the democrats bailed out teamsters unions and had the most pro-labor policies in my lifetime. this guy went right because of social issues. do you think democrats should have softened on LGBT rights to get conservative unions to endorse them?
I never said you said that. My point is that democrats delivered a ton of material gains for unions and the teamsters specifically, but that wasn’t enough to win their votes, and Dems would have to concede on social issues as well. would you be willing to make that tradeoff?
I don’t think she should concede on social issues, but she should at least answer the 12 questions the teamsters asked her and not act dismissive. it follows a pattern by the Harris campaign of dismissing groups who were seeking concessions for an endorsement
another example of this was Palestinian activists at the DNC who only wanted a speaking slot and 0 policy concessions…the “we are going to win anyway” mentality was a big problem in the campaign
I don't understand the mindset of Dems and their cheerleaders thinking they can shed massive voting bases with impunity. It's not fucking working as a strategy.
Pretty clear that Harris' team picked up on that early.
And what happened in the Midwest, and what has happened in the Midwest for decades, is far more complex than O'Brien being bigoted and putting himself about the Teamsters rank-and-file.
As others have said, the Biden administration bailed out Teamsters' pensions, and overall the Biden administration had been much more pro-union than the first Trump administration. So you are left with the fact that this union just did not act in their material interest.
There is a leadership that is supposed to speak for its members. The leadership could have supported Harris, but they did not, despite what the Biden-Harris administration did for them. Not that I think that support would have mattered much.
The fact is that Biden was much more pro-union than Trump, and because of that, one could easily assume that Harris would be much more pro-union than Trump would be. The Democrats as a whole are certainly much more pro-union than the GOP.
Also, yes, Harris lost, but Trump lost in 2020, and the Dems have won many of the non-presidential elections in recent years. The fact of the matter is that the US electorate is very polarized and closely divided, and the opposing party tends to get a critical boost just for being in opposition.
If the point of elections is to accrue enough votes to win, then it's bad strategy to tell the representative of a union of 1.3 million workers that you'll win with or without them, and then lose!
That’s not what she said, but even if it were “I had to destroy the future my union to put a stuck up bitch in her place” is something an unwinnable, right wing moron believes. And any man cheering him on (like yourself) is an anti labour right winger.
This conversation almost certainly had zero impact on the election. Even if the union leadership had supported Harris, it probably wouldn't have made a difference, but they didn't support Harris because many of their members were Trump supporters for cultural reasons.
The guy went on Steve Bannons podcast before the election. Regardless of how you feel about his reporting and i think a lot of it is very good that should have ended his career as a serious journalist tbh.
This is video of the IBT President -- one of the few dozen most important people in the country for deciding who wins elections -- saying a reason why in view Harris didn't win this election. Should this not be shared? Ignorance isn't bliss.
You're missing the "uncritically". NYT reported on this at the time of the meeting and they said she told them she was confident she was going to win and wanted their endorsement, but she would treat them exactly the same regardless.
Kinda seems like a discrepancy that should be looked at
Of course he is :P
Anybody who claims to be "left", but really just wants an excuse to hate Democrats, almost always turns into a right-wing crank sooner or later; and whether they want to admit it or not
Biden's Emergency Pension Plan Relief Act was the largest financial assistance to pension plans in US history. As others have noted, it was so important that you could likely show a mortality benefit bc of how many lives it saved.
It passed w/o a single GOP vote.
Teamsters polled 60%+ for Trump
If I ever submit to collective bargaining, I for sure want my leader to:
1) not recognize overt negotiating 101 tactics when made to his face
2) choose the candidate who stiff workers and doesn’t believe the NLRB should exist
Comments
I don't understand the mindset of Dems and their cheerleaders thinking they can shed massive voting bases with impunity. It's not fucking working as a strategy.
https://www.newsweek.com/teamsters-union-endorsement-kamala-harris-joe-biden-pension-1956536
Pretty clear that Harris' team picked up on that early.
And what happened in the Midwest, and what has happened in the Midwest for decades, is far more complex than O'Brien being bigoted and putting himself about the Teamsters rank-and-file.
People have individual votes. There's no collective union vote. And how does prohibiting workers striking constitute pro-union in any way?
Kinda seems like a discrepancy that should be looked at
Anybody who claims to be "left", but really just wants an excuse to hate Democrats, almost always turns into a right-wing crank sooner or later; and whether they want to admit it or not
It passed w/o a single GOP vote.
Teamsters polled 60%+ for Trump
1) not recognize overt negotiating 101 tactics when made to his face
2) choose the candidate who stiff workers and doesn’t believe the NLRB should exist