2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumUnions representing over 75% of all US unionized workers have already endorsed Hillary Clinton
There are 14.6 million union workers in the US. 16 unions representing 11 million members have endorsed Clinton. And while the rank and file can vote for whomever they want, it is clear that the "capital L" Labor has overwhelmingly sided with Clinton before the first primary has even occurred.
Clinton has been surgical in her shoring up of traditional Democratic demographics from unions to minorities to women. Support her or not, there is no denying that she learned her lesson from 2008 and has taken incredible steps to make sure it can't happen again.
Stats from: http://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/hillary-clinton-secures-another-union-endorsement-bringing-total-to-16/articleshow/50022453.cms
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Hillary has more leadership skills than the rest of the candidates combined.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)having been a member and officer in five unions for 30 years. (AFT, NEA, SEIU, TEAMSTERS and AFSCME) I know how this works. All the endorsements of the leadership can't drive many votes. Most unions don't like being told who to vote for. But what the hell would I know?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Well ... for Hillary supporters that is! For Bernie's fans, I'm sure it's very disheartening and demoralizing. It helps to explain the anger and aggressive attitude we see. :-/
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Labor is huge for Clinton.
demmiblue
(36,875 posts)I don't consider her an enemy to unions (like Republicans are), nor do I consider her a friend to unions. She will most likely fail them, though. Hugely. It is kind of unbelievable that the teacher's unions back her given the deplorable policies of GWB and BHO in regards to education. I don't think she will be any different from either of them.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Union leadership selling out their members again.
sonofspy777
(360 posts)sad.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)My former history teacher, who was as dyed-in-the-wool Arkansas yellow-dog Democrat as you'd ever see, was incensed by what he considered to he "Hillary's meddling" in his classroom instruction. He was a great and dedicated teacher, devoted to his subject and his students, and supremely pissed that Hillary wanted to make him teach from a sanitized textbook, instead of from the unvarnished letters, pictures, and newspaper articles of people who had actually lived in those bygone ages.
Sancho
(9,070 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Still butthurt from 2008 are we??
Sancho
(9,070 posts)the landslide continues...
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)And Hillary has support from Union leaders more than union members. I'm not denying that there is a good number of Hillary supporting union workers, you might be one yourself, but what I'm saying is that most union workers want the candidate that will stick up for them and benefit them the most (Bernie). The union leaders endorsing Hillary are part of the establishment. The same establishment that took progressivism out of the core of the Democratic Party where it was when FDR was President.
Sancho
(9,070 posts)These endorsements can serve several purposes. In some cases, they directly influence voters who trust the judgment of governors and members of Congress from their party. In other cases, endorsements serve as a signal to other party elites. It tells others who is acceptable and who is unacceptable, Cohen, an associate professor of political science at James Madison University, said in an e-mail to FiveThirtyEight. This is the coordination process that we believe goes on during the invisible primary and by way of public endorsements that was formerly and more formally undertaken at the convention.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)I don't dislike Hillary, but is she really the best choice for union workers?
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)think that living on goverment assistance is preferable to being paid a decent wage.
bvf
(6,604 posts)members as mindless sheep is noted.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)Kudos to you for reaching that conclusion based off what I wrote.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Godhumor
(6,437 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)UNION YES! I'm just curious though, what is it that makes Hillary politically attractive to you? I'm not looking for a fight, we're all dems here. We just disagree on what is best for our party.
bvf
(6,604 posts)were to endorse Sanders, you wouldn't say they spoke for you, correct?
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)the union leaders do not actually speak for the union workers. It's not a matter of them being mindless sheep, just not heard.
bvf
(6,604 posts)That's why I question the significance of the OP.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)They know who will fight FOR them and who will be ineffective in doing so. As many of them have said "it was an easy choice."
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)They didn't even bother with the typical conciliatory flattery with phrases like "it was a tough choice" and "we had an abundance of riches" or "it was pretty much a coin-toss" and "we would endorse both if we could".
No, they just flat-out laid it on the line... "EASY CHOICE!!"
.
.
.
.
.
PS: Have you spotted yet the threads/comments suggesting that Hillary's union endorsement are the result of "fishy" things? (I presume that weasel-words like that are meant as a coy way to suggest payoffs, backroom deals, threats, dirty-tricks, fear and bribery?)
It's difficult to know whether comments like that are sincere, or if they're being made just to provoke. Whatever the reason, one thing is clear ... Bernie's fans are definitely NOT HAPPY these days.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I have lived the life of a union member, it takes experience to learn.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)This seems like a way to dodge explaining when there is no actual explanation.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Lets either get real and back up our stances or stop posting. I'll start.
I think Bernie is the bust candidate for labor because:
1.Labor must be the first to step up to change the direction of the American political system
2.Labor Unions serve the working people and we want to have a government that serves the working people
3.We need a government that focuses on economic inequality and works towards ending it. Labor unions lead this fight.
4.Bernie is for the 99%. The people Organized Labor represents and fights for are all part of the 99%.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I think Hillary Clinton is the best for labor because:
. 1. Hillary has the connections already established to push for issues to benefit working people.
. 2. Hillary understands working with unions is the strongest group to enrich families.
. 3. Hillary has an agenda focused on income inequality, it has been a strong point of her candidacy.
. 4. Hillary is the most electable, ergo having a strong candidate who is electable makes getting union ideas completed.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Polls show both of them would beat the repugs in a general election.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Hillarys Top Donors:
Citigroup Inc $824,402 $816,402 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $760,740 $750,740 $10,000
DLA Piper $700,530 $673,530 $27,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $696,456 $693,456 $3,000
Morgan Stanley $636,564 $631,564 $5,000
EMILY's List $609,684 $605,764 $3,920
Time Warner $501,831 $476,831 $25,000
Skadden, Arps et al $469,290 $464,790 $4,500
University of California $417,327 $417,327 $0
Sullivan & Cromwell $369,150 $369,150 $0
Akin, Gump et al $364,478 $360,978 $3,500
Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000
21st Century Fox $340,936 $340,936 $0
Cablevision Systems $336,613 $307,225 $29,388
Kirkland & Ellis $329,141 $312,141 $17,000
National Amusements Inc $328,312 $325,312 $3,000
Squire Patton Boggs $328,306 $322,868 $5,438
Greenberg Traurig LLP $327,890 $319,790 $8,100
Corning Inc $322,450 $304,450 $18,000
Credit Suisse Group $318,120 $308,120 $10,000
AND NONE OTHER THAN FOX NEWS
Now Bernie's top donors:
American Assn for Justice $60,500 $500 $60,000
American Federation of Teachers $36,112 $745 $35,367
American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $58,198 $1,200 $56,998
American Postal Workers Union $37,700 $0 $37,700
Carpenters & Joiners Union $62,000 $0 $62,000
Communications Workers of America $68,000 $1,500 $66,500
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $53,100 $100 $53,000
Laborers Union $64,000 $0 $64,000
Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union $105,000 $0 $105,000
National Assn of Letter Carriers $61,000 $0 $61,000
National Education Assn $89,242 $8,242 $81,000
Operating Engineers Union $46,100 $0 $46,100
Service Employees International Union $44,014 $5,750 $38,264
Sheet Metal Workers Union $47,000 $0 $47,000
Teamsters Union $93,700 $700 $93,000
UNITE HERE $42,875 $3,250 $39,625
United Auto Workers $79,750 $850 $78,900
United Food & Commercial Workers Union $72,500 $0 $72,500
United Steelworkers $41,750 $750 $41,000
United Transportation Union $48,500 $0 $48,500
Now Hillarys Top 5 Donors:
Citigroup Inc $824,402 $816,402 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $760,740 $750,740 $10,000
DLA Piper $700,530 $673,530 $27,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $696,456 $693,456 $3,000
Morgan Stanley $636,564 $631,564 $5,000
Now Bernie's Top 5:
UNITE HERE $15,000 $0 $15,000
Communications Workers of America $13,500 $0 $13,500
National League of Postmasters $12,500 $0 $12,500
Service Employees International Union $11,000 $3,000 $8,000
National Nurses United
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)It's such an attempt to control phrase and your constant use of it, well, says a lot!
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)have revolted against these endorsements.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)Facebook posts not withstanding.
R B Garr
(16,973 posts)I know. It's not that they are disrespectfully mocking him, but he is dismissed as irrelevant.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)In different directions and I support unions endorsing Hillary.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Are deeply divided. On this you point you admit. And so the unions should not be endorsing any candidate unless a clear majority supports that candidate. That's not what is happening.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Lesser qualified candidate will not be in position to assist unions.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Based on their values not because someone thinks they can win!
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Unions and myself easy, I choose the best qualified, Hillary Clinton.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Lingering in Sanders brilliant progressive light: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251866649
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Twenty five years and we still wait.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)I hope we have a few more good debates, and an excellent voting period. Then on the the GE!
Response to Godhumor (Original post)
Cali_Democrat This message was self-deleted by its author.
ismnotwasm
(41,999 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)At least not one that provides any figures representing rank-and-file membership as a whole.
OPs like this are about as meaningful as an announcement about how the CEO of Walmart plans to vote.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Gothmog
(145,489 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Pity the establishment has so failed the American people.
I suppose one can hope that their performance in the past is not indicative of their future exploits.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,703 posts)Think they will listen to the endorsement? OOPS.
OS