Huh? It’s a survey

Sure, they could be lying, but why would they?

And your employee anecdotal stories mean zilch

Another perspective is that a 3% increase in prices - even without non-labor inflation - to pay people closer to a living wage reflects a more accurate cost of that dining experience. It could be that the public is subsidizing those restaurants’ labor through social programs that make up the difference vs a living wage

As you noted, with the real (or at least more realistic) cost of eating out reflected in the pricing, consumers will decide if that experience is worth it. And some businesses may close. And that’s called capitalism

Oh that’s my bad. I didn’t realize only one lawyer could work on any aspect of a case at a time. I wasn’t aware that criminal cases were on a very strict timeline that cannot be impacted at all through resources or prosecutorial discretion on when to charge

I would respectfully argue that everybody knew that there was an election coming that Trump was going to run in, and there was a possibility of him winning it. And that should have dictated the timeline to bring charges. And if that meant more resources or bringing fewer charges, or whatever, that should have been the game plan.

If you believe he’s guilty, you don’t give him time to run out the clock

Not sure about how it feels on the skin, but here’s a good explanation of how Low-E glass coatings keep homes cooler in the summer

https://glassed.vitroglazings.com/topics/how-low-e-glass-works

All fair points. My intended point was that take some exception to Bernie’s blanket statement that the Dems abandoned the working class voters. Though I agree they haven’t focused enough there, nor message it correctly.

Biden definititely ran and led on a more progressively left platform after Bernie and AOC collaborated with them in 2020. I think it’s clear Harris was going to continue that, but I don’t think it was properly messaged

Are you trying to make a point? Because you’re not saying anything

I’m not defending Harris’ overall campaign, but I am taking some issue with Bernie claiming that the Democrats have abandoned working class voters.

I like Bernie, and he makes some good points about the lack of any bill put forth to raise the minimum wage. But I think his overall characterization is quite a bit off base, especially when compared to what the Republicans are offering working-class voters. Which is basically nothing

I’ll listen to any counterpoint with an open mind but you have to make one

The Republicans are doing zero for the working class other than lying to them and giving their money yo billionaires.

Dems supported unions where Trump impugned them

Dems forgave student loans, Republicans went to court to stop it

Dems pushed to end noncompetes for the average worker, Republicans went to court to stop it

Dems passed the CHIPS act to bring good paying jobs to multiple communities

Dems passed an infrastructure bill while Trump had 100 infrastructure weeks that accomplished nothing

Trump said he’d fire workers rather than pay them overtime

Harris promised to investigate price gouging, Trump is supported by the oligarchy

Etc, etc

Yeah, OK, the US isn’t the most economically and militarily powerful country, and by extension, politically powerful🙄

To say otherwise makes you not serious

As does bringing the metric system into the argument

Fascism needs a strong leader - authoritarianism is at the core of fascism. Of course the rank and file don’t go away, but without a strong leader, they lose their power.

Serious question: Referring back to the points I made in my previous post, who is going to effectively step into the fascism void in the US when Trump is gone?

Vance? He’s a clown and isn’t a true believer in Trumpism

DeSantis? Another clown

Ken Paxton? He’s evil enough but not sure he has the charisma to inspire the MAGAts

Trump’s base is comprised of sniveling sycophants who don’t have the personality, influence, or will to actually try and take over

Sure, but I was specifically talking about the US.

That said, when the US has a potential leader embracing fascism/authoritarianism, it creates an opportunity for the growth of those political ideologies across the world.

Keeping Trump out of office and believers in democracy in office will help blunt the power and growth of fascism across the globe. It’s not the sole solution, but it’s quite important that the most powerful country in the world not elect fascists.

While I generally agree with what you said, I’m not convinced Trumpism doesn’t die or at least go back into its hole when he goes away.

Trumpism is really nothing more than a power grab by an authoritarian who uses white nationalism rhetoric to enthrall the baser segment of society and amass a voting base to maintain power long enough to undermine democracy.

Trump could die tomorrow, and there’s a dozen wannabe authoritarians that would try to fill that void and run on Trumpism.

I’m not convinced there’s any MAGAts out there than can inspire the base, get the MAGAts in Congress to coalesce behind them, and solidify the financial support of the Musks, Thiels, etc of the oligarchy.

I don’t see how the full quote really changes anything.

I fully agree with her position that folks she be informed and engaged in their local politics.

Fully agree with her that people should use critical thinking skills.

But saying both sides have the same amount of problems is a ridiculous false equivalency, and directly threatens the very people she supports. One side is going to make life a living hell (if not outright cause deaths - see: abortion rights for an example) for LGTBQ+ people, for women, and for people of color. There’s no “both sides” argument here.

She’s within her right to call out the Left for specific issues she disagrees on, but she loses credibility for effectively saying one side is not better than the other in all the areas I’ve described

Which quote is cherry picked? Honestly curious

I’m quite disappointed in her both-sidesism comments. Maybe that approach is defensible in “normal” times, but not when one candidate/party is fascist, authoritarian, anti-democracy, anti-women’s rights, anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-people of color.

My feeling is that Chappell is effectively supporting that party by not taking a more vocal stand against them, particularly when she has the ability to influence so many young voters whose lives will be impacted for decades by what the extreme right has done in this country, and will further try to do if they win the White House (and/or Congress) again.