oldmanfan

Sure it’s absurd. I have already said I disagree with the tactic. You continue to ignore my point: it works the same the other way. When Conservatives want to try and force say the NFL of a corporation like Disney into following their beliefs by boycotting it’s the same damn thing. Yet we get crickets about that.

Seems quite possible

So you don’t die or get a long term illness. And they don’t have to respond. You’re absolutely right. It’s their decision. And if they are boycotted by some folks, that will be their decision. And if those who don’t like the boycott go on to buy more at Home Depot vs. Lowe’s that will be their decision. And if some still refuse to watch a football game because some guys kneel, that is their decision. And if some nut case conservatives want to shut down Disney World because they actually welcome gays, that is their decision. And if gays then flock to Disney World one weekend a year when they are particularly welcomed, that is their decision. And so on. And so on. And so on. You see, freedom is kind of a complex thing.

If you go back to the link in the comment I responded to, your boy Tucker talks about cities being destroyed. Just trying to be consistent with language.

Yeah, they’re being pressured. They have to respond. As I said earlier, I don’t like these kind of tactics. But I suspect this is why Home Depot has their PR staff and such. Arthur Blank does not strike me as an idiot. I am sure they will come up with a statement that is supportive in some way without selling the farm away from folks like you. All I’m saying is that you are being disingrnuous when you suggest this is any different than when Republicans push corporations to bend to their will. And no, it does not matter who makes the initial policy statement. See my response. You just don’t like it because it works against your side. Get vaccinated.

And I will rebut with several things: 1. January 6th people in the other side of the equation tried not just to “cancel culture “(as some of you would put it) but cancel the Democratic process. Each side does this kind of political crap trying to influence corporations as I have already listed. 2. I have said repeatedly that protests are good but violence cannot be tolerated. So has the current President. 3. Home Depot can make its decision then the market will act. If they come out in favor of voting rights in general they’ll win some customers and lose others. And if they come out in favor of the change in law, same thing will happen. The idea that a large company like Home Depot will fall over this is a wild guess. And those in agreement with a Home Depot or a Steven King rally to their cause.

People should not lose their livelihood because they voice an opinion. What you call cancel culture are other people voicing their opinion.

We argue about things here, and clearly disagree on some things, but let me just reach out here as a research scientist with over 40 years lab and clinical experience. Please get vaccinated. The science supports it. I know you hear things about the mRNA vaccines being new, and that they haven't been tested and so on, but the real data are these: 1. The mRNA technology has been around for a while, and while this is the first time it's been used in a clinical setting it basically does the same thing classical vaccines do: exposes your immune system to a viral specific protein that you then will generate an immune response against. The ingredients are basically the mRNA itself, some lipids for solubility and a salt solution. The mRNA degrades; it does not affect your own DNA. 2. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have over 95% effectiveness at preventing death and/or long term hospitalization, and data from Israel indicates they will provide over 90% effectiveness in spreading virus to others. 3. Concern has been expressed that the vaccines are experimental and not approved. They have emergency use authorization and the FDA gave that based on tens of thousands of patients treated in clinical trials. They are safe. 4. The variants out there seem to be protected against by these two mRNA vaccines, and these variants are more highly infectious. 5. I get the reluctance about the J & J shot, even though I think it should still be given because the complication rate is so low. But the issue with the J & J isn't seen with the mRNA ones. We can argue about other things all you want, but this transcends that. I don't want to see you or anyone else around here get Covid and die, or get it and then have to deal with the long term complications that are becoming increasingly prevalent and will likely sap you of years down the road. I ask you: get the vaccine so we can enjoy (well, I enjoy at least!) debating and arguing on TBD for years into the future. Be safe, my friend.

Just stop with your false piety. Some people have found their political voices and are using them, and you’re butt hurt about it because they’re not the voices you favor. I am not a fan of this kind of stuff but at least I have the decency to say I disagree regardless of which side it comes from. It is obvious who has their head stuck in the sand. Pull yours out. Look in the mirror, and ask yourself honestly if the side you favor were doing this, as they have, you wouldn’t be all in.

No, the problem is that your side of the equation can’t look past your own self-centered bias. And vice versa for the liberal mindset.

Agreed

Multiple audits, the DOJ, and multiple courts say otherwise. You would offer anecdotes. Those are worthless.

While I decry these tactics by each side this certainly makes sense from a political movement perspective. You put pressure on the company, they put pressure on legislators, laws then get written the way you want. It’s only been since, like the 1780’s that this has gone on. Which is one reason I think campaigns should have only restricted public funding.

Where’s the data? Where are the facts? You have none. I say this all the time; you want to decide that 2+2= 5 just because you want to decide it’s true. Sorry but that doesn’t work.

No. people here got up in arms and also pressured Lilly. Your pretend victimhood is amusing. I don't necessarily agree with the tactic. I am saying that for you to cry crocodile tears about people exerting political pressure as if it the sole province of liberals is silly.

Maybe. But that happens to bea part of political protests in this country, and has been forever. and sometimes necessary. Here in Indiana a few years ago when Pence tried to force through his anti-gay legislation, Eli Lilly (arguably the biggest corporate presence in the state) was pressured and they understood it would result in them not being able to hire the best and brightest. And they brought pressure on Pence. Voila, the law was dumped. Yes. So what? Oh stop with this woke culture nonsense and that one side does it with more force. That's all crap. Both sides of the aisle do this. Some are more public and some are more behind the scenes. The Republicans don't twist corporations arms to get donations and such? Democrats as well?

There is no difference. You want to see one to justify your right wing views. Corporations are pressured to go along with the political aspirations either way. Liberals are pressuring Home depot to take their side. Conservatives pressured the NFL and Disney to take their side. And so on.

You are splitting hairs. Citizens pressuring corporations, politicians threatening corporations. Same coin, different sides.

No I don't. They are exactly the same. Conservatives wanted to boycott Disney because they would not go along with their demands to stop recognizing gay people. Trump wanted the NFL boycotted because he wanted the NFL to be on his side. These are two sides of the exact same coin, and your partisanship does not allow you to see it.

Some Republicans wanted to boycott Disney when it had a gay pride day. They wanted to boycott the NFL. And on and on. Quit pretending that political pressure on corporations is one sided.

I agree about mobs not destroying cities. As well as US Capitols.

What I’m saying is building trust is a two way street.

When you say the police only show up to a radio call, that is what I'm talking about with respect to re-establishing trust. I think police should be out in communities during times of non-confrontation, establishing relationships in the community.

I see your point, and would agree somewhat, but when I talk to friends that are black their point is that when they do what you say, such as obey commands and such, they still feel threatened. I think the soldier who got threatened by 2 policemen just because they did not see his temporary plate is a prime example. As a white man that would not have happened to me. I agree with the general idea of not stimulating more conflict by running from the police etc. But police trying also needs to emphasize de-escalation methods as well as better physical restraint methods. I still think it is ridiculous that for young Mr. Wright that 3 police officers could not physically restrain one kid without having to use what turned out to be a gun and not a Taser. Ultimately this comes down to a lack of trust on both sides, which leads to fear on both sides. Black men and women fear they will be shot when confronted by police, police feel they will be shot by a black man. If I were running the show I’d focus on rebuilding trust; have neighborhood policing, have officers visit schools and such to establish rapport. I’d be telling black clergy to emphasize family ties and working with instead of against police. A lot to be done, but the verdict yesterday says that, at least in this case, justice can prevail.

I see your point.