Not Pretty at All: White House and AFL-CIO Argue after the AR Sen. Race.

[Clio the Leo]

lol, note: I'm posting this against my own better judgement .... because it's certainly newsworthy .... and before you poo poo it as a Politico smear ... Marc Ambinder is reporting the same thing (just dont have an article link from him.)

White House official: 'Organized labor just flushed $10 million down the toilet'

A senior White House official just called me with a very pointed message for the administration's sometime allies in organized labor, who invested heavily in beating Blanche Lincoln, Obama's candidate, in Arkanas.

"Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toiled on a pointless exercise," the official said. "If even half that total had been well-targeted and applied in key House races across this country, that could have made a real difference in November."

Lincoln relied heavily both on Obama's endorsement, which she advertised relentlessly on radio and in the mail, and on the backing of former President Bill Clinton, who backed her to the hilt.

Lincoln foe Bill Halter had the unstinting support of the AFL-CIO , SEIU, AFSCME, and other major unions. And labor officials Tuesday evening were already working to spin the narrow loss of their candidate, Bill Halter, as a moral victory, but the cost in money and in the good will of the White House may be a steep price to pay for a near miss.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/White_House_official_Organized_labor_just_flushed_10_million_of_their_members_money_down_the_toilet_.html?showall

and Labor's response...

AFL to White House: 'Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party'

The major labor federation AFL-CIO took sharp objection tonight to a White House official's assessment that they'd "flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet" in the "pointless exercise" of supporting the failed bid of Bill Halter to unseat Senator Blanche Lincoln.

"If that's their take on this, then they severely misread how the electorate feels and how we're running our political program. When we say we're only going to support elected officials who support our issues," said AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale. "When they say we should have targeted our money among some key house races among Blue Dog Democrats --that ain't happening."

"Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party," Vale said. "It exists to suport working families. And that's what we said tonight, and that's what we're gong to keep saying."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/

um .... Solidarity Forever? :shrug:


And here's Ambinder's tweets...

Here's my SR WH official quote, RE: labor: "They will say they made a point, but that point just may have cost us the house. "

http://twitter.com/marcambinder

[IndianaGreen]

1. Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party. It exists to suport working families.

AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale: "When they say we should have targeted our money among some key house races among Blue Dog Democrats --that ain't happening."

No shit!

[Go2Peace]

38. Will the environmental organizations come next?

I see a real pattern here in "traditional" Washington leadership. They seem to be setting up a quite hard line against some of their core constituencies. It's kind of bizzare to watch. I would never have thought it would happen. But it does indeed seem to be evidence that the problems in Washington go far deeper.

[hvn_nbr_2]

138. Repub leaders pander to their base. Dem leaders hold their base in contempt. nt

[GrantDem]

149. Yep...

[proud2BlibKansan]

122. +1

[Freddie Stubbs]

133. And the Democratic Party isn't and arm of organized labor

Elected officials have to answer to the voters, and that sometimes conflicts with what labor leaders want.

[Jennicut]

2. Hmmm, not really helpful for a WH official to say that.

I would not call it a waste of money to primary someone. It is America, we have that right.
I do get the WH wants to keep the majority in the Senate but fighting with Labor is not going to help. Move on, people, move on. The loss with Specter was handled better then this so far...

[Clio the Leo]

see me on election night....

.... and lets hope Blanche wins and the money she spent during the primary couldn't have been better used during the general. And YES, if Halter had won I'd have been sining a different tune.

I dont like Blanche .... but I dont like Dems fighting Dems even more.

[Mass]

19. Seems to me that the culprit here is this WH official who attacked the unions

for supporting an opponent to their candidates.

[Go2Peace]

25. the question is.. who is fighting who?

This is still a Democracy. The admin should have backed off. They have a right to fight for a majority, but if that pitts them against labor they had damn well think twice about what they are doing.

[Clio the Leo]

30. And if the party in power would just as easily outlaw labor...

.... as the GOP would ... then what's the point?

The most recent poll had Halter losing to the GOP nominee by 24 pts.

The whole thing's a mess and without party unity, everyone's to blame.

[daleanime]

85. Well, now that we've had a fair and honest primary;.....

:rofl: :blush: sorry Clio for the sake of party unity, I really did try but:puke: if we are given no choice, what choice do we have?

[quakerboy]

103. What was Lincoln losing to the GOP by in that poll, did you notice?

What if either party, in power, would just as easily outlaw labor? Lincoln has made her stand on EFCA and labor. Apparently just barely enough of Arkansas Dems agree with her.

[cornermouse]

105. You cannot attack members within the party and still expect to

get harmony and unity back from the members under attack. That "move on" thing? It ain't gonna work.

[golfguru]

150. As long as there are primaries and more than 1 contestant, there will be fights

Dems fighting Dems, Repubs fighting Repubs.

Welcome to democracy!

[quiller4]

I'm just glad none of my Teamster DRIVE money was wasted on that race.

[Tarheel_Dem]

18. Was this WH official, the head of housekeeping? I don't like these unnamed sources.

Politico has a habit of not naming it's sources. I suspect this is meant to elicit bad feelings between Labor & the WH.

[Clio the Leo]

24. as I said in the OP ..... this is coming from multiple sources. NT

[Tarheel_Dem]

35. Granted. I'm just wondering why a WH official would go on record...

anonymous or otherwise, with a statement like this. I mean, it's a real poke in the eye to Labor. Are they hoping to to lose? Do they not want a second term?

[Clio the Leo]

37. Ezra explains it best:

Like I said, I think it's silly. But the petty public bitchslap/chest-puff isn't "drama" in the WH's mind...the primaries are.

http://twitter.com/brianbeutler/status/15756012889

[Go2Peace]

41. Maybe it is a little too much a political game?

and not enough understanding of the reality that labor was representing?

[Clio the Leo]

49. the huh?

the what? .... what reality is labor representing (not arguing, I dont understand what you're saying)

[Go2Peace]

81. That is what Ezra is saying

"Like I said, I think it's silly. But the petty public bitchslap/chest-puff isn't "drama" in the WH's mind...the primaries are."

That it is somewhat of a horserace and a gaming "strategery" for Washington. They did not see the "Drama" in it, or in other words, it did not seem to matter. Labor wasn't important.


I feel like Washington very much too often sees elections as a chess board. Which is not completely bad. But the minute you lose sight of what those "pawns" represent, you lose the game.

Labor represents a core constituentcy. They seem to have lost track of that. For labor it *was* a "drama"?

[tsuki]

100. And Marc Ambinder has an anonymous source everywhere. He sometimes

uses anonymous sources to back unnamed sources.

[Tarheel_Dem]

104. Exactly. I've never seen so many people on a democratic message board..

rooting for the failure of a democratic administration, in my life. I'm aware that most of the people who post here are really third party activists, who are wishing for an opening to take down the two party system. However, it seems that they hate the democratic party more than they hate the repukes. My only solace is that they're mostly relegated to internet message boards, as evidenced by the WaPO/ABC poll today.

[tsuki]

126. This is the kind of backbiting that goes on all the time. I cannot

believe that a SENIOR WH official called Ben Smith of Politico to crow.

What I can believe is that a low level aide popped into an office and heard the remark in supposed privacy, then called Ben Smith who embellished.

This is the kind of remark that would be made in private, but not broadcast. It is two faced, but happens all the time.

But it is drama, drama, DRAMA. And that's the NEWS Corpse.

[PFunk]

3. Great.

And the DLC-controlled dems wonder why they'll losing labor. Sheeesh.

[Go2Peace]

4. Chickens are coming home to roost

In this case, the administration and former President were not being friends of labor. I respect your opinion Clio, but in this you have it backwards.

[Clio the Leo]

21. lol .... what's my opinion....

.... I wasn't aware that I expressed it in the OP.

[Go2Peace]

28. Well, wouldn't be the first time

I misread someone.

Hopefully the will become a turning point in the labor vs "DLC thinking" juggernaut. We can hope anyway.

[Clio the Leo]

36. it's ok but for clarification....

.... "solidarity forever" was directed at both of them.

A Democratic senator voting against the President (or not supporting his legislation) is wrong.

Primarying a seated Democrat (esp in a conservative state) is wrong.

Publicly bashing the unions is wrong.

Implying that the unions dont NEED the Democratic party is wrong.

The whole thing is a mess and the GOP is no doubt enjoying the moment.

[Go2Peace]

57. It's not a "failure"

It's a sign of a very serious and growing chasm between Washington leadership and the groups who are on the ground. This has been coming for the last year. Labor has been rebuffed multiple times and keeps coming back. And Washington keeps taking them for granted. Same thing has been happening with environmental groups.

The only thing holding these groups together is the opposition.

I agree that the two need to unify. But really, it has been Washington that has not respected the traditional places that these groups have always had at the table. It is Washington that needs make the gesture. Labor is feeling like it is being asked to sit at the back of the bus. That is a very odd thing to do with an organization that represents a very core constituency of the Democratic Party.

[Clio the Leo]

80. you cant unify and point fingers at the same time ....

... that being said .... Yay Blanche! Woohoo!

[Go2Peace]

84. There are two primary paths to divorce..

One is confrontation.... The other is inattention....

Inattention is as destructive, if not more destructive, because at least when people fight, they can get out things and have a chance at resolution.

In this way I think the latter is the more destructive force. The "pointing fingers", or argument, that you outlines in the OP, is actually a good thing. It get's feelings out on the table. It is what the parties do with it that counts. And if Labor does not get the attention it needs from that "marriage", it will return the favor.

Works in human nature like that, I would say it could work out the same way with this relationship from what I am seeing. Just my 2 cents.

Not that I want to see a "divorce". It just seems like things are setup for a seperation if Washington doesn't start giving labor a little more "attention".

[Clio the Leo]

88. yeah but....

.... I have to admit .... the picture I'm imagining of Labor NOT supporting the party in the fall is quite the contrast to the ACTUAL pictures I've seen from this weekend of the DNC and OFA canvassing with former foe Joe Sestak.

Hopefully Dems will be able to come together for the good of the party in AR as they're already doing in PA. Everyone's feelings are hurt at the moment .... give it a few weeks and things will be fine.

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTFSP2XUEis&feature=player_embedded#!

[Bluenorthwest]

132. What does the administration's petty gloating do to help that?

I've been a constant voter for well over 30 years now. I have always seen the primary winners be as gracious to the losers as possible, because that first day is the first day of the general, and rivals are supposed to unify. Insults and divisive ego displays are not typically the method used.
So I have to wonder what the administration thinks they are doing by slamming the opposition. Did Blanche win that big, that she can do without the rest of the Democrats, really? I guess so.

[Demeter]

5. Right On!

I am a union member (if only recently) and I vote for working people and their dependents.

[RandomThoughts]

6. If the house is lost, it is because of people supporting

Democrats that support policies against society.

It is not Democrats or Republicans, it is a system that does not care what party someone is in if they will sell their vote to corporate interests.

[hlthe2b]

7. Sounds like Rahm Emannuel

and not surprised....

[loudsue]

23. Yep. Sounds just like Rahm.

You don't even have to guess as this one...it's even how he speaks.

[dflprincess]

29. It does sound like Rahm

and one of he "we don't need you, but if we lose it's your fault" statements.

[DrToast]

8. Is the White House this clueless?

Do they really not understand why someone would oppose Lincoln? First, she's worthless. Second, she has no chance to hold her seat.

[katandmoon]

16. Yep

[OHdem10]

9. Good for the Unions if they stick to their guns.

[Mass]

10. Some people in the White House should stop talking to the media.

[ProSense]

11. Who did this official call Ben Smith or Marc Ambinder?

All of this is such BS.

[DrToast]

14. Uh yeah....two separate reporters are making stuff up and they just happen to match

:eyes:

[ProSense]

22. Did I say that?

Why is a WH official making calls to Ben Smith and Marc Ambinder within minutes of the race being decided.

[DrToast]

34. I suspect it's the other way around

[freddie mertz]

114. Because they are labor-hating assholes?

Honestly, ProSense, there are a lot of us who could not be LESS surprised by this contemptible behavior.

We know that there are powerful people in the WH who have nothing but CONTEMPT for organized labor and other grassroots, progressive "retards" who helped get them in office.

This is just another demonstration of this.

[skeptical cynic]

12. Dissent is never wasted unless it isn't expressed

The AR race was so close that only a fool would fail to get the clear message.

When forced to choose between the two, I'll take labor (people) over party every time.

[DJ13]

13. The WH needs to understand that to working people the corporate Dems are the enemies

Every bit as much as the Republicans.

Its not the letter behind the name thats important, its the actions in office thats important.

Thats a lesson Im afraid President Obama will have to learn before he's up again in 2012.

[katandmoon]

15. So who would that cowardly anonymous POS WH official be?

[RandomThoughts]

17. Unnamed white house source?

:rofl:

A movie about cheating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL9-7AeFD5w


Although no like me, I ask this, how many people with Military ideas are in sectors including Media/PR Politicians, and Economic sectors?


Anyone else notice the name Austin in many shows?




I remember back when I use to play pool, some people thought if they fouled, and nobody called them on it, it was not cheating. I remember I use to call my own fouls, because I never thought getting something was worth cheating. Although there is a group that thinks if you do not get punished, then you did not do wrong, that view requires punishment. I think that explains why it is better to change the ways people think on things.

[depakid]

20. It rarely pays to work against one's own constituencies

[xchrom]

26. Well according to Ever Trustworthy Cetrists and Pragmatists

Obama isn't God or Superman -- the poor thing
is barely President -- why would unions
pick a fight with such a victim?

[Imajika]

27. It is kinda true though...

Labor did just burn 10 million bucks and will have to go crawling back to Lincoln anyway. Now she is going to be even more unfriendly to labor.

[Clio the Leo]

31. yup nt

[OHdem10]

32. They do not have to go crawling back to Lincoln. They do not have

to support anyone. From the meetings I watched on C-Span,
I got the distinct impression, they are taking a support
the individual who votes for policies that help working class.
It will not surprise me, to see a lot of Democrats take
this approach.

[Clio the Leo]

39. And the GOP candidate will do that?

Ideological grandstanding is nice.

Plans of action are even better.

[Smashcut]

43. Apparently neither of them will.

And I support labor working to take down corporate stooges like Lincoln.

Just because Obama backs it doesn't make it a correct "plan of action."

[Clio the Leo]

48. Keeping Congress with a Democratic majority is NOT the right plan of action?

You've confused me.

[Smashcut]

50. Keeping Blanche Lincoln was not the right plan of action.

You may be confused, but please stop confusing the issue. This was about the primary.

[Clio the Leo]

56. And how handily would Halter have beaten the GOP?

Guess we'll never know, will we?

[IndianaGreen]

58. Blanche voted for Wall Street bailout while opposing Main Street bailout

Her goose is cooked!

Halter opposed Wall Street bailout.

[Clio the Leo]

75. OUR goose is cooked. NT

[sybylla]

124. You're dreaming if you think we'll hold the senate after November anyway

It's much better if what's left of our senators are the kind who don't straddle the yellow line in the middle of the road while they cave to corporate interests and side with Wallstreet.

We need fighters in the Senate. Not corporate ass-kissers.

[BootinUp]

129. boozman supported it too, I understand. nt

[Go2Peace]

61. Labor would have backed Halter all the way to office

That would have been far more effective than the support that Lincoln will now get. This was the greater risk.

[Clio the Leo]

76. And the WH would have backed Halter, just as they are doing with Sestak nt

[IndianaGreen]

146. Haven't you heard the latest Sestak salvo at the White House?

Check it out!

[totodeinhere]

55. The only reason I can see to vote for Lincoln is that she might help the Dems keep their majority...

in the Senate. But if it becomes obvious that there is no chance that the GOP can take the Senate, then there goes that one and only reason to vote for her. In that case I think I would rather write in Mickey Mouse.

[Clio the Leo]

60. DING DING DING DING!!!

Yay! Someone gets it!

Are we all four years old? Or has the radiation coming from our monitors caused us to forget what a Republican controlled Senate was like?

[Go2Peace]

64. so you did have an opinion?

You were kind of sly about that. ;)

[Clio the Leo]

67. lol, well of course I did ...

.... it just wasn't what I think you thought it was. :)


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x331358#331422

[dflprincess]

33. Right now Lincoln needs Labor and she may still reget she ever abandoned it.

Labor should put its money in races where a real Democrat is running, they don't owe Lincoln anything.

[Clio the Leo]

42. who's the real Democrat in AR now?

Blanche needs Labor and they need her .... unless we all want to see Mitch McConnell's face trying to smile down from the Senate lectern.

[dflprincess]

51. With friends like Blanche, labor doesn't need any enemies.

You can't sell people out and then tell them it's their fault when you lose.

There's no reason for labor to ever support a Republican and that includes the ones who put a "D" after their names.

[Smashcut]

52. +1000

[Clio the Leo]

53. again, WHO is the alternative?

(hint, there isn't one)

Imaginary, idealized candidates cant vote. (or even get on planes to fly to DC for that matter)

[Smashcut]

54. Well, the pres helped make sure of that, didn't he.

And she made sure everyone knew it, in her ads.

[dflprincess]

59. You can always write someone in or file a blank ballot

The lesser of two evils is still evil and, in this case, will sell out the middle and working classes just as quickly as the major evil.

[Clio the Leo]

65. No baby doll, THIS is evil...

..... I think we've become too confident in our hold on Congress.

[Jennicut]

66. You still end up with the Rethug, which is a bit worse then Lincoln.

Not much, but still worse.

[Mass]

70. It could have been Halter. This is what a primary is about: choice.

People are not elected for life and primaries should be welcome as a chance for a state (or district, or country) to make a choice. The truth is that Halter came very close to beat Lincoln, who in passing wants to gut the EPA, among other little things that make her so dear to my heart.

Sure, now, people from AR have to regroup, but what the WH idiot you quote said is wrong, very wrong, and yes, the unions want to be heard.

[Go2Peace]

86. No, Modern parties don't accept Democracy in primaries.

Our vote only counts when it is needed.

Shit, if our party leaders believe that maybe they ought to just get rid of the primary system altogether?

[freddie mertz]

119. That won't fly anymore.

The alternative is Donald Duck, or any name you can write in.

(PS: My family in Ark will vote for Blanche in the end. I would not be able to.)

[treestar]

115. In Arkansas they may have to take the best friend they can get

This is politics. They forgive and go on.

[Go2Peace]

69. Labor's support will be tepid, and rightfully so

I entirely agree with it. They are better off continuing their fight on other fronts. At this point Washington is their own worst enemy. They keep trying to plug the holes they keep imagining in their dam, but it is the material they created that with is the problem, not the holes. The holes are an illusion.

So instead of doing what they really need to do to keep a majority, they are actually working somewhat against it, filling those imaginary "holes" when they should be looking instead at the "cement" they are pouring as a foundation.

The Union is precisely RIGHT. The old DLC thinking of Washington is causing everyone to lose resources. They are absolutely right!

[freddie mertz]

116. Some will not go crawling back to her.

The WH seems to be intent on dividing us at just the point you would think they would be seeking "unity."

[Smashcut]

40. Well, I stand WITH organized labor and AGAINST Blanche Lincoln and any other corporate shill

Obama supports.

So fuck you, "senior White House official."

[jefferson_dem]

44. Don't you really mean you stand with Politico?

I guess they win. Now you're pissed at Blanche and the WH.

[Smashcut]

47. What?

What does politico have to do with anything?

Did Obama back Lincoln or didn't he? Weren't some here saying Obama was secretly "glad" she might lose, i.e., that it was his plan all along, thirty-two-dimensional chess etc. etc.?

[Clio the Leo]

46. So then, how do you propose keeping the Democratic seat in the hands of the party? nt

[IndianaGreen]

62. Who cares? We need people that represents the workers, not the corporations

A D or a R are meaningless when the Beltway is corrupt to the core with corporate whores.

[Clio the Leo]

71. Find me a third party with some money behind it and I'll agree with you.

The cold cruel reality is that MONEY ... not love ... makes the world go 'round.

[Go2Peace]

87. Isn't that what the OP was saying? Labor HAD the damn money and still Washington shot them in the

freaking foot?

[Clio the Leo]

89. Labor doesn't have enough money to exist outside of the party...

.... and the party doesn't have enough money to exist without Labor. Everyone needs everyone.

What the OP said was that (allegedly) Labor took 10,000,000 that could have been better used to fight the GOP in the general and wasted it in the primary. (their words, not mine)

[freddie mertz]

120. Time to get that started, I think.

[Go2Peace]

145. Democrats for America. If you haven't, please join them

They are gaining serious mass and seem the best poised to create a serious movement.

[besdayz]

45. a

somebody should inform the WH that they are complicit with BP in flushing billions of dollars into the oceans.....



she won't win the general without labor..what dumb white house...

[jillan]

63. I just hope they kiss and make up before November.

[Clio the Leo]

68. they will....

.... they .... we .... have no other choice.

[cornermouse]

106. This is just crazy talk.

People always have a choice. They aren't little robots that you can program to walk over and mark an "X" in a proper spot on the ballot. I'm not union, but my dad was and I don't approve of the lack of respect for others or class coming from the White House to unions.

[4lbs]

72. Arkansas is not a very labor union friendly state. It is the home of Wal-Mart.

Halter's labor union support was portrayed as being big money from outsiders telling Arkansans how to run their state.

Furthermore, Bill Clinton is still very beloved in Arkansas, and his support of a candidate is easily worth 10 percentage points, maybe 15.

[Clio the Leo]

73. I love all of my fellow DU'ers, I truly do ....

.... but there are times I wish I could do a survey of those who bash the Blue Dogs (and I agree, Lincolns the worst) and say "a Blue Dog is as bad as a Republican!!!" to see if they are actually represented BY Republicans in Congress.

Because I AM represented by Republicans across the board (Alexander, Corker and Wamp) .... there's not a Democrat here who has a CHANCE to win the the House seat ... and trust me, it's NOT fun.

[Captain Hilts]

77. That's exactly right. nt

[Jennicut]

78. I hear ya...and I live up in CT where we have all Dems.

I think the remarks by the "unnamed source" were a bit too snarky but perhaps they have a slight point. But in pushing to keep the wins in the Senate, the WH does not need to piss off labor. Can't they just get along?

[4lbs]

79. Yeah. I'll still take Lincoln over any true Republican for that Senate seat.

While she essentially killed the public option, she voted for nearly all the Democratic legislation in Congress.


A true Republican Senator (and a DINO as well), would have not voted for any those.

[Clio the Leo]

82. I'd be ECSTATIC if she suddenly became my Senator...

... and I CANNOT STAND HER.

(but I cant stand the Republicans even more)

[4lbs]

83. My state, CA, has it's own version of Lincoln, namely Dianne Feinstein.

However, Feinstein is still more liberal and progressive, as it were, than any Repuke could be.

I just wish she could be further left, like her fellow Senator Boxer.

[Go2Peace]

90. But Lincoln is not a Republican

so obviously Democrats *can* win in that contest. So the question is, could a more to the left Democrat have won? Well, Labor is not stupid. If they put 10 million behind another candidate I am sure they felt it could be done.

Do you really think they would have thrown that kind of money out there if they did not have solid indications they could pull it off? Not in a minute. 10 Million could be used many other places.

I am sure they had intelligence statistics and felt they could do it. Imagine what more would have happened if the admin had backed labor?

[Clio the Leo]

92. And neither is the man who garnered more popular votes than any Presidential candidate in history...

.... of course how did he do it? Party unity. ....... lol, well AFTER June of 2008 anyway. :)

[BootinUp]

113. If they couldn't do it in a runoff

they never had a chance in this one.

[treestar]

117. Absolutely

Wasn't it a "right to work" state? Giving it a try was a good thing but it's not a state where we'd expect a further left candidate to win the general election.

[global1]

74. Let Me Guess Which Senior WH Official Made That Stupid Statement......

My guess is Rahm. Sure sounds like something he would say. You all know that the MSM will take that comment and it will be news for the rest of the week. That statement will come back to haunt the Obama WH.

I just don't get it - Obama needs to control his people's mouths. If he is looking for some "ass to kick" I would recommend that it be Rahm's ass and the sooner the better.

I don't know if these are rookie mistakes or if this is pre-meditated. Either way it does not bode well for maintaining the House and Senate in November. The Dems are going to need all the help they can get - and the unions would have been a good ally. Now I'm afraid they will be pissed off.

But as Rahm also says - "who else are they going to vote for that'll be better". (paraphrasing Rahm - I'm sure that's not his exact quote).

[Wandawilkerson]

91. White House seems happy

Wow.

[Pirate Smile]

101. No, they seem pissy that money which could have been used strategically to

retain control of the House instead went to make a statement. November is going to be tough and they don't see the value in spending millions on intra-party squabbles. I can see validity in the arguments on both sides.

[HooptieWagon]

108. DLC is pissed money was spent on non-corporatist Dem candidate.

Maybe it's time to spend money on non-corporatist IND candidates?

[AtomicKitten]

93. Organized labor is entitled to support whichever candidate they choose collectively.

To expect them to vote for Lincoln after she flat-out bragged about killing the public option is absurd. Strategically it's probably insane but I doubt very seriously I could bring myself to pull the lever for her dumb ass. I'm glad I don't live in Arkansas.

[Clio the Leo]

94. lol, I think you just answered my question...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=331358&mesg_id=331488

we should all be so lucky to have Nancy as one of our choices.

[AtomicKitten]

95. Being California born and raised, I can only imagine your predicament.

[Clio the Leo]

98. do some research sometime on the history of anti-labor backlash in the South....

.... you're right .... labor CAN support whomever in the heck they want ... but in the South, they have almost no clout. There simply aren't enough voters who are members. The downside is that the AFL-CIO doesn't have much pull in politics .... the UP side is we get a lot of auto manufacturing plants. :)

I think that's what everyone's missing in all of this .... going against Labor in Arkansas is NOT the same as going against Labor in Ohio.

Here's a breakdown by state...
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.t05.htm

Only 5% of the work force in AR is represented or members of unions .... compare that to 15% in OH. California's at 18%. ...... as that equates to registered voters .... that's enough to swing elections.

[AtomicKitten]

99. Perhaps this is viewed as intrusion by out-of-state influences,

but Halter did give Lincoln a run for her money and maybe that will nudge her to vote WITH the people from now on instead of with the corporations. We can dream.

:hi:

[flpoljunkie]

110. Media was silent on outside business groups that ran ads for Lincoln,like Americans for Job Security

Americans for Job Security (AJS) is a Virginia-based 501(c)(6) group that OpenSecrets.org describes as "a pro-Republican, pro-business organization" headed by David Carney.<1> The American Insurance Association launched the group with $1 million in seed funding in 1997. AJS runs "issue ads" that attack liberal and moderate candidates nationwide, but is not required to disclose its political contributions or expenditures.<2>

In 2002, for example, AJS ran over $1 million in ads attacking Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, who was running for the US Senate from NH in opposition to Republican John Sununu. In the 2008 rematch between Shaheen and Sununu, AJS again funded ads attacking Shaheen. <3>

Complaints have been filed with the FEC stating that AJS should lose its 501(c)(6) status, which is reserved for "business leagues and trade associations" rather than groups that seek to influence elections. <4><5>

According to the organization's own website, "For more than ten years Americans for Job Security (AJS) has been at the forefront of an explosion of the marketplace of ideas. During this time AJS has put forth a pro-growth, pro-jobs message to the American people. From the beginning our message has been a simple one: free markets and pro-paycheck public policy are fundamental to building a strong economy and creating more and better paying jobs."<6>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Job_Security

[Clio the Leo]

111. That's exactly what it was.....

.... the problems unions have always had in the south is they were viewed as "outside agitators" .... and that was literally what happened here. Blanche made a point yesterday of saying on Morning Joe, "no, not labor .... DC labor!"

I fear this may have been a case of labor overestimating its influence in the state. And perhaps the WH knew this all along.

[Mass]

123. You may be right, but 1) it is sad, 2) it is no reason for the WH to bash the unions.

I am happy unions helped Halter. Given the closeness of the score, particularly after Bill Clinton's prestation, they showed alternatives are possible even in Arkansas, and this by itself is worthwhile.

In this particular instance, f*ck the WH unamed operative who is the source.

[dflprincess]

143. Only between now and November

after that (if she's reelected) she can go back to representing corporate interests for another 6 years.

[WyLoochka]

148. Howard Dean was right

as always.

We need a "global labor movement in order to raise everyone's boat".

Obviously that includes the backwards backwater backhills area of the world commonly known as the southern US states.

[Clio the Leo]

96. And now we have a Twitter satire account, "Sr. WH Official"

http://twitter.com/SrWHOfficial

(a la the BP one, the name escapes me ATM)

[Kitsune]

97. Looks like organized labor wasted a lot more than that when they supported Obama.

Honestly, I don't understand why Obama has such a mental block towards doing right by the people who gave him the damned job. If he keeps pushing back against his own constituents he's going to have a rough time of it come 2012, even if the Republicans run a complete fruitcake, just because half the people who'd otherwise vote for him will be holding a grudge.

[Tarheel_Dem]

102. So now, some "unnamed source" speaks for Pres. Obama?

Labor unions are of course free to do whatever they want, but as has been noted, labor unions in the South just don't carry that much clout.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

107. you should know by now that everything and anything coming from the WH

is Obama's will :p

Even if its an anonymous source(that we have no clue is actually from the WH yet)

[freddie mertz]

121. Well, who do you think hired that clown?

[HooptieWagon]

136. "unnamed source" = Rahm Emmanuel... that much should be obvious.

[Tarheel_Dem]

139. You can say a lot of things about Rahm, but I don't think he's a coward.

If given the chance, I think he'd make his opinion known "on the record". I realize he's the favorite villain around here, but he's no coward.

[treestar]

118. I don't think he's that dumb

But that you are wrong about who gave him the damn job. It was independents.

[flpoljunkie]

109. Labor, MoveOn from the 'Democratic wing of the Democratic party'--not the 'Corporate wing'

Labor, in particular, works their butts off for the Democratic party--they are the foot soldiers. Not a good idea to dump on them.

[treestar]

112. No, they tried

Arkansas is just too conservative a state, is my estimate. A 50 state plan is good but when it comes to being farther left than a Blue Dog, it may be better to concentrate of states where the progressive might really win, though where there is a real one running I don't know. Sestak does not seem to be one.

[TheKentuckian]

142. Maybe if Big Dawg and leadership didn't rally around Lincoln

then she wouldn't have had a welk's chance in a supernova. How bout that. Y'all need to stop talking like she blew Halter out.

Clinton pulled her fat out of the fire and did union bashing to do it.

[catgirl]

125. This is not a White House statement

but rather an unidentified person connected to the lamenting about the money spent.

[DrToast]

134. The White House doesn't have a right to lament about the money spent. It's not their money

[donco6]

127. Imagine, supporting candidates who support your union's concerns.

But they should use the dues to support people who . . . don't?

:wtf:

[QC]

128. They should do as they are told.

Trust and obey, you know.

[w4rma]

130. DLCers will be **limited** to corporate money. Good. Pick a side DLCers. (nt)

[Thrill]

131. According to Nate. There was no evidence that Halter could win the General Election

I don't understand spending that kind of money on a primary in my opinion anyway.

Especially when Halter would never even commit to supporting Card Check

[DrToast]

135. He was going to be an underdog, but at least he had a chance

Lincoln has no chance.

[HooptieWagon]

137. Hadn't Halter previously won a state-wide race?

Certainly it's not impossible for him to win another, especially against an unpopular incumbent Sen.

[Thrill]

140. But they shouldn't have spent

that kind of money on a guy who wouldn't commit to their main concern as well as a guy who was down almost 40 points to the Repub.

[stevenleser]

141. While I agree with the WH "sources" the fact that any of them would say this to press even off the

record is interminably stupid. There is no reason for it at all. If they want to say it to someone, call up the head of the AFL-CIO and have a chat. There is no reason to call them out publicly like this.

That being said, I love my Unions and will defend them every chance I get, their political decision-making sometimes leaves me shaking my head. They should never get involved in a Democratic primary. Everytime I have seen them do it, it has backfired horribly.

[TheKentuckian]

144. How else are they supposed to influence anything to the benefit of workers

when a Democrat repeatedly acts against their interests? Unless you're saying they should abandon the party or just gleefully accept whatever boon the party might grant while giving over their money and footwork in exchange for some possible crumbs if they play ball?

Shut up and get to work in the fall is hardly democracy in action.

[Dinger]

147. K & R (nt)

[flpoljunkie]

151. Greg Sargent's Plumline: SEIU president Mary Kay Henry: "We'd do it again in a heartbeat."

* New SEIU president Mary Kay Henry, in an interview with Glenn Thrush, tells the White House to stuff it: "We'd do it again in a heartbeat."

* Conversations we wish we'd overheard: Marc Ambinder reports that former SEIU chief Andy Stern called the White House, taking issue with their urinating on unions and telling them to knock it off.

“We worked like hell to get the Senate and we worked like hell to get the White House, and our people are saying, ‘What the hell are we getting out of this?’” said Gerald McEntee, president of AFSCME, which shelled out $3 million to back Halter in Arkansas.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/06/the_morning_plum_28.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38343.html