- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Messages
- 35,329
- Reaction score
- 18,943
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
You are older than I expected
I worked there in 1987/88.
Before they brought in clamshell grills for cooking burgers
Yeah, maybe so, but I will not be doing business with McDonalds again.
I worked for McDonalds in 1987, 1990, and 1992. I would not recommend them to anybody.
The two are not related.
Spewing misinformation is not a good look.
I worked there from like '91-'94. They had the clam shell at that time, and I saw the introduction of the steaming ovens and microwaves.You are older than I expected
I worked there in 1987/88.
Before they brought in clamshell grills for cooking burgers
Bean counters who cut corners to hoard profits are ruining American businesses. Trump is the most corrupt politician in America, it is no mere coincidence that everything Trump touches turns to shit.In before some crazed leftist tries to connect this to Tru...
Oh, wait.
Damn.
I worked there from like '91-'94. They had the clam shell at that time, and I saw the introduction of the steaming ovens and microwaves.
No, it's not.The outbreak has been going on for weeks. The timing of CDC announcement is questionable.
I'm pointing out that the left did the same with the product I listed.It isn't, I just pointed out how rightwingers/MAGA boycotted a beer because gays drink it. Homophobia is not racism, but it is close.
Liberal busy bodies' vacuous virtue signaling by hassling everyone else for an invented point who's minority groups they claim to represent (but don't, as cited) is by far not 'moral excellence'.LOL, only to MAGA is having moral excellence a bad thing.
Again, no, I was pointing out what in my view is the left's bad behavior (as describe before and above), and you are doing your best to try and dodge that, apparently believing in the left's false claims of 'moral excellence' (what a load of crap if I ever saw one).Hold on bro, you brought up Aunt Jemima in contrast to Bud Light. YOU did that.
Again, I don't see how boycotting a beer because gays drink it is the same as criticizing a company with racist imagery (and I get you don't think they are racist, but the companies admitted it). You still seem incapable of not understanding the difference, but thats why you are still at this.
Carry on..
Very true. Weird to see someone try to score cheap political points off of something so serious.I'm sorry to hear this. Some strains of E. coli are pretty serious.
What McDonald's sells barely meet the definition of food.Yeah, maybe so, but I will not be doing business with McDonalds again.
I worked for McDonalds in 1987, 1990, and 1992. I would not recommend them to anybody.
We are not talking about the tactics, we are discussing motivation.I'm pointing out that the left did the same with the product I listed.
Anyone can point to a tiny minority and then claim they represent the whole, thats a fallacy of composition.Liberal busy bodies' vacuous virtue signaling by hassling everyone else for an invented point who's minority groups they claim to represent (but don't, as cited) is by far not 'moral excellence'.
You are confused.
I get it, being able to discriminate against gays and blacks is a legit behavior.Again, no, I was pointing out what in my view is the left's bad behavior (as describe before and above), and you are doing your best to try and dodge that, apparently believing in the left's false claims of 'moral excellence' (what a load of crap if I ever saw one).
For years on end, AHB pitching one carefully curated brand image, building brand loyalty on that carefully curated brand image, and you are surprised as to the existing customer base response when some 'woke' idiot in AHB marketing turns all of that carefully curated brand image on it's head and inside out?We are not talking about the tactics, we are discussing motivation.
Boycotting by customers, in MAGA's BL case, was based on, using homophobia and discrimination by those customers.
Specific to the brand icons cited, no, they are not.Blacks and liberals objecting to the companies using racist imagery is an action against discrimination.
What is it then, exactly, when the left accuses everyone on the right, or anyone who disagrees with them as being racist? As being homophobic? As being <insert smear here>?Anyone can point to a tiny minority and then claim they represent the whole, thats a fallacy of composition.
'Non Sequitur. Your facts are confused.'I get it, being able to discriminate against gays and blacks is a legit behavior.
LOL, the shock of having a cross-dresser promote a beer, nope, no homophobia there!For years on end, AHB pitching one carefully curated brand image, building brand loyalty on that carefully curated brand image, and you are surprised as to the existing customer base response when some 'woke' idiot in AHB marketing turns all of that carefully curated brand image on it's head and inside out?
Those carefully curated customers all suffered from whiplash, and let AHB know they didn't like it.
You can't discuss the homophobia at all. It is another example of avoiding the motivations of each boycotting group. Why was it a shock? because the group you keep defending are repulsed by deviation from traditional social norms, all the stuff built up around the myth of your product. It is also why you lament the end of Aunt Jemima and Uncle Bend not still being used in that bit of myth-making.Here you are salving your own ego and virtue signaling by calling those who responded to this brand whiplash names.
I meet your types in Phoenix all the time, throughout my life.Do you actually participate in real life and interact with real people? Or are you some basement keyboard warrior living in isolation separate from the real world?
Yes specific to the icons you cited, ie Aunt Jemima. You forget what you wrote.Specific to the brand icons cited, no, they are not.
That would be a lot of strawman.....and a big whatabout......by you.What is it then, exactly, when the left accuses everyone on the right, or anyone who disagrees with them as being racist? As being homophobic? As being <insert smear here>?
It'd be that same fallacy then, wouldn't it?
I get that you do not recognize Aunt Jemima as discriminatory, I already got that. I get that you cannot discuss that the reaction to BL was homophobic. I get that you cannot recognize that one boycott was against discrimination and the other one used, promoted, discrimination.'Non Sequitur. Your facts are confused.'
I didn't see any of the brand icons mentioned as being discrimination nor as being discriminatory.
I already said your citing a tiny minority as representing the whole is a fallacy.I think the left's busy bodies invented those controversies for their own ego stroking via vacuous virtue signaling, and without even checking with those who were claimed to be 'offended', which, as it turns out, they weren't.
Prove it! You got some w-2’s? You didn’t really work there.Yeah, maybe so, but I will not be doing business with McDonalds again.
I worked for McDonalds in 1987, 1990, and 1992. I would not recommend them to anybody.
I honestly do not remember if they gave out W2s in those days.Prove it! You got some w-2’s? You didn’t really work there.
- Random Conservative
It isn't a matter of homophobia, or any other phobia for that matter. Ay large scale change of a brand imagine is going to lose customers. This is branding reality.LOL, the shock of having a cross-dresser promote a beer, nope, no homophobia there!
You can't discuss the homophobia at all. It is another example of avoiding the motivations of each boycotting group. Why was it a shock? because the group you keep defending are repulsed by deviation from traditional social norms, all the stuff built up around the myth of your product. It is also why you lament the end of Aunt Jemima and Uncle Bend not still being used in that bit of myth-making.
I meet your types in Phoenix all the time, throughout my life.
So much BS.Yes specific to the icons you cited, ie Aunt Jemima. You forget what you wrote.
You are making allot of assertions without evidence, but you do you.That would be a lot of strawman.....and a big whatabout......by you.
I get that you do not recognize Aunt Jemima as discriminatory, I already got that. I get that you cannot discuss that the reaction to BL was homophobic. I get that you cannot recognize that one boycott was against discrimination and the other one used, promoted, discrimination.
This is the kettle calling the pot black.I already said your citing a tiny minority as representing the whole is a fallacy.
I'm reading 'If you don't accept my conclusions we are done'. I guess we are done, because I reject your conclusions as well as the premise and logic which lead to those conclusions are based.If you are going to keep going in circles, not present new counter-argument, we are done.
It isn't a matter of homophobia, or any other phobia for that matter. Ay large scale change of a brand imagine is going to lose customers. This is branding reality.
Queen Margo blurted out the issue:You, and many others, are so desperate to make it about the demanded controversial issue.
You brought up Aunt Jemima as an example, unfortunately it was a racist example.So much BS.
Wait, I'm supposed to list all of your hand-waving about racist imagery and denials about the homophobic reactions to the Bud Light endorsement of a trans on ticktok?You are making allot of assertions without evidence, but you do you.
Hilarious, you think you are the one to be convinced in a debate. You just have zero idea how this works. I'm not here to convince you, you are locked into defending the racism and homophobia of the rightwing even when it is expressed by boycotting a beer if a trans endorses it or STILL holding onto the idea that there is nothing offensive with Black servants as the face of food products.This is the kettle calling the pot black.
I'm reading 'If you don't accept my conclusions we are done'. I guess we are done, because I reject your conclusions as well as the premise and logic which lead to those conclusions are based.
Thank you, trump.You can't make this stuff up. Trump is a bad luck charm.
McDonald’s shares dropped in extended trading Tuesday after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said an E. coli outbreak linked to McDonald’s Quarter Pounder burgers has led to 10 hospitalizations and one death.
No, you missed it. The years long carefully curated brand image was decades in the making was long before the Bud Lite fiasco. It was that years long carefully curated brand image to which was whiplashed by this Bug Light re-branding, and it didn't go well, as has been recorded in the public record.It wasn't "large scale" in terms of who did it or the level of promotion, it was a trans on tick-tok. Your lot made it BIG because it was a trans, an assault upon the myth of white male brawny beer drinkers.
Well, AHB sure did care about it, when one of their prime money making brands went stale on the shelf, had to be flushed down the drain.Queen Margo blurted out the issue:
"If someone doesn't want to drink Bud light for fear of being labeled gay, I say So what!!"
So you keep asserting. The family in question didn't have the problem you assigned to them.You brought up Aunt Jemima as an example, unfortunately it was a racist example.
I have cited in a reply post where no one was offended in the cases cited, which included multiple ethnic groups. My assertion of liberal busy bodies is accurate.Wait, I'm supposed to list all of your hand-waving about racist imagery and denials about the homophobic reactions to the Bud Light endorsement of a trans on ticktok?
I keep pointing out that no one was offended except the busy body liberals. That's the discussion to be had, not the one you want for your vacuous virtue signaling and busy body trouble making.You keep avoiding discussing it.
Who died and appointed the left as the primary dictates racism and homophobia when no one's offended?Hilarious, you think you are the one to be convinced in a debate. You just have zero idea how this works. I'm not here to convince you, you are locked into defending the racism and homophobia of the rightwing even when it is expressed by boycotting a beer if a trans endorses it or STILL holding onto the idea that there is nothing offensive with Black servants as the face of food products.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?