2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhen you trash a union endorsement and call their members stupid, you know they can see you, right?
A union endorsement, whether you agree with it or not, is not a primary vote - it's a recommendation that the members can follow or not follow. Many union memebrs agree with the endorsement and will vote for the union-endorsed candidate, many disagree with it and will vote for someone else - but many of union members are still on the fence, deciding which way to go.
I can only imagine what the third group of union members must think when they see supporters of a candidate who didn't get the endorsement not only trash the endorsed candidate, but also their union and often them as individuals, calling them stupid, ignorant, tools, etc. And even if they don't always agree with their union leadership on every issue, that's THEIR union, which they often see as family and they surely feel more loyalty to it than they do to any political campaign. So, watching a bunch of angry, self-satisfied campaign supporters demean their union and their co-workers certainly doesnn't endear them to that candidate.
This attitude is the same attitude I've pointed out earlier - the sense among certain (but not all or, I hope, and ven most) Sanders supporters that they are the cool kids and everyone else is an idiot. While it may feel good in a "you can't come into our treehouse unless you say the magic words (YES, YES! I feel the BERN!) way, it's hardly an effective tactic for persuading undecided voters to support Sanders.
Of course, I have no doubt that the usual suspects will do everything they can to slime this thread with taunts, off-topic red herrings, and diatribes about why Hillary Clinton is so awful, but I hope that the more reasonable and thoughtful supporters who don't say much but do take the time to read, listen and think will consider this carefully.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)The problem is that most if not all of the union 'endorsements' that Hillary had gotten are done by the officers and without the input to the rank-and-file. THe Rank -and-file are with Bernie
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)As well as attempting to bury with bullshit. Makes you wonder but I guess this is what happens when it's really hard to find anything negative on Bernie.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Hortensis #2
coordinating this B.S.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)my experience pisses off the membership than endorsing someone without their consent. Every endorsement she has in that kind. It won't put votes in her pocket but its a great lie to tell that everyone who sees what a fix this was and says something is 'trashing' unions. Nice try.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Union Endorsements: When Members Decide - It's Bernie; When Leaders Decide - It's Clinton
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511053512
synergie
(1,901 posts)even with member input, polling etc. not so much. The online poll and the habit of Bernie supporters (be they real ones or just visiting CONs who like to meddle) is proven by the comparisons of the "who won" polls conducted online and the ones conducted in a more scientific manner.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)But let's not let facts get in the way of yet another poo flinging by camp desperate.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)So it's difficult to take your post very seriously without even knowing for sure what it is that
you find so offensive.
Was this omission deliberate, or do you even have any such evidence?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)...it's the Union take on Stockholm Syndrome. You've heard of that thread...right!
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)in a teapot ... some criticism of some unions' leadership, when they disregard and over-ride
their own 100% rating for Bernie and/or their own memberships' clear preference for Bernie
Sanders, only to endorse NAFTA/TPP-loving Clinton.
Yes, I see those. So what?
jkbRN
(850 posts)Criticize the methodology used in a lot of union endorsements--whereby the union asks BOARD members and not their actual unionized members.
Don't make it personal when it's not, it comes off as childish.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Either way, I expect a little more honesty and a little less insulting if there is to be any actual discussion or debate.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)MANY voters complained about the over-zealous Dean supporters swarming them.
It was one (probably small) factor in why Dean lost.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)But there sure as hell were a lot of complaints about the awful "Cult of Obama" in 2008....and coincidentally, from the same supporters of the same candidate.
Autumn
(44,973 posts)emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)Autumn
(44,973 posts)"The Perfect Storm" , it looks like a cool movie, add a hat I get this
https://www.google.com/search?q=perfect+storm+hats&espv=2&biw=1440&bih=809&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiesIH5jcHKAhWBUCYKHeocB58QsAQIRA&dpr=1#imgrc=9itXoqbkDRgLdM%3A
When I Google Iowa 2004 I see a lot of nice Iowa 2004 hats, when I Google Howard Dean, Howard Dean comes up if I add hats to it I get this http://www.cafepress.com/+howard_dean_democrat_baseball_hat,9760058?utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=9760058--c-9029017&utm_source=pla-google&utm_campaign=174922210&utm_content=13737576250
Why don't you link to it since you seem to be be coming up with those "special little hats".
emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)The reason I suggested you Google because you seemed to like using Google to find that great article about tea-bagger hats.
A couple articles from a search with all the terms:
The Curse of the Orange Hats from Salon
http://www.salon.com/2004/01/20/orangehats/
The Perfect Storm left whistling in the wind.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1452229/The-Perfect-Storm-left-whistling-in-the-wind.html
Dean's Dizzing Descent, "reprint" from Salon
http://www.uvm.edu/~dguber/POLS125/articles/schaller.htm
"Worse, the abundant orange hats in Iowa created the impression that the Dean campaign was less concerned with the issues that mattered to Iowa's Democrats than the enthusiasm of the non-Iowa political tourists. The campaign wasn't oriented in the local, native way that best resonates with actual caucus-goers. In an obvious change of tone, Dean's New Hampshire state director, Karen Hicks, made plain to the media that the only orange hats in her state arrived on the heads of people who came from Iowa."
Autumn
(44,973 posts)was what did him in.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Autumn
(44,973 posts)I have edited my post.
emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)Autumn
(44,973 posts)in Iowa.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Don't cha think?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)By those on her payroll, or the elite.
It is rediculous, but that is the excuse.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)My union endorsed Hillary, yet I know of not one single supporter at my location. I know MANY Bernie supporters though.
I think it was a bad call.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Supporting Sanders.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)world was ending huh - LOL
Big difference.
cali
(114,904 posts)Criticizing union bigwigs who make top down endorsements, is fucking not criticizing rank and file.
It is less than honest to frame it as you did. But you know that.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)See my reply #24
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)so they misprepresent every situation. They must think people are stupid!
Anyone attacking rank and file union members would get nothing but contempt from any of the Sanders supporters I know.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I hate it when that happens.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Does that count?
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Still on page 1-from today.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511051108
Many examples of the condescending attitude toward these men and women.
Gross.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)This companion thread is replete with even more of that rank-and-file love:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1046156
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)"Sanders supporters that they are the cool kids and everyone else is an idiot. While it may feel good in a "you can't come into our treehouse unless you say the magic words"
First of all,. whether or not you think they are misguided, Sanders supporters want as many people as possible in the "treehouse."
Second of all, the same can be said about the "cool kids" who support Clinton.
cali
(114,904 posts)onecaliberal
(32,776 posts)Faux pas
(14,643 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)I feel bashed. I've been called a "usual suspect". Sliming? Oh and the list goes on. Good lawd.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I always keep it handy in GDP, so much drama.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)words & actions as a presidential candidate. I saw it in '08 and it turned me off. Even so I was almost feeling enthusiastic about supporting her this time, until it all began again.
She lacks the kind of integrity many of us are hungry for. My opinion.
There are lunatics and assholes supporting every candidate but your broad brush description of Sanders' supporters is not accurate. Most have sound reasons for supporting Bernie as well as opposing Hilary. And mature reasons!
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)If Sanders' supporters are as abrasive as you claim, that translates into more votes for your candidate, which should make you happy.
Yet all I'm hearing is a scolding from someone sitting on their high horse.
Autumn
(44,973 posts)is not "trashing" Union Members. Show me a link to Bernie supporters trashing Union members.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)arrgle garrgle blargle!!
(edit: not directed at the OP or anyone in particular. just my honest opinion.)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)What Democrats need to do. Accusing a union or group of "establishment" because they did not endorse a candidate like "establishment" is a dirty word is not the finest moment.
reddread
(6,896 posts)I think Hillary is driving that bus
KelleyD
(277 posts)What I have seen on DU from SOME Bernie supporters is turning me off...just sayin'.