The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

[118th Congress] of the United States: Spoken For

134689101

Posts

  • TuminTumin Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    So you think if the janitor didnt wax the floor so they entire executive board would fall down the stairs theyre complicit?

  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

  • A duck!A duck! Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    Tumin wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    So you think if the janitor didnt wax the floor so they entire executive board would fall down the stairs theyre complicit?

    I don't think this is what good-faith discussion looks like.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

    This isnt a moral distinction we ever draw. Many lobbyists work for lobbying firms not the companies they lobby for. We dont have any problem understanding their moral burden. Dont see why it wiuld be different for a consultant.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited October 2023
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved. (Deliberate exaggeration, obviously the two jobs are not the same)

    Then you misunderstand how partnership works at firms like the consultancy she was part of - partners have ownership stakes.
    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    So given that, why did Uber hire a firm headed by people with ties to a major CA politician (who would become Vice President), including a long term labor activist?

    The problem isn't that Uber made the offer - it's that they accepted it.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

    LA Times, Sept. 12, 2019
    Uber has also retained Laphonza Butler, a senior Harris campaign strategist, to advise the company on its dealings with organized labor.

  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Am I morally bad for doing work for my company that materially benefitted Raytheon?

    You're muckin' with a G!

    Do not engage the Watermelons.
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

    This isnt a moral distinction we ever draw. Many lobbyists work for lobbying firms not the companies they lobby for. We dont have any problem understanding their moral burden. Dont see why it wiuld be different for a consultant.

    Because they are two completely different jobs.

    A lobbyist is hired to directly influence lawmakers and get a predetermined outcome. They are hired, pointed in a specific direction, and told to achieve a goal.

    A consultant is hired to give insight on a situation or to advise on the best way to achieve a goal. They make recommendations but they don’t take action on behalf of the company.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Am I morally bad for doing work for my company that materially benefitted Raytheon?

    Are you an owner of the firm?

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • MonwynMonwyn Apathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime. A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    You guys understand that $100k is literally pocket change for this kind of stuff right

    Like it is literally 0.05% of the money spent on Prop 22 by Uber/Lyft

    For comparison, as a percentage of the national median household income, this would be approx $35 over the course of a year

    That anyone is trying to make this a Thing is a bad joke

    This is not the winning argument you think it is, because you've just pointed out how cheaply the firm (which was headed up by a number of Harris supporters) sold its reputation.

    Which is sort of the point.

    It's your point now. If they'd taken a *lot* of money it'd be "this is a clear conflict of interest and she clearly corrupt," because you don't actually give a shit about Laphonza Butler, it's just another excuse to drag your inane, irrational hatred of any technology company operating after 1995 into yet another thread

    uH3IcEi.png
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    And idk, no politician is perfect and if it somehow improbably ends up being her and some bhaalspawn republican ok it is what it is, but we can at least recognize the black mark when we see it. Otherwise its not supporting a flawed politican as a net good, its just sports.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • KruiteKruite Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Kruite wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »

    The best part about this is Gaetz threatening to call a vote to vacate the chair vs. McCarthy threatening to call a vote to expel Gaetz over his ethics investigation.

    No matter who wins, we all win

    But if they both lose. We lose.

    Nah, we do pretty good there as well.

    You don't understand (I think). If they both lose they both get to stick around in the house, which would be bad.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Goddamnit, I really thought the 100+ posts were going to be about a bloodbath between Gaetz and McCarthy

    So, my understanding of Laphonza Butler (D-CA), which is entirely underbaked hot takes because I didn't even know she existed 24 hours ago is:

    45 year old black married lesbian mother

    Decade + Union organizer and SEIU President

    Left the union to be a direct political strategist for Kamala Harris' failed 2020 Presidential campaign. Also spent some percentage of ~50 billable hours working on an account with Uber during those ~2 years at the political strategy firm

    Left political strategist firm after the presidential administration post obviously failed to materialize and became head of AirBnB's lobbying department

    Left AirBnB after a ~year to run Emily's List

    Left Emily's List after ~2 years to become Senator

    Am I missing anything else that's currently known?

  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

    LA Times, Sept. 12, 2019
    Uber has also retained Laphonza Butler, a senior Harris campaign strategist, to advise the company on its dealings with organized labor.

    Yeah, I know that Uber hired her firm as consultants.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Goddamnit, I really thought the 100+ posts were going to be about a bloodbath between Gaetz and McCarthy

    So, my understanding of Laphonza Butler (D-CA), which is entirely underbaked hot takes because I didn't even know she existed 24 hours ago is:

    45 year old black married lesbian mother

    Decade + Union organizer and SEIU President

    Left the union to be a direct political strategist for Kamala Harris' failed 2020 Presidential campaign. Also spent some percentage of ~50 billable hours working on an account with Uber during those ~2 years at the political strategy firm

    Left political strategist firm after the presidential administration post obviously failed to materialize and became head of AirBnB's lobbying department

    Left AirBnB after a ~year to run Emily's List

    Left Emily's List after ~2 years to become Senator

    Am I missing anything else that's currently known?

    Thats the bullet points yeah

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Styrofoam Sammich and AngelHedgie, since you folks have obviously read the report she provided Uber could you share it with the rest of the class?

    Given that I've explicitly said the problem is that her firm accepted the job in the first place, I fail to see how this is addresses that point.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Am I morally bad for doing work for my company that materially benefitted Raytheon?

    Are you an owner of the firm?

    Do you even know what I did for them?

    You're muckin' with a G!

    Do not engage the Watermelons.
  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    After ten pages I think we’ve successfully exhausted all pertinent commentary pertaining to the announcement of this temporary appointment

  • dporowskidporowski Registered User regular
    Wait. 50 billable hours?

    Y'all have spent 100+ posts arguing about 50 billable hours, and possibly only a fraction thereof?

    GO OUTSIDE.

  • HyperSplattHyperSplatt Registered User regular
    edited October 2023
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?
    I don't have any specific experience with Uber's internal affairs, but it's clear from this discussion that you don't know how these type of consultancies work. They are NOT always there to whitewash or further the CEO/Board's personal preferences. Many large corporations will hire genuinely progressive outside consultants to get their take on the potential risks (not just financial, but in terms of PR, talent recruitment and retention, etc.) of doing the thing the corporate leadership wants to do. Those consultants probably know that it's a long shot that the corporation will follow their progressive advice, but they give it their all to frame their advice as best for the long-term health and growth of the business. Lots of that framing has to do with the fact that the best and brightest young talent today has a lot of progressive sympathies, so it's in corporations' best interests to put their money where their mouth is in terms of treating their employees right.

    The entire Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) consultancy industry is based on this. There are a lot of fantastic, progressive firms whose primary client base is large corporations - their advice is often ignored (and hidden from the clients' employees by their companies), but they do their damnedest to plant the seed in the minds of corporate leadership that the future health of their companies depends on treating their workers with respect, supporting their personal and professional growth, and compensating them well.

    Your viewpoint seems to be that the labor (and DEI) consultant industry is morally complicit with the worst of their clients and should be blamed for those clients' actions, regardless of how progressive the consultants' advice was. I think that kind of purity testing will ensure the doom of progressive political power in this country.

    Edited to add: And lest anyone think these consultants are engaged in a fool's errand, I know from personal experience that they do often manage to win incremental victories for their clients' employees. Corporate leaders will frequently implement at least a few of the recommendations made by progressive consultants. Is that good enough? No, and the consultants don't think so, either. But that doesn't mean that trying to push change from within is a complete waste of time, nor should it disqualify those consultants from seeking or holding political office.

    Also, given her record, I would bet that Butler tried to be a progressive voice of reason within AirBnB's lobbying arm. These people exist, and I admire them for being willing to go into the dragons' lairs to counter the worst impulses of the corporate overlords. The public almost never recognizes the impact they have (which sometimes amounts to "the company did a bad thing instead of the worst thing") but it's still a meaningful impact.

    In an imperfect world, I never treat this type of work history as a negative, unless there's actual evidence that the person in question was pushing for bad policies or was acting as the public face of corporate whitewashing messages.

    HyperSplatt on
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Cybertronian Paranormal Eliminator Registered User regular
    Honeslty, out of those bullet points, if it was just the Uber thing, I wouldn't care; consulting for Uber and THEN lobbying for AirBNB is where I'm like "once is an anomoly, twice is a coincidence.." Her work pre and post seems fine, if not great, so I'd be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

    AIrBnB lobbiest is definitely gonna get the side-eye from me though.

  • Snake GandhiSnake Gandhi Des Moines, IARegistered User regular
    Styrofoam Sammich and AngelHedgie, since you folks have obviously read the report she provided Uber could you share it with the rest of the class?

    Given that I've explicitly said the problem is that her firm accepted the job in the first place, I fail to see how this is addresses that point.
    Well that might be because I find your given stance to be nonsense.

    For all anyone knows Uber payed the firm $100K to be told their stance was stupid. (but probably written a lot better).

    Hell I'd assume most folks here would cheer at that sort of thing, taking a corp's money to tell them they're being dumb.

  • KruiteKruite Registered User regular
    The Horse...is very dead

  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    edited October 2023
    Atomika wrote: »
    After ten pages I think we’ve successfully exhausted all pertinent commentary pertaining to the announcement of this temporary appointment

    but the circular firing squad still has some bullets left!

    dporowski wrote: »
    Wait. 50 billable hours?

    Y'all have spent 100+ posts arguing about 50 billable hours, and possibly only a fraction thereof?

    GO OUTSIDE.

    You can't make me!

    Commander Zoom on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Atomika wrote: »
    After ten pages I think we’ve successfully exhausted all pertinent commentary pertaining to the announcement of this temporary appointment

    So we have another five pages to go, then?

    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited October 2023
    Monwyn wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    You guys understand that $100k is literally pocket change for this kind of stuff right

    Like it is literally 0.05% of the money spent on Prop 22 by Uber/Lyft

    For comparison, as a percentage of the national median household income, this would be approx $35 over the course of a year

    That anyone is trying to make this a Thing is a bad joke

    This is not the winning argument you think it is, because you've just pointed out how cheaply the firm (which was headed up by a number of Harris supporters) sold its reputation.

    Which is sort of the point.

    It's your point now. If they'd taken a *lot* of money it'd be "this is a clear conflict of interest and she clearly corrupt," because you don't actually give a shit about Laphonza Butler, it's just another excuse to drag your inane, irrational hatred of any technology company operating after 1995 into yet another thread

    I've been pretty clear about how it's a clear conflict of interest no matter the price, given the opposition of the interests of gig economy firms with organized labor. I just find it telling that you went to "look, it really wasn't that much money Uber paid" as a defense. And I do think that Butler is an acceptable caretaker choice - I'm just not going to pretend that her working with two particularly notorious gig economy companies isn't the black mark it is.

    Finally, if you think hating a company that abuses its workers in a number of ways, openly fought actually having to acknowledge their employees as such, built systems designed to evade regulation, and has actively covered up sexual assaults in their vehicles, among other known issues is "irrational"...well, that speaks for itself.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    NRCC is posting 4chan green text formatted "jokes" about Bowman. I really want to see what their messaging shop looks like inside.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited October 2023
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

    This isnt a moral distinction we ever draw. Many lobbyists work for lobbying firms not the companies they lobby for. We dont have any problem understanding their moral burden. Dont see why it wiuld be different for a consultant.

    Well. Consulting is not the same as lobbying for one. They are different things and therefore are different.

    One does specific work on behalf of and in service to a companies position and one provides information or advice which the company may or may not listen to and does not necessarily conform to the views or interests of the company.

    Like. I would take money to advise ford on how to deal with the strikers and I would tell them to acquiesce to their demands because they will make more money doing so. This would be “complicit” and a “black mark upon my record”.

    We have no clue what advice she gave but you’re treating it like it was specific instructions on how to crush labor and pass prop 22. It’s fucking ridiculous. They only paid her firm 105k. They clearly didn’t like whatever she said to them.

    Edit: like… her record is about as spotless i you could every expect a record to be. She is the fucking unicorn and you’re complaining about how black her hooves are.

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    And idk, no politician is perfect and if it somehow improbably ends up being her and some bhaalspawn republican ok it is what it is, but we can at least recognize the black mark when we see it. Otherwise its not supporting a flawed politican as a net good, its just sports.

    Hey now, several of my BG play thrus featured chaotic good socialist PCs

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    NRCC is posting 4chan green text formatted "jokes" about Bowman. I really want to see what their messaging shop looks like inside.

    You really don’t the chances there’s child pork in that shop are way way too high

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    NRCC is posting 4chan green text formatted "jokes" about Bowman. I really want to see what their messaging shop looks like inside.

    You really don’t the chances there’s child pork in that shop are way way too high

    Child pork might be a typo but its probably not wrong either

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    Fuck

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • jmcdonaldjmcdonald I voted, did you? DC(ish)Registered User regular
    dporowski wrote: »
    Wait. 50 billable hours?

    Y'all have spent 100+ posts arguing about 50 billable hours, and possibly only a fraction thereof?

    GO OUTSIDE.

    50 billable hours is generating a report on the viability of the ask that's being requested as part of the RFP.

    it's literally nothing.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited October 2023
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    The way in which this mild criticism of the appointee has turned into "you just want the perfect candidate and to never talk to anyone you disagree with" is frankly kinda fucking weird.

    DiFi 2.0, and saying she personally helped deliver one of the biggest blows to American labor in years aren’t my definition of mild criticism, but you know, opinions and all that.

    Which part of this do you object to? That she was personally involved or the damage it did?

    I don’t agree that she was personally involved any more than the janitor who cleans the office is involved.

    As a consultant we have no idea what her recommendations were and what, if anything, she suggested to Uber were acted upon.

    Had Uber hired any other consultant, the outcome of the proposition would have very likely been the same and Uber would have very likely taken the same course they did in the first place.

    The janitor is hired to clean floors. She was hired to advise them on dealing with unions regarding prop22. We all know what that means in the context of Uber. She was involved in the passage of prop22

    See, anytime someone says a thing like “we all know what that means” it usually means we don’t but I’m just asserting this unfounded position anyway

    Do you not know how Uber regards and deals with organized labor and labor rights in general?

    Yes, of course I do. But she didn’t work for Uber. Her firm was hired to consult Uber. That doesn’t make them one and the same.

    This isnt a moral distinction we ever draw. Many lobbyists work for lobbying firms not the companies they lobby for. We dont have any problem understanding their moral burden. Dont see why it wiuld be different for a consultant.

    Well. Consulting is not the same as lobbying for one. They are different things and therefore are different.

    One does specific work on behalf of and in service to a companies position and one provides information or advice which the company may or may not listen to and does not necessarily conform to the views or interests of the company.

    Like. I would take money to advise ford on how to deal with the strikers and I would tell them to acquiesce to their demands because they will make more money doing so. This would be “complicit” and a “black mark upon my record”.

    We have no clue what advice she gave but you’re treating it like it was specific instructions on how to crush labor and pass prop 22. It’s fucking ridiculous. They only paid her firm 105k. They clearly didn’t like whatever she said to them.

    Edit: like… her record is about as spotless i you could every expect a record to be. She is the fucking unicorn and you’re complaining about how black her hooves are.

    Consulting and lobbying are not as cut and dry as you make it out to be, especially when you are talking about a firm like SCRB Strategies. From the article DP linked:
    Butler, who used to lead SEIU California, is a partner at SCRB Strategies, a consulting firm that Uber paid $105,000 during the first half of the year, according to records filed with the California secretary of state. SCRB’s other partners are Juan Rodriguez, who is Harris’ campaign manager, and Sean Clegg and Ace Smith, both senior strategists on her campaign.

    This is a firm built around people within the orbit of one of the more powerful politicians in California, and who likely have ties to the California political structure. Companies do not hire firms like this just for "advice".

    Edit: And I'm sorry, but I don't find a well connected activist signing on to one of the companies responsible for the housing crisis we're currently dealing with to be "spotless". Which doesn't make her horrible - it makes her a politician with black marks like any other politician.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    And a Republican led effort to expel Matt Gaetz absolutely will not be tolerated by Republicans across the country. I can guarantee you that.

    Haha. It's hilarious to think that Republicans across the country give a wet fart about Matt.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    And a Republican led effort to expel Matt Gaetz absolutely will not be tolerated by Republicans across the country. I can guarantee you that.

    Haha. It's hilarious to think that Republicans across the country give a wet fart about Matt.

    At this point, I'm waiting for the kompromat to drop.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    dporowski wrote: »
    Wait. 50 billable hours?

    Y'all have spent 100+ posts arguing about 50 billable hours, and possibly only a fraction thereof?

    GO OUTSIDE.

    I'm making assumptions about their billable rate, so it could well be more than that. McKinsey, Boston, Accenture, &c. charge ~$15k /day to walk into your lobby, so it could be more like ~100 hours. Though, again, split across folks billing to the account. But if you were working for a real Presidential bid you're not charging peanuts hourly.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    And a Republican led effort to expel Matt Gaetz absolutely will not be tolerated by Republicans across the country. I can guarantee you that.

    Haha. It's hilarious to think that Republicans across the country give a wet fart about Matt.

    How dare you threaten to hold Republican members to ethical conduct!

  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    And a Republican led effort to expel Matt Gaetz absolutely will not be tolerated by Republicans across the country. I can guarantee you that.

    Haha. It's hilarious to think that Republicans across the country give a wet fart about Matt.

    How dare you threaten to hold Republican members to ethical conduct!

    That Bowman guy, however... He's gotta go!

    You're muckin' with a G!

    Do not engage the Watermelons.
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    I think it's worth acknowledging those positions, but given how brief they were in her overall career I don't know that it raises to the level of red flag, much less disqualification. Maybe an orange flag.

    People are right to say hey, wait a second, what's that shit about, but I think that's the extent of it barring something more damning in the details?

Sign In or Register to comment.