Teamsters decline to endorse a candidate…

[Anonymous]

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

I think us UMC Democrats are a little out of touch with how inflation has impacted the working class. I don't doubt that racism + sexism affected some members' votes but my guess is most of them are struggling financially and think a change of parties can help them or at least send a message. I don't blame Dems for inflation, but I can see why many people do.

[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.

Members should have the right to negotiate their wages & benefits with employers individually and see how that works out.

It’s literally called a “union.” Kind of suggests a joint effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

The Teamsters membership rejected Harris’ candidacy.

[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.

+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

Middle class kid who had to work for a living comes closer than the millionaire son of a slumlord who shits in gold-plated toilets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Yup - this is the correct answer. The administration that she is a member of literally bailed out their pensions. But all of a sudden they can’t possibly endorse the Dem - who saved their retirement.

As with all things - anyone who votes for trump is racist.

[Anonymous]

I hope the teamsters get well & truly screwed by their corporate overlords. Dumb white trash deserve what they get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The Teamsters membership rejected Harris’ candidacy.

And also Trump’s apparently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What pussies they are. Pretend to be tough guy, working class Americans but refuse to stand up and support a union supporting candidate. Cowards and hypocrites.

Teamsters support Trump over Harris 2-1. Democrats keep using the same rhetoric while ignoring the policy changes they have instituted.

Who saved the Teamsters' pensions? Please answer that.

Also please answer whether Trump praised Elon Musk for firing striking workers. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The Teamsters membership rejected Harris’ candidacy.

Who saved their pensions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Which party saved the Teamsters' pensions? Please answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamsters Statement:

https://teamster.org/2024/09/teamsters-no-endorsement-for-u-s-president/

Leadership doesn't think either candidate is better for unions. Membership is split. 60-40 one way or the other is huge in an election, but not huge for justifying an endorsement.
They weren't impressed by Biden during the Railway strike.

Does anyone have a well-documented argument for why leadership or membership is making a mistake?

Abortion doesn't count; that's not Teamsters responsibility, even if individual members find it important for non-union reasons.

Seriously? What a joke.

Which administration has let in millions of new workers that compete with and depress wages of American workers?? Hmmm I wonder why a union wouldn't endorse such a candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What pussies they are. Pretend to be tough guy, working class Americans but refuse to stand up and support a union supporting candidate. Cowards and hypocrites.

You are too used to groups like AIPAC brainwashing members. Tough guy working class will be earning good money while pussies are replaced by AI and living on subsistence from UBI.

Great. The O’Brians, O'Donnells, Kellys, Murpheys et al don’t need a 36 billion bail out ever again. Maybe send a couple of cases of beer. 🍻

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teamsters Statement:

https://teamster.org/2024/09/teamsters-no-endorsement-for-u-s-president/

Leadership doesn't think either candidate is better for unions. Membership is split. 60-40 one way or the other is huge in an election, but not huge for justifying an endorsement.
They weren't impressed by Biden during the Railway strike.

Does anyone have a well-documented argument for why leadership or membership is making a mistake?

Abortion doesn't count; that's not Teamsters responsibility, even if individual members find it important for non-union reasons.

Seriously? What a joke.

Which administration has let in millions of new workers that compete with and depress wages of American workers?? Hmmm I wonder why a union wouldn't endorse such a candidate.

Which administration saved the Teamster's pensions? Why won't any of you MAGA answer this question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope the teamsters get well & truly screwed by their corporate overlords. Dumb white trash deserve what they get.

+1

Bit off their noses to spite their faces. Couldn’t stand voting for a woman and a POC at that. Good luck to them.

[Anonymous]

Would they have endorsed Biden?