It appears many union members are, in essence, masochists who vote for those who wish to harm them.
Sounds like the unions in Ohio are taking a page from the Vichy playbook wherein the weaker of the French politicians were more comfortable collaborating with the Nazis rather than taking a principled stand in the interest of the country. I suspect many of the union leadership are stuck in failed DNC-mindset of thinking you can change things from within and are afraid of making the effort to kick down the door.
Donât blame the Unions, blame the Democrats for completely dropping the ball in 2010 in Ohio and then subsequently taking the attitude of just writing the state off. There is absolutely no reason why Ohio should not, at a minimum, be a purple state. As late as 2012 Obama won Ohio and there was talk of it being a blue state in terms of presidential elections for the foreseeable future.
What is going on with Ohio is what has afflicted the Democratic Party for some time; write off large swaths of the country, the white working class, unions, in favor of shiny objects in Texas and Florida that never materialize.
The Democrats should try for those things, but they should never cede ground in places like Ohio. All it did was give an opening to Trump. We know how well that worked out.
This is so sadâŚand EXACTLY what Howard Dean was talking about oh those many years ago. We have to campaign on ALL levels. We have to support our candidates on ALL levels. If we want a better country we have to make SURE people hear the message and hold corporations and unions accountable.
The Democrats had fallen to such a woeful level in Ohio state government that unions felt as if they had no choice but to make friends, or at least nonenemies, with some Republicans, in hopes of staving off anti-union measures such as âright-to-workâ legislation and elimination of prevailing-wage standards.
Sure, fellas. Let me know how that works out for you. Because I suspect youâll have plenty of leisure time to think about it soon.
ETA: Since it seems that we need to dredge out old-fashioned terms to describe the horrors that are going on now, let me add one: TRAITOR TO YOUR CLASS.
Was just in Palestine TX and the most amazing thing is how few political signs I saw driving down and back from Dallas.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ted-cruz-beto-orourke-airport-photo_us_5bee179ae4b0c19de3fe2c92
So those unions thought they could bed down with the devil and not end up with a pitchfork up theirâŚoops, this is a family site.
âHey, Jay,â he recalled saying. âItâs Taylor Sappington.â
âTaylor who?â said Edwards.
This. The GOP as a whole seems to love performative cruelty. This is the same guy who walked out as Taylor spoke of his late partner. That such people who lack even the smallest amount of humanity are elected to run things in states like Ohio is breathtakingly maddening.
Unions have been very pragmatic, for decades, and itâs a mistake to see them as Progressive (with a capital P). And their cultures vary widely
The Teamsters strongly endorsed Trump in 2016. That particular culture has a strong âmachoâ ethos.
Others worry about competition for jobs from immigrants.
Donât forget that the shocking Reagan landslide of 1980 was largely fueled by âReagan Democratsâ in the âRust Beltâ . Unionized workers.
After reading the article, I still have no idea why the reporter thinks heâs a âperfectâ red-state candidate. I also have no idea why any union leader should have thought he had a viable chance of beating his opponent, or even getting many votes from the membership of the union. A LOT of union members in that area were Reagan-Democrats and are now trump-republicans. He seems like an interesting guy and I certainly would have voted for him but Iâm a northeast liberal so my preferences are no way in line with majorities of voters in Ohio or any other purple or red state.
Union have been working against their own interests for decades.
Yeah, that was my feeling as well. For one thing, most unions - like any constituency - are going to ask of a candidate âwhat can you do for me?â If they canât raise money, canât organize, canât get anything doneâŚhard to give them a reason to back you. Also, it neglects to say whether Edwards actually lives up to his promises to the unions. If he does support union-friendly policies, even though the overall GOP agenda hurts working people, then they probably donât have much choice.
Consider that Taylor Sappington did at least as well as the prior candidate but with very few resources. Then think about what might have been possible if he had gotten more backing.
Wow. So much confusion in one piece, itâs hard to get it all down:
- State parties usually do not support people for state races. You have to gin up your own support. When I ran, I got nothing from the state party, except they helped me get out postcards, and gave me a cut-rate deal (they raised the prices to give you 40% off)
- Unions are filled with union members. Union members see Dems supporting illegals. The illegals take the jobs that the Union members used to get. Result - union members are not voting D. Maybe the unions tilt D, not the members. Skilled trades in particular have no interest in the kind of crap dished out by the D party these days.
- SE Ohio is Trump country, and was clearly discussed in âHillbilly elegyâ. These people are not interested in big city values.
At a time when the share of white voters without college degrees â who
are fast becoming the Republican base â decreased nationwide, it held
strong in Ohio. The state was drawing relatively few immigrants, its
education system was sliding in national rankings and, with its smaller
cities and towns falling far behind thriving Columbus, it was losing
many young college grads to jobs out of state.
Supermajority Republican government has had the usual positive impact on the state, I see.
Maybe the Democrats lost Ohio, or maybe enough of the people of Ohio have to snap out of it before Dems start winning there. Either way, the answer is to work harder.
No. Non-union states, the rest-of-world, and machines take the jobs the union members used to get.
âperfectâ is an elusive quality - a candidate frequently needs to capture the imagination of the electorate - not always - but if their distinctive differences are just bullet points on a piece of paper, it becomes a huge challenge to move the needle when going against an existing know figure
""The Teamsters strongly endorsed Trump in 2016. That particular culture has a strong âmachoâ ethos. "
Then what am I to make of this from August '16 in the IBTs website:
Today, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters announced its endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president. The Teamsters General Executive Board unanimously voted to endorse the former senator and secretary of state.
âWe are proud to endorse Hillary Clinton for President of the United States,â said Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa. âShe is the right candidate for the middle class and working men and women across the country. She will stand strong for the workers of America by fighting to reject job-killing trade deals, enforcing labor laws and working to provide retirement security for millions of people who have sacrificed so much for the chance to retire with dignity.
âThe Oval Office needs to be occupied by a serious candidate who understands what it means to govern responsibly,â Hoffa said. âDonald Trump supports national right-to-work laws that are proven to weaken the middle class and has a long track record of shipping jobs out of the country as a businessman. He is no friend to working Americans.â
Anti-Trump attacks were also prominently featured in every issue of Teamster magazine printed during the election season, and I received at least a dozen mailers and some calls from the IBT staff in support of the Dem. nominee.
I also phone-banked myself along with other members of the Graphic Communications Conference of the IBT (formerly the GCIU. So to read somebody claiming precisely the opposite on this site really raises my hackles.
Itâs a good illustration of one reason why Reps have been doing so well for some years now. They focus on local candidates, such as city council and school board members and support them as they try for higher posts on the electoral ladder. Dems donât have infinite cash, but they also donât support enough people who will help expand the partyâs reach and power. There were a lot of atypical candidates who won this year. I wonder how much support they got from the DCCC if they werenât in a district that looked really tippable.
As another commenter said, look how well this guy did without support. Ya gotta think he had a reasonable chance all around if he had some. And donât get me started in the unions. Not only did they not support him, they supported the republican opponent and some of that money apparently went to less âmoderateâ republicans. Theyâre throwing in the towel, saying if you canât beat them, join them. But unions will not be able to give them as much cash as corporations overall. Guess whose money will buy the result?! Guess who better still be looking over the shoulder for local right to work laws?