GrubHub Tells Trump Supporters They Can Quit

I've always liked Grubhub. They are reliable, fast and have the largest selection of Denver delivery places around, and never once have they gotten an order wrong or delivered later than they promised.

Today I like them more.

The CEO of Grubhub, an online food delivery service, sent a company wide email Wednesday suggesting employees who agree with President-elect Donald Trump’s behaviors and his campaign rhetoric should resign.

“If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here,” wrote Matt Maloney, Co-Founder of Grubhub. “We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team."

Check and see if Grubhub is in your City. We should patronize businesses that stick up for our core values.

< Paul Ryan: Medicare Killer | The Swamp of Donald Trump's Potential Nominees >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    this thread has been mostly (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 01:51:10 AM EST
    cleaned of insults, I don't have time to get them all.

    Keep in mind all points of view are welcome here. It's how they are expressed, and how frequently in a single thread, that determine if they are not appropriate.

    Exercise some tolerance for the views of others or at least scroll on by without leaving snide comments directed at other commenters.

    im shocked at this (1.00 / 1) (#8)
    by linea on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 06:17:29 PM EST
    this shouldnt be illegal and anyone who thinks this is fine needs to reassess their values. it's hideous.

    i hope this company is prosecuted in those [liberal] states that have worker protecton laws. it should be everyone's goal that all states have laws protecting workers and that a Federal law to protect workers be passed.

    In Oregon, it's illegal to threaten loss of employment in order to influence the way someone votes. In Washington State, it's illegal to retaliate against employees for failing to support a candidate, ballot position or political party. Some states, like California, Colorado, New York, North Dakota and Louisiana, say it's illegal to retaliate against an employee for their off-duty participation in politics or political campaigns. In Florida, it's a felony to "discharge or threaten to discharge any employee in his or her service for voting or not voting in any election, state, county, or municipal, for any candidate or measure submitted to a vote of the people."

    that should read (none / 0) (#9)
    by linea on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 06:28:00 PM EST
    this shouldnt be legal (or) this should be illegal

    You need to read it again (none / 0) (#22)
    by Yman on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:10:51 PM EST
    He didn't violate the law, and no one needs to "reassess their values".

    it's wrong (none / 0) (#23)
    by linea on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:13:58 PM EST
    it's oppressive to employees.
    and it shouldn't be legal.

    Normally I would agree (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 12:49:32 PM EST
    For people who agree with Trump that some Americans are less than human and fair game, the deal is off. Garbage in, garbage out.

    Besides that, Trumper's actions would get you fired by most any HR department, so Grubhub's employees are no more oppressed than they were yesterday. Think about it - Grubhub provides a public accommodation. You think they should tolerate employees that are biased against some of their customers?


    you are wrong (none / 0) (#35)
    by linea on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 02:08:01 PM EST
    this is hideous and what you wrote is hideous.

    a CEO bullying low-paid workers over who they voted for and the "sensible hillary supports" cheering and calling the employees "less than human?" if the actions of the CEO are not criminal they should be and no one should be cheering this.


    I don't agree that it is "hideous" (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Peter G on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 05:11:47 PM EST
    but I do agree with Linea to the extent that I don't believe a private employer should try to impose a political or ideological test on non-policymaking employees who do their jobs properly and keep their  dissenting or even offensive opinions to themselves when working and when interacting with customers.

    Peter,, Mr. Maloney, CEO, Grubhub (none / 0) (#51)
    by NYShooter on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 09:02:38 PM EST
    said no such thing, nor did he impose "a political or ideological test on non-policymaking employees." He said what any responsible executive of a company should say.

    Partial text from his email to his employees:
    (Link to full text in comment by poster above)

    "Some of the statements in my email (please see full text below) have been misconstrued. I want to clarify that I did not ask for anyone to resign if they voted for Trump. I would never make such a demand. To the contrary, the message of the email is that we do not tolerate discriminatory activity or hateful commentary in the workplace, and that we will stand up for our employees.

    Grubhub welcomes and accepts employees with all political beliefs, no matter who they voted for in this or any election. We do not discriminate on the basis of someone's principles, or political or other beliefs."

    My lord, there's enough things to criticize Donald Trump for, but, it doesn't help when critics simply make sh*t up.


    Sure he "clarified" when challenged (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Peter G on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 09:25:40 PM EST
    and I am glad he backtracked. But I read his original email, and I understood it as my comment reflected. I am as disgusted as anyone here at the results of the election, but I will not allow my disgust to cause me to abandon my intellectual integrity. We can be angry and still be honest. Bending one's every opinion to a preconceived ideological bent is what the other side does. Let's not imitate them.

    yes, the first email was somewhat ambiguous (none / 0) (#54)
    by NYShooter on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 10:35:27 PM EST
    I'm glad he clarified it.

    I did not call anyone less than human (none / 0) (#55)
    by FreakyBeaky on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 02:16:25 AM EST
    For the record.

    That's nice you think so (none / 0) (#26)
    by Yman on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:34:56 PM EST
    Only your opinion, and not what you originally claimed (that it was illegal).

    It is deadly (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 09:46:59 AM EST
    I spent almost 40 years working in large corporations. From an field engineer to controlling a large chunk of the sales force and a lot of in between stuff.

    Such a email from the CEO produces a chilling effect that is unbelievable. Corporations are not democracies. Such actions reinforce dishonesty about all kinds of things. From sales forecasts to product problems.

    So it is not just loss of business from customers who disagree, it is the intellectual rot it starts.


    Nonsense. (Even for you.) (none / 0) (#65)
    by Towanda on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 01:12:10 PM EST
    Being directly asked to resign is entirely legal. You can trust that Trump has done so of employees.  And many a board has asked CEOs to resign.

    And so, suggesting that an employee consider resigning certainly is legal.  

    There are other arguments to be made about this that may make more sense.  Can you make them?  That is, can you make sense?  (And with literacy?)


    The subject was the illegal actions (1.00 / 1) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 05:05:38 PM EST
    of the CEO.

    You bring up number of votes and say there are more of us that of you.

    That seems pretty clear to me.

    No, you said (none / 0) (#47)
    by MKS on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 06:05:51 PM EST
    the focus on the popular vote was mast*bation.  

    You now are being dishonest.


    "Illegal actions" of the CEO? (none / 0) (#83)
    by Yman on Tue Nov 15, 2016 at 04:55:36 PM EST
    Time to get a refund for that box of Cracker Jacks where you got your "law degree".

    Their stock is down about $2.00 (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 09:54:17 AM EST
    and trending down.

    A private company, fine. Say and do what you like. It's your money on the line.

    Public? No. It's other people's money. Do what you want privately but don't do things that you know will harm the investors.

    Some of them have/had their futures bet on you.

    It's up as of 12:23 pm EDT (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by jbindc on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 11:39:31 AM EST
    Well (none / 0) (#2)
    by jondee on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:21:28 AM EST
    at least he didn't specifically tell folks they couldn't post pictures of watermelons growing on the Whitehouse lawn..

    Bahahahaha (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 04:11:44 PM EST
    That won't last long

    Actually, ... (none / 0) (#21)
    by Yman on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:07:33 PM EST
    ... the investors are free to take their money elsewhere - or try to fire him - if they don't like it.

    Of course they are free to (none / 0) (#36)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 03:49:08 PM EST
    but the point is the CEO has failed in his fiduciary duty to try and increase the value of the stockholders investment.

    It is one thing to make poor business decisions because of lack of knowledge. It is entirely something else to do something that any intelligent person would know will hurt the company.

    He deserves to be fired.


    No he doesn't (none / 0) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 05:22:06 PM EST
    This improves his company. Bet that stock surges Monday too

    Because YOU think he (none / 0) (#81)
    by Yman on Tue Nov 15, 2016 at 12:31:56 PM EST
     violated his fiduciary duty.

    That's funny.


    GrubHub never invited Trump supporters to quit (none / 0) (#3)
    by Michael Masinter on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 12:35:25 PM EST
    Just because Faux News says so doesn't make it so.The actual email invited intolerant employees to quit; it never invited Trump supporters to quit or suggested that everyone who voted for him was intolerant.  Good for GrubHub for insisting on a tolerant and inclusive workforce!

    thanks for the link (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 04:59:55 PM EST
    From his email:

    ... insulting and ridiculing minorities, immigrants and the physically/mentally disabled worked for Mr. Trump, I want to be clear that this behavior - and these views, have no place at Grubhub. Had he worked here, many of his comments would have resulted in his immediate termination.

    I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can. As we all try to understand what this vote means to us, I want to affirm to anyone on our team that is scared or feels personally exposed, that I and everyone else here at Grubhub will fight for your dignity and your right to make a better life for yourself and your family here in the United States.

    If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here. We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.I want to repeat what Hillary said this morning, that the new administration deserves our open minds and a chance to lead, but never stop believing that the fight for what's right is worth it.

    His comments were indeed directed at Trump supporters -- he did indeed suggest that those who support his hateful agenda resign.


    The point is that he shouldn't have (none / 0) (#4)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 03:54:01 PM EST
    said anything.

    He's running a company not a "safe space."

    By injecting himself into it and making GrubHub a political issue he's harming the people who trust him to protect and grow their money.

    Maybe he's declaring his alliance (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 06:41:48 PM EST
    With the majority of Americans

    Incidentally, as of 5:05 p.m. EST today (Sat., Nov. 12, 2016), Hillary Clinton leads the nationwide count by 574,064 votes. Huffington Post continues to update the tally state by state and in real time, as city / county clerks report their additional results from absentee and provisional balloting.

    It is further anticipated that once those numbers are finalized, Mrs. Clinton may wind up winning the popular count over Trump by as much as 1.5 to 2 million votes, which would equal a pretty substantial 1.7-precentage point margin. If that projection holds, her popular vote win would be larger than that enjoyed by both JFK in 1960 and Richard Nixon in 1968, when they both won the election.

    For people like Matt Maloney, there are times when principle must take precedence over profit. This is one of them. As he said, any bigots and haters who disagree with him can go elsewhere.



    And still (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 06:52:59 PM EST
    4.2 million votes left to count in California, not including San Diego, which has yet to report.



    No. He does not have the (1.00 / 1) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 03:55:53 PM EST
    right to do anything that he knows will harm the stockholders.

    Talking about the popular vote, as you know, is just  mental masturbation.


    No, it shows there is no mandate (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by MKS on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 03:59:25 PM EST
    There are more of us than of you.

    So your position is that laws do not matter (1.00 / 3) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 04:29:43 PM EST
    Well, given the riots of Left wing Democrats breaking out across the country I am not surprised.

    Riots are bad? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Yman on Tue Nov 15, 2016 at 12:36:04 PM EST
    The popular vote is irrelevant?

    Not according to the guy you elected.

    The hypocrisy is rank.


    It sure (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 04:09:57 PM EST
    gets in the craw of Republicans to talk about the popular vote. They even have a disinformation campaign going on to say Trump won the popular vote. Majority did not vote for Trump which is a very good thing.

    When did liberals become the intolerant ones? (none / 0) (#10)
    by McBain on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 06:29:36 PM EST
    Was it during the Bush administration? Did it happen even earlier? The message is loud and clear.... think and vote as we do or there will be consequences.  We'll protest, riot, maybe even terminate your employment.  I'm disappointed Jeralyn is supportive of this mentality. People should leave politics out of the workplace

    I get it.... you guys are bummed out over the election.  I get it.... you really don't like Donald Trump.  But guess what, not everyone who voted for him is a horrible racist.  Some people didn't trust Hilary Clinton.  Some people think Trump will be better for the economy.

    Many liberals are acting like children right now.  Throwing tantrums because they're not getting what they want.  It's time to grow up, regroup and come up with a better option for 2020.  

    Trump is the (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 06:45:07 PM EST
    Most intolerant candidate this country has seen since George Wallace. Republicans lost the authority to discuss tolerance with trump.

    Trump may turn the CIA (none / 0) (#15)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 07:43:13 PM EST
    into the Gestapo.  

    He is reportedly considering naming Jose Rodriguez to head the CIA.  Rodriguez believes in torture.


    Rodriguez was (none / 0) (#16)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 07:51:44 PM EST
    the architect of Bush's torture program.

    You trivialize what just (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 08:16:04 PM EST
    happened.  I hope you are right.

    But Trump is not Romney or McCain.  He is dangerous, unstable lunatic.


    Exactly (none / 0) (#19)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 09:12:03 PM EST
    And Romney and McCain were trashed by liberals and the media......
    It wears off after a while, no matter who the Republicans nominate , will be pilloried and vilified,
    Maybe this time they were right, but the words fell on deaf ears.

    And The Donald is a pragmatist, and a showman.

    Campaigns were for the showman, now he gets down to business, and you will see his pragmatic side.

    Just my guess


    Obama was brilliant (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 09:14:34 PM EST
    He knew the one way to move Trump is to flatter him.  Obama may have saved those of us with Obamacare from great calamity.

    But Trump is unstable, so who knows what he will do.  


    unstable? Maybe (3.00 / 2) (#52)
    by NYShooter on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 09:10:49 PM EST
    But, do me a favor, please, MKS.

    Google: We came, we saw, he died

    and, I'll be happy to discuss "unstable" with you. Sincerely, really.


    You think her comment ... (none / 0) (#94)
    by Yman on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 08:29:45 AM EST
    ... about the overthrow of Gaddafi - a brutal dictator responsible for killing hundreds of Americans and tens of thousands of his own citizens means she is "unstable"?

    That's ridiculous.   But by all means,  if you're actually claiming that,  let's discuss.


    Your "guess" is worthless (none / 0) (#25)
    by Yman on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:16:42 PM EST
    We have his actual, hateful words (and actions) to judge him.  The fact that you think he'll suddenly become responsible is laughable.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:42:32 PM EST
    But he's unstable. However I'm glad you finally admit that you have been lying about not supporting Trump. The GOP lied about Hillary for decades and you have spent the entire time you have been on this log spreading lies and rumors. The people who are to be blamed for Trump are people like yourself.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#30)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 05:57:24 AM EST
    Not my guy, never had my support. I was not going to like either person in the Oval Office,

    But I also accepted the fact , and wrote that, we would also survive the next 4 years, for that is all that the next elected President will serve.


    Trevor the comment (none / 0) (#89)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 01:41:48 AM EST
    replying to this was deleted for personally insulting you.

    When did conservatives ... (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Yman on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 10:14:14 PM EST
    ... become masters of the strawman argument?  When (and why) did they feel suddenly qualified to advise liberals?  When did they fall under the mistaken impression that "tolerance" requires them to remain silent in the face of intolerance?

    You're funny.


    You don't get it (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 12:54:20 PM EST
    People are scared and angry, and rightly so.

    And the likes of you never get to lecture anyone on tolerance, fairness, responsibility, values, or patriotism EVER AGAIN.


    You sound intolerant to me (3.50 / 4) (#33)
    by McBain on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    I have a right to speak my mind. The likes of you need to get that.  This is about more than the election.  It goes back at least a dozen years.  Liberals need to be able to get along with people who don't think exactly like they do.  



    Not racism or bigotry (4.00 / 2) (#34)
    by MKS on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 01:51:44 PM EST
    No more tolerance for that.  Be that way, fine, but then that expression is only protected from interference from the Gov't, not private actors.

    I asked you to show (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 04:13:15 PM EST
    me racism and bigotry and you failed.

    By continuing to make this over heated, over stated, un provable and fakes claims you only harm your position.

    Why not recognize reality and attempt to negotiate?

    Trump does deals.

    But he doesn't respond well to threats.

    Think about it.


    McBain, I apologize (3.00 / 2) (#64)
    by FreakyBeaky on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 12:58:09 PM EST
    I allowed my temper to get the better of me. Allow me to try again.

    Of course you have the right to speak your mind. Indeed, let no one trample your precious rights. You do NOT have the right to be listened to, especially not about values you betray and rights you would strip from others.

    Democracy, tolerance, decency won a majority but are shut out of power. Those who openly associate and agree with white supremacists and neo-Nazis (since we're not supposed to call them names) are in the White House. Did you help put them there? Then STFU about rights and American values, please. (Asking nicely to respect your rights.) I, for one, assure you your insincere words fall on deaf ears.


    If my words fell on deaf ears you wouldn't (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by McBain on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 02:46:50 PM EST
    have responded.  I will continue to point out liberal intolerance when appropriate.  This has a lot to do with why the democrats lost the election.  

    I'm not a Republican.  I am somewhat conservative but I did support Obama's first term and was somewhat neutral on Bill Clinton. If the Dems come with a good candidate in 2020, they might get my vote.  But they'll need to stop the protests, the name calling and the politically correct nonsense.  


    And you feel exactly the same (none / 0) (#69)
    by jondee on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 02:57:22 PM EST
    of course, about the dozens of wild-eyed, wild-swinging Limbaugh clones on dozens of radio stations scattered across the country..

    And the same about the sorts of groups and individuals tracked by the Southern Poverty Law Center.



    I don't listen to right wing radio (none / 0) (#70)
    by McBain on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 03:15:47 PM EST
    I'm not familiar with the Southern Poverty Law Center.  

    I live in a very liberal area. Was raised by liberal parents.  I've seen how things have changed over the years.

    My ideal election would have been a four person race...
    Clinton (D)
    Kasich  (R)
    Trump   (I)
    Sanders (I)  

    I didn't like how the DNC shoved Hillary down our throats.  They cheated Sanders.  


    You've seen how things have changed (none / 0) (#71)
    by jondee on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 03:40:37 PM EST
    but if you don't have any idea about how right talk radio works, or know anything about what the Southern Poverty Law Center does, you're not paying attention to enough "things", imo, to make a judgement about whether or not liberals are being too "pc."

    Sometimes there are good historical reasons for people being hypersensitive.


    I know about right wing radio (none / 0) (#72)
    by McBain on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 03:47:31 PM EST
    I chose not to listen to it.  Limbaugh is an entertainer.  

    I'm certainly not an expert on politics but I seek out information from sources on both sides of the political spectrum.  That seems to be unusual for TL.  


    You disagree with (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Nov 15, 2016 at 10:42:49 AM EST
    the Left and don't listen to Limbaugh??

    How dare you not do what they want you to do.



    An entertainer.. (none / 0) (#73)
    by jondee on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 04:02:58 PM EST
    who just happens to interview (only) right wing pols and journalists on his show, and has the same guest host for him.

    The fact that you parrot that conservative "entertainer" spin about Limbaugh tells me you're not inclined to give equal time to both sides.


    I watch every episode of Bill Maher (none / 0) (#76)
    by McBain on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 08:08:14 PM EST
    He's another entertainer.  I don't take his opinions seriously but I like the back and forth of guests.  I usually fast forward through his opening monologue and his closing new rules.

    I watch more CNN than Fox.  I read CBS news, the SF Chronicle and this blog.  I sometimes read the Conservative Treehouse, especially when there's a high profile racially charged legal case.

    Most of my friends, family and collegues are liberal but I do know a few who are most conservative than me.

    I don't claim to be the most informed but I definitely listen to both sides with more time given to the left.  


    McBain, I find your comments (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 01:40:42 AM EST
    to be expressions of positions you genuinely hold and don't think you parrot anyone or any other site. Don't let other commenters here dissuade you. I may not agree with a lot of your positions on issues, but you express them civilly and coherently and I appreciate you taking the time to comment here.

    I will clean the thread of personal insults to you when I get a chance.


    Thank you Jeralyn :) (none / 0) (#95)
    by McBain on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 11:10:20 AM EST
    Try reading (none / 0) (#77)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 08:34:54 PM EST
    Real Clear politics website,

    You get a cornucopia of articles from all newspapers, magazines and websites, from all political viewpoints.
    They also have spinoffs, real clear energy, real clear science, and others.

    Quite a range of articles in one website


    An "entertainer" (none / 0) (#75)
    by FlJoe on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 04:27:00 PM EST
    who's word is taken as Gospel by millions is a very dangerous thing, a very dangerous thing, a very dangerous thing.......... people who "choose" not to listen to it and dismiss the danger run the gamut from total fools to craven enablers.

    I have no objection to views (none / 0) (#91)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 01:46:16 AM EST
    that disagree with mine if civilly expressed and the commenter isn't a blogclogger, continually repeating the same thing. TalkLeft is fine with you.

    The Bernie (none / 0) (#74)
    by FlJoe on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 04:18:19 PM EST
    got cheated myth was total crap,the DNC had minimal power during the primaries(not that they ever have that much power), and exactly zero influence on voters, who in the end went decisively for Clinton.

    They did cheat at his expense (1.00 / 1) (#84)
    by McBain on Tue Nov 15, 2016 at 05:26:49 PM EST
    If Clinton had the nomination in the bag why would they bother cheating?

    I guess you don't know (none / 0) (#78)
    by NYShooter on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 10:46:30 PM EST
     who Kurt Eichenwald is.

    To each his own.


    Indeed (none / 0) (#86)
    by Yman on Tue Nov 15, 2016 at 06:26:16 PM EST
    I know exactly who he is - a Pulitzer prize winning journalist.

    Go tell someone who cares (none / 0) (#59)
    by FreakyBeaky on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 11:30:34 AM EST
    Same thing Conservatives told (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 12, 2016 at 07:15:14 PM EST
    Those dirty hippies in the 60s and 70s. Expect the exact same results

    Well, we aren't going to agree (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 06:49:54 PM EST
    but I did provide dictionary definitions.

    But Humpty Dumpty explained that:

    "When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

    'The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

    'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all."
    ― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

    The sad thing is that the Left is throwing away opportunities to get things done through negotiations.

    For example, support for our current drug laws is very low among many of Trump's supporters so he might be open to making MJ legal in the federal system for support on say, immigration.

    Sell out 11 million? (none / 0) (#50)
    by MKS on Sun Nov 13, 2016 at 07:01:48 PM EST
    We are already making progress on marijuana....

    I see that (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 10:01:11 AM EST
    you have no desire to, and probably do not have the skill set to negotiate.

    And that's sad because the environment is rich with opportunities to get some things done.

    But instead it appears that the Left is driving the people who elected Trump, and they were Independents and not hard Right Repubs, right into the arms of the hard Right by their violent demonstrations, comments, etc.

    How about this. Say you'll support a nationwide competition between healthcare providers and expanding HSA's if Trump will support citizenship for people brought into the country by their parents as young chidren and green cards for their parents.


    More insults (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by MKS on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 11:29:26 AM EST
    I do have not "the skill set to negotiate"?  What a stupid thing to say.  I would have said arrogant, but that pre-supposes some understanding of what you are talking about.  You have none.   You are the one who said you visited Latin America when you went to the Bahamas.

    I negotiate for a living.

    Some things are non-negotiable.  Selling out 11 million people so racists can feel better is one of those things.  


    Utter bs (none / 0) (#66)
    by jondee on Mon Nov 14, 2016 at 01:14:58 PM EST
    and not even intelligent, well-thought-out bs.

    Who was the selecting of Pence throwing a bone to, if not the hard Right, social conservative Repubs who expect big things in exchange for their support?

    Or do you consider the anti-science, fundamentalist, creationist Pence a moderate?

    Though, given how much Trump excites Nazis and Klansman, maybe you're right.


    Jim stop the insults (none / 0) (#92)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 01:48:29 AM EST
    and stay on topic. Do not change the topic of this thread to you, your views of the economy, health care or anything else you feel like talking about. The thread has a topic. If you want to talk about something else, do it somewhere else.

    sorry he is terrible (none / 0) (#90)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Nov 16, 2016 at 01:44:03 AM EST
    on drug laws. Have you missed his and Pence's call for more cartel wars and more mandatory minimums? No one is going to jail for personal use of pot.