Call to Action Event to Fund MTA

[JAzumah]

6 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Okay, this is just contradicting. You're blaming Schumer for not wanting "play ball" with Trump to get the Gateway Tunnel money unless he caves in for the wall, but then later criticize marijuana legalization and the Illnois pension system bailout provisions being "pork", so which is it? You can't have both of these stances simultaneously and consider yourself consistent on this front. 

When you have a COVID bill, you keep non-COVID related things out of it.

When you have an infrastructure bill, both the wall and Gateway can go in it. You can also put in water systems that don't deliver clean water any more. You can also put in solar energy and nuclear energy + reprocessing the rods. You can even put new Amtrak cars in there.

Unless marijuana treats COVID, it shouldn't be in the COVID bill. Illinois's pension system was toast before COVID and it should not be bailed out through a COVID bill.
 

6 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

This is not about liking or hating the president, and honestly, if any president is going to make decisions like that based on which states/regions are most loyal, then that person is not fit to be president. Not everyone agrees on everything, but the role of the president is to lead the nation as a whole, and not favor other areas as a whole. In the case of funding for public transit, a bill and an agreement can be done on its own merits (meaning, within the scope of public transit only and its related impacts).  If Trump is not willing to agree to fund public transit within its own merits, then he really doesn't believe in it or care about it. It's that simple.  

This is ALL ABOUT hating or liking the president. For starters, the parties are already regionalized to some extent. That means that the benefits of an administration naturally flow to their bases after the corporate interests get taken care of. People talk about presidential ideals and rarely hold everyone to the same standard. 

The House (Democratic) did not propose a clean transit bill. They proposed a second catch-all COVID bill and put some non-COVID related things to make that bill $2.5T. The Senate (Republican) balked at that bill, but sat on their hands until the pressure got too high and proposed an anorexic bill of $300B. President Trump does not propose bills and has long stated that the more money in the bill, the better. The current actions are not satisfactory or useful and the transit's community response is generally not useful either. Cuomo's rhetoric is not useful and DeBlasio is a complete and utter disaster. You want to hand THAT guy $15 billion? What is the likelihood that he spends it properly?

 

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

This thread pretty much shows why we DON'T discuss politics in the advocacy groups.

They need to put on their big boy and big girl pants on and recognize that they are not rich enough to hate President Trump and survive. Governor Cuomo doesn't use transit. Mayor DeBlasio doesn't use transit. They can say anything they want. If you use transit, you have to say that you'll take money from the Russians or the Chinese if the US won't provide it. That should get the discussion going...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

8 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I don't know what reality you live in, because Trump's policies and his record fall in line with many of the standard establishment Republicans in congress. His rhetoric sounds more populist in nature, but that's just that, rhetoric, and it doesn't match up with what he actually does. 

Okay, this is just contradicting. You're blaming Schumer for not wanting "play ball" with Trump to get the Gateway Tunnel money unless he caves in for the wall, but then later criticize marijuana legalization and the Illnois pension system bailout provisions being "pork", so which is it? You can't have both of these stances simultaneously and consider yourself consistent on this front. 

This is not about liking or hating the president, and honestly, if any president is going to make decisions like that based on which states/regions are most loyal, then that person is not fit to be president. Not everyone agrees on everything, but the role of the president is to lead the nation as a whole, and not favor other areas as a whole. In the case of funding for public transit, a bill and an agreement can be done on its own merits (meaning, within the scope of public transit only and its related impacts).  If Trump is not willing to agree to fund public transit within its own merits, then he really doesn't believe in it or care about it. It's that simple.  

Like I said, I don't care what political leaning that person is, if they genuinely want to fight to allocate funding for the MTA, by all means go ahead. That is a positive form of bipartisanship. What's not bipartisanship, is someone stating they would be willing to allocate transit funding under the condition that they get something in return that's completely unrelated to transit funding.  That's a compromise, and it isn't genuine at all. I applaud VG8 in his advocacy efforts, and I just wish that something beneficial comes out of it. 

Yet, I see endless posts about the president. Congress is the one that has to act.

[Hound]

How did this topic turn into a political discussion with all these idiots downplaying President Trump?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, Hound said:

How did this topic turn into a political discussion with all these idiots downplaying President Trump?

I will say it yet again. We are calling on Congress to act... Anything that comes to fruition must come from Congress, not the President.

[MHV9218]

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

This thread pretty much shows why we DON'T discuss politics in the advocacy groups. There are three different groups working together on this event, I'm sure that politically, we have different views personally, but those things must be put aside. We are inviting Republican and Democratic elected officials, as the issue at hand needs support from both sides. We bave several comments about policies. Stick with the facts. That's what we're doing. The  is an important economic factor here in NYC, and without it, the economy will struggle to recover. The economic data supports that. There are some people that simply cannot put their personal beliefs aside for the overall good of the City, which is essentially what we are doing. During our conference call, we made a point to be sure that we kept everything neutral. The discussion was all about how we're going to call attention to this pressing issue, not the Republicans do this and Democrats do that. That doesn't get anything done.

All I did was ask you a simple question, which was whether your personal politics – which you proudly displayed to all of us for months on this forum – were consistent with your stated goals within the group. 

1 hour ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yet, I see endless posts about the president. Congress is the one that has to act.

You know as well as I do that the Republicans in Congress are taking marching orders from Mark Meadows in the White House. What's the point of obfuscating the discussion?

1 hour ago, Hound said:

How did this topic turn into a political discussion with all these idiots downplaying President Trump?

Look, if you're too stupid to follow the discussion, that's hardly my fault. I even tried to say things slowly. We're simply talking about policy realities and the president's stated positions. Nobody is downplaying anything.

[JAzumah]

47 minutes ago, Hound said:

How did this topic turn into a political discussion with all these idiots downplaying President Trump?

I am not an idiot for downplaying President Trump.

This is the problem with the transit community (and with people in this region in general). You say you want something and you do the OPPOSITE of what you need to get it.

President Trump does not introduce spending bills. The House does.

The House deliberately put things into the spending bill that have nothing to do with COVID because it is a MUST PASS bill. People are hurting on numerous fronts and they knew the Senate was going to get beat up for not moving the bill. The Senate proposed an absurd $300B bill that did very little for anyone (to make it look like they are working) and it died on the Senate floor.

Anyone that cares about transit has to focus on Congress. If you would stop attacking the president, he can apply enough pressure on the Senate to put a real bill on the floor. He won't have that leverage unless you stop attacking him. Is that something you can understand? 1/3 of the Senate is up for re-election this year. President Trump has the ability to push a little harder for some of those people to get re-elected. Alternatively, the president can do nothing for people that won't help him and let them sink or swim on their own. Susan Collins (R-ME) could use a lot of help against her opponent, so she is a pressure point to get an actual useful bill passed. So is Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who is tied with his opponent right now. They need a big win and the win would be a COVID bill BEFORE THE ELECTION.

So many people are so caught up in "Orange Man bad" politics that the whole world is falling apart around them and all they can say is "but Trump". NYC is dead broke, NYS is dead broke, and people are leaving because the dysfunction in this region is now outweighing the benefits of being here. This requires federal assistance, but we aren't going to get it unless the attitudes change around here. The alternative is 50% of the transit system disappears and the capital program is limited to life safety projects ONLY. We are all going to have to get highly political...and fast.

[MHV9218]

1 minute ago, JAzumah said:

Anyone that cares about transit has to focus on Congress. If you would stop attacking the president, he can apply enough pressure on the Senate to put a real bill on the floor. He won't have that leverage unless you stop attacking him. Is that something you can understand? 1/3 of the Senate is up for re-election this year. President Trump has the ability to push a little harder for some of those people to get re-elected. Alternatively, the president can do nothing for people that won't help him and let them sink or swim on their own. Susan Collins (R-ME) could use a lot of help against her opponent, so she is a pressure point to get an actual useful bill passed. So is Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who is tied with his opponent right now. They need a big win and the win would be a COVID bill BEFORE THE ELECTION.

But the pressure is coming *from* the White House not to pass the bill. Mark Meadows, Trump's chief of staff and representative in these discussions, has indicated there will be no bill. Trump dictates to Meadows, not the other way round. When Mnuchin ran the discussion, the compromise bill passed. But Meadows is running things differently. It isn't a matter of attacking the president. If the president wanted a reasonable bill with state and local aid passed, he would indicate this to Meadows, and with the Republican-led senate, it would pass. But he hasn't – all he supports is the $1200 check program and potentially a payroll tax program, which isn't that helpful when people are out of work.

[JAzumah]

6 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

All I did was ask you a simple question, which was whether your personal politics – which you proudly displayed to all of us for months on this forum – were consistent with your stated goals within the group. 

And I think it was a fair question to VG8 and I think his answer is a practical one and likely to get the best result. Is his ecosystem big and motivated enough? I don't know...time will tell.
 

9 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

You know as well as I do that the Republicans in Congress are taking marching orders from Mark Meadows in the White House. What's the point of obfuscating the discussion?

That is not correct. The battle is between the populists and the establishment in the GOP. I'm hearing that "too much debt" talk again in an environment that jeopardizes the continued existence of the United States. The closed down screaming matches were highlighted about four weeks ago. I never hear about the deficit in wartime spending and I'd like them to keep that same energy.
 

 

13 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

We're simply talking about policy realities and the president's stated positions.

I don't agree with most of your perspectives, but it is an important discussion to have. The money is being distributed in a political environment and the goal should be to find the arguments that make both sides cooperate. We have to have this discussion in this way at this time.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

19 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

All I did was ask you a simple question, which was whether your personal politics – which you proudly displayed to all of us for months on this forum – were consistent with your stated goals within the group. 

You know as well as I do that the Republicans in Congress are taking marching orders from Mark Meadows in the White House. What's the point of obfuscating the discussion?

Look, if you're too stupid to follow the discussion, that's hardly my fault. I even tried to say things slowly. We're simply talking about policy realities and the president's stated positions. Nobody is downplaying anything.

The fact is there are some Republicans that are more flexible than others, and some that are more fiscally conservative and don't want to blow an even bigger hole into what is an ever gaping deficit.  This is a discussion we should be having because someone has to pay for that eventually. Sacrifices will have to be made one way or another. Tax and spend clearly hasn't worked so well. Look at NYC and NYS... Even as people flee, the Mayor is calling for a tax on millionaires.  I don't know who is supposed to be left to tax when the rich are moving elsewhere, along with their assets.

10 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

But the pressure is coming *from* the White House not to pass the bill. Mark Meadows, Trump's chief of staff and representative in these discussions, has indicated there will be no bill. Trump dictates to Meadows, not the other way round. When Mnuchin ran the discussion, the compromise bill passed. But Meadows is running things differently. It isn't a matter of attacking the president. If the president wanted a reasonable bill with state and local aid passed, he would indicate this to Meadows, and with the Republican-led senate, it would pass. But he hasn't – all he supports is the $1200 check program and potentially a payroll tax program, which isn't that helpful when people are out of work.

Trump has said he's open to negotiating. There are some Republicans that don't want to give up much more in terms of spending, and then there are some Democrats that want to throw in the kitchen sink. There has to be a compromise. One thing that definitely does not make sense is paying people to stay at home that are capable of working, but don't want to go back to their old jobs.  If they don't want to work, then they shouldn't be sitting at home collecting more on unemployment than they did while working on taxpayer dollars.

[JAzumah]

7 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

But the pressure is coming *from* the White House not to pass the bill. Mark Meadows, Trump's chief of staff and representative in these discussions, has indicated there will be no bill. Trump dictates to Meadows, not the other way round. When Mnuchin ran the discussion, the compromise bill passed. But Meadows is running things differently. It isn't a matter of attacking the president. If the president wanted a reasonable bill with state and local aid passed, he would indicate this to Meadows, and with the Republican-led senate, it would pass. But he hasn't – all he supports is the $1200 check program and potentially a payroll tax program, which isn't that helpful when people are out of work.

Mark Meadows does not control the action. Congress controls the action and they have been about everyone else's business but ours. 

As a city, we can simply threaten to vote ALL of the incumbents out in Congress if they don't pass a bill before Election Day. It is that easy. The entire House is up for re-election every 2 years. That's 15 seats just in NYC. Imagine if every city with a serious transportation system did that? 80+% of those seats are blue and many are safe seats. Would that get their attention? That's pretty close to 100 seats that fit that category.

The $1,200 check should be $3,600 and the payroll tax issue is a corporate sweetener. However, the main impediment to a broader bill is that letting liberal cities go broke will sober them up. I agree with that sentiment, but the collateral damage for the country could be significant. I don't want to take that chance.

The "anyone but Trump" strategy isn't going to get the MTA money. The local population has to be mobilized to push out all incumbent congressional representatives if they can't get this passed in this environment. That is the only thing they really understand. Their entire lifestyle revolves around being in Congress and our lifestyle revolves around frequent, affordable transit.

[MHV9218]

12 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The fact is there are some Republicans that are more flexible than others, and some that are more fiscally conservative and don't want to blow an even bigger hole into what is an ever gaping deficit.  This is a discussion we should be having because someone has to pay for that eventually. Sacrifices will have to be made one way or another. Tax and spend clearly hasn't worked so well. Look at NYC and NYS... Even as people flee, the Mayor is calling for a tax on millionaires.  I don't know who is supposed to be left to tax when the rich are moving elsewhere, along with their assets.

Trump has said he's open to negotiating. There are some Republicans that don't want to give up much more in terms of spending, and then there are some Democrats that want to throw in the kitchen sink. There has to be a compromise. One thing that definitely does not make sense is paying people to stay at home that are capable of working, but don't want to go back to their old jobs.  If they don't want to work, then they shouldn't be sitting at home collecting more on unemployment than they did while working on taxpayer dollars.

The 'rich people flee' argument is a myth that numerous studies have debunked. It only applies in low-desirability locales where the rich have no reason to be located near a central district. If North Dakota raises their taxes, yes, people leave. But powerful people around the world have proven time and time again they are willing to stay close to central business regions, whether in London, Paris, New York, or Los Angeles. There are studies about this in California. 

The unemployment line about people 'paid to stay home' is a right-wing talking point and nothing more. People want to work, and again, the data suggests people seek jobs. I don't know what you mean by the 'kitchen sink' here. It's an unprecedented economic downturn. By basic Keynesian theory, there needs to be an unprecedented response, otherwise the buck simply passes down to states and locales that will go bankrupt. Mitch McConnell proposed that option. It's a terribly idea.

9 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

The $1,200 check should be $3,600 and the payroll tax issue is a corporate sweetener. However, the main impediment to a broader bill is that letting liberal cities go broke will sober them up. I agree with that sentiment, but the collateral damage for the country could be significant. I don't want to take that chance.

Even the notion of 'sobering up' is pretty suspect to me. Such liberal states as NY send dramatically more money to the US government than the receive in return, while poor, right-wing states like Kentucky receive far more from the feds than they produce. If nothing else, the lesson in fiscal responsibility ought to be given to the right-wing states. Liberal cities like NY and LA were doing extremely well economically before this completely unprecedented disaster. You're right that the collateral damage would be unimaginable. 

Congress is not going to stand in the way of a president they've put all their loyalty behind. We saw this in the impeachment proceedings, we see this time and time again. I cite Meadows because he conveys the White House's demands. If they wanted a compromise brokered, we would have it already.

[JAzumah]

49 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

The 'rich people flee' argument is a myth that numerous studies have debunked. It only applies in low-desirability locales where the rich have no reason to be located near a central district. If North Dakota raises their taxes, yes, people leave. But powerful people around the world have proven time and time again they are willing to stay close to central business regions, whether in London, Paris, New York, or Los Angeles. There are studies about this in California. 

Your friends in real estate disagree with you. You can draw a 50 mile circle from Times Square and see how the real estate prices have increased in the last six months. In addition, certain vacation areas such as the Hamptons and Long Beach Island have significantly increased school enrollment this year. Rich people working remotely have left, are leaving, and are continuing to think about leaving. Middle-class people are now doing the math to see what their options are. 

Why would Gov Cuomo beg people to come back from their vacation homes? If they aren't buying and selling property, the MTA can't get a cut. If they aren't buying anything locally, the city can't get a cut. If they are vacationing out-of-state for months on end, the state isn't getting a cut.
 

55 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Liberal cities like NY and LA were doing extremely well economically before this completely unprecedented disaster.

The economy was bifurcating. People with money made a ton more money, but that was creating cost pressure on the bottom of the pyramid.

[MHV9218]

7 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

Your friends in real estate disagree with you. You can draw a 50 mile circle from Times Square and see how the real estate prices have increased in the last six months. In addition, certain vacation areas such as the Hamptons and Long Beach Island have significantly increased school enrollment this year. Rich people working remotely have left, are leaving, and are continuing to think about leaving. Middle-class people are now doing the math to see what their options are. 

Why would Gov Cuomo beg people to come back from their vacation homes? If they aren't buying and selling property, the MTA can't get a cut. If they aren't buying anything locally, the city can't get a cut. If they are vacationing out-of-state for months on end, the state isn't getting a cut.

The economy was bifurcating. People with money made a ton more money, but that was creating cost pressure on the bottom of the pyramid.

What I'm referring to is the age-old myth that 'taxes make rich people leave.' What you're referring to are the people who have left due to covid. Those are different things – they haven't left because of taxes. You're correct that this is a phenomenon, but I don't see it as any evidence related to the point he's making. Furthermore, the pandemic is temporary. It's hard to be sure what the long-term relocation prospects will truly be.

Broader picture, I actually think we'll find that the remote economy is less total than many of us expected. Already many companies – particular white-collar – are observing that productivity has fallen. Lots are insisting their workers return. The entire real estate sector is adamant about a return. Yes, remote work has increased, but I certainly wouldn't expect a permanent relocation if downtown/midtown offices remain open. 

[JAzumah]

2 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Broader picture, I actually think we'll find that the remote economy is less total than many of us expected. Already many companies – particular white-collar – are observing that productivity has fallen. Lots are insisting their workers return. The entire real estate sector is adamant about a return. Yes, remote work has increased, but I certainly wouldn't expect a permanent relocation if downtown/midtown offices remain open. 

If people are working 2 days a week or less, they are going to relocate to someplace nicer.

Remote work lowers productivity for everyone but your top performers. The question is whether the cost savings is worth it. I think the jury is still out on that.

[MHV9218]

3 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

If people are working 2 days a week or less, they are going to relocate to someplace nicer.

Remote work lowers productivity for everyone but your top performers. The question is whether the cost savings is worth it. I think the jury is still out on that.

France saw a 113% increase in productivity after ending most of its remote work programs. In Italy the figure was about 100%. Those figures aren't absolutes, and naturally it varies by location and field, but they're striking. I think most companies would be hard-pressed to swallow that kind of a difference in output to save the operating expense of office space. That's part of why I'm not betting on a complete shift out of physical offices. 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Yet, I see endless posts about the president. Congress is the one that has to act.

Agreed, which is why you'll basically need everybody (both local lawmakers and in congress) who supports funding public transit and the MTA. BTW, do you know of outreach and advocacy being done in the other boroughs? I'm thinking Riders Alliance may be doing that, but I'm unaware of others.

[JAzumah]

20 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

France saw a 113% increase in productivity after ending most of its remote work programs. In Italy the figure was about 100%. Those figures aren't absolutes, and naturally it varies by location and field, but they're striking. I think most companies would be hard-pressed to swallow that kind of a difference in output to save the operating expense of office space. That's part of why I'm not betting on a complete shift out of physical offices. 

I believe that if landlords take a steep discount, they will stay. NYC real estate is overvalued by a significant amount.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

25 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Agreed, which is why you'll basically need everybody (both local lawmakers and in congress) who supports funding public transit and the MTA. BTW, do you know of outreach and advocacy being done in the other boroughs? I'm thinking Riders Alliance may be doing that, but I'm unaware of others.

The Riders Alliance is doing that in the outer boroughs and also in places like Westchester and Long Island; basically areas that are far out that have limited transportation options, hence why they reached out to the express bus groups. I'm happy to work with anyone, but I'm not compromising on putting the needs of express bus riders first and foremost, so when we did the last campaign together, it was on my terms, and we've also agreed on a location that they weren't thrilled with at first, but after myself and another express bus advocate went over the reasons why it should be at the Eltingville Transit Center, they agreed to have it there. I mean they're looking to expand their base and be more diverse. Can't do that if you're going to focus on only certain riders. They only have a base on the North Shore on Staten Island, so having this event at the Eltingville Transit Center is no brainer. It serves a ton of local and express bus lines, and you can also get people from the Mid Island and South Shore to attend as well.

Regardless of where someone lives, we all use transportation.

Edited September 18, 2020 by Via Garibaldi 8

[RtrainBlues]

Why don't they make all Staten Island local buses free, including the S53/S93/S79, so express bus users are financially incentivized to take those instead?  People can transfer to the SIR to the ferry for quicker service if needed.   Those who work in lower Manhattan would essentially get to work for free if they took the free local bus then the ferry.  Would likely save the MTA a lot more money than running extra super-expensive express buses.

[Deucey]

As much as I love hashing out politics and why Blue > Red, the point of this was to notify folks of a bipartisan and unified call on both houses of Congress to release COVID funding to keep  from cutting back service.

Instead of focusing on whether @Via Garibaldi 8 is still on the Trump Train, focus on how to visit Eltingville for this rally, or other ones, and things to say and services to advocate for should any of NYC's media end up asking you for comment.

[Deucey]

3 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

All I did was ask you a simple question, which was whether your personal politics – which you proudly displayed to all of us for months on this forum – were consistent with your stated goals within the group.

Actually, you picked an unnecessary fight to distract from @Via Garibaldi 8's purpose.

[MHV9218]

11 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Actually, you picked an unnecessary fight to distract from @Via Garibaldi 8's purpose.

My friend, I've been on this forum long enough to remember when VG8's loud all red-lettered "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN" was attached to every post he made. Nobody else trumpeted politics so loudly – I certainly never put my affiliation on every post. We couldn't escape his politics, the signature was on every single comment. I've been here 10 years, I take notice of how people conduct themselves. It's a very natural question to now observe the contradictory advocacy and ask what's changed. And if anybody's been following this conversation – @JAzumah has thoughtfully considered the mechanisms at play here, even if we differ on our analyses – the point is that the president's actions are directly connected to the success or failure of the bill and the purpose of this event. So I disagree with your accusation. 

Edited September 18, 2020 by MHV9218

[Deucey]

9 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

My friend, I've been on this forum long enough to remember when VG8's loud all red-lettered "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN" was attached to every post he made. Nobody else trumpeted politics so loudly – I certainly never put my affiliation on every post. We couldn't escape his politics, the signature was on every single comment. I've been here 10 years, I take notice of how people conduct themselves. It's a very natural question to now observe the contradictory advocacy and ask what's changed. And if anybody's been following this conversation – @JAzumah has thoughtfully considered the mechanisms at play here, even if we differ on our analyses – the point is that the president's actions are directly connected to the success or failure of the bill and the purpose of this event. So I disagree with your accusation. 

Feel free to disagree. There's even an off-topic section to have that battle of people's activism and wants contrasted with their voting preferences.

But you chose to pick that unnecessary fight when what you should've done was:

22 minutes ago, Deucey said:

As much as I love hashing out politics and why Blue > Red, the point of this was to notify folks of a bipartisan and unified call on both houses of Congress to release COVID funding to keep  from cutting back service.

Instead of focusing on whether @Via Garibaldi 8 is still on the Trump Train, focus on how to visit Eltingville for this rally, or other ones, and things to say and services to advocate for should any of NYC's media end up asking you for comment.

 

[JAzumah]

I have started a new thread called "President Trump & Public Transport" so that the political discussion can move there.

Deucey, many people think people who support President Trump have no interest in mass transportation. There are some instances in which that is true. VG8 has always been a staunch supporter of express buses and both express buses and commuter rail have a significant overlap in political affiliation. Nevertheless, I maintain that it is a fair question and it is not a derailing of anyone's "purpose". When you are asking for large sums of money from the government, the political environment matters.

[MHV9218]

2 minutes ago, Deucey said:

Feel free to disagree. There's even an off-topic section to have that battle of people's activism and wants contrasted with their voting preferences.

But you chose to pick that unnecessary fight when what you should've done was:

If I wore a t-shirt for months that said "Science is Real," and today you saw me at a fundraiser for the Flat Earth Society, I think you'd say, hey man, why the change of heart? An avowed Trump supporter holding a rally on behalf of the stimulus bill (which Trump has let die) is a similar 180º. So that's why I'm curious.