Why the Chick-fil-A boycott didn't work but the Bud Light boycott did

Yep: Fundamental Capitalism 101.

It seems to me that the people who boycott Chick-fil-A are the same kind of people who don't eat fast food or even meat in the first place and after being annoyed by the left's screeching over Chick-fil-A so Chick-fil-A customers wanted to buy more of their food. Only rednecks have poor enough taste and low enough income to buy a beer as cheap and crappy as bud light and when bud light hired a spokesperson that all those rednecks are likely to hate, they lost their customer base. Bud Light tried to pander to the gays but like a said only rednecks drink such a beer and everyone knows that gay people don't like such crappy beer and are much more likely drink fruity drinks such as wine and cocktails. If you ask me, bud light's decision to pander to the lgbt community when their main customer demographic is quite the opposite is the worst fail in rainbow capitalism.

Bite the hand that feeds you. Fascists just don't get it! A/B is a major donor to Republican party, so was Disney. Guess who Corporations will donate too now?

No, it’s because of manufacturing consent. They’re trying to divide us over a fuсking beer bottle design so the public eye doesn’t focus on more inconvenient things like Lockheed bribing (or “lobbying”, as they call it) the U.S. government to bomb children abroad with their product so that they can make more money. This isn’t something new about Lockheed, by the way. It’s literally their entire business model.

Oh, so it it about the beer, not a transwoman selling beer. Cool can't wait fot the tampax commercials.

Ohhh! So it’s not just the beer, it’s about someone you don’t like selling the beer!! Never mind, I retract my statement, this is definitely an objectively important issue

It's both.

It's good to know that Lockheed makes bombs that specifically target children abroad. For a minute there you had me concerned that they were just making aircraft. I'm glad to know that they are also making bombs that target foreign children and spare all adult combatants.

That’s not what I was saying but sure, I can’t stop you from believing what you like.

You are accusing the US government of bombing children with bomb made by Lockheed. We are living under one of the most corrupt governments this nation has ever seen. Even so, I don't understand where you get the idea that we are targeting foreign children. I could easily see Joe Biden bombing children because he is disgusting but I don't know about the rest of the government.

Just search up whether Lockheed uses lobbying and you’ll see what I’m talking about. It “lobbies”, which is just another way of saying bribe if we’re being honest here, the government into incentivizing wars that use the weapons that THEY produce since it’s insanely profitable for them. This is why you’ll notice the U.S. government upping its defense budget so much.

I know what lobbying is. It is part of the 1st amendment. Everyone has the right to petition the government. Ever since the Progressives infested our government they have been working out deals with businesses so that both the politician and the business benefit at the taxpayer's expense.

I also know what Eisenhower meant by the "Military Industrial Complex". Those three words have become the fodder for every conspiracy theorist on the right, the left and everywhere in between.

All governments only excel at 3 things: killing, stealing and enslaving. So when you tell me about how the government is incentivized for war, I say I already know that. But what I take issue with is your comment about killing babies. Right now our military is so overly micromanaged that half the time they can't even shoot the bad guy, so killing babies is completely out of the question.

The other problem is the wars we get involved in. The ONLY valid reason for EVER getting into a war is defense of freedom. Freedom of the individual, not the government. The only thing more precious than life is liberty. But when you look back on all of the wars this nation has ever fought, there are really only 2 wars we fought for liberty. The Revolutionary war and the War of 1812. One could argue the Civil War was fought for the freedom of blacks. While that is true that is not the only reason it was fought and protection of our liberty was not the reason.

WWI and WWII were fought to protect our allies. Korea, Vietnam and the Middle-East was fought for business interests.

I’ve personally never believed in lobbying, since if you vote with your money, then one guy can have billions of votes while the others don’t have any or even have negative. But even if you think lobbying is just “petitioning the government” you do have to admit that it’s kind of sketchy when corporations do so.

And yeah, that’s exactly what I’m saying, wars nowadays are fought for business interests and the media doesn’t focus on so for obvious reasons.

Lobbying is petitioning the government but corruption has turned it into what it is today. The entire idea of lobbying is built on the 1st amendment. I firmly believe in the idea of petitioning the government but I hate how it is being used today.

Whatever you believe about lobbying, it doesn’t stop the fact Lockheed is using it to cause unnecessary human suffering so that the executives can see a line go up.

Is Lockheed sending fighter jets to bomb people without the government's approval? Do we have any American corporations killing people inside or outside of the country?

All military conflicts begin and end with the government. Lockheed does not start wars, they make fighter jets and other aircraft for the military.

Lockheed is not the only military aircraft maker. Boeing is another.

No, Lockheed doesn’t send fighter jets without the government’s approval, it lobbies the government to get its approval. And I know Lockheed isn’t the only one that does this, it’s just an example of companies that do.

👍

It failed because the accusation was false and reasonable people saw through it. AND there product is good.

"everyone knows the gays have better taste than to drink bud light and they prefer fruity drinks"

Nice stereotyping. You think no gay person drinks beer, including bud light? Have you ever met a gay person in your life?

I didn't say all gay people hate bud light, I said it's usually only rednecks who have such poor taste to drink a beer as crappy as bud light and gays typically have better taste than to drink such a crappy beer and they usually like fruity cocktails such as the cosmopolitan, margarita, belini, etc. I also didn't say gays don't drink beer, I just said they have better taste than to drink only what rednecks drink, I'm pretty sure a gay person would much rather drink better beer such as Corona which ironically is also produced by the same company as bud light or probably an even better beer from local a craft brewery. The fact that bud light sales declined so much after the Dylan Mulvaney controversy only proves my point that rednecks who don't tolerate lgbt people are bud light's main customer demographic and not lgbt people. Do you drink bud light? If you don't then why do you defend such a crappy beer just to 'spite conservatives'?

"gays typically have better taste than to drink such a crappy beer and they usually like fruity cocktails such as the cosmopolitan, margarita, belini, etc"

According to whom?

"Do you drink bud light?"

I don't drink any beer at all

"If you don't then why do you defend such a crappy beer just to 'spite conservatives'?"

I'm defending a company who supports the LGBTQ community

I'm wondering how you balance defending a company for seeming to support the LGBTQ community with that same company being a major donor to the maga party which you seem to despise?

(The major republican party contributor statement was made by one of your comrades above. I don't have any information to either accept or refute the assertion.)

I find it very doubtful that any company is going to do everything I would want them to do all of the time. But at least if they do some good things, some of the time, that's better than doing nothing good at all. Like I said to Garnet, I'm sure there are plenty of companies that only pretend to support LGBTQ people because they're thinking about their bottom line. But I guess that's better than them not doing anything at all.

That fact that you are defending a company that makes crappy beer that only rednecks drink even though you don't even drink beer, that's just pathetic. Only proves you don't make your own choices, you only driven by what the big woke virtue signaling corporate machine tells people. That fact that you are supporting bud light just because it makes you happy that they claim to support gays pushes the notion that gays are such insecure snowflakes that they need to constantly have validation, support and coddling from corporate giants even though they live in a society already that accepts them, supports them and protects their rights. The fact that you think a corporation supports you is very naive of you think. Sure corporations paint themselves in rainbows every summer but they also refrain from doing so at the same time in their middle eastern headquarters. In reality corporations don't give f**k about you or really anyone, they just do what lines their pocket. They act all pro-lgbt in the west but say nothing about the anti-lgbt human rights abuses that happen in the middle east because that would of course be bad for business where they also have headquarters. They essentially put their rainbow dress on in the west and put their burqa on in the middle east. Here is yet another reason why corporations don't care about you even when they claim to, the CEO of Coors ran as a Republican for the Colorado Senate, he was opposed to gay marriage and said he would support a constitutional ban on it yet he also has no problem with promoting his beer in gay bars. He even once said that his company's pro-LGBT policies are good business separate from his personal politics, it just goes to show you that corporations only act like they support gays just for profit while not caring how gays are actually treated by people. Budweiser also made a pro-America Clydesdale horse ad to try and appeal to their customers base that they lost, once again proving my point that corporations only pander to what people like regardless of what the people who run the company actually like.

"...even though you don't even drink beer, that's just pathetic. Only proves you don't make your own choices, you only driven by what the big woke virtue signaling corporate machine tells people"

I clearly make my own choice not to drink any beer

"That fact that you are supporting bud light just because it makes you happy that they claim to support gays pushes the notion that gays are such insecure snowflakes that they need to constantly have validation, support and coddling"

Maybe to you. Not to me.

"even though they live in a society already that accepts them, supports them and protects their rights"

Many conservatives are proof that that's not true. We've been over this before.

"Sure corporations paint themselves in rainbows every summer but they also refrain from doing so at the same time in their middle eastern headquarters"

And Christians who openly talk about Jesus in America wouldn't do that in some ME countries. What's your point?

"In reality corporations don't give f**k about you or really anyone, they just do what lines their pocket"

Welcome to capitalism

"the CEO of Coors ran as a Republican for the Colorado Senate, he was opposed to gay marriage and said he would support a constitutional ban on it yet he also has no problem with promoting his beer in gay bars. He even once said that his company's pro-LGBT policies are good business separate from his personal politics"

Yeah, I'm sure plenty of corporations do that. But some genuinely do support LGBTQ equality.

"it just goes to show you that corporations only act like they support gays just for profit while not caring how gays are actually treated"

Some are like that, some aren't.

My point is that the same corporations that paint themselves in rainbows acting as if they support gays refrain from flying such flags in the middle east where they do business and gays are not allowed to have any rights. It really seems to me that these corporations don't really care about lgbt rights and only pretend to be 'lgbt allies' in countries where being lgbt is accepted but don't stand up for lgbt rights in countries where it's not accepted. If these corporations really did care for lgbt rights, they would speak out against these the anti-lgbt human rights abuses in the middle east but of course these corporations don't because that would of course be bad for business, corporations aren't there to stand up for people's rights or care about anyone, they wanna do whatever is good for business regardless of how people are treated in society even if it means siding with evil. These corporations probably act like they support Saudi Arabia's totalitarian theocracy just because it's good for business there regardless of how "pro-lgbt" they act in the west. I don't think a lot of corporations actually support lgbt rights, they just act like they do it because it's good for business, the CEO of Coors is one example but corporations such as Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Visa, etc. That do business in the middle east are even worse because they almost seem to be perfectly OK with gays literally being the death penalty. I find it very naive of you to think that there are corporations that actually care about you as an lgbt person, I'm also surprised you seem so ok with corporations supporting anti-lgbt Republicans an you are like "oh well, corporations can't do everything thing I like all the time" any normal person would've been mad at these corporations for such blatant hypocrisy. You are always going on about how Republicans are a threat to your rights and proof that you live in an "lgbt intolerant society" yet you are acting almost as if your ok with corporations supporting the very politicians you hate, just because the corporations are flying your favorite flags. The fact that you are happy just from seeing lgbt flags and see that as something that makes you feel 'validated' is only proving my point that people like you are insecure and need to constantly be coddled by corporate giants and see rainbow flags.

Why should anyone take you seriously when you show your true colors and prejudice by labeling - intending to be derogatory - as "redneck" an entire group of people. Disappointing.

no different than lumping an entire group of people under an lgbtq label

rednecks take pride in being rednecks, being called rednecks, and being recognized as rednecks.

even if your intention is to be derogatory it ain't received that way.

don't believe me, just ask a redneck.

further evidence - notice there ain't been one outcry from a redneck.

just for the record, i ain't never known any redneck ever slurped on bud light anyhow (except for redneck girls that was born girls).

pbr, milwaukee's best, natural light - those are redneck beers of choice.

berry2690 got offended when referred to bud light drinkers as rednecks, I was pointing out that bud light's decision to pander to the lgbt community was a very poor decision when rednecks are the only people who have poor enough taste and low enough income to buy such a cheap crappy beer. The comment isn't there anymore, it got deleted, I think he reported me for 'hate speech' like a snowflake.

Berry didn't get offended. Berry doesn't care about "rednecks". Berry was virtue signaling. Berry shows true colors and prejudice by labeling an entire group of people as "lgbtq".

I recognized what you were getting at. Whether I agree with you in full, partially, or not at all, should not inhibit your ability to express your opinions.

I can't understand why people are so afraid of words and differences. So much for diversity and inclusiveness.

What are you talking about? I'm not defending bud light or attacking Chick-fil-A. You are clearly not reading the meme properly. I said that Chick-fil-A increased in sales despite the mass boycott from the left and bud light is significantly decreasing in sales because Chick-fil-A is a good product and bud light is a very crappy product.

I worked with them for 2.5 years, and the topic of same-sex marriage was never once brought up. How many LGBT people were really that bothered by what Chick-fil-A thinks?

Apparently a lot, not all but a lot. Have you not seen people protest at Chick-fil-A restaurants all over the country? It was all over the news. Even when the first Chick-fil-A restaurant in Toronto, Ontario, Canada opened back in 2019, a lot of people protested it. I also knew a lesbian who decided to rant on social media about Chick-fil-A and how it's a 'violation of lgbt rights' and how anyone who doesn't eat somewhere else can go f**k themselves but I also knew a bisexual woman who actually worked at Chick-fil-A despite not agreeing with their politics.

Chick-fil-A is a W restaurant

W?