Current and ex-staffers did write a strong letter in her defense that was ignored by the media. It was posted on medium.
As for turnover: I gather my Senator, Chris van Hollen, was the first to insist that all interns on the Hill be paid and has fantastic constituent services has the highest turnover these days. Does this mean he’s a bad boss? Or a good one who lets his staff cultivate their potential so they can move on to other jobs? Or is it a factoid that absent context cannot really be interpreted? I suspect the latter is most likely.
“When you’re out there on the world stage and dealing with people like Vladimir Putin, yeah, you want someone who’s tough,” Klobuchar told CNN. “You want someone that demands the answers and that’s going to get things done, and that’s what I’ve done my whole life.”
It doesn’t square with the headline for the article.
Yeah, that one was weird. Why would she want the comb washed AFTER she ate? Wouldn’t it be better to wash the comb first, and also later? And as you say, why not eat with her hands? I do that all the time.
Yeah, but it does square w the CNN story. I get your point, but it does sound like she was responding to issues about her office and analogized to treating Putin in a tough way.
There’ve been a large number of such ex-staffers who have supported Amy and have publicly done so. They have complained that the NYT and others have not given their views equal prominence and have dropped their views from their stories.
This, to me, is no different than the crap HRC dealt with. You get a salacious story here and there and then people start internalizing it to their own personal experience or to their own notions of how things should be instead of critically analyzing the facts (which I would say has not happened from those who view this as a big issue) and whether it should be relevant in making a decision.
I think Amy is getting hosed. I think Dems are too easily distracted.
Never thought that you would go against the herd mentality.
As far as I can tell, Amy is one of the few candidates with a winning record who could get Republican and independent votes. Independents make up 42% of the electorate. Democrats make up 29%. Republicans 27%.
So let’s help the media destroy her chances.
Anyone thinking Biden is going to be our savior would be betting on a horse with a losing record. I think Trump will destroy him in the general.
Too bad the MSM didn’t give Howard Schultz’s narcissistic attitude the same attention they seem to be wanting to give Klobuchar’s apparently piss poor one.
Yup. And any one of us who has been around a boss who threw something can tell you we’d never want to work for them again.
In this day and age, that’s simply not acceptable behavior.
And that Klobacher refuses to look inside to see what she could change, makes her all of our own experiences very relevant. We do see what’s going on here.
There are plenty of candidates that don’t have this baggage, I’ll take one of those, please.
Have seen other example of this they are called - “temperamental genius”… “demanding perfection” … “stickler for detail” …they are highly regarded - they can be sharp-tonged executives who abusively humiliate a subordinate in front of a crowd … short fused surgeons who throw surgical instruments across the operating room in a rage when handed the incorrect size… oh they are just “perfectionists”
it gets tolerated - it gets ignored - right up to the moment when somebody gets injured / permanently hurt … then often the system that has been tolerating this all along - rises up in false shock and indignation and banishes the perpetrator.
Some on this site say I often go against the media herd;)!
I do think that people are drawing conclusions about Amy from a few stories, which are filled with suggestive anecdotal examples but don’t actually lead up to a formal complaint or an allegation of workplace harassment or creating a hostile work environment. We haven’t heard those types of legal buzzwords because no reporter as of yet can actually find anything that ties to potential actionable claims.
I think this is an area that is well litigated. Labor and employment law firms are plentiful on both the plaintiff and defense side, so I find it a bit hard to believe that if Amy were in fact as abusive as some claim that it wouldn’t have led to that. If it does lead to such a formal claim, I would revise my view based on the facts alleged. But that not having been made to date, then I think we’re debating hypotheticals under an unproven assumption that Amy is abusive, when in fact it might be the case that people are simply imputing their own personal experiences and personal views of workplace conduct to this particular story.
Actually no, it just means you are a bully. I don’t like people who mistreat their employees or other people they have power over. Don’t like it at all. It’s a bad character trait.
That’s your right, but then you’d be closing the door on a very electable candidate based on allegations of things that have never given rise to an actionable claim in an area of law that is extremely well developed and in which dozens of claims for workplace harassment or creating a hostile work environment are filed daily. I’d suggest you take a closer look at the facts before jumping to conclusions about Amy.
I think that’s really debatable. I haven’t been able to understand what people see in her at all. She isn’t well known at all and personally I just find her objectionable on the basis of the way she treats people who cannot fight back.
