• Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Way back in 1980, Ronald Reagan used his leadership of the Screen Actors Guild to pump himself as a ‘Union President.’ Once of his first official acts was to destroy the striking PATCO union [which had been one of the few unions to actually support him.]

  • Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    But in a national electronic poll that was open from July 24 through September 15, Trump held an advantage (59.6% to 34%) over Harris among union members. In a separate union survey, Trump also led Harris — this time 58% to 31%.

    It’s still genuinely disturbing to me that Harris has a history of strong support of unions and is making it a part of her campaign while the orange turd is tied to completely eliminating unions…yet still has a strong advantage in union polls. My cousin is IBEW and said their union leaders are outright telling them they should vote Harris because the orange turd will kill unions

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I thought it made complete sense. These guys are in their trucks all day listening to talk radio, of course they’re going to prefer Trump.

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    3 months ago

    AOC is nosediving her reputation into the ground. They needs to stop demanding people to vote Democrat. Give unions what they want. Give them something to vote for.

    Democrats are starting to act like vote entitled #brats.

      • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        44
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        At the guy who tried to represent his union, that was 60% in favor of Trump so rather than endorse him declined to endorse any candidate?

        Yes we are in fact talking about the same person. AOC is stupid to call him out as his reasoning is sound and his non-dorsement helps the D party more than a trump one.

        Do you really think he should endorse Harris when his members are only 35% in favor of his doing so? I have a hunch his members would take issue with that

        • aalvare2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          But if your argument is that he went to the RNC as an appeal to teamsters who support Trump (aka not lefties), and that he is also choosing not to endorse either candidate on behalf of those teamsters, then that isn’t an appeal to further-left-than-democrats politics, it’s an appeal to centrism.

          My point then being

          Now she’s the one always punching left

          Doesn’t really make sense in this context

          • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            3 months ago

            I suppose you have a point. Maybe punching left is not accurate.

            Thing is tho he didn’t go to the RNC l as an appeal to teamsters, he asked both RNC and DNC to be a speaker and only the RNC called back. DNC ghosted his ass.

            When at the RNC, he spoke about the importance of both parties to respect workers rights. He and other execs went to both camps (and biden before he stepped down) as they always do to try and extract promises in return for an endorsement.

            They didn’t get any promises from either camp though. He could have gone with his “constituents” polling numbers and endorsed Trump but he did not.

          • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            If you understand ‘left’ to simply mean ‘democrat’, then sure? But I think in this context ‘left’ means ‘working class solidarity’.

            Teamsters shopping around with both parties makes sense when you understand their affiliation to be less about party allegiances and more about securing the best conditions for their union. Especially considering Teamsters refused to endorse either party even while their members seem to lean Republican.

            • aalvare2@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I don’t simply understand ‘left’ to mean ‘democrat’, I’m aware that there are people left of democrats.

              Being “Left” encompasses more than just solidarity with the working class, but even specifically in this context, being the first acting teamster president to speak at the conference of a party that is historically anti-worker is…at best, naive. It could be seen as a way to pressure the GOP to care about unions, but they don’t care about unions, and speaking at their conference as a union president just gives a stronger surface-level impression to voters that they might.

              • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                3 months ago

                Sure, it could be to pressure the GOP to care about unions, or it could be to pressure democrats to commit to more protections.

                and speaking at their conference as a union president just gives a stronger surface-level impression to voters that they might.

                A really good way to prove that democrats are more union friendly than republicans would be to commit to more union protections. That’s a simple narrative to fix, if they were interested.

                Being “Left” encompasses more than just solidarity with the working class

                Not to a fucking union, there isn’t. Literally their only job is collective bargaining, and threatening to withhold support to gain concessions is famously their most useful tool.

                • aalvare2@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Sure, it could be to pressure the GOP to care about unions, or it could be to pressure democrats to commit to more protections.

                  If that’s the goal, simply withholding endorsement for the democratic nominee would achieve that goal. Speaking at the RNC, without any serious commitment to unions made by the GOP, goes far beyond that goal, and is again, naive.

                  A really good way to prove that democrats are more union friendly than republicans would be to commit to more union protections. That’s a simple narrative to fix, if they were interested.

                  A really really good way to prove democrats are more union friendly would be to have a president in office with an exceptional pro-union record, and to have earned the endorsement of at least 6 other major unions.

                  Not to a fucking union, there isn’t.

                  Yes, but the statement you’re replying to was a general statement on leftism. That’s why I follow that up with “Even in this context …”

                  Literally their only job is collective bargaining, and threatening to withhold support to gain concessions is famouslytheir most useful tool.

                  That made me chuckle, you have a fair point. But again, withholding support is one thing, and speaking at the RNC with republicans who don’t play ball with workers’ rights is another.

                  I mean, what’s the play exactly? “Give us even more union protections or I’m gonna help the other guys who definitely don’t give a damn?” What protections specifically? The kinds of protections given to workers by the PRO Act? The thing Republicans try to shoot down over and over again?

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          3 months ago

          You don’t understand - I’m told that not endorsing Harris is, in fact, an endorsement of Trump

          Criticizing the democrats for something the Republicans also do is only something a Russian shill would do

          • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’m getting a little scared at how quickly they’re radicalizing. Lookit the DVs and ignorance of extremely recent history itt like for real it doesn’t seem like there’s brakes on this train. Hold me?

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              3 months ago

              Nah, this is more their normal speed.

              When their candidate was looking worryingly weak they were less militant about denying criticism because they couldn’t afford to discard leftist support (and they were feeling extremely insecure about their chances). Now that their polling is strong they’re returning to their usual ‘fuck them leftist losers’ attitude.

    • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Most mature adults learn from their experiences, and change their behavior based on what they learned. What we’re seeing is a young politician with raw talent learn how to wield her power. If that rubs you the wrong way so be it, but she is one of the most effective political communicators we have, and she’s only getting better. Politics isn’t just about what you say and to whom, it’s about how you say things and how you leverage your influence to build coalitions that can get things done. She’s learning all the right lessons, and I’m loving it.

      • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        35
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m happy you feel represented by her! It aint so happy here in my corner, i had hoped when she broke out and was buttin heads with the establishment Ds she n the squad world be a strong coalition to pull a bit closer to where i wish it was. Anyway have a good one :)

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Do you live in her district? If not, she’s really not affecting you in any way.

        • Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          3 months ago

          So… if she doesn’t fall lock-step in line with your every agenda, you turn on her? Please stop wondering why people don’t take leftists seriously.

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think you understand quite what’s going on.

        • Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Oh I’ve seen people try and explain it to you. Your comment history is full of you saying shit like this and then you refusing to accept being corrected.

          I’m not about to waste my time like you did theirs in the effort to explain it. So, go ahead and invoke the tired internet rule of “I in because you refuse to entertain my argument.”

          I’m not going to bite, bud.

          • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you’ve read my comment history you can see what i understand and (i assume thru your comment) what i do not.

            If youre uninterested in educating me why did you comment? Is there a purpose i don’t understand along with this issue which i clearly don’t get?

            I am prepared to be educated.

                • Soup@lemmy.cafe
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  No. Just to be counted among the many voices that have had to tell you that you’re wrong. And don’t think I didn’t notice your little meme edit there. You’re about as bad-faith as they get with that shit.

                  Additionally, per your baseless accusation- I don’t think I insulted you at all, I simply stated that you are wrong. But now that I see you ramping up into victimhood, I’m going to end this here.

    • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Could you please explain to me why you believe this is the case? I guess I’m confused and want to understand your position.