Some of my colleagues at work are McKinsey alums. They're so nice to your face, but apparently super evil. The funny thing is that Pete and the McKinsey guys I know personally all have the same kind of polish. There is definitely a McKinsey type and Pete seems to fit it well.
I would say the most offensive thing I've seen out of him I was non commital either way on him but my mind is made up He's a fraud and I hope he falls out of the race yesterday
It’s funny you say this. My McKinsey alumni coworkers mostly remind me of little finger. Frankly at this point the most durable candidates are Joe and Bernie. And Joe’s past week has me excited. And Bernie is rising.
DEM admin has been consistently better than GOP admin when it comes to the debt and deficits since Reagan. So, yes, the quote when taken out of context looks very bad. Here is more of the quote: "My party's not known for worrying about deficits and the debt too much, but it's time for us to start getting into that business because what we've seen in Washington is that the party that talked a lot about the deficit when they were trying to kill off programs, when it came time for the corporate tax cuts, it turns out they don't care. There is a trillion-dollar deficit now created under a Republican administration, which means if my party doesn't start getting interested in deficits then nobody will." He's trying to make a point that has merit but started with a phrase that easily can be used to attack him and it has been used to attack him. I have said I don't want him to be the dem nominee, but what I have seen over the last few weeks is strange - there seems to be a concerted effort to smear him. I'm not sure what is pushing these, but I'm somewhat suspicious. He's also not helping himself.
I stand corrected then. Should have done some more research but it is worded pretty clumsily. Seperating fact from fiction is getting pretty tedious. The average voter doesn't have time for this.
"the media has been pushing him down our throats (obviously depending on which channels you watch) . I remember him being on some late night talk shows way back in the spring?" Now he's getting some BS for appearing on "some late night talk shows way back in the spring?" That's the media "pushing him down our throats?" Really? I think I'll make another contribution.
Pete is making the point that Dem presidents have historically been better about managing deficits than republicans. Dems just don’t do a good enough job of owning that and instead let republicans portray themselves as the party of fiscal conservatism, even though the last few Republican Presidents have ballooned the deficit.
Lol man that’s just what i think . Of course one appearance doesn’t make it unbearable , I was just pointing out how early and consistently he’s been getting airtime . Obviously my guy is yang so I’m a little sensitive about this haha . Pete was getting attention before he shot up in the polls , and I feel like that attention and familiarity is part of the reason he shot up . I will admit he apparently has an excellent ground game in Iowa and maybe NH now. I feel like with voters , sometimes it’s hard to back someone if you think they can’t win (either primary or general) and the more frequently you are mentioned on TV (especially if it’s favorable ) the more confident people can be that you are a “legit” candidate and voting for you isn’t throwing your vote away. If Democrats main concern is beating trump , everyone obviously has their own opinion on who is the strongest candidate . If you think voting for your number 1 (who stood a low chance of winning) was throwing your vote away , and you thought that someone who couldn’t beat trump might win . Then, you might be tempted to vote for a candidate that you thought was more likely to beat trump instead of your #1 , because otherwise it’s kinda like throwing your vote away. Mainly is a confidence thing and I don’t have any clue how big of a deal it is . Sorry if that was long winded . Did I explain the thought process well ? What do you think about the other things I said about Pete ? What do you like about him that causes you to be willing to donate ? I’ll be honest I donated to yang , it’s the first time I’ve ever donated to a campaign , tho I am fairly young (but not thaaat young lol ) . Listening to him in long form interviews just blew me away and I felt like there was enough other people supporting him that it wasn’t a total throw away. When I hear Pete talk I’m no where near that inspired . He sounds like a politician , and personally , if he’s going to put himself in that box .... then I need a bit more experience than mayor of a small town. Even then , what are his plans ? I’ve heard him talk about his “vision” he talks about an inclusive America and one that gives people hope , but what are his policies ? What is a clever twist he’s thought of or supports that can effect change? Just because we elect a gay dude doesn’t mean that all of a sudden all of our social and economic problems will fix themselves because Americans are more tolerant . We elected a black guy not too long ago , I don’t know that black people feel like racism and economic equality have gotten better on their parts . Maybe I’m biased because I heard yang first. I tried not to talk about him too much because .... well , this IS the Pete thread . But to not be open about my support for him would be disingenuous. That being said , I think Pete’s got a decent shot . My mom likes him . She thinks he’s smart and a good person , and she’s got good judgement . I think he will do well in Iowa and that can create a lot of momentum that could help in other states where he’s not polling as well. I feel like I’d rather have . Yang , Biden , Warren , and then klobuchar in that order ahead of Pete. But if Pete comes out on top I’m voting and I’m voting for him . If sanders wins I might say that I’m not gonna vote against him buuuut I might not vote . If steyer (lol) or Bloomberg win then I’ll feel like the primary got bought and will be very discouraged. If Bloomberg wanted to run he should have done it earlier and been at the debates so he could face scrutiny and explain his positions .
This. I have lived in Europe and have many friends that are in various countries in Europe and family members on my wife’s side. Scandinavian countries and their health care systems are not the utopian wonderland the Democrats portray them to be. Their medical system is better for the lower class and laborer class. Not so much for everyone else. I hear complaints often and in some of these countries medical malpractice doesn’t even exist as a remedy. Also these nations are largely free riders to the drugs produced by manufacturers wanting to charge large amounts to Americans. If we join socialized medicine we are all but guaranteed to see a decrease in money spent on research by private entities as the profit potentially will be greatly cut.
If you added law firms to your list we'd basically be left with a nation governed by small business owners. But not restaurants, or cleaners, or construction, or etc...because they hire illegals. Teachers are out, unions and whatnot. Same with most trades. Sorry agriculture, there's a bunch of shady **** going on with govt cheese and gmo's and, oh yeah, they hire illegals too. All religious clergy are out for obvious reasons. Who are the puritans who can run this country?
McKinsey is pretty amoral but Mayor Pete should just fess up. Like what is McKinsey going to do - Sue him? T would be a huge boost to Pete's lib cred. And another black mark for a company that seemingly collects them like it collects Harvard boyz
Pete had a chance to win... and it was a light one, but Bloomberg just canceled him by entering. He's done.
Seems like only the far left you're never woke enough crowd would care about this, and they were voting for Warren/Sanders. Shouldn't affect the moderate vote imo.
Bloomberg has very little do with Pete for now. He's not competing in the first 4 states, and Pete's fate will be decided almost entirely in those states - he has to win Iowa/NH, and somehow be competitive in NV/SC. If he can't do that, he's done before Bloomberg even is on a ballot, I believe.
I work for a company that competes with McKinsey and I think this attack on Pete is completely ridiculous. -It was his first big corporate America job -They represent everyone... not just unethical companies... they are a massive firm -Non-disclosure is a big deal in this line of business. If some companies announced they were working with a McKinsey or my firm, their stock price could be affected. It shows instability and the need for some serious outside support. Most importantly- -Often in the pursuit phase, you do a ton of discovery to understand what the goals are in the consulting project. Knowing the type of accounts Pete was likely working on at that young of an age, he was likely working on human capital.... meaning he’s talking to people in an org who want to help their people have a successful career. So to that last point... even if he’s starting to work with a Russian oligarch backed business, it’s not like a consultant from McKinsey is going to be working directly with Oleg Derapaska on a plan to launder money into the US or something. He’s going to be talking to someone on the operations level about an corporate or a government initiative, or an operational challenge that they have that typically leads to a report from McKinsey that basically says you need to go here or there to spend money to fix X problem. There’s a lack of understanding here for what McKinsey actually does.... basically they listen and compile a recommendation using their experience evaluating world class companies. Point being.... they don’t actually do anything. They recommend doing things on an operational level after listening to a lot of people. The most unethical thing a consultant like Pete at his level would recommend is letting go of duplicate workers. There’s just no way a consultant from McKinsey especially at that point in his career is going to be hatching evil plans at the highest levels of the organization. You know who they would go to for help doing that??.... probably a shady private “businessman” with a small company with political favors and friends at the DOJ... someone like Donald Trump circa 2016. This attack is going to backfire on Warren.
