POLITICS SCHMALITICS

[gehringer_2]

12 minutes ago, Edman85 said:

Act Blue does more harm than good, imo. The ads that show up on Twitter by Act Blue cause me to block the candidates in them.

They also don't know when to quit. It's customer relations 101 that people don't like to be constantly harrassed.

[chasfh]

FWIW, Act Blue has a 96% rating on Charity Navigator. OTOH, there is a warning box referring to the Paxton investigation and the NYT story.

Personally, I know practically nothing about them, and not at all outside the few times I’ve seen them mentioned here. 

[ewsieg]

3 hours ago, oblong said:

Some people just can’t handle women being in charge. 

What a weaksauce response.  Not sure if that is in reference to me or LeDuff, but regardless it's BS.

[ewsieg]

6 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

It doesn't matter how many times the Trump WH bludgeons the CIA into re-releasing the same warmed over hash of speculation, if anyone knows anything, it's the Chinese - and they aren't saying.

Gehringer, while I give everyone here the benefit of the doubt, you are hold in higher regard than most.   You are one of the few that can occasionally smell some BS being thrown at you from your own side and acknowledge it.

You are absolutely right to say there is no definitive proof this was a lab leak.  You are absolutely right that science has shown that such a thing can happen naturally.  Honestly, I would not even put my life on the line to bet that it was definitely a lab leak..... but c'mon, you and I both know that if I bet my 401k on it, I'd probably be a whole lot better off.

And trust me, the US knows too.

[ewsieg]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

FWIW, Act Blue has a 96% rating on Charity Navigator. OTOH, there is a warning box referring to the Paxton investigation and the NYT story.

Personally, I know practically nothing about them, and not at all outside the few times I’ve seen them mentioned here. 

FWIW, I suspect Act Blue and WinRed both try and push folks towards reoccurring payments towards candidates (No different than any other business).  I will go further and say that WinRed, probably at the lack of morals from the party leading them, pushed it in a way that at least can be deemed unethical.  I wouldn't be surprised further if it's tougher to stop those payments if you gave to WinRed than if you gave to Act Blue either. 

While everyone says I 'both sides', even I'm not even pretending to give each the same benefit of the doubt.   

But that doesn't mean the other side may not be doing things wrong.   And by calling them out for it shouldn't be called 'both sides'ing'.