|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 03 2015 11:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +(Bloomberg) -- One U.S. refinery is shutting while management takes control of operations at six others after union workers walked out of the plants in the biggest strike since 1980.
The United Steelworkers union that represents employees at more than 200 refineries, terminals, pipelines and chemical plants stopped work Sunday at nine sites, accounting for 10 percent of the country’s refining capacity, after contract negotiations fell apart. The union rejected five offers made by Royal Dutch Shell Plc on behalf of companies including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. since talks began Jan. 21. Tesoro Corp. is shutting half of its 166,000-barrel-a-day Martinez plant in California that wasn’t already idled for maintenance.
Union leaders haven’t called a strike nationally since 1980, when a stoppage lasted three months. While only one of the nine plants has curbed production amid the stoppage, a full walkout of USW workers would threaten to disrupt as much as 64 percent of U.S. fuel output. Shell and union officials began negotiations amid the biggest collapse in oil prices since 2008.
Refiners may cut operating rates “a little” during the strike, John Auers, executive vice president at Dallas-based Turner Mason & Co., said by phone Monday. “They won’t push the units as hard. The key will be to run them reliably and safely.” Show nested quote +The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said.
United Steelworkers members do everything from operating units to performing maintenance to testing and analyzing samples in labs at U.S. refineries, Hancock said.
The refineries on strike can produce 1.82 million barrels of fuel a day, data compiled by Bloomberg show. They span the U.S., from Tesoro’s plants in Martinez and Carson, California; and Anacortes, Washington, to Marathon Petroleum Corp.’s Catlettsburg complex in Kentucky to three sites in Texas, according to the USW’s statement. Source
The most important passages from the article, for posterity's sake:
The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said...
Refiners’ shares on the Standard & Poor’s 500 have more than doubled since the beginning of 2012, when the steelworkers last negotiated an agreement. U.S. fuel producers have been cashing in on the biggest-ever domestic oil boom, which has helped drive oil prices almost 50 percent lower in 2014.
tl;dr workers want a new piece of the bigger pie, as refiners are collecting bigger profit margins because the price of oil is low.
|
On February 03 2015 13:59 coverpunch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 11:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:(Bloomberg) -- One U.S. refinery is shutting while management takes control of operations at six others after union workers walked out of the plants in the biggest strike since 1980.
The United Steelworkers union that represents employees at more than 200 refineries, terminals, pipelines and chemical plants stopped work Sunday at nine sites, accounting for 10 percent of the country’s refining capacity, after contract negotiations fell apart. The union rejected five offers made by Royal Dutch Shell Plc on behalf of companies including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. since talks began Jan. 21. Tesoro Corp. is shutting half of its 166,000-barrel-a-day Martinez plant in California that wasn’t already idled for maintenance.
Union leaders haven’t called a strike nationally since 1980, when a stoppage lasted three months. While only one of the nine plants has curbed production amid the stoppage, a full walkout of USW workers would threaten to disrupt as much as 64 percent of U.S. fuel output. Shell and union officials began negotiations amid the biggest collapse in oil prices since 2008.
Refiners may cut operating rates “a little” during the strike, John Auers, executive vice president at Dallas-based Turner Mason & Co., said by phone Monday. “They won’t push the units as hard. The key will be to run them reliably and safely.” The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said.
United Steelworkers members do everything from operating units to performing maintenance to testing and analyzing samples in labs at U.S. refineries, Hancock said.
The refineries on strike can produce 1.82 million barrels of fuel a day, data compiled by Bloomberg show. They span the U.S., from Tesoro’s plants in Martinez and Carson, California; and Anacortes, Washington, to Marathon Petroleum Corp.’s Catlettsburg complex in Kentucky to three sites in Texas, according to the USW’s statement. Source The most important passages from the article, for posterity's sake: Show nested quote +The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said...
Refiners’ shares on the Standard & Poor’s 500 have more than doubled since the beginning of 2012, when the steelworkers last negotiated an agreement. U.S. fuel producers have been cashing in on the biggest-ever domestic oil boom, which has helped drive oil prices almost 50 percent lower in 2014. tl;dr workers want a new piece of the bigger pie, as refiners are collecting bigger profit margins because the price of oil is low.
I'm not sure that oil prices are all that correlated with refining margins. If they really are, let me know.
It seems to be a pretty open question as to just how much of the recent boom is going to last, so I hope the unions are taking that into account.
|
What's with Christie and Rand Paul hopping on the vaccination crazy train? Seems especially weird after how Christie went all Outbreak on the woman who didn't have Ebola.
|
On February 03 2015 14:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
What's with Christie and Rand Paul hopping on the vaccination crazy train? Seems especially weird after how Christie went all Outbreak on the woman who didn't have Ebola.
Especially since it's a losing battle... How many times are they going to ride the anti-science train til they realize that science always comes out on top?
|
On February 03 2015 14:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
What's with Christie and Rand Paul hopping on the vaccination crazy train? Seems especially weird after how Christie went all Outbreak on the woman who didn't have Ebola.
I saw Rand Paul on CNBC and he wasn't anti-vaccine.
|
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him)
|
On February 03 2015 14:20 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 13:59 coverpunch wrote:On February 03 2015 11:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:(Bloomberg) -- One U.S. refinery is shutting while management takes control of operations at six others after union workers walked out of the plants in the biggest strike since 1980.
The United Steelworkers union that represents employees at more than 200 refineries, terminals, pipelines and chemical plants stopped work Sunday at nine sites, accounting for 10 percent of the country’s refining capacity, after contract negotiations fell apart. The union rejected five offers made by Royal Dutch Shell Plc on behalf of companies including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. since talks began Jan. 21. Tesoro Corp. is shutting half of its 166,000-barrel-a-day Martinez plant in California that wasn’t already idled for maintenance.
Union leaders haven’t called a strike nationally since 1980, when a stoppage lasted three months. While only one of the nine plants has curbed production amid the stoppage, a full walkout of USW workers would threaten to disrupt as much as 64 percent of U.S. fuel output. Shell and union officials began negotiations amid the biggest collapse in oil prices since 2008.
Refiners may cut operating rates “a little” during the strike, John Auers, executive vice president at Dallas-based Turner Mason & Co., said by phone Monday. “They won’t push the units as hard. The key will be to run them reliably and safely.” The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said.
United Steelworkers members do everything from operating units to performing maintenance to testing and analyzing samples in labs at U.S. refineries, Hancock said.
The refineries on strike can produce 1.82 million barrels of fuel a day, data compiled by Bloomberg show. They span the U.S., from Tesoro’s plants in Martinez and Carson, California; and Anacortes, Washington, to Marathon Petroleum Corp.’s Catlettsburg complex in Kentucky to three sites in Texas, according to the USW’s statement. Source The most important passages from the article, for posterity's sake: The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said...
Refiners’ shares on the Standard & Poor’s 500 have more than doubled since the beginning of 2012, when the steelworkers last negotiated an agreement. U.S. fuel producers have been cashing in on the biggest-ever domestic oil boom, which has helped drive oil prices almost 50 percent lower in 2014. tl;dr workers want a new piece of the bigger pie, as refiners are collecting bigger profit margins because the price of oil is low. I'm not sure that oil prices are all that correlated with refining margins. If they really are, let me know. It seems to be a pretty open question as to just how much of the recent boom is going to last, so I hope the unions are taking that into account.
The article makes it seem as though the margins on byproducts to oil have risen as the price of oil has fallen, which has led to windfalls for the refiners. It is a bit weird that the United Steel Workers are the main force behind this, but whatever I guess.
I agree that the boom is temporary and American unions don't roll back benefits, but I think it is possible to counter that the Obama administration doesn't seem to be reacting to the strong dollar and low oil prices, which seems to imply they're okay with it and won't be trying to change the situation. Which means the price of oil should remain low until at least 2017, when we get a new president with possibly a new agenda.
The article doesn't talk about how big a bump the union wants or how high the walls against contract workers, which is unfortunate.
|
On February 03 2015 14:55 zlefin wrote:
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him)
We never let nuance get in the way of a good hit piece:
Two leading Republican presidential hopefuls waded into the argument over childhood vaccinations Monday, with Sen. Rand Paul declaring that he had heard of "many tragic cases" of children suffering harm after receiving shots and Gov. Chris Christie saying parents should be given a "choice" on the issue.
The remarks, coupled with President Obama's defense of vaccinations over the weekend, injected an unexpectedly partisan element into a policy issue -- how readily to give exemptions to parents who don't want vaccines for their children -- that until now had not shown much partisan division.
Christie, the New Jersey governor, who has previously courted controversy with actions on public health, seemed to waver on the issue during the course of the day. He first made a statement that, in at least some cases, backed parents who want exemptions, then issued a clarification after coming under attack by Democrats.
Paul, the Kentucky senator, stuck more consistently to his libertarian views. On a conservative radio program Monday morning, he said that he favors vaccines but that "most of them ought to be voluntary."
Later, in an interview on CNBC, he upped the stakes, repeating that he saw the question as an "issue of freedom" then appearing to side with vaccine critics who have linked the shots to autism or other mental problems -- a position that has been repeatedly debunked and, in the case of autism, shown to be based on fraudulent research.
"I think vaccines are one of the greatest medical breakthroughs that we have. I'm a big fan," Paul said. But then he quickly pivoted to criticism of government vaccination requirements.
"I've heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," he said. "I think the parents should have some input. The state doesn't own your children. Parents own the children, and it is an issue of freedom."
I've seen this reflected on Twitter as well, with left-wingers trying to pin anti-vaccination as a right-wing thing (i.e. typical anti-science attitude) and vice versa (e.g. highest vaccination state is Mississippi, red state, highest non-vaccination state is Oregon, blue state).
|
On February 03 2015 14:55 zlefin wrote:
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him)
There's not really anything reasonable about playing into irrational fears about measles or other vaccines.
Masking it behind "parental choice" is just more politically palatable.
Paul saying "I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," is just ridiculous scaremongering.
It's not that I think they actually believe their own bullshit, I just don't understand why they are even trying to play to the Anti-vax crowd in the first place?
EDIT: As for the political aspect of it, while average Americans of both political parties are anti-vax, I haven't seen the politicians on the left playing to that crowd? Has anyone seen that?
|
On February 03 2015 15:14 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 14:55 zlefin wrote:
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him) There's not really anything reasonable about playing into irrational fears about measles or other vaccines. Masking it behind "parental choice" is just more politically palatable. Paul saying "I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," is just ridiculous scaremongering. It's not that I think they actually believe their own bullshit, I just don't understand why they are even trying to play to the Anti-vax crowd in the first place?
I think they're playing to the populism of opposing a nanny state forcing health care decisions on citizens whether they want it or not. I'm also not sure why they're drawing a line in the sand on vaccinations. There have been problems in the past related to poor quality control and side effects, but I think "many" is too strong and vague a word (better to use an order of magnitude) and the alternative of refusing vaccines seems extreme (and both Christie and Paul reject it) as well.
EDIT: As for the edit question, RFK Jr is a big proponent of the anti-vaccine movement.
|
My preference is for vaccination to not turn into a 'vote for my party' shit fest.
Preparing for disappointment...
|
On February 03 2015 14:20 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 13:59 coverpunch wrote:On February 03 2015 11:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:(Bloomberg) -- One U.S. refinery is shutting while management takes control of operations at six others after union workers walked out of the plants in the biggest strike since 1980.
The United Steelworkers union that represents employees at more than 200 refineries, terminals, pipelines and chemical plants stopped work Sunday at nine sites, accounting for 10 percent of the country’s refining capacity, after contract negotiations fell apart. The union rejected five offers made by Royal Dutch Shell Plc on behalf of companies including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. since talks began Jan. 21. Tesoro Corp. is shutting half of its 166,000-barrel-a-day Martinez plant in California that wasn’t already idled for maintenance.
Union leaders haven’t called a strike nationally since 1980, when a stoppage lasted three months. While only one of the nine plants has curbed production amid the stoppage, a full walkout of USW workers would threaten to disrupt as much as 64 percent of U.S. fuel output. Shell and union officials began negotiations amid the biggest collapse in oil prices since 2008.
Refiners may cut operating rates “a little” during the strike, John Auers, executive vice president at Dallas-based Turner Mason & Co., said by phone Monday. “They won’t push the units as hard. The key will be to run them reliably and safely.” The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said.
United Steelworkers members do everything from operating units to performing maintenance to testing and analyzing samples in labs at U.S. refineries, Hancock said.
The refineries on strike can produce 1.82 million barrels of fuel a day, data compiled by Bloomberg show. They span the U.S., from Tesoro’s plants in Martinez and Carson, California; and Anacortes, Washington, to Marathon Petroleum Corp.’s Catlettsburg complex in Kentucky to three sites in Texas, according to the USW’s statement. Source The most important passages from the article, for posterity's sake: The USW has been asking employers for pay increases, stronger rules to prevent fatigue and measures to keep union workers rather than contract employees on the job, Lynne Hancock, a union spokeswoman based in Nashville, Tennessee, said by phone on Monday. It’s also negotiating for better health-care benefits because workers are “paying too much” for deductibles and premiums, she said...
Refiners’ shares on the Standard & Poor’s 500 have more than doubled since the beginning of 2012, when the steelworkers last negotiated an agreement. U.S. fuel producers have been cashing in on the biggest-ever domestic oil boom, which has helped drive oil prices almost 50 percent lower in 2014. tl;dr workers want a new piece of the bigger pie, as refiners are collecting bigger profit margins because the price of oil is low. I'm not sure that oil prices are all that correlated with refining margins. If they really are, let me know.
they're not really. that's why margins are so hard to trade, you need to be able to understand both sides of the crack in order to trade margins well (i work on an oil trading desk). they follow different snd fundamentals.
|
On February 03 2015 15:23 coverpunch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 15:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 03 2015 14:55 zlefin wrote:
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him) There's not really anything reasonable about playing into irrational fears about measles or other vaccines. Masking it behind "parental choice" is just more politically palatable. Paul saying "I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," is just ridiculous scaremongering. It's not that I think they actually believe their own bullshit, I just don't understand why they are even trying to play to the Anti-vax crowd in the first place? I think they're playing to the populism of opposing a nanny state forcing health care decisions on citizens whether they want it or not. I'm also not sure why they're drawing a line in the sand on vaccinations. There have been problems in the past related to poor quality control and side effects, but I think "many" is too strong and vague a word (better to use an order of magnitude) and the alternative of refusing vaccines seems extreme (and both Christie and Paul reject it) as well. EDIT: As for the edit question, RFK Jr is a big proponent of the anti-vaccine movement.
Vaccinating and faith healing rank pretty even for me on whether they should be considered a "healthcare choice".
It's inevitable that eventually one of these anti-vax people is also going to be a faith healing type and their kid is going to get measles or polio or some crap and instead of getting medical treatment they will only pray and the kid will be permanently injured or die.
Some ignorant parent will be responsible for their kids death and people like Paul and Christie will have defended their ability to make those choices.
As for RFK Jr. he isn't really a politician, and your article shows democrats did what they should of.
These were claims he had made in the past, both publicly and in private conversations with other Democrats in Congress, none of whom have taken him seriously.
|
On February 03 2015 15:57 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 15:23 coverpunch wrote:On February 03 2015 15:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 03 2015 14:55 zlefin wrote:
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him) There's not really anything reasonable about playing into irrational fears about measles or other vaccines. Masking it behind "parental choice" is just more politically palatable. Paul saying "I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," is just ridiculous scaremongering. It's not that I think they actually believe their own bullshit, I just don't understand why they are even trying to play to the Anti-vax crowd in the first place? I think they're playing to the populism of opposing a nanny state forcing health care decisions on citizens whether they want it or not. I'm also not sure why they're drawing a line in the sand on vaccinations. There have been problems in the past related to poor quality control and side effects, but I think "many" is too strong and vague a word (better to use an order of magnitude) and the alternative of refusing vaccines seems extreme (and both Christie and Paul reject it) as well. EDIT: As for the edit question, RFK Jr is a big proponent of the anti-vaccine movement. Vaccinating and faith healing rank pretty even for me on whether they should be considered a "healthcare choice". It's inevitable that eventually one of these anti-vax people is also going to be a faith healing type and their kid is going to get measles or polio or some crap and instead of getting medical treatment they will only pray and the kid will be permanently injured or die. Some ignorant parent will be responsible for their kids death and people like Paul and Christie will have defended their ability to make those choices. As for RFK Jr. he isn't really a politician, and your article shows democrats did what they should of. Show nested quote +These were claims he had made in the past, both publicly and in private conversations with other Democrats in Congress, none of whom have taken him seriously.
I dunno, man, the public outcry probably makes them regret ever saying anything on the subject, and they need to move the needle somehow. I don't agree with them and I think they chose the wrong issue, but I kinda see what they're trying to do.
These actions matter less than, say, California's Democratic governor adding a free ride to religion in its vaccine exemption laws, if we're talking about responsibility for the deaths of kids and parental choice. In Christie's defense, New Jersey does have strict vaccination laws and he hasn't loosened them.
|
On February 03 2015 16:22 coverpunch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2015 15:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 03 2015 15:23 coverpunch wrote:On February 03 2015 15:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 03 2015 14:55 zlefin wrote:
The words Christie actually said are pretty reasonable (albeit uncharacteristically nuanced of him) There's not really anything reasonable about playing into irrational fears about measles or other vaccines. Masking it behind "parental choice" is just more politically palatable. Paul saying "I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," is just ridiculous scaremongering. It's not that I think they actually believe their own bullshit, I just don't understand why they are even trying to play to the Anti-vax crowd in the first place? I think they're playing to the populism of opposing a nanny state forcing health care decisions on citizens whether they want it or not. I'm also not sure why they're drawing a line in the sand on vaccinations. There have been problems in the past related to poor quality control and side effects, but I think "many" is too strong and vague a word (better to use an order of magnitude) and the alternative of refusing vaccines seems extreme (and both Christie and Paul reject it) as well. EDIT: As for the edit question, RFK Jr is a big proponent of the anti-vaccine movement. Vaccinating and faith healing rank pretty even for me on whether they should be considered a "healthcare choice". It's inevitable that eventually one of these anti-vax people is also going to be a faith healing type and their kid is going to get measles or polio or some crap and instead of getting medical treatment they will only pray and the kid will be permanently injured or die. Some ignorant parent will be responsible for their kids death and people like Paul and Christie will have defended their ability to make those choices. As for RFK Jr. he isn't really a politician, and your article shows democrats did what they should of. These were claims he had made in the past, both publicly and in private conversations with other Democrats in Congress, none of whom have taken him seriously. I dunno, man, the public outcry probably makes them regret ever saying anything on the subject, and they need to move the needle somehow. I don't agree with them and I think they chose the wrong issue, but I kinda see what they're trying to do. These actions matter less than, say, California's Democratic governor adding a free ride to religion in its vaccine exemption laws, if we're talking about responsibility for the deaths of kids and parental choice. In Christie's defense, New Jersey does have strict vaccination laws and he hasn't loosened them.
I wouldn't exempt him from my criticism just because he's a democrat. Although, the bill he signed was strongly opposed by the Anti-vax crowd in the first place. Also, it's not really clear that he would be able to actually make that happen anyway.
|
It is so sad to see republicans try to defend rand on his anti-vaccine stance. Take some responsibility and try to reform your party instead of trying to rationalize it. It's gone too far. Fucking do something.
|
New York Times does another hit piece on Christie:
As Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey waited to depart on a trade mission to Israel in 2012, his entourage was delayed by a late arrival: Mr. Christie’s father, who had accidentally headed to the wrong airport.
A commercial flight might have left without him, but in this case, there was no rush. The private plane, on which Mr. Christie had his own bedroom, had been lent by Sheldon G. Adelson, the billionaire casino owner and supporter of Israel. At the time, he was opposing legislation then before the governor to legalize online gambling in New Jersey.
Mr. Christie loaded the plane with his wife, three of his four children, his mother-in-law, his father and stepmother, four staff members, his former law partner and a state trooper.
King Abdullah of Jordan picked up the tab for a Christie family weekend at the end of the trip. The governor and two staff members who accompanied him came back to New Jersey bubbling that they had celebrated with Bono, the lead singer of U2, at three parties, two at the king’s residence, the other a Champagne reception in the desert. But a small knot of aides fretted: The rooms in luxurious Kempinski hotels had cost about $30,000; what would happen if that became public?
The governor, a Republican now preparing a run for president, shot to national prominence as a cheese-steak-on-the-boardwalk Everyman who bluntly preached transparency and austerity as the antidote to bloated state budgets. But throughout his career in public service, Mr. Christie has indulged a taste that runs more toward Champagne at the Four Seasons.
He has also quietly let others pay the bills.
That tendency — the governor himself says he wants to “squeeze all the juice out of the orange” — has put him in ethically questionable situations, taking benefits from those who stand to benefit from him.
What happened, no more bridge smack?
|
Even as a political move, it's a terrible move for Republicans to stand by anti-vaccs crowd. Especially since this comes during the measles out break at Disneyland...
I mean, who are they going to try and grab from playing with this issue? moderates? Hell da fuck no. They're only playing to a crowd that's already going to vote for them regardless of this issue. If they just ignored this issue all together they would be further ahead. Now moderates just think the anti-vaccination supporters are crazy, and they're going to lump Republicans with them too. A good as Republicans are at framing the issues, this is definitely one they should have avoided.
|
On February 03 2015 16:53 wei2coolman wrote:
Even as a political move, it's a terrible move for Republicans to stand by anti-vaccs crowd. Especially since this comes during the measles out break at Disneyland...
I mean, who are they going to try and grab from playing with this issue? moderates? Hell da fuck no. They're only playing to a crowd that's already going to vote for them regardless of this issue. If they just ignored this issue all together they would be further ahead. Now moderates just think the anti-vaccination supporters are crazy, and they're going to lump Republicans with them too. A good as Republicans are at framing the issues, this is definitely one they should have avoided.
It's just knee jerk "wait, don't tell me to do things. Don't give 2 shits whether it is a statistically and scientifically good idea. I fucking refuse to be told to do in any way shape or form. ESPECIALLY BY FUCKING OBAMA JESUS CHRIST I HATE THAT GUY"
|
Christie and Paul's statements on vaccinations are incredibly dull. Basically trying to throw out statements that show that they support both sides. Just pandering to as many people as possible like what every politician does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
