Octopus Overlords

Unagi wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 3:33 pm

Jaymann wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 1:56 pm It is strange how everything fell together for Harris. Had she won the nomination in '20 and beaten DonOld, the Banana Republicans would have had four years to attack her and blame her for the economy and the border "crisis." Same if Biden had dropped out earlier. Her late entry caught the GOP with their pants down, and DonOld flummoxed. The selection of Walz was seemingly out of the blue, but was another boost. Of course the results are in the margin of error, but the trends are massively in her favor.

It was a coup!

2. a notable or successful stroke or move.
"it was a major coup to get such a prestigious contract"

Hyena wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2024 7:11 pm Personally I view this like the Tea Party movement. It had its time and failed, went into a chrysalis before crawling out from its gooey embrace to become MAGA. It's nothing more than the TP basic system of beliefs with a shiney veneer of overt racism and xenophobia. If he loses the election it will send him into a mental tailspin he most likely won't recover from, and his followers will bitch and complain about it, then someone like DeSatan will step in and take up the mantle under another name after his time incubating.

If mullets can come back after 25 years, so can these cockroaches.

Did the Tea Party ever actually fade? It seems to me that they hounded Obama for seven years until Trump came down the elevator and rebranded them "MAGA."

Trump's first pet issue--even before he was really a candidate--was birtherism, which was foundational to Tea Party doctrine. In some ways he was theirs before they became his.

Holman wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 5:35 pm until Trump came down the elevator escalator

FTFY

Jaymann wrote:It is strange how everything fell together for Harris. Had she won the nomination in '20 and beaten DonOld, the Banana Republicans would have had four years to attack her and blame her for the economy and the border "crisis."

Trump benefitted from decades of Hillary hate. MAGA spent 6 years sitting up Biden investigations to dirty up his image. It takes years to turn voters off and build a negative image to help Trump. He has to run against Harris-Walz with fewer shenanigans.

Unagi wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 5:40 pm

Holman wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 5:35 pm until Trump came down the elevator escalator

FTFY

Sorry. And now I have to visualize it.

Zarathud wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 5:40 pm

Jaymann wrote:It is strange how everything fell together for Harris. Had she won the nomination in '20 and beaten DonOld, the Banana Republicans would have had four years to attack her and blame her for the economy and the border "crisis."

Trump benefitted from decades of Hillary hate. MAGA spent 6 years sitting up Biden investigations to dirty up his image. It takes years to turn voters off and build a negative image to help Trump. He has to run against Harris-Walz with fewer shenanigans.

Things can turn fast, though it's never certain. Yes, Rush Limbaugh had always hated Hillary, but the whole reason she seemed the inevitable Dem nominee in the run-up to 2016 is that she had genuinely high national approval ratings as late as 2014--something that could be said of almost no other politician on either side.

The GOP threw everything into Benghazi and then Her Emails for two solid years, and even then she probably would have won were it not for James Comey's last minute announcement (which later, but too late, proved a nothingburger).

And but for a quirk of the electoral college she’d have won too.

Hah!

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/18238 ... NcXCfN8s1g

Not in a million years!

They probably find hm..un BEAR able.


…too soon?

Grifman wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 9:05 pm https://twitter.com/yashar/status/18238 ... NcXCfN8s1g

What's with these people's fascination with furniture.

They could make him Director of National Intelligence.

It's absolutely maddening that one side has an actual convicted felon running for office, and CNN has a headline about Tim Walz' 30-year old DUI being under "renewed scrutiny".

YellowKing wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 8:49 am It's absolutely maddening that one side has an actual convicted felon running for office, and CNN has a headline about Tim Walz' 30-year old DUI being under "renewed scrutiny".

Yeah, I saw the Harris campaign edited one of Trump's recent statements in a misleading way yesterday. Which, on the one hand, disappointing because I expect better.

But then I see half a dozen writeups on this, and think to myself that these publications better be producing 10x these writeups on the other campaign. But of course, that's no longer something most outlets do.

Jaymann wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 10:48 pm They could make him Director of National Intelligence.

Or at least his worm.

Grifman wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 9:05 pm Hah!

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/18238 ... NcXCfN8s1g

Not in a million years!

RFK Jr showing the he world what a man of true principle and conviction he really is.

Holman wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 5:35 pm Did the Tea Party ever actually fade? It seems to me that they hounded Obama for seven years until Trump came down the elevator and rebranded them "MAGA."

No, they devolved.

Tea party > Freedom Caucus > MAGA > ???

She's coming out against price gouging tomorrow:

Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday is expected to call for a federal ban on price gouging to lower grocery prices and everyday costs for Americans in her first economic policy speech in Raleigh, North Carolina.

The proposal is part of Harris’ efforts to prevent corporations in the food and grocery industries from hiking prices on consumers and is one component of a larger plan she will roll out to tackle high costs and inflation, according to a news release from the Harris campaign.

As part of her first 100 days in office, the vice president’s campaign said she would implement a plan to keep costs down that includes authorizing the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate and implement harsh penalties on companies that violate the federal ban, resources that can detect price-fixing, and more support for small businesses to potentially grow into competitors of large companies.

Grifman wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 10:08 am This is hard for me to understand:

Makes a lot of sense to my brain's narrative at least. People didn't like being forced to choose between in their view, two terrible candidates (terrible for different reasons though). The new option is a breath of fresh air in a VERY stale campaign that we have seen play out for what feels like decades. People are tired of seeing the same olde white dudes duke it out. I think if Kermit the Frog were running now, we would see the same results. And that's not a knock against Harris, I actually like her a lot...it's just to say that anything was better than the choice presented prior to this change.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 12:17 pm She's coming out against price gouging tomorrow:

Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday is expected to call for a federal ban on price gouging to lower grocery prices and everyday costs for Americans in her first economic policy speech in Raleigh, North Carolina.

The proposal is part of Harris’ efforts to prevent corporations in the food and grocery industries from hiking prices on consumers and is one component of a larger plan she will roll out to tackle high costs and inflation, according to a news release from the Harris campaign.

As part of her first 100 days in office, the vice president’s campaign said she would implement a plan to keep costs down that includes authorizing the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate and implement harsh penalties on companies that violate the federal ban, resources that can detect price-fixing, and more support for small businesses to potentially grow into competitors of large companies.

She already is on TV commercials this morning.

Makes a lot of sense to my brain's narrative at least.

That might be true, but I'm personally having a hard time understanding the polling data suggesting that some magical group is apparently pivoting from Trump to Harris. I need the news media to actually do their job and try to find people willing to talk about what's happening - why they changed their potential vote.

And yes, I'm well aware that it's too early for polls and saying you're doing something vs actually doing it in November are very different things.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 12:42 pm

Makes a lot of sense to my brain's narrative at least.

That might be true, but I'm personally having a hard time understanding the polling data suggesting that some magical group is apparently pivoting from Trump to Harris. I need the news media to actually do their job and try to find people willing to talk about what's happening - why they changed their potential vote.

And yes, I'm well aware that it's too early for polls and saying you're doing something vs actually doing it in November are very different things.

Somewhat unrelated, but I would love to see a deep dive on the kind of people that are willing to answer these polls. I would never answer a rando call for instance. What kind of people would? What kind of people would continue that call after hearing what the call is about? I guess my point is we get skewed data because of the unique characteristics of "people who take polls"...maybe.

LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 12:42 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 12:17 pm She's coming out against price gouging tomorrow:

Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday is expected to call for a federal ban on price gouging to lower grocery prices and everyday costs for Americans in her first economic policy speech in Raleigh, North Carolina.

The proposal is part of Harris’ efforts to prevent corporations in the food and grocery industries from hiking prices on consumers and is one component of a larger plan she will roll out to tackle high costs and inflation, according to a news release from the Harris campaign.

As part of her first 100 days in office, the vice president’s campaign said she would implement a plan to keep costs down that includes authorizing the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate and implement harsh penalties on companies that violate the federal ban, resources that can detect price-fixing, and more support for small businesses to potentially grow into competitors of large companies.

She already is on TV commercials this morning.

This is a sound good but ultimately worthless policy. How can you even define "price gouging"? Sure in a few cases it's obvious, like when there is a hurricane moving into the area the gas station around the corner raises the price of gas by a couple of bucks a gallon. But if the price of a can of soup goes up ten cents, then what? Companies will always try to maximize profits, and the market usually ends up taming that, as many companies are now finding out as it has been in the news a lot recently that consumers are resisting higher prices and substituting products or just foregoing certain things.

I don't know her plan, so I can't say. I know it's been pursued here several times in not too distant past, like sometime toward the end of the before times, over gasoline supply chain issues being expressed in price increases that caused $5 a gallon spikes.

Yeah, I was thinking here in Jerz we have price gouging laws related to declared emergencies (gasoline, hotel rooms, etc...) but that is a defined event and a specific amount (no more than 10% increase).

Maybe start mandating that corporations give stock options to all workers as part of their employment status. I bet things would change super quick, because Communism.

Any expected profit increase due to layoffs should be penalized at 100% with all proceeds distributed to the affected employees.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:00 pm Yeah, I was thinking here in Jerz we have price gouging laws related to declared emergencies (gasoline, hotel rooms, etc...) but that is a defined event and a specific amount (no more than 10% increase).

Maybe start mandating that corporations give stock options to all workers as part of their employment status. I bet things would change super quick, because Communism.

I know that my Albertson's and Kroger stock have each close to doubled in value in less than three years and that's including the idea that they won't be allowed to merge with current sentiment. Also, I don't shop at Kroger hardly at all anymore, as after it was clear they were going to not be able to merge, their prices shot out of touch with other big box (and Aldi) grocers around here. I am inclined to let my KR get bought by options at this point, as I can't see how they sustain their current trajectory. I also assume they're employees are going to start demanding a bigger piece of the bigger pie they are now serving their investors.

Again, no idea how Harris could implement such thing, but that's not to say it's impossible nor a good or bad idea. I mean supply chains are still borked, especially for proteins where cattle are burning to death as disease is running rampant in both red meat and poultry/eggs pretty much on and off for six years running.

YellowKing wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 8:49 am It's absolutely maddening that one side has an actual convicted felon running for office, and CNN has a headline about Tim Walz' 30-year old DUI being under "renewed scrutiny".

Look at it the other way...they are desperate to report some dirt on Harris/Walz and this was the best they could come up with?

DonOld should pivot and base his whole campaign on this.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 12:17 pm She's coming out against price gouging tomorrow:

Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday is expected to call for a federal ban on price gouging to lower grocery prices and everyday costs for Americans in her first economic policy speech in Raleigh, North Carolina.

The proposal is part of Harris’ efforts to prevent corporations in the food and grocery industries from hiking prices on consumers and is one component of a larger plan she will roll out to tackle high costs and inflation, according to a news release from the Harris campaign.

As part of her first 100 days in office, the vice president’s campaign said she would implement a plan to keep costs down that includes authorizing the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate and implement harsh penalties on companies that violate the federal ban, resources that can detect price-fixing, and more support for small businesses to potentially grow into competitors of large companies.

I'm sure the government overreach people will be all over this.

Alefroth wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:04 pm I'm sure the government overreach people will be all over this.

You mean all of the ones complaining about how government has been the cause of hyper inflation on food and needed to find a solution concurrent with maintaining record profits, keeping interest rates at all time lows, and making sure someone is serving me my hamburger and keeping the stores stocked, and yet want labor cuts down to "hardcore" workers, saying in no uncertain terms that all of this inflation was caused by those $1600 stimulus checks that overheat the economy for 2.5 years? Those government overreach people?

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:08 pm Any expected profit increase due to layoffs should be penalized at 100% with all proceeds distributed to the affected employees.

This is a joke, right? I'm pretty sure it is, but my sarcasm detector may need adjustment.

If she has enough momentum, I wonder if she could pull an Obama and flip some states that are normally considered safe.

Kurth wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:39 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:08 pm Any expected profit increase due to layoffs should be penalized at 100% with all proceeds distributed to the affected employees.

This is a joke, right? I'm pretty sure it is, but my sarcasm detector may need adjustment.

I'm willing to negotiate, but no, it's not a joke.

Blackhawk wrote:If she has enough momentum, I wonder if she could pull an Obama and flip some states that are normally considered safe.

I think there is a very reasonable chance of her flipping NC.

My reasons:

- NC went blue for Obama in 2008. Similar energy.
- RFK is allowed on the ballot here, which should draw votes away from Trump
- We have a deeply unpopular extreme MAGA GOP candidate for governor (Mark Robinson) that may help drive Democratic turnout
- NC also has a large black population (9th) and a rapidly growing Latino population (over 10%)

Honestly I feel if she can't flip NC under these circumstances, we're probably going to be a red state for several more election cycles until the demographics shift sufficiently.

LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:16 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:04 pm I'm sure the government overreach people will be all over this.

You mean all of the ones complaining about how government has been the cause of hyper inflation on food and needed to find a solution concurrent with maintaining record profits, keeping interest rates at all time lows, and making sure someone is serving me my hamburger and keeping the stores stocked, and yet want labor cuts down to "hardcore" workers, saying in no uncertain terms that all of this inflation was caused by those $1600 stimulus checks that overheat the economy for 2.5 years? Those government overreach people?

I believe those are the ones.

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:44 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 2:39 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 1:08 pm Any expected profit increase due to layoffs should be penalized at 100% with all proceeds distributed to the affected employees.

This is a joke, right? I'm pretty sure it is, but my sarcasm detector may need adjustment.

I'm willing to negotiate, but no, it's not a joke.

Ok. Thanks for clarifying. Also, that's insane!

I would like to disincentivize layoffs for short-term gains. Again, I'm willing to negotiate.

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 4:31 pm I would like to disincentivize layoffs for short-term gains. Again, I'm willing to negotiate.

Layoffs are shitty but how can you regulate how many employees an employer is supposed to have?

Jaymann wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2024 1:56 pm It is strange how everything fell together for Harris. Had she won the nomination in '20 and beaten DonOld, the Banana Republicans would have had four years to attack her and blame her for the economy and the border "crisis." Same if Biden had dropped out earlier. Her late entry caught the GOP with their pants down, and DonOld flummoxed. The selection of Walz was seemingly out of the blue, but was another boost. Of course the results are in the margin of error, but the trends are massively in her favor.

Psst. It's also showing a shit-ton of competence to get a Presidential Campaign up and running apparently smoothly in such a short amount of time. Leveraging Biden and the Democratic machine is a part of that, but the planning and execution has been quite amazing, and even more so when one considers the shit-show it could have been had other Dems decided to go for it - it has been quite the accomplishment thus far.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 4:35 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2024 4:31 pm I would like to disincentivize layoffs for short-term gains. Again, I'm willing to negotiate.

Layoffs are shitty but how can you regulate how many employees an employer is supposed to have?

...I'm not?