Interesting that they are laying off managers while “moving towards more automation”. I’m guessing they mean draconian employee-monitoring hardware and software installed in the vehicles, warehouses, repair facilities, etc.
My feeling is that Clinton’s big problem was that she had a low ceiling and low floor because of 20+ years of smears; even though she was definitely qualified, there was just too much generalized negative baggage. I knew many democrats that believed something big would come out because republican muckrakers had spent so many years seeding that field. When Comey decided to break all tradition over nothing it just reinforced that perception.
Harris doesn’t have that, she has a high ceiling for perception. More people have no idea who she is and the more she can be the one to define herself while Trump looks crazier and crazier the better she’ll do. And the debate feeds that unlike Clinton.
I voted Clinton in 2016…but I didn’t exactly vote FOR her, moreso I voted against Trump. I feel like that’s why she lost - she repeatedly demonstrated that she’s an out-of-touch career politician. She had several How Do You Do, Fellow Kids? moments that turned off a lot of people. It also felt like they were putting way too much emphasis on her being a woman and that’s…just not a selling point. I don’t care what reproductive gear a candidate is equipped with.
I cringed a bit at those gaffs but there were two main reasons my vote was a reluctant one:
I can’t stand politician dynasties. I don’t want political families running the country and I definitely don’t want it to be a Clinton (who I admittedly would have voted for in the 90s if I was eligible). Staying with Bill after the scandal was a political move in my opinion.
The nomination didn’t feel deserved at all. Sanders got screwed in a time we needed him most and it felt like it did earlier this year when I intended on voting for Biden. Nobody likes thinking “this is not who I want to support but I have no choice.” She was/is a “generic politician” who doesn’t represent the people. 2016 was an awful time for the Democrats to hoist her up.
I don’t have the same reservations about Harris even though she wasn’t my first pick, for what it’s worth, so please don’t bring up misogyny. I was vocally against the ridiculousness of pizzagate and the “omg her emails,” too.
Yeah the DNC trying to be kingmakers and shoving her to be the candidate because it was “her turn” was so demoralizing at the time.
I think this year will be different. A lot of people stayed home in 2016 because they hated Hilary but thought she had it in the bag. I don’t think people are making the same mistake again. Especially after Roe v Wade.
Fair. But tbh I wasn’t paying attention to him until then (except through decisions, which were still better than we had in a long time.) I assumed the MAGA feces-throwing was the usual gaslighting until I saw it.
Howabout [In a typical two-party presidential debate where the candidates are both under eighty years old] they mean nothing.
Kerry won all his. Hillary won all hers. The race is unchanged and will boil down to who gets out to vote and how successful republiQan election stealing efforts are.
There is a context to what was said that is not fairly put in the title of the article, but this is still fucking creepy, misogynistic, ultimately unacceptable behavior.
There is a context to what was said that is not fairly put in the title of the article…
What’s the context? The only context I know is she endorsed Kamala and signed her name as Childless Cat Lady. Musk didn’t like that and said this line. Did I miss anything?
If not (and even if I did), as a male talking to a female, saying you’re going to “give you a child” pretty much only means “I’m going to impregnate you.”
Yes, that exactly. The way she signed the endorsement and its relation to the Republican candidate. Still, the things he said are very disturbing and menacing, coming from the richest person in the world.
Yes, Reagan once stopped Israel cold in a few minutes, with most of the time waiting to find people to talk.
Israel is completely dependent on the USA in several important ways. An American president can ride roughshod over military plans using several threats and actions, these are not illegal under USA law.
And, more subtlety, if the direct power play is considered unwarranted, the president can halt arms deliveries if the target nation is doing war crimes.
But political will at this time is a misnomer, this is up to only on one man, Biden.
Political will in congress will be muted no matter what the population feels. And this has nothing to do with individual Zionist leanings, although some are sincere in their support. But Israel has blackmailed many of our esteemed senators and congressmen due to their own mistakes. We, as a nation, really do not elect officials pure as the driven snow.
This is something remarked on for decades, since the 1950s. It’s a fact their spy service has more representatives per square foot of capital area than all other countries; although for some reason it’s slipped out of fashion to discuss it in the last few years
Trump has recently stated that he may not do any more debates with Harris, which I suppose wouldn’t be a surprise – it sounds like this one substantially hurt his chances.
Sure, DeWine, no truth, no evidence. But the real point is who are you going to vote for Governor? Go ahead, tell the world you are going to vote for Kamala Harris. smh
I have so little faith in polls anymore. I know Silver and others try to patch over the shortcomings by analyzing multiple polls and running weighted probability equations on them and so on. But I always think of GIGO: garbage in, garbage out.
And of course, probabilities are just that: probabilities. So if they say candidate X has a 75% chance to beat candidate Y, that means candidate Y still wins 25% of the time. Which is much higher than we intuit when we just look at the 75%. Anybody who’s rolled a 1d4 in D&D knows that 1 will come up more than we’d like.
Allan Lichtman’s analysis is more interesting to me. He’s been right 9 out of 10 times. Which certainly doesn’t mean he’ll be right this time. But I think it’s cool that he ignores polls. I wonder if his methodology, while very clever, may not be up to date for 2024 with all the weird shit going on with judges, electors, etc. The “meta issues”, if you will, around his “Keys to the White House.”
And of course, probabilities are just that: probabilities.
LIke… Yeah. It’s crazy to me how many people think “75%” means “that person will win” and then blame the polls if they don’t. People do this all the f’ing time with the weather as well. “They said it would rain!” when, in fact, they said there was a 80% probability that it would rain.
Yeah it’s true. Though with weather its more egregious, we have a huge dataset to test weather predictions vs weather results against, to test the accuracy of models.
Our ability to test election forecasting percentages is limited to a dataset too small and too different year-to-year to call it tested. So, it really is much less grounded in empirical reality than weather forecasting. It’s mathematical voodoo, in my eyes closer to numerology than science.
I don't doubt some of this is optimization in the middle. But they (as with so many companies) have expressed interest in reducing the working force with AI and robotics too. Mechanical workers show up for work, don't have HR or other issues to deal with, and can work when you need them. I.e. cheaper in even the short run. Now with UPS being union there's going to be a bit of friction there, but they'll figure it out. Maybe give a bit more to the workers who are allowed to stay (which is good for them I suppose). Other companies that don't have that protection, well...there's other jobs, right?
HA! The Marketing and Sales jobs will go untouched, there is no doubt. IT managers, get ready to sling some boxes. Customer Service? Dang I forgot you were still here, ha ha - gtfo.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.