ewsieg

An ID for a ballot was put in place just to screw over POC? C'mon Man </Biden voice>

I hope, based on my time on motownsports/motownforums, that this is a generalized statement towards people that tend to agree with me politically, but not me in particular. It has never been lost on me that minorities face issues I don't have to deal with. I tend to think its more associated with class based issues and not race based, but in the end First, i'll let Oblong respond to this statement: Now obviously in full context, that's not what Oblong is saying. Well, excuse me, that's exactly what Oblong is saying as long as it's directed to White males. My argument is that Oblong is dead on right and this statement should be directed at everyone, not just one race. Removing the obstacle of ID to vote definitely would help POC vote. I am not arguing it wouldn't. My only point is that removing that obstacle helps perpetuate other legitimate obstacles that POC have that can be attained by getting an ID. Instead of telling POC they are victims and shouldn't have to get an ID, encourage them to get one, explain why it will help them vote, help them bring more justice into the judicial system, help them overcome so many other obstacles that are easier with an ID.

I was not trying to give a sweeping generalization of an entire group, but felt the only way I could reply to your stats which was specific to entire ethnic groups was to speak to some of the reasons that affect them. I have no doubt that the vast majority of people you talk to are good people. Most people I've met, regardless of their ethnicity, are good people. Even poor rural people i've met...good people. I like the James Brown lyric you quoted and I would add that it is very DNC'ish of him. "These people don't need my help at all, but obviously they need me to open the door for them, that's too difficult for them to do (but not difficult in a way that makes it a sweeping generalization that they can't do it themselves)." My lyric would not be as smooth as Brown's, but I would say "I Don't Want Nobody to Give Me Nothing, just tell me how to get a key card so I can open that door and any other door I come across myself"

I mean, I did say please not to take it the wrong way. 😉 It was just my honest reaction to what I viewed as an extremely condescending response from you. No need to read the rest of my response anyway, it was spot on logically and there would be no legitimate argument against it anyway.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but seriously....**** off. You're not the savior and everyone that disagrees with you is some stupid inbred racist from 'red' country. Poor urban folks, just like poor rural folks, deserve social programs designed to help them. I didn't call it a hand out, you inferred that on your own. I called it a social program and even stated that not having full access to those only burdens folks further. I'm not as concerned about POC of modest means, because, as I said already, for anyone with modest means, getting an ID isn't that hard and my guess is your percentages go out the window if we reevaluate your statistics based on income rather than race. As for juries, the demographic of your average jury is often not representative of the local demographic. On this site you're aware I often state that fixing issues that affect poor urban folks would also help poor rural folks, and vice versa. When it comes to juries, that is probably the biggest example where helping one doesn't help the other. This disproportionally affects minorities. I'm not going to pretend that only getting State IDs into the hands of all minorities will fix that, but its the first barrier. Getting IDs into everyone's hands eliminates that barrier.

I'm not arguing your statistics, I'm just debating why it got to that point. My argument is that you see correlation, laws enforcing ID = your stats therefore laws enforcing ID are causing your stats. My argument is maybe a system made certain ethnicities and the poor a little suspicious against the government, which led them to bypass what the rest of us consider standard government practices and kept them from getting an ID. While understandable, this also means these people may not have received some social programs, further hurting their ability to move up in society. This should be addressed. But somehow, the "Science" party is having trouble remembering the phrase "correlation does not imply causation". It touts to its base, which happens to be those people most affected by this, feeding into their concerns. Then they push back against voter ID laws which would quickly ease concerns by an opposing party, while also arguing that democracy is in the balance if the other party doesn't believe the election results. P.S. Absolutely agree and would actually prefer a federal law requiring voter ID, but handling the cost. Personally I'd probably try to shoehorn in some extended early voting and mail in ballot wording to solidify that stuff, but maybe let's pretend to cross one bridge at a time.

Saw Chapel at PJ's Lager House last night. Fun show.

ID's are not as hard to get as the left likes to pretend. Many cities and states already have programs to help get ID's and those certainly could be expanded. Additionally, getting ID's into the hands of every eligible voter, would disproportionately improve the lives of people of color by improving their ability to get a job, get a bank account, give more access to social programs, and even improve the justice system as it would put more people of color on juries. Getting everyone an ID should be a goal if you truly want to help people.

Guess you’re right, but a little shocked you, Tigerholic, and Archie are all on the same side regarding ICE and getting rid of illegals.

From a lifetime of experience in dealing with multiple industries, I feel like several shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt, including manufacturers and dealerships. My issue with SOS is shutting them down, which they have the right to do, and doing a press release that lies and says this: "LANSING, Mich. – Today, the Michigan Department of State (MDOS) suspended the license of LaFontaine Chevrolet Buick GMC of St. Clair, Inc. for imminent harm to the public. The vehicle dealership is located at 3050 King Rd. in China Township, Mich." No harm was done to the public. Zip, Zero, Zilch. An administrative issue was not correctly done, LaFontaine should do it correctly, but let's not pretend it caused harm to the public. I think any department and especially one headed by someone that is elected by its citizens, should always question the legitimacy of any laws and regulations and if they are going to enforce them, I would like to think they understand them.

Used/New, it really doesn't matter. They aren't new cars and they aren't being sold as new cars. End of story as far as the consumer is concerned. They are 'like new' cars sold at a discount, just like demo cars. The difference here is the manufacturer, in agreement with the dealership, allows them to be sold as 'new' which allows the consumer to also gain the benefit of certain discounts only allowed on new cars. (actually it might not be a difference at all, Demo cars were typically given to sales people to drive (benefit to the employee, also lets him promote the vehicles, these are essentially demo cars given to customers to build loyalty) It actually costs more for the dealership as well. 15 years ago if I had to drop off my car at Moran, they had an Enterprise office and if my car was under warranty, the manufacturer would cover the cost of the rental. If not, I had to pay for a rental or simply be without my car for the duration of the service. Depending on the situation, the dealer might cover it as well. Dealerships, in an attempt to secure more service department business started using their own vehicles. The manufacturer doesn't have to cover the cost of a rental, but in turn they agree to still allow the dealership to sell the service vehicles as new. The dealership is able to provide better service which keeps more returning customers and they gain volume on the added costs they incur making it better for them as well. It works out for everybody. SOS should have noticed the discrepancy in the paperwork, called it out, and had them fix it. Or, as I said, even better yet, they should have noticed the discrepancy, realized how ass backwords Michigan law is, and worked with dealerships in conjunction with the legislative branch to find a way to ensure dealerships don't have to spend more time and money to play their stupid little checkbox game AND help protect consumers. This benefits no one. Not a single person bought a vehicle with 5k miles and got home, looked at the odometer and went 'WTF?'. In fact this law only hurts consumers because in Michigan, unlike most other states that allow this to be documented as a new vehicle sale, the warranty on that car starts when the dealership puts it into it's rental service. In other states, the manufacturer doesn't start the clock on the warranty until it is titled to the new owner.

I think this perfectly summarizes the idea that folks are more patient with their own side. Defund the police was a very serious movement by a small group of progressives. Instead of calling it out, ridiculing it, and defending the police, the mainstream portion of the party tried to keep the momentum but co-opt it into many of the things you went into detail on. It wasn't until the pastors and ministers of urban areas started to be heard that they actually want a bigger police presence in their neighborhoods not less, did it finally peter out. But by not recognizing the obvious, which is even if there are issues with police in this country, having no police is crazier than Brittany Spears, those that entertained the progressives looked ridiculous to the majority of the country.

No one was conned, it was a clerical error and SOS wanted to make it look like they were defending the consumer. My Mother in Law works at Moran Chevrolet and people come into the dealership specifically looking to buy these. The dealer uses them as 'rentals' for customers that are getting their vehicles serviced. The dealership is allowed to use them for a period of time and the manufacturer allows them to still sell them as 'new' to make them eligible for additional discounts as they are never titled to an individual. The consumer is able to get a 'new' car at a discount because of the miles on it, plus get the manufacturer discounts for new cars to make it a better deal for them then if they purchased a new car right off the lot with less then 100 miles. Michigan is one of the only states that doesn't allow you to sell the car as new (by the state). So they are legally allowed to sell it as used in the eyes of the state, but new in the eyes of the manufacturer. Lafontaine was not going back and ensuring that the documentation was correct for the state. In short, instead of trying to match laws to an issue that dealerships and manufacturers that already solved, they are 1) not doing anything to try and ease the useless paperwork dealerships need to do and 2) they are playing it off as some big win. Benson will probably tout it as what she'll do to protect Michiganders as she runs for Governor.

No to the first part, maybe to the second part. Depends if the report looks good or not.

There is a part of me that feels Schumer folded, but I also recognize the pain having a shutdown has on so many people. He ended up getting a vote on the ACA subsidies. I could see Trump telling the GOP to vote for it, what does he care about spending more money to make his base happy? If they do, then they look like asshats that shut down the economy, did everything they could not to fund SNAP, for no reason at all as the sticky point on the left was the ACA subsidies. If they vote against, dems can clearly point to the GOP as the reason for high costs. That said, the GOP response will be that they always said the ACA was going to cost more and we can't simply keep funding it, we need to fix it (i'm not saying they will actually put out any plan). At that point, it just comes down to messaging. I feel like Trump's tweets about tariffs and giving money back to citizens indicated he felt like he was in the hot seat. So politically I'm annoyed by Schumer, for families that depend on SNAP and probably struggle at the end of the month already, i'm glad they will get some relief.

Honestly, I don't think she's smart enough to try and pretend to move to the middle. She also is still a big Trump supporter, she's just seeing some things that I think most of us assume others in the republican party see as well, she's just vocal about it, even if it doesn't align with what Trump wants out of her.

One may argue that only cements the idea that she's an idiot. What sane person wants that job?!?!? I get the feeling she came into Congress thinking everyone (on one side of the aisle) was crooked with a bit of a naivety to her that allowed her to entertain conspiracy theories. Now that she's there, she's seeing it's more bickering then work and is realizing it's not a D or R thing. As she's not your normal politician, she's simply reporting back on what she sees. I still wouldn't want to put her in a position of power, but my guess is a good chunk of folks go into politics like her and are quickly dismayed. Unlike her, most shut their mouth and follow the party line regardless though.

I agree with most, but mocking people doesn't generally turn people around, in fact it tends to harden some.

In the long run, I think i'm rooting for Youtube. Essentially they want ABC and ESPN, but they don't want all the nonsense channels that Disney wants to force them to take as well. In short, they are trying to move back towards a traditional Cable style, where you can pick and choose packages, but also include other 3rd party apps into 1 'menu' via Youtube where you have everything in one interface.

I'm not going to pretend I know the specific details of the hispanic/latino community in NYC, but as a whole, they tend to not like the words communist or socialist. Mamdani easily winning that group shows the populist message he's giving resonates with them. As for Spanberger not only winning, but by such a margin, just shows how racist our society is still. Oh wait, she's the white one? Sorry, still a rookie at these DNC talking points and got ahead of myself.

You're just overreacting </WorldCom employee who went to work on a midnight shift the day the accounting scandal was reported and watched our stock shrink to nothing (first time I learned stock could still go up and down outside of Wall Street hours) while his boss huddled up with other mgmt in a conference room at 4am and came out with nothing more than 'folks, business as usual, you're all expected to be hear on your next scheduled day, and we'll be able to answer questions soon'.>

The funny part is you thought there was a good Cuomo.

Calling Mamdani as good for NYC is likely just as rich. He's basically hoping folks in NYC forgot about Bill DeBlasio. I'm not saying Mamdani isn't pointing out legitimate issues and issues that should be priority. I just don't have any confidence a democratic socialist will make the right decisions to correct those issues without exacerbating other issues, and not fixing the issues at hand. Cuomo would probably be a better mayor, but he doesn't represent change, which is what people want. He does represent the status quo, which isn't great either.

We are banged up, but there isn't another team that isn't dealing with some injuries. Just a few weeks ago we were playing with the 'Legion of whom', while a few guys are questionable for this upcoming week, as of right now, we might have our entire starting defensive backfield in place for Washington. I would have preferred some additional depth at DE as I have no trust in Paschal or Davenport staying on the field (heck, just get on the field at this point). Obviously the Lions still like something about them though.

My brother was just telling me about a use case he was walking through regarding a competitor (kind of, same business, but they don't operate in the same region). This company used AI to eliminate a ton of jobs in the end of Q2. They already have publicly acknowledged with Q3 results they expect to blow past their original budget numbers due to so many mistakes on the backend which are much more costly to correct now. Anyone that uses AI to save money right now probably shouldn't spend it quite yet.