sarcastic

25 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said:

Well that's exactly the attitude that formed the Democrats blue wall. The Democrats are trying to fight back with pro union bills while Trump is tied up because at the end of the day, Republicans are still mighty anti union.

Agree, huge dilemma for Trump.  But he might be the only person can can kill them off once and for all.  Probably mostly hurts democrats from a fundraising perspective - probably the lowest % of union voters that they've had in decades.  If they actually cared about the country they'd let it happen.  But they won't because, you know...socialism. 

Could you imagine the outcry if a Republican organized White Dudes for Trump?

 

Just now, Procus said:

Could you imagine the outcry if a Republican organized White Dudes for Trump?

 

they already had one...

 

1 minute ago, Procus said:

Could you imagine the outcry if a Republican organized White Dudes for Trump?

 

Ummm...

3 hours ago, Mike030270 said:

Now do the same for trump

Or what? I don't take orders.

You want something out there? Got something to say?

It's on you.

9 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Agree, huge dilemma for Trump.  But he might be the only person can can kill them off once and for all.  Probably mostly hurts democrats from a fundraising perspective - probably the lowest % of union voters that they've had in decades.  If they actually cared about the country they'd let it happen.  But they won't because, you know...socialism. 

I don't agree at all, unions have regained importance thanks to globalization.

4 minutes ago, lynched1 said:

Or what? I don't take orders.

You want something out there? Got something to say?

It's on you.

Or don't. Don't care

i'm convinced procus is like this guy 

 

On 7/29/2024 at 6:55 PM, VanHammersly said:

BTW, on this sort of racism/culture war topic, woke sheet actually got much, much more prevalent and much, much worse under Trump than it did under Obama.  And under Biden, I'd argue that it's actually receded a bit as the left at large has reexamined their priorities.  But of course that all goes out the window if Trump were to win.  If you want hard-line woke nonsense to take off, the most surefire way to do it would be re-electing Trump.

100% agree.  It was bad under Obama and Trump took full advantage by making it FAR worse.  Poor white man was marked as "the problem" and Trump just went with that x10.  The pendulum has started to swing back under Biden.

23 hours ago, The Norseman said:

yea, except that your tantrum filled hate parade with Trump started on day one of his presidency.  

Mine started before that though I went thru a very short naive period of "let's see what he does".  He has been everything and worse than I feared.

 

Just now, mr_hunt said:

 

manufactured enthusiasm !!! 

1 hour ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

i'm convinced procus is like this guy 

 

Procus is at least 100 years older than that guy.

6 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Procus is at least 100 years older than that guy.

Impossible... Old Billy (R.I.P.) from Lancashire holds the record at 62.

2 hours ago, dawkins4prez said:

I don't agree at all, unions have regained importance thanks to globalization.

I might be able to be persuaded that they provide some value for independent contractors or truck drivers that aren't aligned to a larger group (ie. IEW and Teamsters).  That being said, they have absolutely no place in corporations, our government or our schools.  

And before you say that they are good for the workers, I have seen time and time again how workers get screwed when they try to unionize.  The overwhelming majority of companies will do ANYTHING to avoid dealing with unions.  Shut down facilities and plants, abandon programs and fire those who tried to organize.  It is literally easier and cheaper for the companies to deal the political and legal fallout than it is to deal with the potential union.  They are awful. 

I have worked with union leaders in a corporate environment many times.  They are some of the most unintelligent thugs I've ever met.  Their purpose is the continuation and prosperity of the union.  Has little to nothing to do with the workers.  As far as I'm concerned they should all go away. 

14 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

I might be able to be persuaded that they provide some value for independent contractors or truck drivers that aren't aligned to a larger group (ie. IEW and Teamsters).  That being said, they have absolutely no place in corporations, our government or our schools.  

And before you say that they are good for the workers, I have seen time and time again how workers get screwed when they try to unionize.  The overwhelming majority of companies will do ANYTHING to avoid dealing with unions.  Shut down facilities and plants, abandon programs and fire those who tried to organize.  It is literally easier and cheaper for the companies to deal the political and legal fallout than it is with the potential union.  They are awful. 

I have worked with union leaders in a corporate environment many times.  They are some of the most unintelligent thugs I've ever met.  Their purpose is the continuation and prosperity of the union.  Has little to nothing to do with the workers.  As far as I'm concerned they should all go away. 

There are some very bad apple unions out there.  I say empower them to form anywhere but also put some guard rails and prosecute bad behaviors.  Collective bargaining is a tool that must be available as a right to almost anyone as the lines continue to blur between government and private, countries and corporations, and the very concept of employment.

26 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said:

There are some very bad apple unions out there.  I say empower them to form anywhere but also put some guard rails and prosecute bad behaviors.  Collective bargaining is a tool that must be available as a right to almost anyone as the lines continue to blur between government and private, countries and corporations, and the very concept of employment.

Obviously we disagree, but why do you say that we need collective bargaining for everyone?  Unions made sense in the early 1900's when factory workers were being abused but we have all sorts of controls and regulations for that now.  Why do people need to unionize when they work for an already heavily regulated company?  Or a school system?  Or a government entity?

Perhaps most egregious in my mind is public sector unions.  Why on earth is our government beholden to a union that forces upon them insolvent pension programs, unreasonable wage disputes and makes it near impossible to terminate unproductive workers?