President Saunders and the AFSCME Executive Board: No Early Endorsement!

[Segami]

~snip~

The endorsement comes one day after Clinton's widely praised testimony before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, where she emerged unscathed -- and actually stronger, politically -- after 11 hours of questioning.

Although Clinton's top primary opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), has a long history of supporting labor rights, Clinton has won the vast majority of union endorsements this cycle. The International Association of Firefighters, however, said this week that it will not endorse anyone this year after its preferred candidate, Vice President Joe Biden, announced he would not be running.

Some AFSCME members made it clear Friday that they're unhappy with the union's decision to endorse Clinton. Eight leaders of AFSCME Council 28 in Washington state initiated a petition Friday, shortly before Saunders made his announcement. It has about 100 signatures so far.

"We in Council 28...are against AFSCME doing an early endorsement for President of the United States," read the group's press release. "Our membership has NOT coalesced around single candidate. Now is not the time for us to be divided. Now is the time to focus on the issues that unite us."

President Saunders and the AFSCME Executive Board: No Early Endorsement!

The decision on which candidate AFSCME supports will be one of the most important political decisions our organization makes. It's important that the decision be made democratically and that our members are actively engaged in the process.

That is why we are so dismayed to hear that the AFSCME is poised to make a premature endorsement for Hillary Clinton without meaningful membership input.

Many of us in AFSCME are trying to prepare for an adverse Supreme Court decision on the pending Frederick's case that would make union membership voluntary. Maintaining a strong, dues paying membership will require our local organizations to be more inclusive and democratic. An undemocratic decision at this time will only confirm what so many members' already believe: that AFSCME is not an organization run by and for its members.

Another reason not to make an early endorsement is that the field of candidates may change. For example, Vice President Biden is likely to get into the race.

The undersigned AFSCME leaders and members urge national President Lee Saunders and the AFSCME Executive Board not to make an early primary endorsement.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1sik19p-8FN8rcfEcE22xn9WWnD-QB9Anw1AyffQAq98/viewform?c=0&w=1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-afscme_562a6777e4b0443bb563c778

[brooklynite]

1. 100 / 1.6 million =0.0625%

[cherokeeprogressive]

5. Is it your contention that only 100 of AFSCME's membership disagree?

No matter really, an endorsement doesn't mean votes. It merely means union members have their dues go to something they disagree with.

I'd like to see that change.

[brooklynite]

6. Is it your contention that a significant number do?

Because the only evidence in your post is the "100"

[cherokeeprogressive]

9. Oh. Shit. I'm sorry, I guess I missed all the evidence present in the post I replied to (yours).

BAD Chris... Bad!

"Significant" is a totally subjective word. One person's roof is another person's floor... one person's trash is another person's treasure...

[shenmue]

8. It's not going to matter

Clinton could invent a cure for cancer and Segami would shit on it.

[DanTex]

17. I think it's actually 0.00625%

[workinclasszero]

19. Math is hard

[BeanMusical]

2. Kick and R

[Segami]

3. "..Nearly two-thirds of them planned to back Clinton in the primary..."

Heh,...scrolling down and reading comments posted on AFSCME's Facebook page, one begs to ask the question, where are all those Happy two-thirds Hillary supporters........all I read were negative posts from pissed off members regarding the Hillary endorsement.

Read for yourself:

https://www.facebook.com/AFSCME/posts/10153219365223061

[JaneyVee]

7. You're really going the facebook route?

What next, online polls?

[Agschmid]

14. Yup they went there...

Again.

[workinclasszero]

20. Here we go again....

[Segami]

10. Yea,...

Clintons,..... a couple of real fighters for Unions.....


from 2010:



First Bill Clinton gave us NAFTA, now bashes unions



~snip~

So, when I see headlines such as the one above, it reminds me of all of the flaws of the sellout/DLC sponsored/triangulating ways of Bill Clinton. Clinton sold out the working classes while president with his multiple trade deals which, in effect, left workers in a weaker position. For the poor, Clinton signed off on welfare reform, in spite of the many flaws of the legislation, and unadressed problems of welfare-to-work programs. The Clinton years may have been years of economic growth, but at a hidden cost of unadressed wealth and income inequality, a trend to grow much worse under George W. Bush, a president who no longer pretended not to be representing the interests of plutocrats and corporate elites.

So, when I read such clueless quotes, and on behalf of arguably one of the two worst, most corporatist, Democratic Senators (along with Ben Nelson) as this,

Reading from a Washington Post article that quoted a national labor union leader saying that forcing Lincoln to "fight this kind of fight" might make other senators "think twice about it," Clinton said that national labor unions had decided to make Lincoln "the poster child for what happens when a Democrat crosses them."

"In other words, this is about using you and manipulating your votes to terrify members of Congress and members of the Senate from other states," Clinton told the crowd. "Now if you want to be used that way, have at it."

The 42nd president continued to rip labor unions, which have largely supported him in the past.

"They admit here, they don’t necessarily favor her opponent. They want to make her a poster child. They want you to be something besides a voter for your children and your community and your future. They want you to help them make a poster," Clinton said.

"If you want to do that, go back to grade school," he added.

"If you want to be Arkansas’ advocate, vote for somebody who will fight for you. Vote for Blanche Lincoln," he added.

Clinton summed up the tough tactics from unions as "Washington games."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/28/bill-clinton-praises-lincoln-claims-unions-trying-to-manipulate-voters-to-‘terrify”-dems/?fbid=lTNmH8VtYwj

I get thoroughly disgusted. Clinton here helps to spread the Republican meme of "corrupt, moblike, threatening" unions (when the fact of the matter is that unions are not nearly as powerful as they once were, given the nature of active opposition to them by conservative business interests, (who would like to abolish unions, and perhaps return us to the era of slave labor)).

And to think, I voted for Clinton twice and volunteered for his campaign in 1992. I also spent countless hours defending him against the ludicrous impeachment charges by a witchhunting GOP; truth be told, by acting like an egotistical douchebag intoxicated by power, he handed ammunition to his political enemies, which then required a whole lot of effort and energy by progressives to rally to his defense.

I'm a member of the American Federation of Teachers, and a proud union member. I am done with Bill Clinton. I'll give no money to his foundations or causes. I'll stop arguing on behalf of his merits as president. I will not support candidates that he endorses, unless they are true progressives who fully support workers. And I will support those who work to dismantle the DLC.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/05/29/871107/-First-Bill-Clinton-gave-us-NAFTA-now-bashes-unions

[Agschmid]

13. Are you aware how Facebook works?

[angrychair]

4. Council 28 is my council

Local 443. Shop Steward. I do not support or endorse HRC as a candidate in the primary. No early endorsement of any canidiate was the agreement.
Would have had no issues if they had waited until the general before declaring for any canidiate.

My opinion, in the big picture, means nothing. I am just one person. While I strongly believe that unions are the only way to protect worker rights and I believe in public employee union, I have to show my disagreement with this action the only way I can: by withdrawing my money, time and effort for the union for balance of this election cycle. I will resign as a shop steward, will stop the money going out of my check that goes to PEOPLE, the political arm of my union and will remain inactive in the union for the balance of the election cycle.

[oasis]

12. Does your Union receive dues from automatic payroll deductions?

[angrychair]

15. Yes

But they cannot be used for political purposes. I don't want to advocate for its destruction, just express my frustration in the only limited way I can.

[Snotcicles]

21. +1.nt

[Trajan]

11. Maybe that Facebook page cannot be located by the AFSCME Hillary supporters

Because it is clear the Bernie supporters dominate the page, and are clearly pissed about this sellout ...

It would not surprise me if the union leadership is on the take ...

[mythology]

16. God this conspiracy shit is pathetic

You do understand that basically nobody responds if they aren't angry right? When was the last time you called a customer service line to say that you were satisfied?

Buy to accuse the Clinton campaign of bribery and the union of accepting bribes is pathetic unsubstantiated bullshit that should be beneath you.

[NCTraveler]

18. What a great endorsement.

Would have been great if she would have gotten it earlier in the process though I fully understand why they made the decision to wait. Very respectful to the process. Would have been nice to have more than three months to use it on literature and the stump. Great pick up for Clinton.

[PotatoChip]

22. Polling seems to be another new front in the manufacturing of consent. (nt)

ETA: Or rather, the manipulation thereof.