Labor-dissing Dems, think again

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=23C69363-18FE-70B2-A8FDD1F8E3BF2EB1

By: Vic Fingerhut
June 11, 2010 04:56 AM EDT

According to most political analysis of Tuesday’s primaries, a big takeaway is that labor took a big hit.

The Associated Press, for example, called incumbent Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s defeat of labor-backed Lt. Gov. Bill Halter in the Arkansas Senate primary runoff a “stunning defeat for labor.” Implicit in this analysis is the idea that Lincoln’s victory — granted, with support from the two most recent Democratic presidents — was a score for the party’s sensible center. This, the reasoning goes, is what wins presidential races, and more important, Lincoln’s victory was a sharp rebuke to the narrow, party-weakening, special-interest labor movement.

Lost in this analysis is the critical role that labor unions and their millions of members play in the electoral strength of the Democratic Party.

It must be said that much of the analysis has been written by folks who have had little contact with the labor movement or hands-on experience with the day-to-day operational realities of Democratic races.

But you would — at least — expect the commentators to look at the basic numbers in the mass of available data on U.S. elections and election outcomes. Let me cite some facts.

While Barack Obama won the 2008 election 53 percent to 47 percent, among the same union members the administration fought in Arkansas he won by 36 percentage points, 68 percent to 32 percent.

FULL story at link.

the idea that there is no where else to go without realizing that there are a lot of people who just won't show up to vote.

at campaign offices nationwide...tirelessly I migght add..or contributing big $$$$$$$$$$$$ time..or showing up at campaign rallys enmass..or GOTV...They can Kiss this retred union worker goodbye!

I think I will have a very important nail appointment!..maybe even a facial.....

canvassing for Gillibrand in her first race. Next time she lost some of thebase support,no one was aware that she was going to the Blue Dogs until after she was elected. She still had volunteers but she also had a group of paid canvassers @$10hr. I guess that's one way to get around the union volunteering and they do have a bunch of money.

Not all candidates can do that and they will have no one.

The money, the call centers, the organized and dedicated people who do the grunt work of a lot of campaigns -- doorknocking, calling, GOTV, rallying. There are many sitting politicians who would be nowhere without labor's help.

say: Why should I support the Democrat Party when it is
simply Republican Lite. I voted for Obama for a change
from Republican Lite. I am a common sense Liberal and
realize compromise is necessary. Just as in Carter and
Clinton we have appeasement not compromise. In compromise
the GOP give something and the Democrats give something.
Our Democrats simply lie down and roll over. When they
work on Legislation, they waste months trying to get
Republican Support. Instead of starting a piece of legislation
with the broad--what would be good for the country--they
start with what can we get that the GOP might approve?
Therefore we end up with RW Legislation written by supposed
Democrats??

This chronic cry--if we do not re-elect these Democrats
the Republicans will be worse. Not much, I would say.

BTW, I love it. Lincoln wins and her first act back
is to vote with the GOP on EPa Legislation.

:kick:

Republicans and Democrats have sort of blended together as two evils. We are supposed to choose the "Lessor of two Evils". We still get Evil.:shrug:

Solidarity Forever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYiKdJoSsb8

while the administration cowered behind "anonymous senior WH officials".

The break between the Democratic Party and Labor is healthy. They tried to work with this WH on the "Cadillac tax" on health care. Labor has tried to work with this administration.

The NRA would not support gun control Republicons, so it is only fair that Labor not support corporate loving Democrats.

Analysis: Labor won, the corporate political wing of the Democratic Party lost.

Edited to say: It was a well spent 10 million dollars.