s73ver

When it rains, it pours, I guess.

No, it isn't. Not when many of their female employees were willing to leave the company, and when the existence of that manifesto would make their recruiting efforts much, much harder.

This idea that one can only disagree with it because they haven't read it is extremely uncivil, and does nothing but attempt to shut down the discussion here.

Both of those theses are quite sexist, and no, neither one is appropriate for discussion in the workplace. Especially a workplace that wishes to appear as welcoming for all, not just conservative white men.

"No. His firing confirmed part of Demore's thesis; that Google has monoculture issues and sits in some sort of bubble."

Google had to decide which they value more: Demore's manifesto, or the contributions of a third of their workforce.

"Healthcare, like, the mandatory profits for insurance companies?"

Like the end to discrimination against pre-existing conditions. Like the end to yearly and lifetime caps on coverage. Like the end to insurance companies just being able to drop you the minute you get sick.

"Immigration is a loaded topic."

No, it's not.

"And calling an argument intellectually lazy is being "intellectually lazy" itself."

No, it's not. It's pointing out the faults in your argument.

"You're delusional if you think the Democrats and Republicans by and large have any real interest in the American people."

And you're far too cynical if you think they don't, or if you think that they're the same.

"If you vote Democrat you're just as bad (maybe worse since you should know better) as Republicans."

Wrong. No matter how much you hope that they're the same, they are not. Again, all it takes is looking at the various issues facing people today. Healthcare. Immigration. Minority rights. Voting rights. For you to say they are equally as bad is for you to say you have never actually looked at anything, and want an excuse not to.

I have absolutely no respect for lazy people like you who don't even bother to look at the issues, and just choose the easy way out. Do not bother responding back with another easily disproven and shot down argument.

No, I got exactly what you wrote. I don't buy it, and I incredibly do not buy this bunk idea that the disagreements are entirely superficial. To those millions who would have lost health coverage under the GOP plan, do you think that difference was "entirely superficial"? To the transgender people who are having their ability to exist in public spaces assaulted by the GOP, do you think those differences are "entirely superficial"? To the masses of people being deported solely for committing the crime of wanting a better life for them and their family, do you think the differences are "entirely superficial"?

And saying that people who disagree with you just "don't know what they're talking about" is incredibly intellectually lazy.

Only if you're intellectually dishonest, or you've not been paying attention. For instance, how many parties are actively trying to suppress minority voters?

They're being downvoted because their point, and yours, is absolutely bunk. You pick one or two token things on which they agree, and ignore an entire host of issues on which they have significant differences.

Part of the problem, I suspect, is that most startups only target cities, and those who live in them.

No. This both-sidesism is laughably wrong. There are extremely clear distinctions between the two parties. Anyone claiming they are the same is either intellectually lazy or corrupt.

And how does that get me better internet access?

Saying "rewrite the app" is pure hyperbole. You have a few things to update, but that's it.