Skip to main content

View Diary: AR-Sen: Who cares what labor does? (216 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And what "benefit" is that? No, there's none.... (0+ / 0-)

    Lincoln's fellow Senators and candidates know Arkansas is a conservative state with few union workers.  They know the union push there was to scare them, and still the unions lost.  So there you go, no scare at all......I'd bet anything that even the most liberal Senators we have recognize this was a strategic folly.  You spend money on seats you can actually win, not to defeat Democrats in races where you can't win in November no matter what.

    Lincoln voted for health care reform, and all Republicans voted NO.  Lincoln voted with Democrats on almost everything else of significance, while Republicans almost uniformly voted NO.

    There's a clear distinction between Lincoln and any Republican, and anyone who doesn't see that is simply blinded by their own irrational rage.

    In a time of war, is that really the time to be asking whether we should be at war?...When it is over we should ask whether we should leave. -- Stephen Colbert

    by DCCyclone on Wed Jun 09, 2010 at 01:45:47 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  hah (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Corporate Dog, schnecke21

      and now they know that the union is ready to put its money where its mouth is..for every election coming down the pike.

      Why do you think they picked the first big one with national exposure?

      Every single non-union supporting dem candidate now knows they they can count on NO union support this time around unless they change their tune, and if the candidate is being primaried by someone who does support unions, they know they can count on active opposition.

      This is no small thing.

      And aside from the political games, how, exactly should a worker's union act in the political sphere besides supporting pro-union candidates in big elections.

      You act like there's something outrageous going on here.  This is how people are supposed to try to get their interests met.  Give your money and your votes to people who will support you.  I fail to see how doing that is not a benefit to any group trying to be represented.

      •  Awww... you're letting common sense... (0+ / 0-)

        ... get in the way of a perfectly fine rant about the "angry left".

        Corporate Dog

        We didn't elect Obama to be an expedient president. We elected him to be a great one. -- Eugene Robinson

        by Corporate Dog on Wed Jun 09, 2010 at 06:42:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Except unions didn't do that in AR-Sen...... (0+ / 0-)

        Halter was happy to take on union support to help him win, but he has no history of being pro-union.  He came out in favor of a public option, and that was it.  He never came out in support of EFCA.  He never came out for anything else unions care about.  He used the union support for his own purposes, and they used him for their own purposes.  That's fine insofar as they did it with open eyes, but your characterization and framing shows you're doing nothing more than buying spin wholesale.

        Now, I don't doubt that he'd be a milliion times better than Boozman.  But the same goes for Lincoln.

        And no, Democrats who haven't been fully supportive of unions aren't so scared now.  Unions don't have unlimited money, they blew through $10 million, and they've got that much less to spend on a wide and defensive playing field now.  And looking further ahead, the unions ultimately are going to support Democrats because they have to.  They, and you, will find out the next Congress how much harder it is to get stuff done with fewer Democrats in Congress.

        In a time of war, is that really the time to be asking whether we should be at war?...When it is over we should ask whether we should leave. -- Stephen Colbert

        by DCCyclone on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 03:43:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site