• ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Imagine if she ran on a $15 an hour minimum wage increase

    To be extremely clear. THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES

      Democrats run on $15/hr, win in a landslide (2020), and throw up their hands because they don’t have Joe Manchin’s permission to raise wages in the US Senate.

      Republicans run on ending abortions and now abortions are fully illegal in a slew of states, with a national ban on the horizon.

      • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I didn’t watch her every appearance, but I did watch quite a lot, and minimum wage seriously got very little time compared to her pursuit of Republicans. Reporters and politicos who did watch everything agree. Abortion was in the forefront regarding their D platform, which has about as much support as higher minimum wage (over 60%).

        If she had replaced her R outreach with campaigning for higher wages, and continued as she did with the abortion issue, she would have received many more D and independent voters. She needed them both to win, the “R strategy” was weird and stupid and in my opinion I think she was paid to do exactly what she did.

        Her campaign undeniably made a fortune from somebody (over a billion dollars). Not only did she make more than anybody ever, she did it in just a few months. It’s a radical and preposterous increase, right in the open, in public.

        She immediately knew reaching out to Rs was a massive waste of precious time and that she would lose if she did so. It’s a mathematical certainty, bOtH pArTiEs know that they need to court independents instead of their opponents to win a fed election.

        I voted for her, this is not a Trump defense, he also is paid to do exactly what he does by “donors” (like Saudi Arabia and Musk and Bezos and Walmart and Russia and that guy from the Hercules sitcom).

      • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        And you’re every so politely ignoring the states run by dems having higher min wages, to pretend that it’s only Republicans getting shit done. Notably just like there isn’t a $15 min national wage, there’s also not a national abortion ban. Your comparison is poorly cherry picked.

        • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          I can’t speak for everyone, but I thought thoroughness would be pedantic. I could have gone into much more detail, or at least typed out “FEDERAL minimum wage”, but I had thought this was taken for granted in any FEDERAL election. So what do you do? Accuse me of “pretending” and “cherry picking”, that’s not nice.

          So, for future reference, a President can only sign a federal minimum wage increase, they are unable to raise state, city, etc. minimum wages. I’ll be sure to type that out into great detail next time. Ha, I’m kidding, ain’t nobody got time for that.

          You know my post would have had to be pages long for the wage increase if I went into detail, you could easily write a fat book about it.

          Remember, 40% of voters are independent, Ds and Rs are at 30% each. It’s to your advantage to be cordial, whatever party you are; hostility will NOT win elections. Not an accusation, just sharing a factoid (hint hint)

          • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            19 minutes ago

            For the comment higher towards you I really did mean that as a general clarification. I would’ve worded it more strongly otherwise. I wasn’t entirely sure if you realized it or not given your wording, so I wanted to make sure less familiar people reading on that were more clear.

            The cherry picking comment was not to you, it was to their person it’s replied to. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misread the comment chain

    • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      To be extremely clear. THAT WAS ONE OF HER POLICIES

      Of course, this is well known in politics circles. That is why I said, “a good portion of her campaign was targeting Republican women voters.” (bold added for emphasis)

      To be totally transparent, SERIOUSLY, THIS Is NOT A JOKE OR SOME KIND OF WORD TRICKERY OR CONSPIRACY, WITH NO CLAIMS MADE OF A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OR EXCLUSIVITY OF POLICIES.

      • AxExRx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I think the 2 of your’s disconnect is over what ‘ran on’ means. Most people would take that to be the main emphasis of the campign messaging,

        Not the total platform and all its contents.

        • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Yes, my opinion is she “ran on” abortion and R outreach primarily.

          Abortion was a good issue, but any “R outreach” time spent was wasted. Spend that time on Democrats and independents instead.