Michigan, as well: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/local-teamsters-groups-announce-harris-endorsements-national-union-dec-rcna171984 I would've posted one of the local links, but...
I would've posted one of the local links, but local news websites seem like one of the lowest dregs of the internet. My computer shudders any time I think of visiting one.
This is seem as a blow for Harris, as unions have traditionally endorsed the democratic candidate in modern times. It seems to stem from internal polling showing broad support for Trump Given the...
This is seem as a blow for Harris, as unions have traditionally endorsed the democratic candidate in modern times. It seems to stem from internal polling showing broad support for Trump
But the union released two other surveys as well, an “electronic member poll” that showed Mr. Trump crushing Ms. Harris, 60 percent to 34 percent, and a “research phone poll” with a similar Trump lead, 58 percent to 31 percent.
Given the difference between the polling numbers from when Biden in the race
The union’s membership was clearly divided. Earlier this year, when Mr. Biden was still in the race, Mr. O’Brien asked each Teamsters local to hold a straw poll. The Teamsters released those results on Wednesday: Mr. Biden had won a plurality, 44 percent to Mr. Trump’s 36 percent.
A hypothesis that immediately arises is that the change is due to chauvinism/misogyny amongst the white non-college educated.
It seems that, in the end, identity matters more for these voters than policy issues regarding labor.
Even though I see racism and misogyny every day, and have grown used to the noise it generates online, the thought that teamsters would rather support Trump over Harris is gobsmacking. Has Harris...
Even though I see racism and misogyny every day, and have grown used to the noise it generates online, the thought that teamsters would rather support Trump over Harris is gobsmacking.
Has Harris said or done anything that would cause this? Has Biden done anything to jeopardize support from the teamsters since they were last polled? I’m just shocked that there would be such a sharp drop in support over Kamala’s race and gender. I want there to be another explanation because the running theory is saddening.
Yeah, there is no way any rational evaluation of the two candidates’ positions and track records could lead a union member to think that their interests are best served by supporting Trump. It has...
Yeah, there is no way any rational evaluation of the two candidates’ positions and track records could lead a union member to think that their interests are best served by supporting Trump. It has to be because she’s a woman of color.
I hate to be so dismissive, but honestly, if there’s one thing that I’ve learned since 2016, it’s that a disappointingly large segment of the American public is made up of outright assholes.
They’re between a rock and a hard place. Given that thousands of Teamsters locals are independently endorsing Harris (as in each local charter, not the national body), it seems like the national...
They’re between a rock and a hard place.
Given that thousands of Teamsters locals are independently endorsing Harris (as in each local charter, not the national body), it seems like the national group is hedging their bets.
They probably know endorsing Trump will absolutely alienate a massive chunk of their organization, but they don’t want to endorse Harris because they think Trump stands a good chance of winning and don’t want to be on his bad side.
I don’t think that’s the reason - it hasn’t stopped any of the other unions from endorsing Harris, or Teamsters from endorsing Biden in 2020. Rather it’s the reverse - they’re afraid of alienating...
I don’t think that’s the reason - it hasn’t stopped any of the other unions from endorsing Harris, or Teamsters from endorsing Biden in 2020.
Rather it’s the reverse - they’re afraid of alienating their own base by endorsing Harris. After all, their own internal poll shows dominant support for Trump in their base (60 Trump 34 Harris).
Appeasement, essentially? Dangerous. Trump, himself, probably doesn't care about the unions one way or another. Unless he somehow benefits. But Republicans, overall, obviously aren't the biggest...
Appeasement, essentially? Dangerous. Trump, himself, probably doesn't care about the unions one way or another. Unless he somehow benefits. But Republicans, overall, obviously aren't the biggest fans. I know I've heard some talk of Republicans or MAGAs trying to toss a bone to workers and unions, but it's still quite a minority position. If it's anything more than just words, anyway. We should want to see some action before saying Republicans are anything close to being pro-worker.
Assuming Trump wins in November (ugh), I don't think Trump would shield the Teamsters for being "loyal," if Republicans in Congress or even in statehouses, would go after organized labor (or labor, period). It has been demonstrated time and time again that loyalty with Trump is a one-way street. I don't know how many more times we have to see it play out on the national stage, before people understand that. Especially for an organization or movement that is perceived quite negatively by Republicans. Teamsters, Sean O'Brien, you are not any more special than anyone else trying to get into Trump's orbit. If someone like Rudy Giuliani can't even get help from Trump, I don't know why anyone else would think they're different.
Yesterday @boxer_dogs_dance posted this comment in the recurring thread: So I'm curious how much of an actual "blow" this is to the Harris campaign. Does anyone well-informed on this kind of thing...
Who I don't see endorsing Harris are teamsters in the south east. Georgia and North Carolina are in play. But Harris has other enthusiastic voters in those states
Who I don't see endorsing Harris are teamsters in the south east. Georgia and North Carolina are in play.
But Harris has other enthusiastic voters in those states
Given that recent internal polling suggested support for Trump over Harris (although older polling showed Biden leading Trump), I think a non-endorsement is the best thing that could’ve happened,...
Given that recent internal polling suggested support for Trump over Harris (although older polling showed Biden leading Trump), I think a non-endorsement is the best thing that could’ve happened, even if it leaves everyone unsatisfied in the end.
Personally speaking, I don't know anyone who bases their votes based on endorsements from professional organizations - at least not candidate votes, because issue votes are a different story...
Personally speaking, I don't know anyone who bases their votes based on endorsements from professional organizations - at least not candidate votes, because issue votes are a different story altogether.
But at the same time I don't know many people who are super into the idea of unions. For some reason unions are not super popular in Southern California.
This wasn't true in 2016 or 2020. I remember plenty of Op-Eds predicting how Hillary had the endorsement of all this nation's great unions but their members (at least in the rust belt) would...
This wasn't true in 2016 or 2020. I remember plenty of Op-Eds predicting how Hillary had the endorsement of all this nation's great unions but their members (at least in the rust belt) would dutifully line up to vote for Trump.
Perhaps endorsements used to matter, but I can't imagine anyone changing their voting decisions based on them (outside of some pro-life fanatics in a GOP primary).
Yes, and it was a large break from tradition brought on by union members feeling they'd been heavily betrayed by their leadership for a long time. Such as say, endorsing a candidate who didn't...
Yes, and it was a large break from tradition brought on by union members feeling they'd been heavily betrayed by their leadership for a long time. Such as say, endorsing a candidate who didn't even bother to visit your state while jobs are struggling everywhere.
Given the internal polls, it's better than if they had endorsed Trump. But it still gives Trump an opening - remember, the majority of Americans already trust Trump more on economics. And the poll...
Given the internal polls, it's better than if they had endorsed Trump. But it still gives Trump an opening - remember, the majority of Americans already trust Trump more on economics.
And the poll results themselves are quite bad, since white non-college educated workers are one of the demographics she'll need to win for the rust belt. It brings up fears of non-response bias in the current polls.
I saw an article reporting that the local teamster's chapter in western Pennsylvania broke with that and endorsed Harris on their own.
Yeah I don't have links unfortunately but I recall seeing multiple stories like that from various states.
Michigan, as well: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/local-teamsters-groups-announce-harris-endorsements-national-union-dec-rcna171984
I would've posted one of the local links, but local news websites seem like one of the lowest dregs of the internet. My computer shudders any time I think of visiting one.
This is seem as a blow for Harris, as unions have traditionally endorsed the democratic candidate in modern times. It seems to stem from internal polling showing broad support for Trump
Given the difference between the polling numbers from when Biden in the race
A hypothesis that immediately arises is that the change is due to chauvinism/misogyny amongst the white non-college educated.
It seems that, in the end, identity matters more for these voters than policy issues regarding labor.
archive.is
Even though I see racism and misogyny every day, and have grown used to the noise it generates online, the thought that teamsters would rather support Trump over Harris is gobsmacking.
Has Harris said or done anything that would cause this? Has Biden done anything to jeopardize support from the teamsters since they were last polled? I’m just shocked that there would be such a sharp drop in support over Kamala’s race and gender. I want there to be another explanation because the running theory is saddening.
It really feels like their political support isn't being based on policy here
Yeah, there is no way any rational evaluation of the two candidates’ positions and track records could lead a union member to think that their interests are best served by supporting Trump. It has to be because she’s a woman of color.
I hate to be so dismissive, but honestly, if there’s one thing that I’ve learned since 2016, it’s that a disappointingly large segment of the American public is made up of outright assholes.
They’re between a rock and a hard place.
Given that thousands of Teamsters locals are independently endorsing Harris (as in each local charter, not the national body), it seems like the national group is hedging their bets.
They probably know endorsing Trump will absolutely alienate a massive chunk of their organization, but they don’t want to endorse Harris because they think Trump stands a good chance of winning and don’t want to be on his bad side.
I don’t think that’s the reason - it hasn’t stopped any of the other unions from endorsing Harris, or Teamsters from endorsing Biden in 2020.
Rather it’s the reverse - they’re afraid of alienating their own base by endorsing Harris. After all, their own internal poll shows dominant support for Trump in their base (60 Trump 34 Harris).
Appeasement, essentially? Dangerous. Trump, himself, probably doesn't care about the unions one way or another. Unless he somehow benefits. But Republicans, overall, obviously aren't the biggest fans. I know I've heard some talk of Republicans or MAGAs trying to toss a bone to workers and unions, but it's still quite a minority position. If it's anything more than just words, anyway. We should want to see some action before saying Republicans are anything close to being pro-worker.
Assuming Trump wins in November (ugh), I don't think Trump would shield the Teamsters for being "loyal," if Republicans in Congress or even in statehouses, would go after organized labor (or labor, period). It has been demonstrated time and time again that loyalty with Trump is a one-way street. I don't know how many more times we have to see it play out on the national stage, before people understand that. Especially for an organization or movement that is perceived quite negatively by Republicans. Teamsters, Sean O'Brien, you are not any more special than anyone else trying to get into Trump's orbit. If someone like Rudy Giuliani can't even get help from Trump, I don't know why anyone else would think they're different.
Yesterday @boxer_dogs_dance posted this comment in the recurring thread:
So I'm curious how much of an actual "blow" this is to the Harris campaign. Does anyone well-informed on this kind of thing have an opinion?
Who I don't see endorsing Harris are teamsters in the south east. Georgia and North Carolina are in play.
But Harris has other enthusiastic voters in those states
Given that recent internal polling suggested support for Trump over Harris (although older polling showed Biden leading Trump), I think a non-endorsement is the best thing that could’ve happened, even if it leaves everyone unsatisfied in the end.
Personally speaking, I don't know anyone who bases their votes based on endorsements from professional organizations - at least not candidate votes, because issue votes are a different story altogether.
But at the same time I don't know many people who are super into the idea of unions. For some reason unions are not super popular in Southern California.
Union members are VERY likely to vote what they're told to vote. It's, in theory, the point of a union.
This wasn't true in 2016 or 2020. I remember plenty of Op-Eds predicting how Hillary had the endorsement of all this nation's great unions but their members (at least in the rust belt) would dutifully line up to vote for Trump.
Perhaps endorsements used to matter, but I can't imagine anyone changing their voting decisions based on them (outside of some pro-life fanatics in a GOP primary).
Yes, and it was a large break from tradition brought on by union members feeling they'd been heavily betrayed by their leadership for a long time. Such as say, endorsing a candidate who didn't even bother to visit your state while jobs are struggling everywhere.
Given the internal polls, it's better than if they had endorsed Trump. But it still gives Trump an opening - remember, the majority of Americans already trust Trump more on economics.
And the poll results themselves are quite bad, since white non-college educated workers are one of the demographics she'll need to win for the rust belt. It brings up fears of non-response bias in the current polls.