168 points
*

Reminder: this is the same Teamster that spoke at the Republican convention, making these comments to Tucker Carlson.

You probably shouldn’t take this at face value and assume this was her attitude toward labor in general.

permalink
report
reply
72 points

It’s bullshit on it’s face. Biden told Congress they should pass the PRO Act, Harris echoed that ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL.

One of the provisions of the PRO Act is to gut right-to-work laws by allowing Unions to collect dues from every employee at a Union shop.

So the guy is just lying about that, of course there’s no way for me to know if she wagged her finger in a Teamster’s face.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

Excuse my ignorance on American doublespeak, but does the “right to work” just mean the “right for companies to employ scabs”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

They named it that so it would get confused with similarly named laws that protect the rights of workers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

right to work laws “protect” workers from unions forcing them to pay dues so: yes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

We could have gotten Right-To-Work off the books?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Well, nah. 'cause congress would have to pass it before the prez could sign it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

A major union head went on Tucker Carlson’s podcast… gross. Harris could have done more to appeal to workers, but this dude can’t paint himself as a neutral politically-impartial leader!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Yes because politically neutral means only going on democrat podcasts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It’s not that the union head should be neutral. The head of a union should be openly and unapologetically pro-union. Going on a podcast and agreeing with someone who is right-wing extremely anti-union, is a very bad and traitorous look for the head of the union.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why would a union head be expected to be politically neutral?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The elections over why are you still running cover for that fucking loser

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

It’s imbecilic to make a comment like this when someone is making it explanation of something else.

If all you have to say in this thread are childish insults and attacks, degrading from the conversation and not contributing to it at all, leave the platform, no one wants you here. Go back to Reddit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

How can you still be defending a campaign that failed so miserably. It failed, learn something from that or get used to losing your whole life

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

OK I don’t have a dog in this regatta, but I gotta say you making a comment calling out someone providing nothing but insults that itself contains nothing but childish insults that also contributed nothing is fucking amazing.

I would say this is some peak reddit right here, but I don’t really think its an insult or care enough about another website to invoke its name.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Lmfao you are gonna love the next four years. Unless youre rich, then you actually are going to love the next four years. Probably a pot more than four years i suspect

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I’m gonna hate the next four years because the dems ran a candidate that they knew couldn’t win and idiots like you shouted at people who pointed this out and called us trump lovers

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

With who her enemy was, it doesnt matter who she said it to. The fact that she had to say it in the first place means Teamsters is an enemy of the country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Fucking thank you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

It was, though, at least in practice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
69 points

I’m sure one of a great many statements that aged like milk. The sheer contempt that Democrat politicians have for voters is breathtaking. Maybe some day they’ll care about voters the way they very obviously care about corporate donors.

permalink
report
reply
53 points

Judging by their performance in the last three presidential elections with absolutely zero course correction, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

Given the number of people in this thread stating they’ll never vote Democrat again I don’t expect that to change.

I’m pretty pissed at the system myself but in no way am I going to encourage more Republican leadership. Which is far far worse than what we would get otherwise.

It’s really weird to shoot yourself in the foot just to spite your hand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

It’s shooting yourself in the foot to stop foot cancer that was metastasized from hand cancer, to correct your metaphor. And the actual alternative is to start doing some Luigi’s Special towards every CEO and politician.

We’re not there yet, so voting third party, even pointlessly, is the only effective action left.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

We didn’t shoot ourselves in the foot, the Democratic party did in a failed attempt to court more right-wing voters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Maybe some day they’ll care about voters the way they very obviously care about corporate donors.

How are you coming away with that the lesson to learn? The guys that won care even less for voters. The lesson appears to be: “Say whatever you think voters want to hear at that exact moment with no intention of following through for their benefit.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

That’s rather the point isn’t it? Republicans lie constantly about everything but those lies are about things their voters want. Democrats meanwhile tell their voters that they’ll get what Democrats are gracious enough to give them and be happy they’re not as bad as the Republicans. In either case neither party is delivering what progressive voters are asking for. Then Democrats wonder why they have voter turnout problems.

People are sick and tired of showing up to vote for the lesser evil and the result being either things only get very slightly worse or much worse depending on who wins. It’s particularly hard for people to justify investing that time and effort when they’re struggling to just survive day to day and keep a roof over their head and food in their stomachs.

I and many others tried our best this last election to keep Trump out of office but we can all only do so much when the Democrats are working against us every step of the way. We need an actual progressive running on progressive policies out of the Democrats if they want to win an election, because running as diet conservative isn’t cutting it anymore.

People gave Bernie a lot of shit for being a populist but you know what? He motivated people. His supporters were excited to get out and vote for him. Unfortunately he was never given the chance and instead we got the same tired “we’ll run on Republican policies from two decades ago” Democrats.

Even Obama, the most “progressive” Democrat in at least fifty years, promised socialized healthcare like the rest of the first world countries have but ended up delivering a watered down half assed Republican healthcare plan instead.

So yeah, people are sick and tired of Democrats that only ever seem to be able to successfully deliver things wealthy corporate donors are asking for.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s rather the point isn’t it? Republicans lie constantly about everything but those lies are about things their voters want. Democrats meanwhile tell their voters that they’ll get what Democrats are gracious enough to give them and be happy they’re not as bad as the Republicans. In either case neither party is delivering what progressive voters are asking for. Then Democrats wonder why they have voter turnout problems.

But again, the lesson Democrats need to learn is that American voters just care about what the candidate says during the campaign, not actual policy delivered if elected. So Democrats should adopt the same method of the GOP, simply straight up lying to the electorate and the Democrats will have a better chance of winning.

People are sick and tired of showing up to vote for the lesser evil

I’m not buying this as a reason they voted for Trump. If they saw Harris as the “lesser evil” then that would acknowledge they are actively voting for the “greater evil”.

The result being either things only get very slightly worse or much worse depending on who wins. It’s particularly hard for people to justify investing that time and effort when they’re struggling to just survive day to day and keep a roof over their head and food in their stomachs.

So they vote for the one that will make it MUCH worse?

I and many others tried our best this last election to keep Trump out of office but we can all only do so much when the Democrats are working against us every step of the way. We need an actual progressive running on progressive policies out of the Democrats if they want to win an election, because running as diet conservative isn’t cutting it anymore.

Again, that appears to be the wrong message. Voters didn’t want any measure of progressive policies. They voted for Trump with his regressive policies. Democrats apparently need to do the same to win votes.

So yeah, people are sick and tired of Democrats that only ever seem to be able to successfully deliver things wealthy corporate donors are asking for.

I disagree with your assessment, but that is exactly what Trump is going to do, and he got the votes, so its the winning strategy apparently.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

Democrats at least in the last cycle told their voters what they can get based on what is achievable during a term.

It was a realistic outlook. It wasn’t just lying and pandering.

What seems to be what you would prefer which is absolutely crazy. Why do you want to be lied to just for your vote and then no actual action taken? Somehow that is better than being told what is real and then action being taken on what is possible?

The amount of commentary in this thread that share the sentiment is mind-boggling. If most of the voter base in this country only cares about lip service then this place is well and truly fucked. Nothing can fix that, not within a couple generations.

If this is the case then idiocracy really was a documentary…

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Exactly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

If that’s what it takes to win then they should fucking do it, assuming democrats even want to win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I don’t really care what the Democratic leadership want, or even say they want. If they’re not prepared to stand up to Trump, then I’ll support others who are willing. If you’re in a pre-revolutionary situation, does it make sense to try coalescing the resistance around a failed controlled opposition?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The GOP, unlike the DNC, absolutely care what their voters think. That’s the whole point of the culture war project.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The GOP, unlike the DNC, absolutely care what their voters think. That’s the whole point of the culture war project.

Of course they care about what voters think. They need to know what to say to lie to them. It doesn’t mean they’ll actually intact policies that will help Americans. The most working class Americans might get is minorities being subjugated more, which for some is a win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I mean you’re not wrong but that doesn’t make them better than the DNC, at least in terms of policy. The GOP enacts policies they know will hurt their voters but lie and tell them they’ll help them. Then when those policies inevitably make things worse they lie again and claim they would have worked, but Democrats/minorities fucked it up. That has been their go to move since Reagan and it’s worked amazingly well. Reaganomics/trickle down economics has never once in history worked to do anything but make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Likewise cutting taxes doesn’t do anything but hurt the poor and middle class. But the GOP time and time again puts forward this myth that both of those policies will help the working class and their room temperature IQ supporters gobble it up despite it never once in over 40 years actually working.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Most of the thread seems to take this lesson. Which is crazy.

They would literally rather have a pandering candidate who just lies to them to get their votes and then does nothing after then a candidate who is transparent about what they can and cannot do, and pushes realistic change that can actually be achieved within their term.

This country is fucked, because the voter base is comprised of morons. The education system has failed this country and there really isn’t any turning back now. If entire generations lack critical thinking ability then they lack the ability to make good choices, and are unable to see past their nose, never mind vote.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I don’t understand this.

The statement made means “are you with me or not, I’m not going to stop on your behalf”

And generally the campaign trail was pro workers rights, the activism history was for workers rights.

So it sounds like teamsters had something else going on? It seems like this thread is reading it wrong.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

…Biden and Harris broke multiple strikes.

Yeah, great, they advocated for the PRO act the same way they advocated for m4a or a ceasefire in Palestine.

permalink
report
parent
reply

So Pro-Labor they broke several strikes and love “Right to Work” bills that prohibit unions!

permalink
report
parent
reply
65 points

The statement reflects the actions of the Kamala campaign and the Dem party, so I believe it. Will Democrats ever change, though? Not until the old guard relinquishes their tight grasp on the party and allows it to operate democratically. The old guard are corrupt and they are paid by the same ultra wealthy donors that pay Republicans. The only reason the Tea Party was successful in taking over the Republican party was that there was a huge amount of funding behind them. An equivalent leftist force does not exist because there is no monied interest that would fund an insurgency on the left (except for the masses— think Bernie 2016, 2020, but we would need even more to create a lasting insurgency of equal scale). In light of this, the Democratic party has continuously pursued a “third way” approach to become essentially Republican with some social equality. The Democratic brand stands for nothing anymore.

permalink
report
reply
19 points
*

The old guard are corrupt and they are paid by the same ultra wealthy donors that pay Republicans.

I don’t think it’s actually possible to win national elections in this country post citizens united without the ultra wealthy donor class. I’d love to be wrong, but I’m pretty sure I’m not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Bernie’s campaign loved pointing out the average donation was $27. The issue in 2016 was media coverage for him that the Dems knowingly sabotaged iirc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The only reason the Tea Party was successful in taking over the Republican party was that there was a huge amount of funding behind them.

That would be the Koch Brothers. Sadly there isn’t a left-wing version of them, and it feels as if the system is set up in such a way that there couldn’t be a left-wing version.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

because there is no monied interest that would fund an insurgency on the left

There could be, but in the last 2 decades such companies generally went down or at least didn’t grow into something significant and were not being helped by the state and such when having problems. I agree that politics reflect money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

Term and age limits for all elected politicians serving all levels. Two terms and 65 is the maximum age to enter the election. In addition, get rid of the Electoral College.

The union members who voted for Putin’s Sock Puppet do not realize the damage they are going inflict on the US blue-collar sector.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

America’s fate is sealed, the country we’ve known, flaws and all is done. Before it was an Oligarchy pretending to be a Democratic Republic, Now its just going to stop pretending, America’s going to resemble Russia in the 90s for a bit as the country gets carved up by corporate interests and gangsters in suits

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So what are you going to do about it? Keep on reciting your learned-helplessness narrative, or fight back?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

America’s slide into fascism isn’t at the top of my problems list. seeing as I’m not American. I’m more concerned with the general “America is turning hostile against its allies, and friendly towards enemies of the free world like Russia”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Come on, you know the answer to that question.

They’ve got tendies in the oven, fighting is hard

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Doom! Dooooooom!! DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Term limits mean the only people left in washing that understand the system are lobbyists and consultants. As for age, there should be twice annual fitness tests after the age of 65. There are some geezers that are still very capable mentally.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

California has term limits for state officials. It has worked out exactly as @demizerone@lemmy.world has said. It’s just another stupid quick fix that actually makes things worse. You get a revolving door where elected officials are always looking for the next place to jump, and it disproportionately empowers the party officials who can offer those steps up the ladder. You love the DNC? That’s how you get even more of a dead hand in control of elected officials.

But as for fitness tests, those can be too easily gamed, and whoever administers the tests will now have extreme political power with no responsibility. So that’s as bad an idea as the literacy tests for voting in the US south used to be, and for the same reasons: selective enforcement and corrupt application of the rules.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Any system based on medical or intellectual tests is doomed to fail. There’s a reason we had to end literacy tests. Any test has to have people that design, administer, and grade the test. Age limits are a crude and blunt instrument, but there is a reason we use them for other matters of politics in the early stages of life. We have a voting age, not a voting competency test. And we have minimum ages for House, Senate, and Presidency eligibility. Yes, you could try to write qualifying exams for these positions, but the history of literary tests shows how that would go. Age is a crude instrument, but it is objective. You were born on certain day, and assuming accurate public records, that is a fact that isn’t open to interpretation. It is clear and unambiguous.

An age limit for high offices makes perfect sense. If we can have minimum ages, we can have maximum ages. And any argument for why maximum ages won’t work would also apply to minimum ages, yet our constitution is based on minimum ages, not fuzzy ability tests.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*

You have a moronic take. I understand the federal government’s inner workings better than Trump and I’ve served 0 terms as president.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

So Bernie shouldn’t be a politician anymore?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

elon is arguing for term limits

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Please, no. We don’t need more myopia from politicians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Seems like the Teamsters would have been better running mates than a fucking Cheney

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Don’t worry, next election they can get Hitler’s grandson or Putins niece to help them campaign. That should get the average everyday person to come out and vote for them! Everyone loves relatives of super powerful war criminals, right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Honestly, yes they are the best. Especially when their politics aren’t all that different from the mass murderer.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 207K

    Comments