What's new
Frozen in Carbonite

Welcome to FiC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2018 United States Midterm

Yeah I guess it's just a coincidence that the candidate Blue Cross Blue Shield didn't support, Abdul El-Sayed, was campaigning on establishing a statewide single-payer health care system.
So talk about that. That's a thing, the honorary chair is not.
 
Yeah I guess it's just a coincidence that the candidate Blue Cross Blue Shield didn't support, Abdul El-Sayed, was campaigning on establishing a statewide single-payer health care system. Something that I thought progs would support.

Actually it was in the company's best interest to make sure he didn't win.

Of course they're not going to give that guy a real position but he can stick around to influence her and nobody can say anything cause nobody can prove anything.

Nah there's nothing fishy here at all Screen, you nut.
Not our fault you cannot understand the English language here. Have you tried debating in good faith for a change?
 
Not our fault you cannot understand the English language here. Have you tried debating in good faith for a change?
1 post, two sentences with no substance about my beliefs but are just attacks on my character. Not quite a record from you Rufus but it's definitely what I've come to expect out of you. You gonna edit in some shit about me needing to read a book before I post this reply while you're at it?

What's there to debate? I don't like the slimey connection between powerful lobbyist and politicians. This is a straw man argument that I'm saying a honorary chair has any actual duties to the constituents. There's no way they're going to actually give him a seat, but perhaps some stooge of theirs (if Gretchen herself isn't a stooge already, her own father having been the CEO of this company in the past).

I'm not going to continue further. You know my, religious, paranoid, gut feeling position on this and I don't feel like dealing with the usual Rufus shit stirring.
 
To expand on my prior post: it isn't news that a politician gave an honorary position to a supporter, so don't talk about that. Talk about why they were supporters, talk about the position and how it is out of step with supposed values. We aren't persuaded by punchy sound bites and clickbaity headlines
 
1 post, two sentences with no substance about my beliefs but are just attacks on my character. Not quite a record from you Rufus but it's definitely what I've come to expect out of you. You gonna edit in some shit about me needing to read a book before I post this reply while you're at it?

What's there to debate? I don't like the slimey connection between powerful lobbyist and politicians. This is a straw man argument that I'm saying a honorary chair has any actual duties to the constituents. There's no way they're going to actually give him a seat, but perhaps some stooge of theirs (if Gretchen herself isn't a stooge already, her own father having been the CEO of this company in the past).

I'm not going to continue further. You know my gut feeling position on this and I don't feel like dealing with the usual Rufus shit stirring.
Once again. Not my fault you cannot understand my previous posts where I listed you numerous honorary chairs in conferences and definitions of honorary co-chairs showing your interpretation to be totally and utterly wrong. Your failure at reading comprehension is nothing more than this: yours.
 
Talk about why they were supporters
Her father was the CEO of the company
Her opponent was for single payer system.
It's in the company's best interest to make sure she won.

Once again. Not my fault you cannot understand my previous posts where I listed you numerous honorary chairs in conferences and definitions of honorary co-chairs showing your interpretation to be totally and utterly wrong. Your failure at reading comprehension is nothing more than this: yours.
Your previous post are irrelevant. Not my fault you miss the point. And that's the last time i'm getting baited by you in this thread. I've already had this discussion with you and I know exactly where it's going to go.
 
Her father was the CEO of the company
Her opponent was for single payer system.
It's in the company's best interest to make sure she won.
Wow, and you unraveled the entire conspiracy by noticing he was a... honorary co-chair of a transition team. Probably Russia's Active Measures at work.
Your previous post are irrelevant. Not my fault you miss the point. And that's the last time i'm getting baited by you in this thread. I've already had this discussion with you and I know exactly where it's going to go.
Well, of course you know where it goes: I show multiple sources that you are wrong, you refuse to accept that you can be wrong, and you look like a fool when proven wrong. It's a pattern.
 
Last edited:
This is rich, if a neo nazi was on Trump's transition team I'm sure Rufus and Ravan would be saying "oh that doesn't mean anything he's only an honorary chairman"
 
This is rich, if a neo nazi was on Trump's transition team I'm sure Rufus and Ravan would be saying "oh that doesn't mean anything he's only an honorary chairman"
Ummm.... when did "CEO of company previously led by candidate's dad" and "nazi" become anywhere near the same thing?

And no. One needs to ask why they support the person enough to get that position. With any corporation, it's easy enough to guess, they expect support for their industry. What does it say when Nazis expect support for their "industry"?
 
@Ravan , give me your honest hot take on this situation. You OK with a health insurance CEO being this close to your politician?
When you have family connections like that, you'd have to literally bar people from running based on who their family is to avoid it. I'd say that this particular instance is less egregious because of that. Unless you'd like to suggest that we ban everyone whose family has ever been wealthy or connected from political office, in which case we'd have to empty out the trash currently occupying the oval office right away.

Edit: to put it another way, I'm much more disturbed by Rick Scott, who presided over the largest medicare fraud in history, tried to require that all state employees and welfare recipients pay for drug testing to be done by his wife's company, and is claiming election fraud without evidence while his own party illegally had people in their counties vote by email.

Edit 2: oh, and by the republican who got reelected despite being under FBI investigation for possibly being part of a violent cult advocating the murder of all non-christian men and the enslavement of their wives and daughter as concubines.
 
Unless you'd like to suggest that we ban everyone whose family has ever been wealthy or connected from political office, in which case we'd have to empty out the trash currently occupying the oval office right away.
You mean drain the swamp? :p
 
Won't argue with that. But yeah I just find the whole situation to be fucked up and gross. It triggers all my deepstate paranoia. I want those kinds of family connections to be a point against the candidate.

I look forward to being proven wrong by actions, not words.
 
Won't argue with that. But yeah I just find the whole situation to be fucked up and gross. It triggers all my deepstate paranoia. I want those kinds of family connections to be a point against the candidate.

I look forward to being proven wrong by actions, not words.
They may well be. That's not a race in my area, so I don't know either person's history and positions on any issue. Beyond you mentioning that the opponent was for universal healthcare.
 
She is a corporate liberal who beat her leftist opponent using family connections to a health insurance company to beat said leftist opponent who was championing medicare-for-all. I don't know why you are digging your heels in on this, it's not like denying corporate Democrats are a thing makes any sense considering it's a thing that we complain about all the time. Yeah, she's better than the Republicans, but that doesn't mean that's all we should aspire to put in that seat.
 
She is a corporate liberal who beat her leftist opponent using family connections to a health insurance company to beat said leftist opponent who was championing medicare-for-all. I don't know why you are digging your heels in on this, it's not like denying corporate Democrats are a thing makes any sense considering it's a thing that we complain about all the time. Yeah, she's better than the Republicans, but that doesn't mean that's all we should aspire to put in that seat.
Not sure you understood what I meant. I was saying that for all I know these connectioms did hurt her in the election, just not enough to lose, not disagreeing with the idea that they should.
 
Not sure you understood what I meant. I was saying that for all I know these connectioms did hurt her in the election, just not enough to lose, not disagreeing with the idea that they should.
I'm objecting to the notion that we should dismiss them. Just because a bought and paid for Dem is technically better than an R doesn't mean we shouldn't still attempt to replace them in primaries.

Case in point:

 
Last edited:
Ummm.... when did "CEO of company previously led by candidate's dad" and "nazi" become anywhere near the same thing?
When health insurance companies started exploiting poor and vulnerable americans as a business model and this particular relationship is why the candidate in question isn't supporting single payer.

You wouldn't want a klansmen whispering in the ear of one of our representatives so why are you ok with a corporatist shill doing it?
 
Democrat Harder upsets California GOP US Rep. Denham
LOS ANGELES (AP) — First-time candidate Josh Harder defeated four-term Republican U.S. Rep. Jeff Denham Tuesday in California's farm belt, giving Democrats their fourth pickup of a GOP House seat in California.

Harder, 32, a venture capitalist, had anchored his campaign to Denham's vote against the Affordable Care Act, while arguing that he would push for universal health care in Congress. He also argued that Denham and other Washington Republicans ignored poverty and health care in the agricultural 10th District in California's Central Valley.

"Washington is broken because our leaders have put party over country. I pledge that I will always put this community before anything in Washington," Harder said in a statement.
Woot! Democrat Josh Harder won California's 10th Congressional District; my district! He defeats incumbent Republican Jeff Denham.
 
Back
Top Bottom