I mean, all internet posting is a fun waste of time.
5 Likes
The pete attacks and skys defences are good clarifying posts. You want thread full of “bernie rocks! Yay M4A”? Sky is 100% holding her own. Of course she’s not going to change her mind but how is it not a good thing to be able to ask real probing questions of a significant person in a presidential campaign?
3 Likes
You’re allowing a single supporter to cause the entire discussion on here to be framed around their candidate. This is a microcosm of what is happening in the campaign as a whole. We’ve allowed the entire primary to become a discussion of a candidate that was in 4th or 5th at the time because he took a bunch of shitty stances and since the primary became all about him his chances of winning have only increased. It’s like none of you understand how Trump actually won in 2016
2 Likes
Going to work for McKinsey is what talented middle class Harvard grads did in the early 2000s if they weren’t going to grad/med/law school or I-banking. There’s nothing at all unusual about it. It’s literally the standard play while considering a “next step.” Those that couldn’t get hired at McKinsey went to Booz Allen Hamilton or wherever.
While McKinsey may work for some ghouls (less than has been reported), their main biz is simply giving reasonable, informed business advice at an extravagant rate. I represented big companies when I graduated law school. I almost never dealt with people in those companies and do not care a whit more about them now than if I had never “worked for” them. My primary concern was how much they were overbilled in relation to the value of the work, and also how I needed to bill 2000 hours or my time earning $140k with benefits in 2004 would be brief.
There is nothing even minimally suspicious or unsavory about Pete working for McKinsey. Worse case, he’s just Bill Clinton 2.0 or Barack Obama with a better resume and less time in the wilderness. He did not land in the presidential race by accident. He’s been thinking about it since grade school, as have many other talented (and untalented) people. That’s not my concern. My concern are that he will get out-knowledged (unlike Warren) when appointing people and pushing for reforms, that he should get some experience in higher office, and that his gayness will be an electoral liability.
8 Likes
You enjoy spending your time arguing with cultists who are just going to post in bad faith? Go argue with the Trump supporters on the old site.
I do.
9 Likes
Big plus for Pete: not a lawyer.
1 Like
BTW, McKinsey had a pretty much “above reproach” reputation in 2007. They were the elite doing things for American Commerce (and, obv, firing people). It’s only in the last couple of years that some shady stuff has come out about working with foreign governments, etc. (there are apparently strict policies in place to ensure such work is above board, and the scandals I’ve seen have many related to breach of its own policies). McKinsey wants and needs to avoid any taint or serious criticism, or they won’t be able to hire summa cum laude Harvard grads looking for the next step up on The Ladder Of Success. While they pay a lot, they don’t pay banking money, so their reputation, especially with top tier recruits, is important.
When the executives of companies max out donations to a certain candidate that should cause anyone worry and obviously some here put more weight on that than others. Also LOL at comparing that to donations from regular amazon employees to Bernie, pretty sure the average donation from amazon employees is fairly low and I’d bet very few donations if any are from execs at the company. Also the Amazon employees definitely aren’t giving to Bernie so that he can be nicer to Amazon
my point…exactly. Sorry, i thought the 3 !!! was enough to denote facetiousness.
not true. My friend worked there in the 90s. No one thought he was consulting in concentration camps, but McKinsey did not have a good reputation. It had a prestigious reputation, but not a good reputation.
1 Like
He also takes donations as long as they aren‘t explicitly named publicly.
Sky,
Makehaste and Elizabeth Warren up there had a point that was very different then regular employees making donations.
No I know you were but most of Bernie’s donations from employees at bad companies are from people in the lower rungs of the company and for smaller amounts, so there’s not much argument that it is the company trying to buy influence. When a candidate gets maxed donations from execs or higher ups in a certain company there is a lot more room for scrutiny (edit: also i know maybe arguing the dollar amount doesn’t matter since it’s a design of the system that execs make more money and have more disposable income for donations). You can understand why some of us are more weary and quicker to scrutinize cases where that happens or appears to happen.
Also I hope you don’t take the criticism of Pete (whether valid or not) in here as a knock towards you.
give me a minute to find a full cell phone video of one of Pete’s house meet and greet “large dollar fundraisers”. Oh wait, there’s already one I posted in this thread. Our San Diego event was closed to the press. But I suspect that’s not what you’re looking for…one sec.
Spoiler alert: it’s the same stuff he says at rallies in NH and Iowa
This has always come around as a result of trying to frame other people in the best possible light. Sort of like they must be lying, because they’d look way worse if they weren’t.
ok here. I doubt you’ll watch it, but this is the entire thing.
If you look close you can even spot me in the background. I was a volunteer who helped check in people at the door.
also, someone blogged about one:
https://buttheiremails.com/2019/09/19/pete-buttigieg-high-dollar-fundraiser/
Let’s assume this event hosted by his husband is representative of all other the private events hosted by big pharma, silicon valley, and wall street lobbyists and execs. Let’s assume Pete’s not making any promises to those corporate interests that would benefit them over the working class (on issues like M4A) that he wouldn’t make in front of press. Even if that were the case, there certainly are other politicians who are selling out at these types of fundraisers. There’s good reason to stop this practice, denounce it, and continue to add transparency to campaign financing. Warren and Sanders are leading by example on this issue.
2 Likes
In the category of nobody gives a shit … I interviewed for a position at McKinsey in the 1980’s but turned down their offer due to their “mixed” reputation (which I did not fully understand or appreciate until after I interviewed). I went to work instead for a smaller management consulting firm (at significantly lower salary) with around 30 employees and eventually left that position some years later when the company was bought out by the management consulting arm of a big-five accounting firm.
Cliffs: Working for McKinsey when and where Pete did is an orange flag to me.
4 Likes