Liberal Forum

Kobia2 » 06 Dec 2023, 10:53 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 10:53 am

            How many **** colors are on that Flag now?
   You really have to wonder what the conversation was in the Target Boardroom (or any Woke Corporation's Boardroom) to determine it was a sound business decision to attach their Brand to polarizing controversial & contentious issues... 

           Though this Gay Christmas Merch isn't remotely on the scale as their large and in your face Pride Month Display, which sent the company's Market Value crashing from $74 Billion to $60 BIllion, and Shareholders seeking to take Legal Action ---- it doesn't belong on store shelves period...  

Target is not hitching its wagon to it. Target IS the wagon.

The guy who controls target is a transgender. He is pushing this, not looking to be pulled by it. 

He'll get bailed out - the people behind this print the **** money. And what if he DOES lose a billion? Does he care? Money is nothing until you spend it. Only then does it become a value statement. 

How many beds can he sleep in? How many jets can he ride in? How many ukrainian children can he buy on the black market? This is his agenda. He doesn't think like you think.
 
 
 

RedheadedStranger » 06 Dec 2023, 10:59 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 10:59 am

From a marketing standpoint, it makes zero sense.

The number of customers they are trying to gain by pushing this **** is miniscule compared to the number you are pissing off and losing by doing it.

Somebody has to be getting paid off by some entity pushing their agenda somewhere down the line for making these decisions.

See my post above. This is not about marketing. It's about an agenda.

Skans » 06 Dec 2023, 11:22 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 11:22 am

My wife and I were talking about just that this morning.  Every commercial has something like 3 blacks and one white, SIMP who I guess is supposed to be the dad.  Now, no white guy I know is going to buy **** from a company that advertises like that.  And, likely no black guy will either.  What imbecile is telling these companies to advertise like that?  Why are they even still employed?  Most people tune-out commercials to start with.  Then, you make them unpalatable for everyone in your audience - just freaking stupid!

Their marketing is not about sales. European men are taking up less space so that they do not offend men pouring in who take up more space. Moves are afoot that anyone can see but few seem wiling to understand. 

So long as you keep believing this is marketing, you will keep scratching grooves into your head. Once you abandon that idea, you are free to assess the matter for what it really is. 
 
 
 

Kisses » 06 Dec 2023, 11:42 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 11:42 am

isn't his net worth like $200 million?

Maybe, but he beat up a 6-year old kid and he might have gotten sued.
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:00 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:00 pm

Their marketing is not about sales. European men are taking up less space so that they do not offend men pouring in who take up more space. Moves are afoot that anyone can see but few seem wiling to understand. 

So long as you keep believing this is marketing, you will keep scratching grooves into your head. Once you abandon that idea, you are free to assess the matter for what it really is.

LOL - I just press the mute button and then go take a piss.
 
 

Zeets2 » 06 Dec 2023, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 11:25 am

More to the point, this display proves they've learned nothing from seeing the way sales crashed since their "pride month" support ****.
 

Keep pretending they're stupid, keep missing their actual agenda. 

The idea that billionaires are stupid is kinda stupid.

Eschew that folly and free yourself to see their moves through clear eyes. Their propaganda is NOT ABOUT SALES. 
 

RedheadedStranger » 06 Dec 2023, 10:59 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 10:59 am

From a marketing standpoint, it makes zero sense.

The number of customers they are trying to gain by pushing this **** is miniscule compared to the number you are pissing off and losing by doing it.

Somebody has to be getting paid off by some entity pushing their agenda somewhere down the line for making these decisions.

That's exactly what's going on. Some corporate gubmint welfare subsidies. Pushing the agenda. And the Ceo's play along for a big personal  BONUS! ESG scores.. play along or else!
 

Skans » 06 Dec 2023, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:02 pm

LOL - I just press the mute button and then go take a piss.

That'll teach em. Keep that up, and we will win. 
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:02 pm

Keep pretending they're stupid, keep missing their actual agenda. 

The idea that billionaires are stupid is kinda stupid.

Eschew that folly and free yourself to see their moves through clear eyes. Their propaganda is NOT ABOUT SALES.

So, you think losing billions for their stockholders isn't being noticed?
If they weren't stupid at Bud Lite for giving Mulvany the OK for her association with them, then why did they stop using her to promote it?
I'm sure their stockholders are tickled to death over the losing of $27 billion in the stock price, right?

Bud Light parent Anheuser-Busch’s stock has lost $27B over Dylan Mulvaney
NY Post June 2, 2023 By Shannon ThalerBud Light maker Anheuser-Busch InBev has lost a whopping $27 billion in market value in the wake of its star-crossed partnership with Dylan Mulvaney — most recently slammed by a 4% stock drop this week.AB InBev’s market capitalization fell to $107.44 billion through the end of May — down more than $27 billion from the $134.55 billion value the company had on March 31, the day before Mulvaney’s partnership went live, according to Dow Jones Market Data Group.

So you think the Mulvany hiring was a smart move for them?
All I can say is that you have a strange way of evaluating what is and isn't "stupid"!
 

Zeets2 » 06 Dec 2023, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:20 pm

So, you think losing billions for their stockholders isn't being noticed?
If they weren't stupid at Bud Lite for giving Mulvany the OK for her association with them, then why did they stop using her to promote it?
I'm sure their stockholders are tickled to death over the losing of $27 billion in the stock price, right?

I was talking about target.

Zeets2 » 06 Dec 2023, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:20 pm

So you think the Mulvany hiring was a smart move for them?

I was talking about target.

Zeets2 » 06 Dec 2023, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:20 pm

All I can say is that you have a strange way of evaluating what is and isn't "stupid"!

Calling evil stupid puts you on the side of evil - excusing it. You seem to think that pointing and laughing and taking joy in their suffering is the same thing as defending your family and your nation from their agenda. It isn't.

Boycotting is an EXCELLENT answer. But being aware of what is really going on puts you in a much better situation to oppose their agenda. I say to you again: Calling evil stupid sides with evil. They are not stupid. They are evil. 
 

Skans » 06 Dec 2023, 12:01 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:01 pm

Maybe, but he beat up a 6-year old kid and he might have gotten sued.

Just read the fiasco. He is lucky they didn't. What a violent temper.. Went Mike Tyson on a guy's ear in the 80s.   
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 11:54 am » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 11:54 am

Target is not hitching its wagon to it. Target IS the wagon.

The guy who controls target is a transgender. He is pushing this, not looking to be pulled by it. 

He'll get bailed out - the people behind this print the **** money. And what if he DOES lose a billion? Does he care? Money is nothing until you spend it. Only then does it become a value statement. 

How many beds can he sleep in? How many jets can he ride in? How many ukrainian children can he buy on the black market? This is his agenda. He doesn't think like you think.

@Skans  @Zeets2  @RebelGator  @Redheaded Stranger  @Kobia2  THIS^


DO NOT EXCUSE EVIL AS STUPIDITY. That is a favor to evil.

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:27 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:27 pm

@Skans  @Zeets2  @RebelGator  @Redheaded Stranger  @Kobia2  THIS^

DO NOT EXCUSE EVIL AS STUPIDITY. That is a favor to evil.

Why can't it be BOTH?

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:27 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:27 pm

@Skans  @Zeets2  @RebelGator  @Redheaded Stranger  @Kobia2  THIS^

DO NOT EXCUSE EVIL AS STUPIDITY. That is a favor to evil.

I was pointing out that this isn't marketing to grow sales at all... since the move makes no marketing sense whatsoever. It is indeed about agenda.

Bud Light was a sacrificial lamb for InBev to support the cause as well. Tanking that brand didn't hurt them at all in the grand scheme of things and still got everybody talking about some **** tranny with a five o'clock shadow.

A good many if not most former Bud Light drinkers switched to another brand that most likely still contributed to InBev's coffers just the same. 

 
 

Zeets2 » 06 Dec 2023, 12:37 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:37 pm

Why can't it be BOTH?

If you wish to see it as both, or either, be my guest. 

I see it purely as evil. Nothing "stupid" about it, They know EXACTLY what they are doing and who they are doing it to. 

And they're doing it to you. 
 

RedheadedStranger » 06 Dec 2023, 12:38 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:38 pm

I was pointing out that this isn't marketing to grow sales at all... since the move makes no marketing sense whatsoever. It is indeed about agenda.

Bud Light was a sacrificial lamb for InBev to support the cause as well. Tanking that brand didn't hurt them at all in the grand scheme of things and still got everybody talking about some **** tranny with a five o'clock shadow.

A good many if not most former Bud Light drinkers switched to another brand that most likely still contributed to InBev's coffers just the same.

This one has eyes. 

"this isn't marketing to grow sales at all... since the move makes no marketing sense whatsoever."

There it is right there. Instead of yukking it up that "there dum," you correctly isolate the PROPER take-away: "this isn't marketing to grow sales at all..." 

THIS ISN'T ABOUT MARKETING TO GROW SALES AT ALL... so, what IS it about? Once you get the math right, set the equation up right - and bully for you that you have done so, - the only obvious conclusion is that they are launching a direct attack on our culture, our families, and our nation itself. They are parasites who are looking to finish us off and move on to their next hosts. And money is of minor concern to them, since at the end of the day, they **** print the stuff.
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:25 pm

I was talking about target.

I was talking about target.

Calling evil stupid puts you on the side of evil - excusing it. You seem to think that pointing and laughing and taking joy in their suffering is the same thing as defending your family and your nation from their agenda. It isn't.

Boycotting is an EXCELLENT answer. But being aware of what is really going on puts you in a much better situation to oppose their agenda. I say to you again: Calling evil stupid sides with evil. They are not stupid. They are evil.

You think the stockholders of Target are any happier after THEIR stock crashed?: 

Target Is the Latest Proof—Going Woke Means Going Broke | OpinionNewsweek Jun 01, 2023 
I think those are just good business decisions, and it's the right thing for society, and it's the great thing for our brand." That's how Target CEO Brian Cornell described his company's diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in mid-May, when conservatives objecting to flamboyantly pro-LGBTQ+ merchandise declared a boycott of the low-end retailer. Within just 10 days of Cornell's statement, Target lost $10 billion, watched its stock price fall daily, and proved yet again that going woke means going broke.Suffering an unmitigated sales and public relations disaster, Target removed some of the offensive merchandise—which included "tuck-friendly" swimwear—and moved other items to more discreet parts of its stores, walking back the supposed wisdom of marketing to a marginal fringe that advocates a radical gender ideology most Americans reject.

You think that laughing and cheering at their loss is "excusing" their actions that caused it?  I've got no problem pointing to those woke companies as being evil.  But don't try to tell me they weren't stupid as well!  Or do you think that both Target and Bud Lite wouldn't have done anything differently now if they could go back in time and reconsider doing what they did?

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:25 pm

Boycotting is an EXCELLENT answer. 

 

Not really.  Boycotting has never worked.  
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Dec 2023, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:49 pm

This one has eyes. 

"this isn't marketing to grow sales at all... since the move makes no marketing sense whatsoever."

There it is right there. Instead of yukking it up that "there dum," you correctly isolate the PROPER take-away: "this isn't marketing to grow sales at all..." 

THIS ISN'T ABOUT MARKETING TO GROW SALES AT ALL... so, what IS it about? Once you get the math right, set the equation up right - and bully for you that you have done so, - the only obvious conclusion is that they are launching a direct attack on our culture, our families, and our nation itself. They are parasites who are looking to finish us off and move on to their next hosts. And money is of minor concern to them, since at the end of the day, they **** print the stuff.

When money becomes no object, all that's left exerting power and influence.
 

Zeets2 » 06 Dec 2023, 12:51 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Dec 2023, 12:51 pm

You think the stockholders of Target are any happier after THEIR stock crashed?: 

You think that laughing and cheering at their loss is "excusing" their actions that caused it?  I've got no problem pointing to those woke companies as being evil.  But don't try to tell me they weren't stupid as well!  Or do you think that both Target and Bud Lite wouldn't have done anything differently now if they could go back in time and reconsider doing what they did?

Here is what I believe. 

I believe that the billionaires are smarter than you. AND ME.

That is not a put down - I included myself because I really believe that.

Which means that when you call them stupid, you are lowering your own intellectual station, as they are smarter than you.

You are not lowering MY intellectual station, because I am not stupid enough to pretend I am smarter than the billionaires. I am not calling THEM stupid, nor am I calling MYSELF stupid. 

The smarter thing for you to say is that their actions APPEAR stupid - and then you ought to get busy figuring out what you missed, such that people you know to be smart APPEAR to be acting stupidly. 

Stop conflating their actions with their competence and start equating their actions to their agenda. That would be the smart move. 

Or keep pointing and name calling and thinking their lowered sales is a win.