Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Am I Wrong to Worry About Labor's Effectiveness After Iowa?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 09:27 PM
Original message
Am I Wrong to Worry About Labor's Effectiveness After Iowa?
Here in California, the unions came up small when Bustamante tried to beat the Gropernator. Now in Iowa, Dean and Gephardt, with the biggest and best labor endorsements, have faltered. Maybe we will have to wait until Michigan to guage the real meaning of labor and electoral politics, but it is worrying to me. Is this an important signal as we plan for the general election or just a quirk of Iowa and the stupid California recall?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm worried about it too
I thought Gehpardt would do much better with all the tradfitional Union support he had.

Also, Dean had the support of AFSCME and didn't fare much better. I'm afraid that with the decline of manufacturing jobs in the country, the influence/importance of unions is wanning badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Better Count Labor Out -- They Have No Power Left
Offshoring has castrated what was left of the American labor movement.
It is dead.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arewethereyet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. labor has apparantly lost its political viability
which is not good news for unions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. yeah, this is not good
it makes you wonder if there's an incentive for someone in Congress to devote their career to labor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. This is because there's little "labor" in the traditional sense left.....
tonight really proved it. And, yes it's very sad. Without labor organizing we've lost any incentive for workers rights, and wage improvements. That's why the media is so thrilled.

There's alot of work to be done in America. We didn't know how much we had lost until Bush tore it all open for everyone to see....or for us here to see....those of us who pay attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angee_is_mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
6. working class is irrelevant now
to the democratic party. The middle class is the new big thing now.

Even though he is not my candidate I really appreciate Edwards spotlighting the working class,the poor and minorities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudnclear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
7. The Labor Movement is only alive in foreign countries...America it's dead!
Sheeple would rather hate someone else than organize to work together.

You can thank good of "Ronnie" who fought so hard for labor in Poland as he smashed the unions at home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John_H Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-19-04 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. The unions split in Iowa--Labor still gets out more Dem votes than
the NRA and Christian Coalition get out Republican votes combined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
auburnblu Donating Member (536 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-20-04 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
9. Look at Gephardt's fundraising
A lot of unions used to give big-time to candidates. But with campaign financing reform, seems like the biggest losers are candidates supported by unions. Because it seems like union members are not going to automatically donate to the candidate supported by the union.

I really thought the union was going to get the votes out though. I think the Iowa results does signal that union endorsements don't mean what they used to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC