After Hillary Announcement: AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka Still Looking At All Candidates

[WillTwain]

Following Hillary Clinton's announcement, big labor issued a statement saying they are still looking at all the options and need to hear more from Hillary. Although they praise Hillary, they are far from endorsing her.

Labor is playing it smart this time. The only thing that can get in her way from gaining the White House is labor endorsing someone like Bernie Sanders. If labor pulls their money and vast election machine from democrats, she will be in trouble. Labor is using its leverage for the first time in many years.

The following is from the AFL-CIO site:

Secretary Clinton has a long and distinguished career in public service, and has been an inspiration for tens of millions of women in America and around the globe.
We hope her candidacy will contribute to the critical debate in our country over how to raise wages.
We applaud Secretary Clinton’s decision to begin her campaign by going directly to voters and listening to them first. We urge all presidential candidates, in both parties, to follow her lead. We believe she, and they, will hear an urgent need to raise wages in America, and an equally urgent need to reject corporate-driven agendas that produce everything from tax breaks for the wealthy to destructive trade agreements.
Working people want to hear Secretary Clinton's ideas on how to create a Raising Wages America. We look forward to a long and vibrant national discussion with all presidential candidates, about how to solve the problems of income inequality and improve the lives of every working person in our great country.

[riversedge]

1. As Hillary said--she willl earn the vote.

[WillTwain]

2. I hope so.

I love that labor is forcing her to the left.

[Maedhros]

28. As we saw so starkly with Obama,

the only thing that moves to the left is the candidate's rhetoric. Once in office, it's "Rightward Ho!"

The solution is to nominate a candidate that doesn't need to be moved to the Left.

[WillTwain]

36. I really think Labor is going to move Hillary left in concrete ways or they will move to another.

[Maedhros]

41. I'm not so sure.

Labor leaders can be bought off.

[WillTwain]

44. Maybe, we will see. This is about the future of hundreds of millions of American workers.

If Gerard and Trumka can be bought, it is all over.

[Maedhros]

47. Maybe I'm being too cynical.

In the past, I've seen labor leaders endorse some spectacularly poor candidates which left me scratching my head. So far, from what I've seen, Gerard and Trumka have said the right things. Since I often advocate against defeatism, I should heed my own advice here.

[WillTwain]

55. I really sense it is different this time. I could be a fool.

[bvar22]

114. Trumka long ago forgot where he came from,

and has joined the private jet set and Millionaire crowd.

[WillTwain]

115. Any quotes of policy moves you can send would be of great help.

Thanks.

[bvar22]

119. Policy moves for Obama....or Trumka.

For Obama:

*Walk away from the TPP... just WALK AWAY and forget it.

*Begin trade negotiations on a bi-Lateral Basis with countries that respect Environmental Protections and Human (LABOR) Rights.

*Immediately freeze trade with any country that uses near slave labor
until the Worker's conditions are equivalent to the USA.

*"Immediately renegotiate NAFTA" (campaign PROMISE)

*Work to get EFCA Passed (Campaign Promise)

*Put on comfortable shoes and walk the line with LABOR

*Start using the Bully Pulpit to promote Organized LABOR

*Revisit the Sherman Anti-Trust Act

...that will be a good start for Obama.


For Trumka... past time to retire and be replaced by a UNION Man that still has fire in his eyes and grease under his nails, and has not become too comfortable running around in private jets with Management.

[WillTwain]

120. Man, that is a great list. Everyone should check it out. But, I wanted Trumka's bad policy or quotes

Thanks

[WillTwain]

121. Any labor person that watches that video must feel betrayed by the POTUS.

[bvar22]

123. If that were the only one,

it wouldn't be so bad.

[WillTwain]

124. Has any of Obama's interest groups been more neglected than labor?

Last edited Tue Apr 14, 2015, 08:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Women

Minorities

LGBT

Wall Street...oops

[bvar22]

140. The Obama Administration has been openly hostile to Organized LABOR.

Last edited Wed Apr 15, 2015, 03:04 PM - Edit history (1)

The Arkansas Democratic Primary of 2010 was a heart breaking eye opener for the Grass Roots and Organized LABOR. We were given a Look Behind the Curtain,
and it wasn't very pretty.

[font size=3]We did EVERYTHING right in Arkansas in 2010.
We did EXACTLY what the White House asked us to do to "give the President Progressives in Congress that would work with him."[/font]

We organized and supported Democratic Lt Governor Bill Halter, the Pro-LABOR/ Pro-Health Care challenger to DINO Obstructionist Blanche Lincoln's Senate seat.
Halter was:

* Polling BETTER against the Republicans in the General,

*was popular in Arkansas in his OWN right,

*had an Up & Running Political machine,

* had a track record of winning elections (Lt. Governor)

*Had the full backing of Organized LABOR and The Grass Roots activists

*was handing Blanche her Anti-LABOR ass

...and we were WINNING!

Guess what happened.

The White House stepped in at the last minute to save Blanche's failing primary campaign with an Oval Office Endorsement of The Wicked Witch that Wrecked the Obama Agenda who was actually campaigning at that time as the one who had killed the Public Option!!!

Adding insult to injury, the White House sent Bill Clinton back to Arkansas on a state-wide Campaign/Fund Raising Tour for Blanche,
focusing on the areas with high Black Populations, and bashing Organized LABOR and "Liberals" at every opportunity.

For those of us who had worked hard to give President Obama Progressive Democrats who would work with him, it was especially difficult to watch his smiling Oval Office Endorsement for DINO Blanche Lincoln which played 24/7 on Arkansas TV the week before the runoff Primary election.

White House steps in to rescue Lincoln’s Primary Campaign in Arkansas

"So what did the Democratic Party establishment do when a Senator who allegedly impedes their agenda faced a primary challenger who would be more supportive of that agenda? They engaged in full-scale efforts to support Blanche Lincoln.

* Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure.

*Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests.

*The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln — a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just don’t have the votes for.

<snip>

What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse we’ve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, if the Senate doesn’t have 60 votes to pass good legislation, it’s not Obama’s fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face.

Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you don’t support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but we’ll support a primary challenger against you. Obama’s support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"

<much more>

http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/

After the White House and Party Leadership had spent a truck full of money torpedoing the Primary challenge of a Pro-LABOR Democrat for Lincoln's Senate seat, the Party support for Lincoln evaporated for the General Election, and as EVERYBODY had predicted, Lincoln lost badly giving that Senate seat to a Republican virtually uncontested in the General Election.

Don't you find it "interesting" that the Party Establishment and conservative Power Brokers would spend all that money in a Democratic Primary to make sure that their candidate won, and then leave Their Winner dangling without support in the General Election?

Many Grass Roots Activists working for a better government concluded that the current Democratic Party Leadership preferred to GIVE this Senate Seat to a Big Business Republican rather than taking the risk that a Pro-LABOR Democrat might win it, and it was difficult to argue with them.
This was greatly reinforced by the Insults & Ridicule to LABOR & The Grass Roots from the White House after their Primary "victory" over Organized LABOR & the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Democratic Primary.

When the supporters of Pro-LABOR Lt Gov Bill Halter asked the White House WHY they had chosen to throw their full support behind Lincoln at the last minute, rescuing her failing campaign, the only answer was ridicule and insults.

Ed Schultz sums up my feeling perfectly in the following clip.
http://crooksandliars.com/heather/ed-schultz-if-it-wasnt-labor-barack-obama-

So what did the White House gain by Beating Down Labor and the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Democratic Primary?
We don't know.
The White House has never responded to our questions with an explanation, only insults.
To date, the White House has refused to answer our questions,
or issue an apology for their taunts and ridicule of Organized LABOR and the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Democratic Primary.

[WillTwain]

141. More Evidence Of Obama's Disrespect Of Workers - They Wonder Why Obama Bums Us Out

They call us racists and women haters for questioning elitists like Obama or out of touch types like Hillary - absolutely sickening. You want to know who is abused - labor - by liberals none the less.

As I write, Thom Hartmann is ranting about how good white males have it. Sickening. We are all spoiled lazy rich guys. Where is this coming from?

Check this out:


file:///Users/robrenzaglia/Desktop/Obama%20Hates%20Unions%20%7C%20The%20official%20website%20of%20the%20PJSTA.webarchive

[PatrynXX]

86. I would hope so.

She's too right for my tastes. I have major problems she's too close to Big Oil and that can just crucify our economy

[WillTwain]

91. I am down the middle with Hillary. Very strong on foreign affairs, social issues.

Her stance on labor is still questionable. Trumka will let us know what to think.

[JDPriestly]

60. +1000.

[MissDeeds]

95. Excellent point

A candidate's record is the best indicator of how they will govern once in office. It's easy to make promises on the campaign trail and then abandon them once elected.

[Maedhros]

99. It's easy because we make it easy.

Democratic voters do not hold their elected officials accountable for betraying us. Instead, they focus their efforts on marginalizing and silencing critics.

[WillTwain]

100. Our leadership is toying with us.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

127. Paging Elizabeth Warren . . . please pick up the blue courtesy phone.

[WillTwain]

135. Hillary is sounding like Warren.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

136. Yup, smart move by Hillary's handlers. Wud help tho if she sounded more natural by stating her populist positions without havin to refer to her notes.

[WillTwain]

138. Saw that,

She is getting better but no Liz. Politics is 90 percent acting.

[cherokeeprogressive]

43. Yeah, with $2,500,000,000 dollars.

Or, based on the number of votes President Obama got in his re-election bid; $37.92 per vote.

She'll have my vote if she wins the nomination, but in light of this I'm NEVER donating money to a politician again.

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. And water is still wet. Since we are still waiting to see who the other candidates will be.

it would be premature to jump in the black van bandwagon.

[tammywammy]

6. +1 n/t

[WillTwain]

8. The point is this is labor is holding back on endorsing Hillary.

There is no time in history that labor has distanced themselves from the presumptive candidate. The carefully worded statement could easily have been changed to say they would endorse her upon winning the nomination. This is troubling for the Clinton people. She may get their backing but it is clearly no guarantee. Bill and Barack knew the whole time they would get labor's enormous help.

[stevenleser]

9. You need to prove your point with links, not just repeat it. Since 2004, I don't think Labor has

endorsed early without a Democratic incumbent running. I will find links.

[stevenleser]

14. Here's the link. Zero labor endorsements in 2008 this early out. The earliest were August 2007.

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/labor/laborendorse08.html

[WillTwain]

20. it is different this time.

Everybody knew they would endorse the nominee. This time they are playing hardball. Do not be surprised if they walk.

[stevenleser]

22. No, it's not. They likely haven't even met to discuss it yet and won't for some time. nt

[WillTwain]

31. Believe me, they are in contact all the time - constantly.

That is like saying Republicans do not talk to Wall Street on the side.

Unions know this may be their last hurrah.

[Agnosticsherbet]

16. Labor did not support anyone quite this early in the 2008 campaign. (See links below)

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/labor/laborendorse08.html

In 2012, they supported the sitting Democratic President.

This isn't news, and doesn't mean that they will not endorse Hillary Clinton or other candidate.

[WillTwain]

25. Actually, it is big news.

They have demanded Hillary does not include the Obama economic team in the Clinton administration. They have clearly stated they will not endorse Hillary, if that is the case. It is a new world.

[Agnosticsherbet]

26. I will wait for them to determine who they support.

[WillTwain]

32. Me, too.

It may not be Hillary.

[JDPriestly]

62. Yes. There are a number of crucial issues, but a major one is who would

Hillary pick for her economic team if elected. That's just major. And I think that many of us are going to insist that she or any other candidate makes that clear before the election.

Never again the Obama switch to all Wall Street, all corporate while pretending to be a liberal. I don't think we can accept that again. It could break our party up.

[WillTwain]

65. Trumka is our hope. His pick gets my vote.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

79. You're so transparent. Your disdain for Obama is obvious. The economic team that served

Obama was pretty much the same team that served Bill Clinton.

Next...

[WillTwain]

84. Exactly, you nailed it. And I resent your sick assessment of my opinion of Obama.

I voted for Obama both times, sent him lots of money, campaigned for him and lost friends over my support of him. I would like an apology for your rude assumption.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

87. "My sick assessment"? How is it sick? It's the tone of your entire OP. You provide no link.

Then, I go to look up the content and find that it comes from the Washington Times--conservative newspaper.

Even if Trumpka did utter these words, I looked up the other quotes you posted and couldn't find a link.

Now, if you read my other statements, you would see that I clearly stated that neither Obama nor Clinton reflect my views. However, the tone of your posts clearly lead me to believe that you have ulterior motives.

Bottom line: It is fair and just for Trumpka and AFL-CIO not to endorse ANY candidate until said candidate proves himself/herself worthy of that endorsement.

Sorry but Clinton gets no special treatment. And I applaud Trumpka for that.

Do I like Obama's economic team? No. But in all fairness, that same team was virtually the same team that served under President Bill Clinton.

[WillTwain]

89. The tone is internal to your head. You are looking for racism that does not exist. I resent it.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

142. My posts had nothing to do with race. Are you admitting to something that's not there?

Sounds like you have an issue that you need to deal with internally.

I was not even thinking about race. Not even in the least.

Again, neither Obama nor Hillary Clinton were my top choices in 2007 or 2008.

Nothing to do with race.

Far more to do with their ideology. Go back and reread what I wrote.

You need to work on your guilt. I have nothing to do with that.

(I didn't even know you are white.)

[WillTwain]

143. You did it again, stop the pseudo-psychology lameness.

You said,"You're so transparent. Your disdain for Obama is obvious."

What disdain for Obama? What makes you think I have disdain for Obama? Obama has been disdainful to most unions and the working class in general. Read the thread before you recklessly trash people. Open your eyes and mind and ditch the pre-conceived notions you have of Obama critics. Explain the disdain I have for Obama. I dare you.

Then you follow it up with, "You need to work on your guilt." What in the world are you talking about?
Guilty of what? Tell me what i am guilty of. Gotch ya.

Do not even go there with me.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

146. Where did I imply or state anything about race?

"Your disdain for Obama" is about race?

That's what you got from that?

Dude, that's YOUR deduction from that statement?

Again, you have the problem.

And I did detect anti-Obama bias in your posts. That you assume it was about his race is YOUR problem, not mine.

Sigh...

[WillTwain]

148. What is it about? You brought it up not me.

[WillTwain]

150. You said I have ulterior motives. come on make something up.

[WillTwain]

149. Who said I am white?

[WillTwain]

145. Cat got your tongue? Lose your internet?

I want an apology.

[WillTwain]

144. You have more to answer about.

Another odd comment from you, "the tone of your posts clearly lead me to believe that you have ulterior motives." My motive is holding Obama's feet to the fire (Bill Clinton, too).

If you have any integrity at all, you will tell me my transparent ulterior motives. This crap has to stop.

News for you, Obama has been an epic disappointment to labor, the middle-class and those that believe unions are essential to fixing the mess that is the new American economy.

If you cannot explain my "transparency" and "ulterior motives." I want an apology. It is the mature liberal thing to do.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

147. Bill Clinton's policies did a great deal to hurt the middle class.

And as I stated at least twice before, his economic team does not differ much from Obama's.

Where the hell did you get race from in those statements?

Again, the issue is from you.

You talk about integrity? Really?

You post these statements with no link.

When caught by me, you attack me rather than support your own arguments.

Typical.

Welcome to ignore.

[WillTwain]

151. I said Clinton's team was the same long before you.

I want an apology.

You refuse to man up fine. Now I can walk away knowing you are disingenuous.

Obama is a disaster on labor and wealth inequality. Deal with it.

[appalachiablue]

90. This shows how bad things have become for working Americans, to me.

[WillTwain]

93. This is the result of being burned too many times.

[appalachiablue]

101. Don't we know it. Labor chiefs are right to hold back after C & O. That the Democratic Party

and US Labor organizations have such a precarious relationship is historic, and not good for workers obviously-

Things were so different 35 and 70 years ago-

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2012-12-07/when-the-army-invaded-montgomery-ward

[WillTwain]

102. Great read. Do you see FDR in Obama?

[stevenleser]

4. Howard Dean got a lot of big labor support early. It didn't put him over the top.

And I am not happy that this is the case. I think big labor should have more influence than it does.

Still, the point is that big labor's endorsement of Sanders would not help him get close to Hillary. Dean still lost to Kerry with a ton of Labor behind him.

[WillTwain]

10. Labor ultimately got behind every democratic nominee. This time may be different.

This is a big turn of events, potentially.

[stevenleser]

11. It wont be different. nt

[WillTwain]

19. We will see. They are desperate and need help.

They fully understand this may be their last stand.

[fadedrose]

15. DLC in Iowa - Anyone here who was in Iowa/2000

caused Dean's loss, and the phrase that Dean was "unelectable" going from one group to another was most responsible. At the debate with several other Democratic candidates on the stage, Barbara Lee was the ONLY one who did not pick on Dean because he at that time was the frontrunner.

Clinton showed up for a speech and I can't recall that she endorsed anyone. Harkins endorsed Dean.

If any one was there, please confirm or call me a liar. There were several of you there who told us this stuff.

The loss then was attributed to the young people there supporting Dean.

[JDPriestly]

64. Have you ever worked on a presidential campaign in a big city?

Have you made calls and walked precincts?

Chances are if you have that you were walking right along-side organized labor union members.

It's quite a thrill to see the get out the vote efforts and the precinct walking and calling that union members do for the Democratic presidential and in some cases Senate candidates.

I remember one time I was walking my precinct from my house North. I got about half-way through my precinct and people started saying that someone had just been there for the Democrats. I walked a bit further and there they were full of energy and walking my precinct.

And if you go to a Democratic headquarters for the presidential candidate toward the end of a campaign, they are out in droves. Enthusiastic, well informed and persuasive. Hillary's campaign would suffer if she did not get that support.

[stevenleser]

67. I didn't say labor was invisible. I said they havent been making the difference in primaries. nt

[WillTwain]

71. It is because they have faithfully endorsed Democrats. who have burned them - OBAMA.

Every liberal but those who know unions take them for granted and we all, all suffer because of it.

[JDPriestly]

76. Thank you.

[WillTwain]

125. Solidarity Brother

[Bluenorthwest]

108. You and Will both sound confused. In the primary cycles, it is not the

AFL-CIO that makes an endorsement in most cases, the individual Unions that comprise the AFL-CIO endorse as they wish. In 08, many endorsed Clinton, plenty endorsed Obama, a few Edwards, a few Dodd, and so forth. AFL-CIO endorsed the nominee, Barack Obama as nominee, not as Primary candidate.

So what Trumka said was what AFL-CIO will always say about favorable candidates, that they should be talking about labor issues and the needs of working Americans.

There will be no Republican or third Party support from Big Labor in a general election. The very worst would be no endorsement at all. That also will not happen.

[WillTwain]

116. This should clear up the confusion.

Trumka said this time the unions are acting in unison. They are all in communications with each other. As noted, this time is different. This is serious, not a few negative guys posting.

[WillTwain]

69. I have walked with union members, too. It is inspiring to see people actually fighting not bitching.

[BlueCaliDem]

5. The AFL-CIO supports building the Keystone XL Pipeline.

The AFL-CIO Building & Construction Trades Department “emphatically” supports Keystone, noting that the “economic, energy security and national security benefits” are “too important to allow it to be delayed any longer.” Read their letter to Congress here.

Not all Unions are good for America, and not all Unions have our best interest in mind. Let's at least acknowledge that.

I would love to know why the AFL-CIO are being coy with their endorsement. Could it be that they're looking for a presidential candidate who will support the building of Keystone XL?

[stevenleser]

7. Note my above discussion of labor's early endorsements of Dean in 2004, I think that is why

Labor has become loathe to endorse early. It's not in their interests to annoy the person who may become the nominee and President by their early endorsement of someone else.

When Kerry got the nomination and not Dean, a lot of Labor leaders realized they made a mistake.

[WillTwain]

13. With all respect, that is a real slap at unions.

The Keystone is a very small project. They may support a tiny project but it does not mean they will support Hillary.

I disagree that unions are not good for America. Every union benefits all Americans. It is surprising that they are so demonized by democrats.

[Dawgs]

29. Don't agree at all. Unions rely on temporary jobs, much like Keystone would produce.

It's not as small as project as you make it.

I'm not saying I want them to build the pipeline, just that to unions those temporary jobs are important.

[WillTwain]

39. The pipeline is a small project.

A few thousand employed at any one time. A single project like the Mall Of America employs ten times the employees as Keystone. It is a drop in the bucket. Sure, a few local unions would benefit but it is not enough to change things. Trumka is not that simple.

[Dawgs]

53. Small compared to Mall of America, but not small. n/t

[Omaha Steve]

45. Construction unions are for it

Green energy unions like the IBEW are against it.

[WillTwain]

49. Overall, It is not driving Trumka's thinking. He has much bigger things in mind.

Unions are about self-interest, too, unfortunately. But without them fighting for their self-interest, everybody else has nobody fighting for a better life indirectly for all. The days of solidarity are largely gone.

The thing is union tides lift all boats even if by default.

[mmonk]

63. Thank you for mentioning this.

[former9thward]

104. The IBEW would disagree with you.

IBEW Tells Congress: Time to Approve Keystone

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers is urging Congress to support Sen. Mary Landrieu’s bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

“At a time when job creation should be a top priority, the Keystone XL pipeline project will put Americans back to work and have ripple benefits throughout the economy,” said International President Edwin D. Hill in a letter to members of Congress.

The proposed $7 billion project would transport unrefined petroleum from the oil sands of northern Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico, creating with supporting more than 40,000 private sector positions.

Keystone has been awaiting federal approval since 2008.

"This has been a project that has lingered far too long,” Landrieu told the Senate Nov. 12.

The project requires the building of numerous pump stations, work that will translate into tens of thousands of electrical labor hours for IBEW members.

http://ibew.org/articles/14daily/1411/141117_keystone.htm

[WillTwain]

109. Interesting,

Tens of thousands of hours is only a few full-time workers.

Surprising move by the IBEW.

[Omaha Steve]

113. I stand corrected

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-swift/5-unions-oppose-keystone_b_6177264.html

National Nurses United • 1199 SEIU Health Care Workers East • Amalgamated Transit Union • New York State Nurses Association • National Domestic Workers Alliance

So it is no wonder that these five unions are opposing Keystone XL. They write:

We are for jobs. There is no shortage of water and sewage pipelines that need to be fixed or replaced, bridges and tunnels that are in need of emergency repair, transportation infrastructure that needs to be renewed and developed. Many thousands of jobs could also be created in energy conservation, upgrading the grid, maintaining and expanding public transportation--jobs that can help us reduce air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and improve energy efficiency.

FULL statement at link.

[NCTraveler]

12. Well stated by Trumka. Common sense.

It would be irresponsible for him to endorse the only person to currently be in the race.

[WillTwain]

17. I think Trumka is saying after all are in they will pick the best candidate. Hillary is no guarantee

This time, if the top candidate does not move hard left, they will not be there.

[NCTraveler]

21. Seems like common sense to me.

He will pick the person who best represents who he represents. Politics 101. I could even see where he waits until closer to the end of the primary. His concerns are completely based on his needs. As are many of ours. Not how I personally place my backing but it would be if I was in his position.

[WillTwain]

24. It is a game of chicken.

Will he endorse a third party?

[NCTraveler]

35. No. He is smarter than that and understands his position. nt.

[WillTwain]

37. He may have no choice. Another right-leaning dem will end them.

[NCTraveler]

38. Fact is he does have a choice.

No choice isn't based in reality.

[WillTwain]

40. This is another Trumka quote,

“We will call in and question all of the candidates,” he said. “One of our biggest concerns is who is the candidate’s economic team, because if the present economic team doesn’t change, you are going get the same results.”

He has said he will not endorse another team like Obama. If he is a man of his word or Hillary does not change away from Obama, he will not endorse.

We will see. Maybe, in the end he will blink. But, he has clearly said he is demanding change.

[NCTraveler]

51. He must demand change. It makes perfect sense.

The current cast of those in the Democratic Party who might run is impressive. To think they are all simply going to be anti-union or fiscal conservatives is pretty wrong. He is saying just what he should and it really is common sense.

"If he is a man of his word or Hillary does not change away from Obama, he will not endorse. " I don't buy that. Also, most democrats on the ticket will campaign as Obama did. Further left than they will govern.

[WillTwain]

56. Read the whole thread. His quotes are intriguing.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

81. You're making these statements without a link. Please post a link, please.

[WillTwain]

85. Ever googled?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

137. No way. I'm guessing it'll be O'malley if Elizabeth doesn't get in.

[WillTwain]

139. That would be wild.

the party would be split. This is a tough decision for labor.

[Sheepshank]

18. ok...so the possibility of going with Walker is appealing?

or any of the other RW possible candidates?

Sure.

[WillTwain]

23. I do not understand. They would never endorse Walker.

A third party candidate, maybe.

[mmonk]

52. It's the old straw man argument we are damned to hear from now until the primaries are over.

[WillTwain]

57. Really frickin boring to be honest.

[mmonk]

59. Yup. But such lack of conversation on issues always is.

[Sheepshank]

58. how does going with the 3rd party help their cause and keep Unions alive and viable?

the likelyhood of a 3rd party winning the Presidency in 2016 is nil.

If they don't support a Dem nominee, they may likley be under the scruity and at the pleasure of a Republican President, if the race will be as close as Nate Silver predicts and they withdraw their support from a DEM. How does any Republican help the Union cause?...I threw out Walker's name as the obvious anti Union standard for the RW.

[WillTwain]

98. How does Hillary survive without them? It is a stand off - a game of chicken.

[Sheepshank]

105. clearly a game of chicken...but Hillary has a better chance of coming out this.

Hillary may not win POTUS, but she will survive. Unions very survival depends on keeping a Republican out of the Whitehouse.

In addition, while Union Leaders may not endorse, and may encourage their membership in a particular route for voting....most, more than 50% (I believe) are Dems at heart.

[WillTwain]

107. She may have a slight edge.

They may gamble on putting money into Senate and House elections and pray she wins without them. She may, actually. Then they get her in the White House and possibly gain the house and Senate.

Chess game.

Fascinating stuff.

[jwirr]

27. This is the primary. Why would they endorse someone when there may be other hats in the ring?

[WillTwain]

30. What they are saying is she is no guarantee. It is different this time.

As I have commented, if she does not distance herself from past Democratic ways, they said they absolutely will not endorse her.

This is not a statement about her being the only candidate and they are waiting for the other candidates. They have said, this time is different, they are making demands for a change.

Do not be surprised if this becomes a big problem for Hillary. The times are different. Unions are desperate and bitter about Obama.

[jwirr]

33. I won't be surprised. But I know for a fact that they will not vote R. However, many of the

workers may just stay home as they did in 1980.

[WillTwain]

34. For sure,

I do not think most people are taking the union threat seriously. They may well endorse Hillary, but if they do not, she is in trouble.

Unions are in dire straights and may make a bold move, like a cornered tiger.

[Maedhros]

42. Labor is this country's last, best hope for change.

If labor can wake up, and find its strength, we may see some progress.

[WillTwain]

46. if labor sells out, it is lights out.

We are in a hell of a crisis. Without labor we have no hope. The option is letting corporate America completely set the standards. Good luck millenials.

[Omaha Steve]

48. Over in another OP today Trumka strongly implies TPP will be a huge factor on the endorsment

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026505759

[WillTwain]

50. Thanks Steve

[WillTwain]

54. Telling Trumka quote from your post

“I find Hillary a wonderful, independent woman who is very, very smart,” Trumka said. Then in an unmistakable effort to nudge her to the left, he added: “There are people like that I wouldn’t necessarily vote for if their policies are bad. It’s about policy. It’s about what are you going to do to raise wages. It’s about what are you going to do to change the rules to help everybody and not just those at the top.”

[840high]

131. Thanks.

[Autumn]

61. Only a fool would endorse Hillary at this time. Others are thinking of running

but have not yet decided or announced. Richard Trumka is no fool.

[WillTwain]

73. Richard Trumka is no fool. - Not this time.

Fool me once, as they say.

[turbinetree]

66. Yeah

Lets not do a Reagan endorsement like some unions did back in the day--look what that got us--------screwed

[WillTwain]

68. Richard Trumka needs to be heard.

I am putting trust in him.

[turbinetree]

152. I agree

his union and my very old and former union the United Mine workers we never backed down

[WillTwain]

153. Some say he is removed from his past, any ideas?

I have heard he forgot where he came from. Do you see that, too?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

70. Richard Trumka looks at all candidates. And he should. He looked at all the candidates in 2007.

And he should. That was fair.

She has to earn the vote.

She definitely has a great deal to do to earn my vote, that's for damn sure.

No special treatment. No entitlement.

Earn the vote!

[WillTwain]

72. In 2007, in an act of blind faith, endorsed Obama. They have regrets.

This is why they are forcing Hillary to come to them.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

74. "They have regrets"? Where do you see that? They may have been disappointed

in Obama here and there, but regrets?

Where do you see this?

[WillTwain]

75. They are very open about it. Please read the thread, so I do not need to re-type. Thanks.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

78. Open about what? Not supporting anyone in the primaries? They didn't support anyone this

early. When it came down to Obama and Hillary, they went with Obama. But they didn't support Obama outright; he had to earn their support. Or, they went with him because he was the lesser of two evils, which is why I went with him.

Regrets? There is no perfect candidate for them and there probably will never be. So of course they'll continue to be disappointed, just as must of us liberals will be.

Neither Obama and definitely not Hillary Clinton align perfectly with my ideological philosophy, but so what? You go with the candidate that is the closest to that, understand that said candidate won't be perfect and also understanding that you're going to be disappointed.

[WillTwain]

82. Please read the thread. They are extremely bothered by Obama on many issues, including the TPP.

[Bluenorthwest]

110. In 2008, as in most years, AFL-CIO made no Primary endorsement and offered endorsement to

nominee Obama June 2007. There was no leap of blind faith for Obama, there was strong support for him and a great revulsion at the candidacy of John McCain and Sarah Palin.

[WillTwain]

111. Again, Trumka released this the day after Hillary endorsed.

This is not a bout anearly endorsement, that is not what the OP is about. It is predictable that they would wait. Trumka is firing a shot across the bow, letting Hillary know she is just another candidate. He went on to say he would not vote for her if she had bad policy.

I follow him a little and he is not going to get burned again like in 2008. They no longer can afford any mistakes.

This time is different. The rhetoric is more harsh.

They did get behind Obama strongly, but by 2010 were voicing disapproval and nearly pulled their support in 2012. He toyed with them, embarrassed them and this time are going to try to do it right.

[MineralMan]

77. If she is the nominee, she'll get the endorsement.

No question about it. During the primaries? I don't know. I suspect she'll get the endorsement of most labor organizations for that, too.

She's saying all the right things, even at this early stage of her campaign, which she appears to be unfolding slowly. A good strategy, I think. So far, she hasn't said a think I don't agree with. How about you? I'm sure you're paying attention to what she's saying, right?

[WillTwain]

80. She is messaging well. Actually, so are the Republicans on income inequality.

Everyone is saying they need to help workers.

It is a game of chicken between labor and Hillary, if she gets the nomination. I think the times have changed, and judging by Trumka's comments, this may be the first time in history that labor looks to a third party. I am not saying this will happen definitely, but the odds are as high as they have ever been. Unions are cornered and will go down swinging.

At the very least, she must overthrow Obama's economic team, demand passage of the EFCA. and push hard for a huge infrastructure bill. We are at a tipping point and Trumka knows it.

[mmonk]

83. Well said. The tipping point is here though many do not recognize it.

[WillTwain]

88. This is serious and half of all democrats could care less about unions and how important they are

in everyones lives.

They accuse me of being a racist or mysoginist rather than simply discussing this very serious problem.

[still_one]

92. Does that mean they would consider republican candidates also?

[WillTwain]

94. Not a chance, Maybe a third party.

[still_one]

96. I hope you are right

[WillTwain]

97. They may put their huge donations to work on congressional races, instead.

if they control congress, they control the budget and legislation. Who knows?

[Bluenorthwest]

103. I'd vote for Trumka if he ran, but this framing is bogus, AFL-CIO would never endorse ahead of

an actual primary field being offered. It's ludicrous to expect that they would be rushing to endorse on announcement day in a primary. They never have, never will.

[WillTwain]

106. This is deeper than that.

Trumka has yelled from the rooftops that "he will not endorse" Hillary or any other candidate that brings Obama's economic team to the White House. He is clear about this. So, if she does not work with him, according to his words, he will not endorse her. If she does not work with him, he will not endorse her. This has nothing to do with how early it is. It is a warning from Trumka. Nobody is saying he should endorse today, but they issued another statement after the announcement to remind people that she is just another candidate.

He even said he would not vote for her if she has bad policy. Unions are talking tough like they rarely do at this point, especially to the front runner. This is not about endorsing her today, but a shot over the bow.

[Bluenorthwest]

112. In 2008, as in most years, AFL-CIO made no Primary endorsement and offered endorsement to

any primary candidate. That's the role of the individual Unions that comprise AFL-CIO. The big endorsement comes for the nominee, not to primary candidates ever.
In this thread you keep insisting that AFL-CIO endorsed Obama early on in a leap of faith, but they did not endorse him until he was the Democratic nominee, June 2007. In the primaries, various member Unions endorsed Obama, or Clinton, a few Edwards, a few Dodd. AFL-CIO itself made no endorsement.

I'm a Union member. Obviously you are not. Expecting an endorsement now is absurd. AFL-CIO rarely endorses in a primary and would never do so in advance of all candidates standing.

[WillTwain]

117. I am a union member, too. As I have already written, this time is different.

Trumka said they have talked to all the unions and they are moving forward together. This is a new time and plan.

[WillTwain]

118. I should have linked this earlier, sorry. The interview is tough on Obama.

Trumka says,“We’ve signed an agreement with all the unions of the AFL-CIO [that] no one will endorse until we decide that all of us are going to endorse,” Mr. Trumka said told reporters.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/28/afl-cio-wont-endorse-any-democrat-with-obama-econo/#ixzz3XKEOFelB
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

[WillTwain]

122. Check out comment 119 by BVAR, and see why Labor is ready for a new plan.

[PeteSelman]

126. After Bill and NAFTA and Hillary's writing of the TPP, he should be leery.

We all should. They don't give a damn about us anymore. They'll sell us right out.

There is no one to stand for labor anymore.

[WillTwain]

128. Except Labor

This is a good sign. Hillary is talking the talk.

[PeteSelman]

129. Yeah but it's all bullshit.

A leopard doesn't change its spots. The Clintons have never been for labor. They're third way all the way.

We remember Reich and his "rich, white construction workers" bullshit when he was Bill's guy.

She's for TPP and this awful immigration reform crap.

[WillTwain]

130. What is this - Reich and his "rich, white construction workers" bullshit

[PeteSelman]

133. Here's a link.

https://www.laprogressive.com/the-stimulus-how-to-create-jobs-without-them-all-going-to-skilled-professionals-and-white-male-construction-workers/

The suggestion that highly skilled workers, who were devastated by the Bush depression, shouldn't get jobs from the stimulus program and that what we do is "easily" taught is downright insulting. It took me five years of work and school to get my electrician license and another ten years to become a full mechanic. It's the same in the other trades.

Reich was incredibly naive and foolish for saying what he said.

[WillTwain]

134. Reich is way out of line on this.

he is an excellent economist who should not offer career advise. It shows you how detached they are from real work. God, we are a fucked up country.

I like the guy, but how stupid are these people. Ninety percent of them could not or would not work construction and this is the way they view tradesmen. Frankly, it takes more brains to do skilled construction than most white collar jobs.

Thanks for the depressing piece.

[840high]

132. +1