Did the Teamsters not endorse Hillary Clinton because she's a woman?

[RestoreGore]

It sure looks that way to me. They endorsed her husband in 92 and 96, they endorsed Al Gore in 2000, and John Kerry in 2004... Looks to me like they just didn't want to endorse the "woman." Either that, or they waited so long to endorse just to endorse who they think will be "the winner" to suit their own agenda. They endorse Obama now because they think it will derail union members in Ohio from voting for her... maybe it will, but then that just proves how endorsements to anyone during primaries are only vehicles of disenfranchisement. You know, I have stated many times that I do not vote for candidates based on gender or race... but I'm getting to the point where I would vote for a woman now just because she is a woman, because the subtle mysogyny I am seeing is really ignorant. And sure, we don't have proof the Teamsters didn't endorse her this time even though they endorsed her huisband twice just to derail her because she is a woman... That's only true if we talk about race, right?

[GodlessBiker]

1. If they endorsed Clinton, would they not have endorsed Obama because he is black?

[RestoreGore]

3. he's a man first

that matters more.

[saltpoint]

98. Says who?

Isn't a baby born as a baby born of its genetic parents?

Wouldn't that be regarding the human entity on equal terms?

[scheming daemons]

102. Where do you get off saying a person's gender is "first" over their race?

If so.... why are so man more black women voting for Obama instead of Clinton in all of the exit polls?


Pretty presumptuous of you to conclude that a person's gender is considered first before their race.

Obama won WI with 90% of the black vote.... but only 63% of the male vote. Seems that, while he was strong in BOTH categories, he was stronger in race-identification than in gender-identification.


You're just looking for sexism in every anti-Hillary endorsement, and it's awfully intellectually lazy of you to do so.

[RestoreGore]

140. And you're right, people are voting for him because he is black

But of course, that is not intellectually lazy at all.

[Leopolds Ghost]

145. You'd like to be able to criticize blacks for it, but you can't.

Because you know that if the candidate were YOUR ethnicity, assuming
you have one (and most Americans have one -- "white" is not an ethnicity)

you AND 90% of the persons in your social-ethnic group WOULD vote for
him/her unless he was a complete dunderhead or considered a bad exemplar.

[Colobo]

129. I don't agree at all. He's a BLACK man.

[Leopolds Ghost]

143. Sexism "matters more" than Racism?

You're white, I take it.

[Raydawg1234]

146. hahahahahahahahahahahahahah

[Seabiscuit]

2. The mysogeny in this primary race is far from subtle. n/t

[RestoreGore]

29. That's becoming more obvious n/t

[CorpGovActivist]

70. Um...

... it's spelled: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=misogyny">misogyny.

Single standard. Even in spelling.

And we all have access to the same Interwebs, to look it up when in doubt.

- Dave

[xmas74]

124. And that was rather rude.

I was taught never to correct someone's spelling or pronunciation, unless dealing with a child. It is the height of rudeness.

I understand that sometimes people spell words incorrectly. I can overlook incorrect spelling. Why can't you?

[CorpGovActivist]

127. Because faux intellectuals spouting fauxminism...

... are like little children.

[Leopolds Ghost]

150. If people cared about the meaning of words they should've studied Latin or etymology

Like educated folks were once required to,
then we wouldn't have to rely on spelling
to know what the word meant.

For instance, "gyn" (female) is the root of "misogyny"

and is the only part of the spelling I need to get right.

"gen" means something else. It's a verb root meaning
"generate" so I don't think you can use an "y" suffix

[Recursion]

93. This is a joke, right?

The teamsters don't endorse the candidate who has the worse record on labor issues, and do endorse the candidate who is trying to rein in offshoring, and you can't see anything but this alleged misogyny?

[Seabiscuit]

103. Sp. correction: misogyny

[CorpGovActivist]

119. Now, if only Hillary would correct the mis-spelling of her IWR vote. n/t

[billyoc]

4. How did it look to you when they endorsed Ronald Reagan?

Just askin'...

[RestoreGore]

9. That they just endorse the man regardless of his principles or lack thereof?

The one who they think will give them what they want? But then, aren't endorsements in general like that? That is why I think they shouldn't be allowed during primaries because they skew peoples' perceptions.

[hollowdweller]

82. No they endorse the one that they think might win.

I'm sure the GOP and the whole Mexican truck issue kept them from the GOP and NAFTA possibly kept them from Hillary

[cali]

5. What codswalllop. You provide nothing in the way of evidence.

That they endorsed men before is evidence of nada. After all, until this year there was never a viable woman candidate. Your second guess is a better one: They believe that Obama is more electable. That's hardly a novel idea; many people view him as more electable than Hillary. And you don't explain why endorsements are instruments of disenfranchisement. Perhaps you should elaborate on that. Yes, there's misogyny and a lot of it isn't very subtle, but I doubt that this is a case of it. Many other unions have endorsed her. Why would you single out this particular endorsement as being rooted in sexism?

[CorpGovActivist]

8. Codswallop?!?

:rofl:

I love a new word that arrests my attention. NICE!

Yes, it's tripe, all right.

These rabid Clintonites really should let the sour grapes ripen a bit more, before they press their whine.

- Dave

P.S. This is my new favorite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codswallop">Britishism. Huge Anglophile here, so I'm not surprised at its origin.

[RestoreGore]

27. I AM NOT A CLINTONITE

God, some of you here are so ignorant. You are all so wrapped up in your cutsy little phrases that you can't even see beyond them to the POINT. I am a WOMAN, and therefore noticed the pattern and asked the question based on what I believe is the make up of teh Teamsters. I doubt they would endorse any woman regardless of WHO SHE IS. So if all you can give me here are stupid petnames and calling it "codswallop" without any discussion don't even waste your time.

[CorpGovActivist]

32. Did you do any research into whether or not the Teamsters have endorsed women in other races?

That might be a beginning to an objective meme. There's been much too much fauxminism this race, without adding to it.

- Dave

[sendero]

56. Are you going to vote for HRC..

... just because she is a woman? That is just as sexist.

People don't like HRC because she tries to be all things to all people.

I don't like her because she won't commit to ending the war quickly. Had she done so, a politically safe move with most Americans wanting out, I believe this race would now be hers.

I have no idea why she got on the waffle train, maybe she really thinks we have to stay 10 years. I don't.

[RestoreGore]

13. You have your opinions, I have mine You don't like it ignore me

I asked it in the form of a question. I don't need no stinkin' PROOF, I noticed the pattern. And I wrote about this because of the TIMING of it. Should I then come here and badger you about why you post what you post? Codswallop indeed. ... that's all that's posted in this forum for the most part. At least some of us DISCUSS things besides just cheerlead.

[CorpGovActivist]

22. I was going to start my first daily "Sheer Absurdity K&R" award...

... for this OP, but that doesn't even come close to codswallop.

:rofl:

[cali]

lol

you posted an OP. People are going to respond. You may want nothing but an amen chorus, but that's not the way things work here. I explained exactly why the logic in your "piece" was flawed. You may not like it, but if you post here, odds are that people are not going to just agree with you. And you noted NO pattern whatsoever. You simply pulled something out of thin air with no evidence for it at all.

[CorpGovActivist]

41. I came for the absurdity, and stayed for the codswallop.

[greguganus]

77. Create your own forum and let yourself be the only member. n/t

[SoxFan]

131. Stop stealing my catch phrases!

Next thing, you'll be using "sweet raisin danish!", you damn plagiarist!

[CorpGovActivist]

132. Are you the attribution-worthy source?

[SoxFan]

142. Um...no

But I won't let that stand in the way of my feigned outrage and righteous indignation!

[Maribelle]

6. Supporting Obama, then making a signing statement that they totally disagree with Oabma's platform

is truly telling, weak, and pathetic.

Of course they went for Obama because Hillary is a woman. Who makes up the Teamsters?

[thesubstanceofdreams]

7. Saying that anytime someone doesn't favor Hillary is because of misogyny

undermines the real fight against misogyny.

There are tons of reasons why one can prefer Obama over Hillary which have nothing to do with gender, just like there are many reasons why one can prefer Hillary over Obama which have nothing to do with race.

Teamsters endorsed Bill twice. So what? Different times, different opponents, DIFFERENT PERSON for god's sake. It's funny that a post against supposed misogynism is based on the premise that wife=husband.

[RestoreGore]

19. I DON'T DO IT EVERYTIME

I asked ONCE.

[JVS]

10. Way to hate unions!

:thumbsup:

[Maribelle]

15. You're the one that is injecting the hate pomp here.

An old ploy, that.

Discussing real issues in a civil tone, as in the OP, is not 'hate' not matter how you try. Dry up, hero.

[RestoreGore]

28. Way to not contribute to the thread!

[JVS]

51. A thread that starts by accusing a union of being either bigots or of disenfranchising people...

is an irredeemable cesspool from the start. You've already decided they're guilty of one or the other, which is disrespectful toward unionized people everywhere and disgusts me.

[CorpGovActivist]

57. Yup, there was no attempt at objectivity whatsoever here.

See #48 below.

[ObamaFan]

86. Agreed

An attack wrapped in fluff is still an attack.

[casus belli]

11. Oh my god.

Please lay this crap to rest.

[Maribelle]

17. God had nothing to do with it. Please lay your crap to rest.

[casus belli]

117. Plagiarizing my lines now are we?

Is that how the Hillary train rolls? And yes, I'm kidding.

Just one question: do you think it's fair for someone to accuse someone of sexism out of the clear blue sky, with absolutely no evidence to back up the claims? If you want sexism to be abhorred, as much as many of us do, then perhaps you shouldn't WEAKEN the word by using it with no regard for whether the accusation is justified or not.

[RestoreGore]

33. I think you need to change you avatar

Woule the Dalai Lama talk like that to someone? If you can't discuss the issue at hand in an adult fashion, please don't waste my time. And don't tell me what to do. To me it is obvious that mysogeny is a big issue in this election and US politics in general, that has been swept under the rug. But of course, far be it to be considered a serious discussion in this vapid forum.

[BoneDaddy]

67. Swept under the rug?

The Clinton camp uses misogyny as the way to browbeat everyone who does not support Hillary at EVERY opportunity they can. Maybe people are tired of her excuses.

[casus belli]

114. This endorsement had absolutely nothing to do with misogyny.

In exactly the same way that Hillary's labor endorsements had nothing to do with racism.

As to my avatar, the irony in you pointing it out is that the Dalai Lama has most certainly been subjected to intolerance you probably can't even fathom. Yet, he continues to smile and never plays the victim.

You do no favors to feminism with this line of logic that you're trying to put forth. In fact, it would take a quite bigoted person to perceive intolerance in others that isn't apparent. Or do you think that calling the leaders of this particular labor organization sexist is fair play given that you have no idea what their particular motivations were.

[CorpGovActivist]

69. No, it's good.

Hold this sort of absurdity up for a full examination in the free marketplace of ideas.

- Dave

[michaz]

12. Just maybe they endorsed Pres. Clinton, Gore and Kerry because

they simply liked them. Just maybe they prefer Obama to Hillary. Just maybe it has not a damn thing to do with gender, race or anything else! Just maybe this is a ridiculous thread.

[goddess40]

14. It might be the union buster that's running her campaign

According to Wikipedia: In mid-2007, the dual role of Mark Penn as the CEO of Burson-Marsteller and chief strategist for Hillary Clinton, irked some labor leaders. Labor leaders wrote to Clinton expressing their concern about Burson-Marsteller's anti-labor work.

[CorpGovActivist]

134. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Facty.

[MadHound]

16. Or it simply could be that Clinton's support of NAFTA and allowing Mexican trucks to operate here

Pissed off the Teamsters to the point where they endorsed Obama. Naaah can't be that simple, it must be misogyny:eyes:

You know, it helps if you actually dig into the issues at hand rather than popping off with a stock answer. It keeps you from looking foolish later on.

[Maribelle]

21. Did you even pay attention to the Teamster's signing statement?

I didn't think so.

[MadHound]

30. No, it would be nice if you had a link though

Meanwhile I do know where Hillary stands on transportation issues, and the Teamsters have never forgiven Bill for pushing NAFTA on us, and they were dead set against allowing low paid Mexican drivers and trucks onto US highways, a position that Hillary is in favor of. Therefore I go with the the logical view, that they're holding Hillary accountable for her actions, you know, kind of like the anti-war folks are doing.

But hey, if you have some link that proves your point, I'm willing to check it out.

[MadHound]

50. I guess you don't have a link to back yourself up with

Just throw around vague accusations, cryptic ideas and bleat "misogyny" every time a person or group dares to come out against Hillary, even though their concerns and criticism are valid. Sorry, but people see through that tactic, see the fact that you're trying to shut down critical thinking and rational debate. Sad, really.

[rjx]

18. Maybe because Hillary has a dark past

of defending anti-union corporations.

[shaniqua6392]

20. My husband is a Teamster;

Word has it that they waited until very late in the game to attach themselves to the perceived winning nominee. This will enable them to promote their agenda at a later date. But endorsements do not necessarily translate into votes and we know of no fellow Teamsters who will be voting for Obama. I don't think it was misogyny, but it was designed to be self serving to the union.

[Maribelle]

31. With all due respect to you and your husband...

and while many union members do not fit the mold in the slightest, the Teamsters Union is the largest misogynistically-focused group in the United States in ways that are not pretty. They even beat out the Southern Baptist that want their women subservient to their husbands. A big difference, however, is that in the Teamsters Union it is not a requirement.

[JVS]

34. link?

I want to see where the teamsters promote what you accuse them of.

[greguganus]

80. link please. n/t

[Recursion]

92. Seriously, this is some bizarre conspiracy-theory crap you're writing now

the Teamsters Union is the largest misogynistically-focused group in the United States

I'm waiting for "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" references or mentioning Freemasons any minute now.

[Marrah_G]

139. Or the Illuminati!!!!!!!

[K Gardner]

112. OMG ! I second the call for LINK ! LOL

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

55. Self-serving? Our union?

It's sometimes hard to tell who the union works for.

When I was in the IBoT, union reps would occasionally visit. When the two of them got out of the Lincoln Town Car, the car would sit three inches higher. Those were some big heavy "men in black".

Sometimes they showed up to give mgt a hard time, sometimes to give us a hard time. Ya never knew. Scary guys.

I never caught any "misogyny", they didn't single out any gender. I don't think they liked anyone very much.

[RestoreGore]

141. Wow, thanks for that n/t

[Tatiana]

23. Like SEIU, I think they just want to be seen as backing the winner. n/t

[JVS]

25. I which case they are also evil according to the OP.

[Tatiana]

35. No, it's not evil. Just practical. I wish women would stop this misogyny BS.

It only trivializes the legitimate instances where women are marginalized or disenfranchised.

It's obvious they waited so long because they were trying to see who would pull ahead of the pack. Most of the rank and file will go for Clinton anyway.

This is a non-issue.

[RestoreGore]

38. If it's a non issue then you have no problem moving on?

[Tatiana]

40. Nope. n/t

[CorpGovActivist]

47. Several weeks ago, I posted a link to a story about unions holding back their endorsements this ...

... cycle.

I'll try to find it.

The gist of the article was that many unions had learned - the hard way - that early endorsements marginalize them.

Think Gephardt.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=teamsters+endorsement+gephardt

- Dave

[Tatiana]

52. My own union, the NEA has yet to endorse a candidate.

So I think you are absolutely correct on that point.

[CorpGovActivist]

53. The article was a top-tier outlet, and really delved into why union leaders...

... were deliberately holding their fire, this go-around. It listed instance after instance where an early "loyalty play" essentially was wasted on an "also ran" candidate.

- Dave

[CorpGovActivist]

54. See #48 below: Teamsters endorsed Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan.

[K Gardner]

113. They won't stop, unfortunately. Its one of the only things they have

to hang onto as to why Hillary isn't winning. Other than states don't count, votes don't count, etc etc.

[CorpGovActivist]

120. This is the GREAT BIG SILVER LINING of Hillary's stubborn losing campaign...

... it is helping to expose some mindless orthodoxies: like fauxminism.

:toast:

[RestoreGore]

36. Well, I think that's a part of it too.Thanks at least for a civil adult response

[CorpGovActivist]

76. Do you think Jennifer Granholm looked their endorsement in the mouth?

Or do you think she earned it, instead of expecting it?

[DiverDave]

24. oh, bullshit, so they didn't endorse her

yeah, when you have nothing else, bring the Sexist/race card.

Pathetic, really.

[goddess40]

26. Or it could be that Terry McAuliffe threw that last two Presidents under the bus

Where was Terry during the last two botched elections? At the helm giving crappy advice and standing silent when the republican machine stole them. This and Mark Penn are the two main reasons I got off the fence and voted for Obama Tuesday.

[GumboYaYa]

37. No, it was because she is losing badly and it is almost a certainy that she will lose.

The last thing the teamsters would do at this stage is jump on the sinking ship that is the Clinton campaign. It would be a stupid political move.

[billyoc]

39. I don't get the disenfranchisement factor in a union endorsement, who are the victims? nt

[saltpoint]

42. IMO, no. The endorsement was not gender-specific. The Teamsters also

did not endorse Chris Dodd. They didn't endorse Dodd on grounds that he is a white male.

They haven't endorsed Obama because he is a black male.

And their not choosing Clinton is not a sexist gesture but a political expediency. Teamsters read polls just as you and I do and their political sense, while not perfect over the years, is at least as keen as other anallysts.

Teamsters likely survey the landscape of available, practical political choices and cast support based on an alignment of enthusiasm for given candidates among their rank-and-file and a given candidates' likely willingness to work toward goals beneficial to rank-and-file.

They likey are interested in putting somebody in the Oval Office who is closely aligned with their hopes for legislation beneficial to the men and women who constitute their membership.

[JTFrog]

43. JFC. She is a horrible politician and is running a horrible and nasty campaign.

The majority of the world can see this and they are calling for Obama.

In the end most of the blame will be put on Mark Penn... A MAN... who tried to run her as an inevitable candidate and made most of the country feel like they didn't matter. But Hillary will have to bear her share of failure.

It's a disservice to all women for anyone to put the onus on them because of Hillary's failures. She has been failing in politics since the early 90's even if she claims to have beat "the republicans" over the years. She has nothing to show or prove that. Her negativity combined with her Pro-Neocon voting record (WFRA, IWR, Kyl-Lieberman, Patriot Act) have been the reason for her not "breaking the glass ceiling" within the democratic party.

You cannot place the entire fate of women in the hands of a fatally flawed politician.

Yes the time is right for a woman president, but this candidate has done no favors to women by playing the victim. She is a wealthy ivy league woman who has taken advantage of every opportunity that wealth and fame could offer her. It's beyond ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

I'm a woman and I'm for Obama. I can't hold Hillary up as an example to my daughter. My daughter is disgusted with Hillary's war votes. Disgusted with her crying to try to manipulate her into voting for her. Disgusted with her nasty get down in the mud politics and shameful "anything to win as long as we get ours" tactics. And I'm right there with her.

[liberal N proud]

44. I don't see anything about NAFTA here

Could it be because her husband ushered in NAFTA?

[JVS]

46. Policy concerns? No way!

after all don't you know that the "Teamsters Union is the largest misogynistically-focused group in the United States" according to someone up-thread?

[liberal N proud]

58. I hope that is sarcasm

[JVS]

62. I have no fight with the Teamsters, but some here do

I was being sarcastic, but I don't think the person I was quoting was being sarcastic

[liberal N proud]

79. I don't think they were either

[bowens43]

45. They didn't endorse her because she isn't a viable candidate.

You go right ahead and make excuses for though.

[CorpGovActivist]

48. Teamsters ENDORSE Jennifer Granholm

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=teamsters+granholm

And many, many, many other women they consider to be the best candidate to protect their membership.

What a little research can do! Wonders!

Scientific method. Not just for men anymore.

[Armstead]

59. You beat me to it -- Yes they have endorsed many women

[saltpoint]

60. - - - -

:thumbsup: :hi:

[Armstead]

63. Back at ya

[CorpGovActivist]

65. See #32 upthread.

[texas_indy]

83. Much easier to play the "victim/sexism" card than to do actual research and fact finding. (nt)

[CorpGovActivist]

87. Scientific Method. Not just for dead white guys anymore.

:thumbsup:

And - no - the test won't be graded on a curve based on your gender, boys and girls.

[ObamaFan]

89. Oh my...Imagine that..

[CorpGovActivist]

94. Yeah. Facts. Inconvenient truths. You know. Orthodoxy exploders.

[theHandpuppet]

49. It's a legitimate question worthy of legitimate discussion

Although I feel the Teamsters' endorsement in this case was more a matter of political expediency and NAFTA backlash, I think your questions/suspicions are worthy of legitimate discussion. There's been so much misogyny rearing it's ugly head during this campaign one can't help but wonder how this may be effecting votes or endorsements, even in a subliminal way.

Thank you for this thread and ignore those who would ridicule or attack you for merely raising the issue.

[RestoreGore]

138. Thank you for your response, and I will definitely be taking your advice

Some people here are just off the wall.

[ProSense]

61. No, here's why

Teamsters Endorse Barack Obama

Hoffa Makes Announcement Following Texas Meeting With Obama

(Washington, D.C.) – Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa announced today the union’s endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for president. The endorsement is the first step in mobilizing the union’s 1.4 million members and their families to elect Obama.

General President Jim Hoffa congratulates Sen. Barak Obama after receiving the Teamsters endorsement“Senator Obama understands the challenges working people face every day,” Hoffa said. “He is the candidate in the best position to lead our movement to restore the American dream for working people in this country. Senator Obama will fight for better wages, real health care reform, stronger retirement security, fair trade and an end to the outsourcing of good jobs. He understands the importance of giving workers a voice at work and will fight for strong unions to help rebuild America’s middle class.”

The endorsement decision follows a meeting in Austin, Texas, between Hoffa and Obama, and completes a months-long process that included scientific polling of Teamster members, surveys of local union and joint council leaders and deliberations by the union’s democratically elected General Executive Board.

“We have been fortunate to have candidates throughout the Democratic primary who are friends of working families and the Teamsters Union,” Hoffa said. “We are pleased that all of the Democratic candidates have focused on issues of importance to working people, including wages, health care, retirement security, fair trade and outsourcing.”

The union’s endorsement immediately activates the union’s 50-state election program, with special emphasis on swing states.

“Senator Obama will stand with the Teamsters when it comes to fighting for working families,” Hoffa said. “This endorsement begins a partnership to change America. Together we will reinvent the political process and give a voice to those who have been ignored by the Bush administration for the past eight years.”

Hoffa emphasized Obama’s commitment to rebuilding and strengthening the national transportation infrastructure, a key priority of the Teamsters Union.

“Senator Obama will fight to rebuild our transportation infrastructure,” Hoffa said. “He will work with us to address critical issues from our ports to our highways, rails and airports. We need a president who is focused on rebuilding America and Barack Obama will be that president.”

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters represents more than 1.4 million hardworking men and women throughout the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico.

[CorpGovActivist]

72. But doesn't Hoffa moonlight as the Master Mason Misogynist on Mondays?

[BoneDaddy]

64. Or perhaps Hill has no where near the charisma or likeability

that her husband has. Maybe she just is not liked as a person. Maybe she comes across as a disingenuous, manipulative and grandstanding.

There are plenty of reasons why a candidate is not liked. It is pathetic when the Clinton camp loses they immediately blame gender. Perhaps it is that knee jerk way they throw misogyny and gender around to beat people over the head that turns people off. This is the big game...grow up and deal with it.

[CorpGovActivist]

74. Or maybe the Teamsters felt they were "more than square" with the Clintons already.

And Hillary wasn't "owed" anything, after all.

[BoneDaddy]

81. Agreed

I believe that there are plenty of legitimate reasons why she was not endorsed. I think it is a sad sad shame that the Clintonistas IMMEDIATELY blame gender. It is pathetic. And even if it is true (and I don't) get over it. This isn't a college classroom where we play little sociological games to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy. This is the "pit" of political warfare where pretty much anyone who has their hat in the ring is vulnerable to any attack.

[CorpGovActivist]

88. No. No. No.

Let's all go to our happy place.

And get "Participant" ribbons.

And take naps after milk and cookies.

:eyes:

Seriously. You'd think this was Teletubbies or something.

[BoneDaddy]

108. Hehe

This is where "liberals" often make the fundamental mistake of whining about fairness. Life aint fair. Sure, we work for it and towards it, but to act as if it is when it is not, that does not make sense.

[Warren Stupidity]

66. Another Candidate for Stupidest GDP Post Of the Day!

Congratulations!

[CorpGovActivist]

68. But it sure has its value, nevertheless.

This is why the free marketplace of ideas rocks. Because it's much easier to spot the threadbare wares.

- Dave

[saltpoint]

71. The Teamsters' endorsement is here:

http://www.teamster.org/08news/nr_080220_6.asp

[DemVet]

73. To answer your question, probably. n/t

[Marrah_G]

75. I don't think so. I think they simply preffered Obama.

For note I am a Clinton supporter.

[Independent-Voter]

78. HRC - always the victim. Maybe they didn't endose b/c she lost the last 10 states by 17% or more

Nah - couldn't be something as simple as that.

[CorpGovActivist]

105. If they give her a "Participant" ribbon, will it all be OK? Milk and cookies for everybody!

[saltpoint]

84. Did the Teamsters endorse Barack Obama because they're gay?

It sure looks that way to me. Here they had an attractive female candidate they could have chosen but mysteriously elected to endorse Obama -- a MAN. Personally, I don't vote for candidates based on gender or race but I'm guessing the Teamsters got to the point where they'd vote for Obama just because they're gay and he's a man. Anyone who thinkings differently on this is ignorant.

[karynnj]

85. It is sexist to say that anyone not endorsing HRC is sexist

I know many women, including myself, who have always wanted to vote for a woman for President, who were not for HRC. HRC is not her husband and it is not 1992. Endorsing in the primaries can often be chosing among several good choices. At this time though, it may be a real vote for change and Obama is the fresh face that she cannot be. It could also be a vote against her because of NAFTA or other WJC programs.

At this point, it can even be revulsion against HRC speaking about winning even if she doesn't get the most votes or pledged delegates. Her argument that she can more easily win doesn't cut it as she is losing.

[CorpGovActivist]

90. Thank you!

When did fauxminism become such a big thing?

:shrug:

[Independent-Voter]

97. It's not. A few shrill old-school feminists do not a movement make.

[CorpGovActivist]

100. Agreed.

:toast:

[WillyT]

107. Oh Ouch !!!

:hide::popcorn::hide:

[theHandpuppet]

152. Nope, no misogyny around here

:eyes:

[RestoreGore]

137. Did I say ANYONE?

I asked ONE question about it ONCE.

[mohc]

91. That depends on what you mean I guess

The Teamsters decided to wait and endorse until after they thought the race was over. You can read many of the replied upthread to see why, but basically they did not want to have to re-endorse after their endorsed candidate lost. So the Teamster endorsement is less about who the Teamsters want to support, and more about who they think the Democratic primary voters support. Now, if you believe that voters are voting for Obama over Clinton because she is a woman, than I suppose you can say that the Teamsters' endorsement is the result of that, but it would be indirect. That said, although there is certainly a portion of the Democratic electorate voting for Obama over Clinton because she is a woman, the vast majority are not.

[mckeown1128]

95. Another day... another post claiming sexism for the reason that

Hillary is losing. These posts are regular as clockwork. SO, go ahead tell us how much of a victim Hillary is again. :eyes:

[saltpoint]

96. O you artists, you workers of oil and watercolor, you sculptors of stone

and wood, denizens of the imaginary realms, won't you please apply your gift to creating the masterpiece-in-waiting,

** HILLARY AS ST. SEBASTIAN **

--in as rapid a time as can be managed, preferably before the Ohio and Texas primaries?

Her minions crave artistic representation of her perilous quest!

Make it tragic! Let it throb with victimhood! Auction it on eBay!

[JVS]

109. I have this from a thread where she's compared to jesus. not much, but a start

[saltpoint]

110. the "INRI" overtop, as the British joke goes, stands for

'I'm Nailed Right In" -- an apparent reference to the Ohio and Texas firewall strategy adopted by the Clinton campaign.

Or perhaps, 'I'm Not Really Inevitable."

Wow. What an image. It's the eye glasses that does it for me, I think.

[rndmprsn]

99. more likely becase she's a boring loser...

imho

[kristopher]

101. 30% of teamsters are women

[scheming daemons]

104. ...and only 15% of Teamsters are black

...another Clintonista "theory" blown out of the water.

[ObamaFan]

116. James Hoffa and Bill Clinton: The Dinner

By Jonathan Weisman
It must have been an awkward dinner.

Last Wednesday, Israel honored Teamsters President James P. Hoffa with its Yitzhak Rabin Legacy award for his support of the Jewish state at a dinner in Washington. Among the guests was Bill Clinton, who needless to say, was very interested in whether the 1.4 million member International Brotherhood of Teamsters planned to endorse a presidential candidate. "He wanted us to back Hillary," Hoffa said yesterday. Hoffa said he tried to warn the Clintons before the news broke, to no avail. The cell phone number he had for Bill Clinton didn't work, he said. "It's not personal. I hold Bill Clinton in highest regard. I hold Hillary Clinton in highest regard," he said, adding, "I owe them a call."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/20/james_hoffa_and_bill_clinton_t_1.html

[saltpoint]

106. Yeah, but those women are only kept by the Teamsters for

sexual favors and to make coffee.

An exaggeration of the OP's assertion at one level, yes. But not on the basic premise. I know female Teamsters. They aren't gender voters. They're voters. I'd like to see the OP respond to your point about the 30%.

[RoadRage]

111. New Defense: If you don't endorse Hillary - it's because you're sexist...

So is that the new line now? If you don't endorse her, it must be because she's a woman? :eyes:

Perhaps more of their union like her. I do believe she split the Union vote in WI 50% / 50% - so why SHOULD she get the vote over Obama? Just because she IS a woman? No.

[K Gardner]

115. Oh, that's been the Meme all along. I'm surprised you haven't

seen it. Even other women are bullied and told they are in denial about their sexism if they're not voting for Hillary. Its pathetic, truly.

[RoadRage]

125. Ironic, isn't it?

Let's see - white males are the demographic that Hillary has really not had much support in (aside from blacks). This union is predominitely white males, and yet after she loses 10 in a row.. her supporters want to know why this union isn't endorsing her?

I don't think Obama would question why the "White 70 year old librarian ladies union" isn't endorsing him.. i think he would "get it". It's not because he's black or male, it's because they identify with Hillary more. But, alas - he's not asking those obvious questions.. she is.

[Occam Bandage]

118. You guys are getting desperate in the playing of the sex card.

[ObamaFan]

121. Clinton campaign to be studied for years to come...

Seeking lessons learned, everyone from party insiders and policy wonks to journalists and students of government will study for years her turns and moves, and her surprisingly quick comedown in the polls.

But studying them, too, should be business people -- those corporate chiefs, entrepreneurs, lawyers and other leaders who make the economy spin. Hillary Clinton's disappointing campaign for the Democratic nomination for the presidency will be picked apart for months and years to examine all the things a candidate should NOT do.

For one thing, don't believe all your press clippings. For more than a year now, party insiders assumed that New York Sen. Hillary Clinton had the rare ability and the know-how to put together (and keep together!) a smoothly running campaign machine.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/lessons-business-leaders-can-learn/story.aspx?guid=%7B80D5F3B2-2C04-426D-BB0C-03BDA2BD8402%7D#comments

[GarbagemanLB]

130. So true. It really is pathetic.

[thatsrightimirish]

122. They didn't endorse Kerry in the primary

They endorsed Gephardt.

[saltpoint]

123. John Kerry was a woman? Who knew?

[jackson_dem]

126. They joined the Obama bandwagon. Hoffa preferred Edwards but didn't endorse him because of poll #'s

[Yurem2008]

128. No, because she is a LOSER

that is why. Nobody wants to be with a losing campaign

[jackson_dem]

136. What principle!

[SoxFan]

133. Damn misogynists

Some of the candidates endorsed by the Granite State Teamsters in 2006:

Martha Fuller Clark
Deb Reynolds
Jackie Cilley
Betsi DeVries
Maggie Hassan
Deb Pignatelli
Sara Kelly
Sue Beauchesne
Janice Kelble
Alida Milham

[EndElectoral]

135. N-A-F-T-A....ask any trucker how they feel about it?

[LadyVT]

144. Yes.

[COFoothills]

147. Has nothing to do with her plumbing...

...but if you are inclined to need to blame everything on that, go right ahead.

They endorsed Obama because HRC is clearly in the pocket of management, and not labor. Obama too to some degree, but clearly less so.

[Drunken Irishman]

148. Wow, you're wrong on so many levels.

Firstly, they did not endorse Kerry in 2004 originally. They had backed Gephardt in the primary (http://www.teamster.org/03news/nr_030808_1.htm), they only moved to Kerry after Gephardt lost and it looked like Kerry would go on to win the nomination.

Secondly, after the SEIU endorsed Dean and he lost, many unions decided to wait in the wings a bit for a clear frontrunner. They didn't want to get burned again, which explains why they didn't endorse earlier in the primary. And let's be realistic here, had they endorsed earlier, both Obama and Clinton probably would not have won that endorsement and instead it would have gone to Edwards. Now that Obama looks like he'll win this thing, they're backing the winner. I can guarantee you had Clinton won 10 straight and looked as if she'd be well on her way to the nomination, they'd be endorsing her.

But believe what you want. Clinton is only losing because she's a woman, forget for a second she's run a piss-poor campaign. That has nothing to do with it, right? I mean, where were all these sexists when Clinton looked improbable? Didn't she lead by huge numbers in nearly every state prior to Iowa? Did Democrats just wake up one day and decide they were all sexists?

[Raydawg1234]

149. Heres why......................

Hoffa emphasized Obama’s commitment to rebuilding and strengthening the national transportation infrastructure, a key priority of the Teamsters Union.

“Senator Obama will fight to rebuild our transportation infrastructure,” Hoffa said. “He will work with us to address critical issues from our ports to our highways, rails and airports. We need a president who is focused on rebuilding America and Barack Obama will be that president.”

http://www.teamster.org/08news/nr_080220_6.asp

You should do a little research before you post

[anigbrowl]

151. What a silly argument

If there were strong female contenders in all of the previous nomination races, you might have a point. But drawing a conclusion on the basis of one example is ridiculous. I think you're just playing to the stereotype that truckers are sexist, therefore they must have made their endorsement on that basis.

[doni_georgia]

153. They didn't endorse Clinton because of NAFTA

And before you say, well they endorsed Bill, look at the situation in trucking now. There are Mexican truckers allowed to drive into America without the same qualification for CDLs, without the same screenings, without the same safety standards. This is a major issue in the business. I know - my husband works for one of the biggest shippers in America. I know Hillary is saying she wasn't in favor of NAFTA, but which story is it? Did she have the influence in the White House she claimed - enough so we should count her experience as First Lady as experience for the job, or did she not? Trying to turn this into sexism is way over the top. I am a woman, but I will not vote for a woman just because she is a woman. To me that is just as wrong as someone refusing to vote for a woman just because she is a woman. This is 2008. I think we are past that.