We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I really thought I kept an even keel.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing.
LOL an airline trying to win business in NYC, Seattle and Los Angeles (not to mention Boston and Austin) in super competitive environments isn’t going to be like “you know, going against the progressive grain is the way to the customer’s heart”.
Again, this is mostly immaterial to the airline ticket buying decision process, but there is no way they thought going conservative was a good strategy considering their most competitive core markets. They did this for other reasons.
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I really thought I kept an even keel.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing.
LOL an airline trying to win business in NYC, Seattle and Los Angeles (not to mention Boston and Austin) in super competitive environments isn’t going to be like “you know, going against the progressive grain is the way to the customer’s heart”.
Again, this is mostly immaterial to the airline ticket buying decision process, but there is no way they thought going conservative was a good strategy considering their most competitive core markets. They did this for other reasons.
Can you think of a reason? It's all I could come up with. I always question why a company or entertainer would go political to begin with. It's stupid. Ego probably? Can't resist exploiting your platform to stoke the ego?
Agree it is immaterial to ticket buying decision. So now I'm back to thinking they just want to be heard.
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I really thought I kept an even keel.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing.
LOL an airline trying to win business in NYC, Seattle and Los Angeles (not to mention Boston and Austin) in super competitive environments isn’t going to be like “you know, going against the progressive grain is the way to the customer’s heart”.
Again, this is mostly immaterial to the airline ticket buying decision process, but there is no way they thought going conservative was a good strategy considering their most competitive core markets. They did this for other reasons.
Can you think of a reason? It's all I could come up with. I always question why a company or entertainer would go political to begin with. It's stupid. Ego probably? Can't resist exploiting your platform to stoke the ego?
Agree it is immaterial to ticket buying decision. So now I'm back to thinking they just want to be heard.
I think they’re trying to support the GA legislature in exchange for support on what Delta actually wants. Tax breaks, grants, whatever.
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I really thought I kept an even keel.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing.
LOL an airline trying to win business in NYC, Seattle and Los Angeles (not to mention Boston and Austin) in super competitive environments isn’t going to be like “you know, going against the progressive grain is the way to the customer’s heart”.
Again, this is mostly immaterial to the airline ticket buying decision process, but there is no way they thought going conservative was a good strategy considering their most competitive core markets. They did this for other reasons.
Can you think of a reason? It's all I could come up with. I always question why a company or entertainer would go political to begin with. It's stupid. Ego probably? Can't resist exploiting your platform to stoke the ego?
Agree it is immaterial to ticket buying decision. So now I'm back to thinking they just want to be heard.
I think they’re trying to support the GA legislature in exchange for support on what Delta actually wants. Tax breaks, grants, whatever.
Which seems like an odd tactic. A few quick campaign donations would be a much easier road than braving the Twitter mob and a potential reputation hit.
This thing might start to get a little bigger. Merck CEO and former Amex CEO are going to be on CNBC to seemingly drum up support to fight against "restrictive" voting laws, asking companies to take a direct stance against these types of laws.
So, can we add Merck to this discussion? This looks to be a very firm stance against where Delta's stance was more neutral with a definite lean for the law.
This reminds me of the .... okay, I'll say "demonstrations" because we're not in the Tug, we saw this summer where innocent outside diners were forced by roving groups of people to state a position on a social issue.
This thing might start to get a little bigger. Merck CEO and former Amex CEO are going to be on CNBC to seemingly drum up support to fight against "restrictive" voting laws, asking companies to take a direct stance against these types of laws.
So, can we add Merck to this discussion? This looks to be a very firm stance against where Delta's stance was more neutral with a definite lean for the law.
This reminds me of the .... okay, I'll say "demonstrations" because we're not in the Tug, we saw this summer where innocent outside diners were forced by roving groups of people to state a position on a social issue.
I'm genuinely fascinated to see what comes out of that. This seems like such a bizarre, no-win issue to take a stance on. And it would be one thing to simply not kowtow to the popular woke flavors of the day, but to go against it would be an unironic #profileincourage. But again, bizarre from a strategy standpoint, especially since Amex and Delta were certainly part of the milquetoast corporate support for BLM.
Delta CEO calls new Georgia voting law 'unacceptable'
This is what started all the backlash against Delta:
Delta believes that full and equal access to voting is a fundamental right for all citizens. Over the past several weeks, Delta engaged extensively with state elected officials in both parties to express our strong view that Georgia must have a fair and secure election process, with broad voter participation and equal access to the polls. The legislation signed this week improved considerably during the legislative process, and expands weekend voting, codifies Sunday voting and protects a voter’s ability to cast an absentee ballot without providing a reason. For the first time, drop boxes have also been authorized for all counties statewide and poll workers will be allowed to work across county lines. Nonetheless, we understand concerns remain over other provisions in the legislation, and there continues to be work ahead in this important effort. We are committed to continuing to listen to our people and our communities, and engage with leaders from both parties to ensure every eligible employee and Georgia voter can exercise their right to vote.
For Delta to now say "unacceptable" seems to be pretty far from what they were saying a few days ago.
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I really thought I kept an even keel.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing.
LOL an airline trying to win business in NYC, Seattle and Los Angeles (not to mention Boston and Austin) in super competitive environments isn’t going to be like “you know, going against the progressive grain is the way to the customer’s heart”.
Again, this is mostly immaterial to the airline ticket buying decision process, but there is no way they thought going conservative was a good strategy considering their most competitive core markets. They did this for other reasons.
Can you think of a reason? It's all I could come up with. I always question why a company or entertainer would go political to begin with. It's stupid. Ego probably? Can't resist exploiting your platform to stoke the ego?
Agree it is immaterial to ticket buying decision. So now I'm back to thinking they just want to be heard.
I think they’re trying to support the GA legislature in exchange for support on what Delta actually wants. Tax breaks, grants, whatever.
Which seems like an odd tactic. A few quick campaign donations would be a much easier road than braving the Twitter mob and a potential reputation hit.
While the government has ensured the major airlines won’t go bankrupt, all their expenses are under major scrutiny. FREE PUB!!! in the form of support for their people, is of course free.
Of course now that they’ve changed their position who knows what will come of this.
I became all things to all men so that I might save some
New American Translation - so that I might sell them a seat on the plane
If you somehow feel the need to wade in at least have some conviction that lasts more than a couple of mean tweets. Twitter really isn't an accurate barometer of public opinion but to be safe just shut up and fly
Comments
Again, this is mostly immaterial to the airline ticket buying decision process, but there is no way they thought going conservative was a good strategy considering their most competitive core markets. They did this for other reasons.
Agree it is immaterial to ticket buying decision. So now I'm back to thinking they just want to be heard.
all the people on twitter trying to 'boycott' delta can only afford to fly frontier anyway.
So, can we add Merck to this discussion? This looks to be a very firm stance against where Delta's stance was more neutral with a definite lean for the law.
This reminds me of the .... okay, I'll say "demonstrations" because we're not in the Tug, we saw this summer where innocent outside diners were forced by roving groups of people to state a position on a social issue.
EWIWBI
Delta CEO calls new Georgia voting law 'unacceptable'
This is what started all the backlash against Delta:
Delta believes that full and equal access to voting is a fundamental right for all citizens. Over the past several weeks, Delta engaged extensively with state elected officials in both parties to express our strong view that Georgia must have a fair and secure election process, with broad voter participation and equal access to the polls. The legislation signed this week improved considerably during the legislative process, and expands weekend voting, codifies Sunday voting and protects a voter’s ability to cast an absentee ballot without providing a reason. For the first time, drop boxes have also been authorized for all counties statewide and poll workers will be allowed to work across county lines. Nonetheless, we understand concerns remain over other provisions in the legislation, and there continues to be work ahead in this important effort. We are committed to continuing to listen to our people and our communities, and engage with leaders from both parties to ensure every eligible employee and Georgia voter can exercise their right to vote.
For Delta to now say "unacceptable" seems to be pretty far from what they were saying a few days ago.
Of course now that they’ve changed their position who knows what will come of this.
I became all things to all men so that I might save some
New American Translation - so that I might sell them a seat on the plane
If you somehow feel the need to wade in at least have some conviction that lasts more than a couple of mean tweets. Twitter really isn't an accurate barometer of public opinion but to be safe just shut up and fly
Let's just get rid of state legislatures and put the CEOs in-charge.
FUFMFE
#notourbestandbrightest