Hey, there! Log in / Register
Lynch tells constituents to buy sneakers for all the protests they'll march in
By adamg on Fri, 02/03/2017 - 11:51pm
Steve Lynch is no fan of the nascent Trump administration. At a forum at Milton Avenue tonight, the 8th District congressman had some choice words, as highlighted by Molly Lanzarotta:
I've never seen concern like this before.
We have to buy sneakers...there will be a lot more marches.
A fatal mistake is to underestimate how far Bannon and Trump are willing to go.
Trump is good for 2 groups: Goldman Sachs and Russia.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Any particular brand of sneaker?
Definitely this one.
Definitely this one.
Yeah right
Stephen Lynch has suddenly found a moral backbone and he's not just holding his finger to the wind? I find that hard to believe.
Some people sit and bitch
Others rise to the challenge and organize.
...and all of us posting to
...and all of us posting to uhub are sitting and bitching.
Trump is good for three groups
Since Boston is becoming the sneaker capital of America and protesters will be buying millions of new sneakers the weekly protests the next four years will be good for the economy.
Back in my day, protests were
Back in my day, protests were tougher. Effeminate sneakers and pink hats and those douchebag thick black frame glasses that millennials wear to appear smart are a total joke.
Back in my day, protests had puppets.
https://www.google.com/search?q=bush+puppet+protest&source=lnms&tbm=isch...
I probably laughed at the puppet people just as hard as the current common Daily Show-styled protester nowadays, but for some reason, I just gotta give some more respect to the puppet protesters. Nostalgia maybe. I dunno. Maybe I harbor a secret fear that one day the pansycakes of todays protests are going to actually win a protest and we are all going to be forced to wear those idiotic glasses. .. or that my daughter is gonna drag home one of those losers someday if they keep multiplying. "This is my new boyfriend and he protests with puppets" does not seem as devastating as "This is my new boyfriend and he wears glasses like Jenine Garafalo and he complains about his women problems twice as much!".
Atta boy, Lynchie.
I wrote him yesterday to say thanks for standing up to that smarmy a$$hat, Jason Chaffetz.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rawstory.com/2017/02/elijah-cummings-bl...
Our reps ARE listening. A simple email or phone call seems so insignificant but actually works.
This is not normal and we can't let our kids grow up thinking it is.
Keep fighting, keep marching!
Some people will have to
Some people will have to choose between new sneakers to run the hamster wheel of pointless protests or new gloves to hold those "racist,sexist" signs without those inevitable blisters.
If only the people would elect someone who gets things done.
Oh wait, they did.
President Trump.
Must be nice...
To live in a democracy where the person with the majority of votes gets the office.
I find it more satisfying to
I find it more satisfying to know that president Trump is smart enough to plan for, execute said plan, and mightily win the electoral college.
Hell, Kim Cardassian could have probably won a popular vote. Popular was not the contest. Capable enough to be president was the contest.
President Trump proved more than capable to win the electoral college, thus winning the presidential election.
Imagine the New York football team trying to win the Superbowl by scoring so many points against their two regular season games against the Detroit Lions that they have so many points, they feel they should just automatically win the Superbowl. Then imagine the leader of the New York team spending the next year crying about how many points they scored against the Detroit Lions. Then imagine the person dim-witted enough to be all like "Yeah, they did score more points than anyone". Then imagine that dim-witted person running the country.
There is a REASON Hillary lost the election. Not understanding how to win an election was just one of many more obvious problems she had.
weird to mention her but
i guess shes alright
Wow
Wow
Oh Yeah
Trump expected to lose. You're giving him far too much credit to say he craftily planned to win the electoral college and lose the popular vote. He got lucky enough to have the help of Russia and a corrupt FBI official while going up against a flawed candidate.. Oh, and he still couldn't convince a majority of Americans he was the best man for job.
No matter what you'd like to believe, it is a fact (not an alternate fact) that what Trump is doing is in opposition to a majority of Americans based on the election. In a true democracy someone wouldn't gain tremendous power unless they at least got a majority of votes. In a true democracy, the votes of rural areas wouldn't count more then votes of urban ones.
Umm....
-- Trump expected to lose. --
Expectations were not part of what it took to win the election for President of the United States. Pay attention. Electoral votes were key. President Trump formulated a plan to win the electoral college and he won. I can *expect to lose* a contest of "worlds most pathetic liar" to Elizabeth Warren, but if she drinks so much firewater the night before the contest that I win by virtue of her not being able to speak and then puking all over the judges which she paid off with taxpayer dollars, then it speaks to my naivete of why I would enter such a stupid contest in the first place. Presidential contests are not stupid, however. Presidential contests have so much at stake, that making such a stupid mistake such as running a leftist pig like Hillary is not something you are going to see in our lifetime again.
As a bonus, President Trump is doing so awesome these past few weeks. I can't wait for the 2018 mid-term elections. 2018 is going to make 2002 look like 1910.
You hear that? That is a swamp draining. What will happen to the drained swamp after is anyone's guess. I remain optimistic. Then again, I really like Russia and Israel.... Soviet Union and red diaper babies not so much, though.
Sorry
I took your previous message seriously. This is some pretty funny satire. Well done.
Curious
What exactly about Russia and Israel, respectively, do you like so much about them?
Hillary knew how elections
Hillary knew how elections are won. Not Trump's fault she squandered resources.
I am not convinced that
I am not convinced that Hillary knows how elections are won.
Money spent on TV ads:
Hillary: 108 Million
Trump: 5 Million
Paid Election Staff:
Hillary: 705
Trump: 82
Electoral votes:
Trump 289
Clinton 218
I looked up this word you used - squander. It means to waste. The only resource-based waste I saw Hillary perform (besides buying bizarre clothes like pantsuits) was to spend large sums of monies to get the highest amount of popular votes instead of spending her monies on winning the electoral college. Trump spent TWENTY times less on TV advertisements.
Maybe the reason Trump really won was that a multitude of fiscally superior minds saw the proverbial writing in the ledger.
Did you mean democratic republic?
In the USA the States elect the President. Trump received the most electoral votes from the States.
I beg to differ
First you are right, Trump is the first candidate to do what he promised; and for some of us, we didn't like what he was promising. And he is breaking a few promises; i.e. the gift for Wall Street in pledging to do away with the Dodd-Frank regulations. And let's not forget how he is lining his own pockets with his conflicts of interest with his businesses (do a google search) and that of his cabinet nominees. I am no idealist; I expect politicians to enrich themselves as a result of being in office but this is raising it to a high art.
As for protest not working, I beg to differ:
* calls to Congress are up 900% from last year. Town Halls are crowded. For better or worse, people have been moved to pay attention. Friends who are moderate Republicans who have never called a rep before in their lives (and they are in their late 40's) are doing so.
*More people of different career/religious/economic/race backgrounds are considering running for political office than ever before.
* DeVos confirmation has proven to be more controversial that expected and is actually in jeopardy due to the calls.
* Federal hiring freeze is reversed for VA (Veteran Affairs).
* Court orders to suspend the immigration ban for those with valid visas and green card holders
* Uber and Lyft both pledged substantial support for their immigrant drivers; in other words, some employers are actually concerned too. And they stand to benefit from this administration.
* Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) enrollment ads are on the air...
* Covering pre-existing conditions are no longer a radical thought. Which is why the GOP can't come up with an alternative to ACA.
* HHS, EPA, USDA gag order lifted.
* EPA climate data no longer scrubbed from website.
May I add to your list, the
May I add to your list, the reversal of the asinine plan to gut the Office of Congressional Ethics?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/03/us/politics/trump-house-ethics-office...
VA Hiring Freeze is NOT
VA Hiring Freeze is NOT reversed. There's a limited number of high-need positions that have been given an exception. Mostly critical clinical positions filled by Doctors and Nurses. (Which is fine, we need more doctors and nurses). Administrative staff, schedulers, billers, engineering, etc, have not been granted any exceptions so the slow-bleed "we'll force you to run at half staff so you fuck up and then we can justify shutting you down for being fuckups" plan is still well in effect. Refusing to let them hire Doctors was just inexcusably bad for optics.
If protesting is so pointless ...
Why isn't Dunks renowned for its tea?
Why don't we sing God Save the Queen at all cricket events?
Why is the right to do so enshrined straight up, in your face, number one in the Bill of Rights?
Why do I get the impression that you are still annoyed about that whole 19th amendment thing (won through marching and protest)?
Anyway, enjoy your weekend!
Brianna Wu for district 8!
https://briannawu2018.com
Why is Lynch avoiding a
Why is Lynch avoiding a debate?
Because
He doesn't want to embarrass Ms. Wu.
Have you looked on a map of what cities and towns are in this district?
Fair play to here if she gets 25% of the democratic primary vote. Her top aide might as well be called Panza from here on in.
What's with the Wu hate?
Let Lynch debate the woman and for them both to run a fair campaign. The district can decide who they want to represent them. No harm in having a primary.
Here's a better answer
Since Lynch is the incumbent, the debate will probably take place either on the 31st of June or early some Sunday morning on AM radio.
I'm sure Costello has no problem with there being a primary. He just wants to make sure that Wu's actual neighbors realize that the South Shore is a tad different than Metro West, and that the Democrats there are the old school type of Democrats who a lot of you wish were Republicans yet somehow still have ties to the party of Jackson (like me.)
Wrong question
Frontrunners always tend to avoid debates. They have nothing to gain. It's the underdogs and lesser-known candidates who need the free publicity that debates offer. What incentive does Lynch have to debate Brianna Wu?
The exception to the rule was Trump, who somehow leveraged nonstop publicity from the Republican debates into cementing his frontrunner status. That was weird, but his core competency is as a salesman and a showman, so don't expect that approach to work for most candidates.
Lynch has been in office for 15 years
Maybe its time he buys some new house slippers.
Just tell them what they want to hear, Lynchie
Lynch was one of the few Democrats to vote against disastrous Obamacare. Did he praise Trump's stated goal to repeal it?
Lynch ran on his union credentials, does he agree with Teamsters union General President Jimmy Hoffa's recent comments, “today, President Trump made good on his campaign promise to withdraw the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. With this decision, the president has taken the first step toward fixing 30 years of bad trade policies that have cost working Americans millions of good-paying jobs"? Speaking of costing millions of Americans jobs, does he support the wall on the Mexican border?
In 1979, it was alleged that Lynch infamously assaulted an Iranian. Does he support President Trump's non-violent effort to temporarily keep unvetted immigrants from Iran and six other dysfunctional countries out of the U.S.?
As a rare moderate Dem, it would seem Lynch has some common ground to work with, rather than protest Trump but that's probably not what his audience wanted to hear. Sad.
Yeah, how's that Obamacare repeal going?
Wasn't that supposed to be repealed on day 1?
Seems the GOP suddenly is feeling nostalgic for made-up bogeymen to demonize.
Day one was an executive
Day one was an executive action. Congress has to figure out a replacement plan in the meantime as enrollment is ongoing and people have contractual coverage for a year. Obama Care took several years to implement and will take the same to sunset into a replacement system.
Oh?
250+ Representatives and about 50 Senators campaigned on the promise they'd repeal it on the first day in session.
Are you telling me that after 7 years they didn't have an alternative plan ready to go? Seems pretty simple: Lower costs and ensure everyone is covered, just like Trump said. What's the wait?
Assaulted an Iranian?
Link please.
The Fish doesn't just rot from his head...
In his latest incarnation of "In real life I am nothing more than a deceptive, lying, internet troll," Fish attempts to characterize Lynch in a false light by referencing a legal dispute between Lynch and 6 Iran students that occurred 38 years ago when the Rep was 24 years old (Lynch is now in his early 60s).
The real story behind the alleged assault on an Iranian is that Lynch was confronted by 6 Iranians who were engaged in a protest. One of the students positioned his protest sign immediately in front of Lynch's face, tempers flared and a fight broke out. Lynch was subsequently arrested for A&B but the charges were later dropped with prejudice (meaning the charges could not be resurrected at another time).
With his post, Fish's game is predictable but nonetheless just as tedious as always. Notice his verbiage is salted with negative descriptors prefacing each false equivalency after another. For example, notice how he tries to portray Lynch being against the ACA. What Fish does not say is that Lynch is, in fact, an advocate for health care reform but split with his party on Obama's health care reform efforts.
He voted in November 2009 to pass the Affordable Health Care for America Act (AHCAA), the House's health care reform bill. This bill was scrapped by Congressional leaders in favor of the Senate's bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Despite pressure from Obama and Democratic leaders, Lynch stated that he would oppose the PPACA until "they put reform back in the health reform bill." He described the Senate bill as a "surrender" to insurance companies, putting too little pressure on insurance companies to reduce costs, and that did not represent meaningful reform.
In a slimy tactic to underscore his attempt to smear Lynch, Fish tosses the A&B incident at the end of his comment - a classic Karl Rove like method to leave the reader with a generally negative impression.
I am not a particular fan of Lynch - my differences with him, however, are not so pronounced as allow a malevolent liar like Fish to to get away with a free shot without being held to account.
O-FISH-L: I apologize for believing Lynch's confession
Who is lying about the assault and battery on Iranians? Even Lynch admitted it to Yvonne Abraham of the Boston Globe. And I'm the liar?
As for Obamacare, "I actually voted against it. Because unlike some people, I sat down and read it." -- U.S. Rep. Steve Lynch (D-S.Boston). Hat tip there.
Bringing us together
Greater unity than Americans have seen in decades will be a result of Trumpski's regime. Political participation is increasing by leaps and bounds, and the opposition will encompass most of the American political spectrum, from moderate Republicans and Democrats through to the perennial left. Friday's op-ed from the Archbishop makes it clear that all good people of faith are on the same side. Within two years, only a narrow fifth column of troublemakers, grifters, and Putin sympathizers will remain behind Cheeto Benito.
Re-Org
Trump's win is going to make the Democrats the coalition of people with a college education, minorities, and urbanites.
The GOP will be the coalition of non-college (uneducated), rural voters, and a small business class.
It will be interesting to see what happens in 2 and 4 years, assuming Trump/GOP hasn't made it impossible for non-white citizens to vote.
White college educated voters
voted for trump over hillary by 4 points.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-di...
*IF*
*IF* being the key word there.
IF they can get it together. Yet I still see Bernie Bros going "well if yall supported Bernie he would have won" or HRC folks "See what voting third party did?" kinda crap. Its rear view mirror now.. let it go. what done is done, and now we have a much bigger beast to deal with, let's focus on that.
Yet I see very little of us trying to come together.. still lots of 'party infighting' going on. Until that happens, we will never unify and defeat the orange cheeto.
But also, alot of this has to come from the Republicans side too. The Democrats can make a stink all they want, but without bringing over some of the moderates to their side, we're as good as dead.
Winning by 44% of the vote does not imply strength
Depending on which numbers you believe, voter turn out (at roughly 50%) set the stage for a Trump victory. That measure of turnout is the lowest in a presidential election since 1996, when 53.5% of voting-age citizens turned out.
The blame for the Trump win falls squarely on Progressives who share responsibility for the loss. It begins with HRC - she was a flawed candidate to begin with & compounded her unpopularity with a series of boneheaded actions. Examples: no matter how compelling the reason in her mind for a personal server, when you are running for POTUS she should have anticipated the result of it being disclosed. Related, the emails and her subsequent defensiveness around them clearly did her enormous damage.
Similarly, the Clintons should have disengaged from their foundation at least a couple of years before she announced. It created bad optics throughout the campaign.
But the problems don't end there...like it or not, the Democratic Party leadership is stale, entrenched and out-of-touch. Our beliefs and commitments to progressive causes are not enough & they are elusive to the average voter. We need to champion very specific causes - not concepts and ideas - but real issues. Things that directly relate to the voter.
Our leadership's elections tactics & strategies are robotic and rigid. We need to be meeting with voters on a regular and recurring basis - election or no election - seek citizens input and respond with tangible actions. We need new leadership at every single level. New leadership not protégés of our current party heads.
We need to treat voter turnout as important as the candidate. Fight for every single vote at every single level (local, state & federal). National elections are won when you tie up the selectman, mayors, state reps, governors, congress - town halls and caucuses.
Finally pick our fights well - standup for things - not against the opposition. Give voters something to vote for - not a name to vote against.
The problem is
Many voters.. whether they voted in the last election or not.. are just disengaged now. Between basically being told "sorry your vote does not matter, just the electoral colleges" and people who just "do not care about politics" now have turned against coming out and voting again. Why go vote when your vote really doesn't matter.
Now I do NOT agree with that statement but I keep hearing it over and over again.. THAT is going to be a hard hurdle to get over, more so than the democrats getting their shit together. We, collectively, need to get it together and get these people involved.
It also does not help that social media is forcing people to just tune it out. I'm pretty political but even I've stopped checking facebook daily because I'm tired of "this is my soapbox" speeches people do now or sharing the same old articles over and over again. It turns people off and burns them out. This is a very, VERY bad thing if we need to get a movement together.
Unfortunately most people don't care enough to pull themselves out of their self absorbed behavior until it effects them. Watch this moment change rapidly and people start to really give a shit when it effects them. Such points.. paying more at the supermarket for groceries (big 20-40% jump if all Cheeto's policies go thru. gotta pay for that wall ya know), or that 12 dollar shirt at Old Navy now costs close to 25 now. OR better yet, yeah no more national parks because we're going to drill and mine every inch OR.. oh we're going to put an oil line thru your back yard. Don't like it? Tough shit, we rule and you do what we want (the attitude I see coming).
Again people only care about issues when it starts to effect them. Just wait.. it will happen. But until then, people just won't care.
I assume Lynchie hasn't asked
I assume Lynchie hasn't asked any of his old union buddies who they voted for.