Boycott GM

[ghein]

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090609/AUTO01/906090329

A conservative-led boycott of a major American industry is just what the republicans need to win back some voters.

[Islandman]

Good luck with that.

[MoparDan]

Great. A Republican boycott of GM plus Mitt Romney's "Let Detroit fail" will pretty much guarantee that the Republicans need not even campaign in Michigan for the next decade or so. Probably large parts of the Midwest as well.

Talk about misreading public opinion.

And they wonder why they've lost my wife & her relatives as party faithfuls. :cool:

[Papasito]

Great. A Republican boycott of GM plus Mitt Romney's "Let Detroit fail" will pretty much guarantee that the Republicans need not even campaign in Michigan for the next decade or so. Probably large parts of the Midwest as well.
But the Democrat move of making GM into a black hole for tax dollars in order to "buy" the votes of Union members is a "good" decision?
I don't think the Republicans should boycott GM, but I do think that the government should have washed their hands of GM when it filed bankruptcy, and took their losses. Now since the government won't back off, they will continue to spend countless taxpayer dollars in order to appease a limited group of Union workers.

It may make the Union workers happy, but the rest of the people won't be dancing in the street over it.

[Flanders]

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090609/AUTO01/906090329

A conservative-led boycott of a major American industry is just what the republicans need to win back some voters.


Voters for whom?

Talk-show hosts?

LOL

"Nobody wants to support an Obama company," Rush Limbaugh told his audience Friday, citing a poll showing that 17 percent of Americans backed a boycott of GM

Nobody=17%

LOL x2

[ccbatson]

Buy the best quality product at the lowest price...this is THE BEST way to right the market. A completelyt different subject is to debate the wisdom (lack of) having organized labor and the government run anything...most importantly when funded by tax dollars (stolen money as this is not what government is charged to do constitutionally).

[Bearinabox]

The popular, controversial Limbaugh didn't outright call for a boycott, but said he understood why people would want to avoid GM vehicles. "They don't want to patronize Obama. They don't want to do anything to make Obama's policies work."Isn't it a good thing when policies work? Don't we want to revive the economy and preserve jobs? If you oppose a given set of policies because you don't think they will work, that makes sense. If you take action to sabotage a given set of policies because you're afraid that they'll make the person who proposed them look good, you're a moron.

Basically, Rush is saying that Obama's policies are so sensible and well thought-out that they'll actually work unless someone stops them. If he thought Obama's policies were poorly-conceived and doomed to fail, he'd just sit back and watch the train wreck unfold while formulating an "I told you so" rant to be delivered a few months down the road.

[smogboy]

So lemme get this right.... boycott GM, watch it spiral down in flames, and take down a good chunk of our region along with it is somehow good for the US? Or is this more of a personal vendetta between Rush against the Democrats?

[Bearinabox]

So lemme get this right.... boycott GM, watch it spiral down in flames, and take down a good chunk of our region along with it is somehow good for the US? Or is this more of a personal vendetta between Rush against the Democrats?
Oh, I doubt it's personal. Rush has built a niche for himself by spewing a certain kind of bullshit, and the more of it he spews the richer he gets. It's still fun to poke holes in his logic, though (if you can even call it that).

[Detroit Stylin]

Don't these idiots know that this will cost possibly even MORE US Jobs?!

And the Nominee for our next award is.....*drum roll*

1666

[Detroitej72]

So lemme get this right.... boycott GM, watch it spiral down in flames, and take down a good chunk of our region along with it is somehow good for the US? Or is this more of a personal vendetta between Rush against the Democrats?

Aren't these the same folks, including the auto dealers, (many who are Republican)who protested their dealership closings?

[lilpup]

Yeah, ya know, those morons with their entitlement attitudes who think they deserve automatic renewals of their franchise agreements. I'll bet they were all "at will" employers, too.

[oladub]

Screw Rush. Buy American.

Are there any Democrats here who do not intend to buy GM or Chrysler products in the future.? I cannot understand why so many liberals buy foreign label and manufactured cars. The Asian manufacturers allow fewer women into management than the big three and are less likely to hire U.S. minorities, and other Americans for that matter, in the manufacturing of their cars. Buying foreign cars has always been a regressive personal social action.

So much for the stick. President Obama's administration has now added a carrot for liberals to encourage their purchase of GM products - government ownership! No more evil profits. Revenue will go to Chrysler workers and 72% of GM revenues will now be defacto government revenue.

I have always purchased big three autos because I am acutely aware of the unemployment problems in Detroit when US auto sales go down. I will continue to try to purchase US autos and will even consider additional GM products in the future. My question was if liberals will break their socially destructive habit of purchasing foreign cars now that President Obama has purchased GM for the government and has become car maker in chief.

[lilpup]

This left-leaning independent "liberal" has always bought Ford products, thanks.

[Lorax]

Oh, I doubt it's personal. Rush has built a niche for himself by spewing a certain kind of bullshit, and the more of it he spews the richer he gets. It's still fun to poke holes in his logic, though (if you can even call it that).


You can drive a bus through those holes. :eek:

[Detroitej72]

This moderate has one of each, Ford, GM, and Chrysler in his fleet.

[oldredfordette]

We only drive Ford's in the 'Dette house. My republican neighbors drive Range Rovers, Lexus, BMW's and Toyotas.

[Jimaz]

Between conservatives and GM, which has suffered the greater boycott?

The girl who can't dance claims the band can't play.

[oladub]

A March 2009 Gallop Poll came up with the following. This was taken before GM became the majority owner. I was surprised that the results show that moderate Democrats are more likely to buy US cars than Republicans. Also, higher income groups are less likely to buy Americans.:


There are only slight differences along partisan lines in car-buying preferences, with 39% of Democrats, 37% of Republicans, and 33% of independents favoring American cars. The distinctions are a bit stronger along ideological lines, with conservatives more inclined than liberals to buy American: 40% vs. 30%. Moderates fall squarely in between, at 35%.

Two Kinds of Democrats

These differences in car buying along political lines are magnified when looking at ideology within party. Most notably, Democrats are sharply divided along ideological lines in their car tastes.

Moderate and conservative Democrats (consisting of 65% of all Democrats) are among the most pro-buy-American auto consumers in the new survey: 46% say they would only consider cars from an American company while just 6% would only consider cars from foreign companies.
By contrast, liberal Democrats are almost evenly divided among those who say they would only buy American and those who say they would only buy foreign cars: 27% and 22%, respectively. This makes liberal Democrats (consisting of 35% of all Democrats) among the least pro-buy-American consumers in the survey.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116356/Buy-American-Feeling-Grows-Automakers-Struggle.aspx


The above are national statistics. In this same Gallop Poll, midwesterners are much more likely to buy big three vehicles than people in the rest of the country.

[smogboy]

You can drive a bus through those holes. :eek:

If that's the case, Limbaugh might be calling for a boycott against buses before long.

[ccbatson]

I still don't get the reason that the automakers have this level of power regarding dealerships. Why don't they simply allow the use of their name, without costs from the automaker to the dealers, and let the free market decide?

[Detroitej72]

I still don't get the reason that the automakers have this level of power regarding dealerships. Why don't they simply allow the use of their name, without costs from the automaker to the dealers, and let the free market decide?

I have been wondering the same thing, as long as the dealers don't tarnish the brand's name, what harm is it to let them continue operations outside of the company?

[ccbatson]

I am not being inflammatory on this one either. There must be a tangible reason that they are actively shutting down dealerships....anybody know why?

Even if there is a good explanation, wouldn't it be worthwhile to rework the system so that the automakers are not at financial risk by virtue of dealerships?

[lilpup]

As long as dealerships are using the automakers' brands the automakers could be at risk. Dealerships are the public presentation of the automaker even though the automaker has little control over the dealership management. Bad dealers can hurt an automaker more than some recalls.

The automakers aren't randomly shutting down dealerships. Performance stats are a big part of dictating who gets discontinued. If a dealership is not capturing market share in its area or has poor customer service scores it's not going to make the cut.

Picture this scenario as one example - a dealership wants to boost its bottom line but can't sell units. What to do? One option is to boost vehicle service revenue, perhaps through unnecessary repairs or fudging about what's covered under warranty and soaking the customer (while the repair tech grumbles on about how Detroit makes shit product when, in reality, he's either a fraud or is grossly undertrained) - who gets the black eye? The automaker that's who, not the dealer who is a local face and supposed friend of the community. That's part of why Detroit can't shake its inferior reputation. {I'm not making this up out of the blue. An acquaintance from down south crabbed non-stop about her Escalade while she had it - how many times she had to take it in for service - she claimed continual problems. Escalades aren't a problem prone vehicle at all. I firmly believe her dealer was screwing her over and recommended she go to a different one. She traded in the Escalade and bought foreign instead.}

[ccbatson]

So issue standards of quality that must be complied with (for free) in order to attain and maintain dealership status.

[oladub]

I'm still for buying American, even GM. The ummm nice looking Congresswoman from Minnesota, Michelle Bachmann explains how GM dealers closings are sometimes decided these days. I probably missed this in civics class.

We Now Have A Total Gangster Government (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thR-lVuztIY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Edailypaul%2Ecom%2Fnode%2F9 7324&feature=player_embedded) 4min41sec

[Bobl]

Those AM Radio talkers who have suggested boycotting GM and Chrysler for taking government bailouts neglect to mention that, just recently, the government run Bank Of Japan infused 300 billion dollars into Toyota so that they can continue zero interest loans, and other promotions. They also fail to mention that the government of Japan subsidizes retirement plans and health care coverage.

[Detroitej72]

Those AM Radio talkers who have suggested boycotting GM and Chrysler for taking government bailouts neglect to mention that, just recently, the government run Bank Of Japan infused 300 billion dollars into Toyota so that they can continue zero interest loans, and other promotions. They also fail to mention that the government of Japan subsidizes retirement plans and health care coverage.

Shh Bobl, you'll expose those fools for the wind bags they really are!

[ccbatson]

Which AM radio talkers suggested a boycott? Not Rush, Hannity, Levin, Wilkow, Church....who then?

[rb336]

Rush praised the following article, and had a link to it on his web page:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/the_ethical_case_for_boycottin_1.html


but I think it was Hugh Hewitt from townhall.com who started it

[ccbatson]

Praising an article for making it's point clearly...IF rush did, in fact do so (unlikely in the proper context, however) is not the same as endorsing a Boycott. Sean Hannity put it very succinctly when he described that he believes boycotts to be the wrong tool to be used (in almost any circumstances), but can understand the reasoning behind an argument in favor of it.

[Detroitej72]

Sean Hannity put it very succinctly when he described that he believes boycotts to be the wrong tool to be used (in almost any circumstances), but can understand the reasoning behind an argument in favor of it.

By understanding the reasoning and stopping short of endorsing it, he shows his cowardice. Just like when he bragged water boarding wasn't bad and he would do it for charity. Then he showed himself for the coward that he is by not taking Keith Olberman up on the offer.

Just one more nail in the coffin of the credibility of another right wing hypocrite.

[ccbatson]

You realize that Hannity is still a sponsored spokesperson for GM, Don't you?

[East Detroit]

Who is Sean Hannity? Also, who cares?

[ccbatson]

Number 2 highest rated radio host across the board, and the highest rated television news show on the highest rated news channel...but you already knew that while pretending not to.

[Papasito]

Another idiotic move that proves our government doesnt put our interests first is the cash for clunkers program.....


Consumers will be able to take advantage of this program and receive a $3,500 or $4,500 discount from the car dealer when they trade in their old vehicle and purchase or lease a new one. Consumers you do not need to register anywhere or at anytime for this program. However, to find out eligibility requirements
http://www.cars.gov/

now, why NOT only make this kind of incentive apply to car manufacturers we have OUR TAX DOLLARS into? why would we offer these discounts to people to buy cars from foreign manufacturers? why not put automobiles made by American companies as priority over the others, and give our companies an advantage so we can get this economy going again?

Oh, that's right, because Americans are not the priority of the American government anymore.

[East Detroit]

Number 2 highest rated radio host across the board, and the highest rated television news show on the highest rated news channel...but you already knew that while pretending not to.


You didn't address the "who cares?" portion.

A circus freak can get a huge audience, but that doesn't make him pertinent to daily life.

[elganned]

Another idiotic move that proves our government doesnt put our interests first is the cash for clunkers program.....

now, why NOT only make this kind of incentive apply to car manufacturers we have OUR TAX DOLLARS into? why would we offer these discounts to people to buy cars from foreign manufacturers? why not put automobiles made by American companies as priority over the others, and give our companies an advantage so we can get this economy going again?

Oh, that's right, because Americans are not the priority of the American government anymore.
The objectives of this program were:
1) to give an influx of cash to AMERICAN DEALERSHIPS
2) while stimulating production of CARS MADE IN AMERICA (which, BTW, includes Honda, VW, and Toyota cars built in American factories by American workers)
3) while simultaneously REDUCING CO2 EMISSIONS and LOWERING DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL by replacing older less fuel-efficient models with newer, smaller, cleaner-burning, more efficient models.

It was never intended as a "put DETROIT back to work" program. Given the objectives as listed, I'd say it was a pretty good success story.

[exdetroiter]

The should have boycotted the foriegn automaters a long time ago. The economy of the U.S. would be booming, if the automobile dollars had remained in the U.S.

[elganned]

What're you guys, some kinda socialists?

"Competition" is one of the cornerstones of the American Way of free enterprise capitalism.
Had the Big 3 spent their energies on improving the quality of their vehicles instead of just thinking up more creative ways to torture the exterior sheet-metal, the foreigners wouldn't have stood a chance.

It's not my fault that Honda builds a better car than GM--it's GM's fault (which they are finally waking up to). So why should I buy an American-branded (note I didn't say American-made) vehicle when I can get better value for my money elsewhere?

[thatguy123]

The should have boycotted the foriegn automaters a long time ago. The economy of the U.S. would be booming, if the automobile dollars had remained in the U.S.

Why does everyone assume the money you spend on an automaker that is not the Big 3 is put in an envelope and mailed overseas when you buy a car? Fact is the majority of the money stays here, the same way the money a company like Ford makes in Korea stays in Korea (tax wise it would kill them to send it back here).

Take a read of this article, this would not be possible if they were just shipping cars over on boats and mailing the money to Seoul the minute each car was bought. When was the last time one of the Big 3 did this? http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/07/09/kia-ville-georgia-a-small-town-catches-a-big-break/

[ccbatson]

If you let market forces compel purchase decisions, everyone is better off. Keeping a failure on life support via boycotts and subsidies is short sighted and doomed to fail.

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "Keeping a failure on life support via boycotts and subsidies is short sighted and doomed to fail."

Nothing wrong with aiding an ailing company, IF they are taking the appropriate measures to correct themselves. Looks as though they are trying to do the same thing and expect a different result. Not going to happen. These car companies should have taken drastic measures in regard to labor costs, they didn't when they had the chance, or at least the best opportunity to do so. It's going to come back to bite them in the ass. Simply writing off some of their debt, closing some dealers and shuffling their product line is going to have little impact in the long term.

[ccbatson]

Within the existing bankrupties laws (which are too lax), it may be acceptable to give a company a chance to right itself. These nationalizing efforts at taxpayer expense are abhorent abominations...THIS IS THE USA, isn't it? We don't do this kind of anti capitalist economic suicide...or do we?

[East Detroit]

Don't worry, we're balancing the nationalizing by giving our tax money to foreign corporations under the guise of "cash for clunkers." 6/10 new cars under the program are from foreign companies.

Americans are geniuses!

[ccbatson]

American liberals to be more accurate East Detroit.

[ccbatson]

Remember, the goal of socialism isn't money...it is power. This explains why Obama seems unconcerned about spending so much that paying the interest on the debt will be impossible to sustain, and inflation/devaluation is a foregone conclusion.

[elganned]

Neither Reagan nor the two Georges were concerned about the interest on their debt increases, which were record-breaking for their time. Why should Obama?