rickair7777

Disclaimer: I don't like, and am not voting for, either candidate. This discussion is strictly tactical airline merger stuff. Yes most politicians blow with the winds, the ones that don't are either "Statesmen" or "Not Re-elected" (damn few of the former left). You can make the case that "blowing with the winds" = "responsive to the voters".

Specifics:

Long-time Californians know all this well, but outsiders might not.
Pre-2020: Hard ass CA AG, despised by CA libs for heavy-handed incarceration policies.
2020: Defund the Po-Lice
2024: Back to Law and Order

2020: Open borders and free stuff for illegals, eliminate or reform ICE.
2024: Trying to take credit for alleged border crackdown as "Border Czar".

Non-partisan article from centrist media outlet: https://www.newsnationnow.com/politi...policy-pivots/

Plenty more where that came from (google).

Bottom line, for our purposes, she's unpredictable.

Trump takes a pro-business stance for the most part, especially big business. Nothing about Trump 1.0 that makes me think Trump 2.0 would block a logical merger which won't materially effect the competitive landscape vis a vis the big four.

Contrary arguments:
1. He's in bed with the big four and will do them a solid and block the small-fry merger.
2. He likes to punish blue states (ex property tax deduction), so maybe he'd like to see HAL struggle.

clearandcold

The administration kind of hosed the railroad unions a while back. They had been released by the NMB and then the PEB contract got imposed on them by Congress and the President. Not what I was
expecting out of the “Most pro labor President since FDR.”

Neosporin

Awesome, thank you very much. I competely understand your descliaimer also. Those are good points. I will follow up with my own Google search as you have suggested. I understand our points, thank you.
I didnt know much about her AG days and what happened in California other than recent discussion about her relating to those issues. thx

Neosporin

Thanks, I do remebemr Clinton blocking a labor dispute at American Airlines in the 90's. Yes I too am concerned that the "Labor pro president" has, or would have issues with labor and/or will she as president have the the same or simliar issues.

Valar Morghulis

Yet they let the NWA guys strike after that. It’s all about who is spins the best story.

News flash. The railroads are mess. They’ve stripped everything down to the bare minimum to run just in time. Any little burble brings the whole house of cards down. A strike would have created a mess God himself couldn’t untangle. And this was at a time when the supply chain for everything from saline to toilet paper was not even fully recovered. The public was just getting Charmin back when they’d been using 120 grit for the last year.

Should the railroad guys been able to strike, absolutely, positively. What was the chance that was going to happen given the conditions? Zero.

ReluctantEskimo

What's missing from this fun little narrative is the outcome.

The railroad workers got their sick days in the end.

clearandcold

Nothing fun about it. They got their legs taken out from beneath them and lost all leverage even after exhausting the limited options available to them under the RLA. 8 months later each union got a few days of sick time, 3-4 days a year and the ability to convert a few vacation days a well. Sounds like a home run to me. The whole thing sent a great message to all companies who have labor groups who are regulated under the RLA.

ReluctantEskimo

Whether or not it achieves your personal threshold isn't a factor.

It's what they bargained for, and it was achieved without a work stoppage.

Sounds like a win to me.

blackbox348

Stock is almost to $13 again, time for another Seeking Alpha article with no sources to drive it back down.

GoodJet

I hope to be blessed with another amazing opportunity