Teamsters decline to endorse a candidate…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a very big deal for two reasons:

1) Optics. This is the first time in decades that the Teamsters have not endorsed the D nominee, and 2) Perhaps more important: the Teamsters typically fund and execute a huge get-out-the vote effort in the rust belt states. This will cost Harris dearly there.

Agree the optics are not good. But you should know that all the other unions (see the very long list elsewhere on this thread) who HAVE endorsed Harris will be working that much harder on get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a very big deal for two reasons:

1) Optics. This is the first time in decades that the Teamsters have not endorsed the D nominee, and 2) Perhaps more important: the Teamsters typically fund and execute a huge get-out-the vote effort in the rust belt states. This will cost Harris dearly there.

Agree the optics are not good. But you should know that all the other unions (see the very long list elsewhere on this thread) who HAVE endorsed Harris will be working that much harder on get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states.

No other union is like the Teamsters. When it comes to unions, they are IT basically. Smaller newer ones don't have the swager.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a very big deal for two reasons:

1) Optics. This is the first time in decades that the Teamsters have not endorsed the D nominee, and 2) Perhaps more important: the Teamsters typically fund and execute a huge get-out-the vote effort in the rust belt states. This will cost Harris dearly there.

Agree the optics are not good. But you should know that all the other unions (see the very long list elsewhere on this thread) who HAVE endorsed Harris will be working that much harder on get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states.

No one should pay any attention to an endorsement or non-endorsement from a public or private entity. Undue influence from large or small entities is what got us into the current political mess. Shame on them and shame on the American people for letting our wealthy conglomerates influence their political thoughts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

Their "members" should have the freedom to vote as individuals without undue influence that can be created by an endorsement from a union or any other entity an individual may be affiliated with. Everyone should agree with this regardless of party affiliation but they won't because most people have lost all reasonable intelligence while hanging out in their political bubbles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

+1 The members want the vessel filled with shit. Teamsters are the kind of people Trump will patronize with back slaps and bullshit, but who he privately thinks are low-class "losers." This is a guy who made a lifelong practice of routinely stiffing carpenters, plumbers, electricians. "Oh, you want to be paid for your work? Sue me."

Trump wouldn't piss on these "regular Joes" if they were on fire. But support him they do, like good peasants.

[Anonymous]

Democrats are big on banning fracking and boosting gas prices- bad for teamsters. Then there is what California is doing with their truck mandates, that is requiring people to use more expensive trucking, to the point where they deliver the goods to the Nevada border and then offload to a different less expensive truck.
Democrats like to think they are pro-worker, but it was their party that was opposing Trump's trade initiatives, largely because Trump proposed them.
Three decades ago, these policies would have been mainstream. Vast majority of Democrats voted against NAFTA at the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

+1 The members want the vessel filled with shit. Teamsters are the kind of people Trump will patronize with back slaps and bullshit, but who he privately thinks are low-class "losers." This is a guy who made a lifelong practice of routinely stiffing carpenters, plumbers, electricians. "Oh, you want to be paid for your work? Sue me."

Trump wouldn't piss on these "regular Joes" if they were on fire. But support him they do, like good peasants.

Crassly stated but accurate. These losers think Trump the billionaire known for being anti-worker is one of them. So stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

Their "members" should have the freedom to vote as individuals without undue influence that can be created by an endorsement from a union or any other entity an individual may be affiliated with. Everyone should agree with this regardless of party affiliation but they won't because most people have lost all reasonable intelligence while hanging out in their political bubbles.

+ 1 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

Their "members" should have the freedom to vote as individuals without undue influence that can be created by an endorsement from a union or any other entity an individual may be affiliated with. Everyone should agree with this regardless of party affiliation but they won't because most people have lost all reasonable intelligence while hanging out in their political bubbles.

+ 1 million

Calm down both of you. Union endorsements don't "unduly influence" union members--the members are going to vote the way they want to. Perhaps endorsements mattered a very long time ago when unions were stronger and many workers belonged to them, but not any longer.

PS. I hope you feel as strongly about religious leaders telling their congregants who not to vote for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

+1 The members want the vessel filled with shit. Teamsters are the kind of people Trump will patronize with back slaps and bullshit, but who he privately thinks are low-class "losers." This is a guy who made a lifelong practice of routinely stiffing carpenters, plumbers, electricians. "Oh, you want to be paid for your work? Sue me."

Trump wouldn't piss on these "regular Joes" if they were on fire. But support him they do, like good peasants.

Crassly stated but accurate. These losers think Trump the billionaire known for being anti-worker is one of them. So stupid.

Yeah and the far-left California liberal attorney is really one of them

[Anonymous]

Stupid union thinking union busting Trump, stiffing contractors Trump is a viable choice. Just can’t get their small minds around supporting a black woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamster poll

Trump 58%
Harris 31%

Teamsters say it is too close to call so they won't endorse (with a straight face).

The leadership wanted to endorse Kamala, but their members won’t vote for the empty vessel.

Their "members" should have the freedom to vote as individuals without undue influence that can be created by an endorsement from a union or any other entity an individual may be affiliated with. Everyone should agree with this regardless of party affiliation but they won't because most people have lost all reasonable intelligence while hanging out in their political bubbles.

+ 1 million

Calm down both of you. Union endorsements don't "unduly influence" union members--the members are going to vote the way they want to. Perhaps endorsements mattered a very long time ago when unions were stronger and many workers belonged to them, but not any longer.

PS. I hope you feel as strongly about religious leaders telling their congregants who not to vote for.

PP here. I absolutely feel the same. I don't want my minister mentioning politics at all.

[Anonymous]

We know that Trump and the Republicans are outright union busters and support rolling back worker protections that union leaders fought so hard for over the last 100 years.

But here we have some dipshit union leaders who are confused about which candidate is better for unions.

Pathetic.

[Anonymous]

I’m very surprised. I hope this does not hurt Harris.