Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve's Labor Group

merrily

(45,251 posts)

20. The "beauty" for the RW of shaming Democrats about

Reply to Jackpine Radical (Reply #11)

Mon Sep 15, 2014, 08:46 PM

Sep 2014

associating with unions is that you kill a lot of birds with one stone, unless Democrats rear up and nip it in the bud.

You shame Democrats so what happens?

(1) You succeed in making the union association seem sleazy and undesirable, so fewer and fewer people vote for Democrats (and, unless our entire system changes), more and more of them vote for Republicans. Well, that solves everything: pro Union laws, minimum wage increases, Social Security, ACA, Medicare, all of it. Poof!

and/or

(2) You vitiate the potency of union endorsements and succeed in making Democrats shy away from unions. Unions stop donating and supporting Democrats. Democrats find it harder and harder to get elected. Again, good programs, poof!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

23 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Are mainstream media conspiring against unions? [View all] merrily Sep 2014 OP

Of course newfie11 Sep 2014 #1

Yes, but that has been the case for a long time. I think this is new. merrily Sep 2014 #2

Yes it is worse now newfie11 Sep 2014 #3

My point is the possibility of a new, concerted, conscious decision among merrily Sep 2014 #4

I have no doubt they've talked newfie11 Sep 2014 #5

Not only wages, but safer working conditions. merrily Sep 2014 #6

I get what you're saying, but Jackpine Radical Sep 2014 #11

The "beauty" for the RW of shaming Democrats about merrily Sep 2014 #20

PS On the thread in GD, very few wanted to admit that there might be an actual conspiracy, as in merrily Sep 2014 #21

A predictable response from them. Jackpine Radical Sep 2014 #22

People who don't want you to know that people are taking concerted action merrily Sep 2014 #23

How many media networks are owned by unions? GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #7

I get who owns msm. But, the general principle that msm works for the merrily Sep 2014 #8

I wish they would support Freespeech TV. Nt newfie11 Sep 2014 #9

I'd rather see them support their own station merrily Sep 2014 #12

In my area ( if there were unions) and there are none that I know of newfie11 Sep 2014 #14

I am not talking about a show. I am talking about an entire station or network merrily Sep 2014 #15

I am talking about the two stations here not a show newfie11 Sep 2014 #16

By not viable, do you mean no one would watch? merrily Sep 2014 #19

You ask a very interesting question. Jackpine Radical Sep 2014 #10

I don't know the options or the technology, but I know Trinity Broadcasting merrily Sep 2014 #13

I R'd it in both places Omaha Steve Sep 2014 #17

Thanks. Did you happen read Mountain Grammy's post on the GD thread? merrily Sep 2014 #18