So...there was a debate between Stevens, McMorrow, and El Sayed. I discussed the race earlier today, but want to provide an update in how my opinions have shifted after watching the debate. The debate was in a union hall and the focus was very labor oriented. There was a lot of talk about how it shouldn't be so hard to earn a living, but also a lot of talk about job preservation as well. And look, before I even get into the debates, I wanna give my own take, since none of them did a good job here. Some of them got close, but here's my honest opinion.
Jobs are rich people paying poor people to do things for them in exchange for their needs. At best, jobs exist to meet our wants and needs, at worst, they're slavery that we no longer call slavery. Work is at best a necessary evil, and at worst, an unnecessary one. And the core problem of why it's so hard to "earn a living" in our economy is these rich MFers don't wanna pay people. They dont. For all the talk of work and job creators, the basic social contract surrounding a job is a romanticized farce. It's something that sounds nicer on paper than in reality. Unions try to make such a contract work, but in reality, we gotta think beyond jobs. And in the age of automation, AI, and outsourcing, this problem is especially pronounced. Why are they sending jobs outside of the country? because they dont wanna pay us, that's why. And you know what? i think it's about time to say, maybe we don't wanna work. I know, that's a controversial, even heretical statement in our society. But I'm just being honest and saying what I think a lot of people wish they could say, but they're too afraid to say. Some might ask, well if we dont wanna work and no one works, who gets the stuff done? Ask the "job creators." If they have a solution, like they do with AI, fine. But if they need human labor, that's where we assert our interests, and where unions come in and say, "well do it...but you gotta pay us." But we shouldnt romanticize jobs, and romanticize work. I'm so sick of union and labor people romanticizing the social contract. It's like their entire existence is a contradiction. They recognize they gotta hold employers' feet to the fire, but they also put this weird social contract on a pedestal with this "work has dignity" bullcrap. With that said, let's discuss the debate.
Abdul El Sayed won. He was the most charismatic, and the most progressive on labor issues. he hammered home his priorities, talking about medicare for all, getting money out of politics. He supported unions and supported making things easier for people. Heck, I was arguing with the candidates/moderators in my head over how we should bring back fricking work sharing in response to AI. Then El Sayed drops a 32 hour work week. Hell yeah, brother, that's how you win me over! So yeah, withdrawing the McMorrow endorsement, I'll do El Sayed.
Don't get me wrong though. Mallory McMorrow was a close second, and she kinda "gets it." She's around my age, she graduated from college, couldnt get a job. Ended up working minimum wage after applying to 300 jobs. She should understand that the whole concept of a job is BS based on that explanation, but went in a more moderate direction, but still, she does feel our pain and understand it's hard. And she ran for office to fix it. So with a story like that, I gotta give her props, and she gave a good performance too. I just think El Sayed was stronger here.
Haley Stevens....eh....she was there. Like, her background doesn't enthuse me. Seeing her in person, I'm even less enthused. She's very uncharismatic and her voice is nasally. Shouldn't be a thing in and of itself. I try to take out personal characteristics when judging candidates, but I cant deny charisma plays a role in debates and given this debate was a way to inform me more on the three candidates, well, yeah. She kinda flopped here. She wasn't herself, like objectively speaking. But she is the least progressive candidate, and the least charismatic candidate. I'd easily take her over ANY republican. But honestly, definitely a third place finish. I identify more with mcmorrow and her struggles with the economy, and el sayed is just the suave charismatic "zohran mamdani" type candidate in the race. He has that kind of charisma. He's another mamdani.
And yeah. I guess I'm team el sayed now, although tbqh mcmorrow isn't bad either and as I said, I actually think she's stronger on policy. But then el sayed has more to him than just what's on his campaign site, so...yeah. Candidates, if you want me to take you seriously, PLEASE explain what you wanna do in office. In detail. The more detail, the more I like you (or hate you if i dislike your answer). It's why I gravitated to mcmorrow first. But yeah. That's where I'm at.
No comments:
Post a Comment