you know, it seems like that kid in new york is going to be running against amazon in the next election, which may be a tough fight. she may have shot herself in the foot on this.

i'll just reassert the point that she hasn't produced any substantive policy at this point, making her more of a shit-disturber than anything else. and, what was the point of this, really? it seems like empty political rhetoric.

nobody doubts that bringing amazon in would create a lot of jobs. the argument against it is apparently that the wages are too low. but, how does sending the jobs somewhere else fix the thing? moving the jobs somewhere else doesn't improve wages or working conditions. the answer you'd expect from a socialist candidate is to fight for a higher minimum wage - not to tell the company to locate somewhere else. i mean, you'd think a real socialist firebrand would see the opportunity to organise that many workers in her district as a godsend. you'd think she'd be all over it. if you send the jobs to a district with a less progressive representation, you just decrease the chances of the workers getting a wage increase. it's consequently pretty harshly anti-worker...

...which i suspect was the actual point. base nimbyism aside, the actual driver probably had to do with district demographics, which was some kind of combination of the existing residents not wanting to get flooded with amazon workers and the representative not wanting to get flooded with voters that work for amazon.

it's hard to avoid her right now, and when that happens you know there's money afoot.

stated bluntly, i don't trust her, and think you shouldn't, either.