AFL-CIO dropping donations to Obama - Hey 240 - "Did Wisconsin matter"

[Soul Crusher]

AFL-CIO Pulling Funds From Obama Campaign
 U.S. News & World Report ^ | Wednesday, June 13, 2012 | Elizabeth Flock




The AFL-CIO has told Washington Whispers it will redeploy funds away from political candidates smack dab in the middle of election season, the latest sign that the largest federation of unions in the country could be becoming increasingly disillusioned with President Obama.

The federation says the shift has been in the works for months, and had nothing to do with the president's failure to show in Wisconsin last week, where labor unions led a failed recall election of Governor Scott Walker.

"We wanted to start investing our funds in our own infrastructure and advocacy," AFL-CIO spokesman Josh Goldstein told Whispers. "There will be less contributions to candidates," including President Obama.

While there were "a lot of different opinions" about whether Obama should have gone to Wisconsin, according to Goldstein, "this is not a slight at the president."


(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...


________________________ ______________________

Wow , just wow. 

[MCWAY]

AFL-CIO Pulling Funds From Obama Campaign
 U.S. News & World Report ^ | Wednesday, June 13, 2012 | Elizabeth Flock




The AFL-CIO has told Washington Whispers it will redeploy funds away from political candidates smack dab in the middle of election season, the latest sign that the largest federation of unions in the country could be becoming increasingly disillusioned with President Obama.

The federation says the shift has been in the works for months, and had nothing to do with the president's failure to show in Wisconsin last week, where labor unions led a failed recall election of Governor Scott Walker.

"We wanted to start investing our funds in our own infrastructure and advocacy," AFL-CIO spokesman Josh Goldstein told Whispers. "There will be less contributions to candidates," including President Obama.

While there were "a lot of different opinions" about whether Obama should have gone to Wisconsin, according to Goldstein, "this is not a slight at the president."


(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...


________________________ ______________________

Wow , just wow.  

Not a slight on the President.......RRRRRRRR IIIIIIIIGHTT!!!!

Maybe, they're just too busy with other stuff.

[Straw Man]

AFL-CIO Pulling Funds From Obama Campaign
 U.S. News & World Report ^ | Wednesday, June 13, 2012 | Elizabeth Flock




The AFL-CIO has told Washington Whispers it will redeploy funds away from political candidates smack dab in the middle of election season, the latest sign that the largest federation of unions in the country could be becoming increasingly disillusioned with President Obama.

The federation says the shift has been in the works for months, and had nothing to do with the president's failure to show in Wisconsin last week, where labor unions led a failed recall election of Governor Scott Walker.

"We wanted to start investing our funds in our own infrastructure and advocacy," AFL-CIO spokesman Josh Goldstein told Whispers. "There will be less contributions to candidates," including President Obama.

While there were "a lot of different opinions" about whether Obama should have gone to Wisconsin, according to Goldstein, "this is not a slight at the president."


(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...


________________________ ______________________

Wow , just wow. 

do you even read the stuff you post before making your titles

[Soul Crusher]

do you even read the stuff you post before making your titles

What else are they going to say?

[Straw Man]

What else are they going to say?

they could say it's because they think Obama didn't support them

Why not say that if it were in fact the case ?

Did it ever occur to your that their ranks are decimated since being stripped of their right to collectlvely bargain and maybe they have a lot less money to spend and want to spend it in a way that gives them the most return

[Soul Crusher]

they could say it's because they think Obama didn't support them

Why not say that if it were in fact the case ?

Did it ever occur to your that their ranks are decimated since being stripped of their right to collectlvely bargain and maybe they have a lot less money to spend and want to spend it in a way that gives them the most return

Or maybe that Obama's failed economy has resulted in less work for its members? 

[MCWAY]

they could say it's because they think Obama didn't support them

Why not say that if it were in fact the case ?

For the same reason, Obama was too busy with stuff.

Did it ever occur to your that their ranks are decimated since being stripped of their right to collectlvely bargain and maybe they have a lot less money to spend and want to spend it in a way that gives them the most return

Their ranks are decimated because (at least in Wisconsin), people are no longer FORCED to join or have their dues yanked from them.

[Straw Man]

Or maybe that Obama's failed economy has resulted in less work for its members? 

that could be part of it too

doesn't change the fact that they have less $'s to spend and have said this reduction in funds was planned for months and had nothing to do with Obama not coming to Wisconsin

why lie about it?

If they were pissed at Obama why would they not say so

Your belief makes no sense?

[Soul Crusher]

that could be part of it too

doesn't change the fact that they have less $'s to spend and have said this reduction in funds was planned for months and had nothing to do with Obama not coming to Wisconsin

why lie about it?

If they were pissed at Obama why would they not say so

Your belief makes no sense?

Because they still have to rely on demos in the senate and house - vice versa

[Straw Man]

For the same reason, Obama was too busy with stuff.

this makes no sense

why would Obama being "too busy" prevent them from telling the "truth" as believed by 333.

Their ranks are decimated because (at least in Wisconsin), people are no longer FORCED to join or have their dues yanked from them.

why pay dues when your Union can't actually bargain on your behalf

[Straw Man]

Because they still have to rely on demos in the senate and house - vice versa

so what

again, they have less $'s to spend and choosing the most effective what to spend it

their stated reason makes perfect sense given the drop in funds:

"We wanted to start investing our funds in our own infrastructure and advocacy," AFL-CIO spokesman Josh Goldstein told Whispers. "There will be less contributions to candidates," including President Obama.

no need to create a CT

unless of course you're the dumbest lawyer on the planet and your world revolves about make believe outrage and ridiculous CT's

[Soul Crusher]

so what

again, they have less $'s to spend and choosing the most effective what to spend it

their stated reason makes perfect sense given the drop in funds:

no need to create a CT

unless of course you're the dumbest lawyer on the planet and your world revolves about make believe outrage and ridiculous CT's

Yeah, timing is of no consequence here whatsoever.   

[MCWAY]

this makes no sense

why would Obama being "too busy" prevent them from telling the "truth" as believed by 333.

It's called a facade. Obama has to pretend that he was too busy to stop in Wisconsin (even though he had half a dozen fundraisers in neighboring states). Now, the unions have to pretend that they can't back Obama, SOLELY or PRIMARILY because their funds are low. I don't doubt that they are and that this indeed has been in the works for months.

But, Obama hasn't stuck up for them in months (or years). So, why should they waste what little money they have left on a guy, so scared to be associated with them in defeat that he sends a half-hearted tweet, while they faced the biggest showdown of their lives and went down in flames.

why pay dues when your Union can't actually bargain on your behalf

Union dues, at least in the public-sector ones, are taken automatically. The members have no choice. That is, until Walker did his thing.

The membership in Wisconsin's public-sector unions have dropped by nearly 60% since Walker implemented this law of his.

[Soul Crusher]

Now union members are deserting Obama
 Washington Examiner ^ | 6-12-12 | Paul Bedard


Two new and disturbing polls just out suggest that the road to reelection is getting tougher for President Obama.

In the most significant, Gallup found that union member support for the president is weaker than it was on Election Day. While Obama took 67 of the union vote, according to 2008 election night polling by Peter Hart for the AFL-CIO, Gallup discovered that just 58 percent of union members back the president now. Some 35 percent support Mitt Romney, 5 percent more than Sen. John McCain won in 2008.

Gallup said the union vote is a significant block for Obama, though, “their impact on the presidential race will be limited by their size -- just about 12% of employed voters are union members.”

Rasmussen Reports, found that a majority of likely American voters -- 60 percent -- believe that it is at least somewhat likely that the next president will be a Republican, including 34% who see this scenario as very likely. Among Democrats, 35 percent of likely voters also said Obama would be followed by a Republican.

Rasmussen said that when Obama first took office, just 44 percent thought a Republican would replace him

[Straw Man]

Yeah, timing is of no consequence here whatsoever.   

so says the source in the article

much ado about nothing

just like virtually all of your posts

[MCWAY]

so says the source in the article

much ado about nothing

just like virtually all of your posts

Obama losing significant chunks of the CORE of his base? Much ado about nothing?

[Straw Man]

It's called a facade. Obama has to pretend that he was too busy to stop in Wisconsin (even though he had half a dozen fundraisers in neighboring states). Now, the unions have to pretend that they can't back Obama, SOLELY or PRIMARILY because their funds are low. I don't doubt that they are and that this indeed has been in the works for months.

But, Obama hasn't stuck up for them in months (or years). So, why should they waste what little money they have left on a guy, so scared to be associated with them in defeat that he sends a half-hearted tweet, while they faced the biggest showdown of their lives and went down in flames.



Union dues, at least in the public-sector ones, are taken automatically. The members have no choice. That is, until Walker did his thing.

The membership in Wisconsin's public-sector unions have dropped by nearly 60% since Walker implemented this law of his.

I guess they knew back on March 14th that Obama wasn't going to come to Wisconsi in June for a recall election that didn't even exist yet?

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Labor unions, saying they can’t hope to compete with the new breed of conservative fundraising groups, plan to spend less money this year on specific candidates and political party organizations and more on door-to-door canvassing, phone banks and registration drives to help President Barack Obama and other Democrats.

The shift, outlined at the AFL-CIO’s annual executive council meeting near Disney World, marks a change from two years ago, when roughly two-thirds of organized labor’s campaign spending went to political parties and candidates.

“We’re not going to ever raise anything like the kind of money that our opponents have,” said AFL-CIO political director Mike Podhorzer. “But the power of people talking to each other, friends talking to friends, friends talking to neighbors is always going to trump these cheap negative ads.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/14/afl-cio-boosts-ground-support-for-obama-democrats-2/#ixzz1xhcuM8dD

[240 is Back]

yeah, he's plummeted to 50% on gallup, and lead/tied with romney in every national poll.   scared shitless, i'm betting.

[MCWAY]

yeah, he's plummeted to 50% on gallup, and lead/tied with romney in every national poll.   scared shitless, i'm betting.

Your poll might be a bit dated. Gallup currently has him at 46, Rasmussen at 44.

[MCWAY]

I guess they knew back on March 14th that Obama wasn't going to come to Wisconsi in June for a recall election that didn't even exist yet?

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/14/afl-cio-boosts-ground-support-for-obama-democrats-2/#ixzz1xhcuM8dD

As I said, Obama hasn't backed them for months. And, they're low on money because their members are fleeing. Therefore, they're not going to spend their money frivolously. Blowing cash on a guy, who's MIA when the unions need him most, would qualify as frivolous spending.

[Straw Man]

As I said, Obama hasn't backed them for months. And, they're low on money because their members are fleeing. Therefore, they're not going to spend their money frivolously. Blowing cash on a guy, who's MIA when the unions need him most, would qualify as frivolous spending.

pathetic attempt at backpedaling

How about just reading the article from March of 2012

here's a salient excerpt that shows how mad they are at Obama for not coming to stump for their candidate in June (even though they wrote it in March)

plan to spend less money this year on specific candidates and political party organizations and more on door-to-door canvassing, phone banks and registration drives to help President Barack Obama and other Democrats.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/14/afl-cio-boosts-ground-support-for-obama-democrats-2/#ixzz1xhi3UQEx

[240 is Back]

Your poll might be a bit dated. Gallup currently has him at 46, Rasmussen at 44.

he was at 50 yesterday.  i dont check it daily.  obama only lets us play online 3x a week.  The rest of the time, we're knitting protest signs or occupying an abortion clinic.

[polychronopolous]

he was at 50 yesterday.  i dont check it daily.  obama only lets us play online 3x a week.  The rest of the time, we're knitting protest signs or occupying an abortion clinic.

50 percent is an absolute pipedream for Obama at this point. You can't seriously believe that number....

[MCWAY]

pathetic attempt at backpedaling

How about just reading the article from March of 2012

here's a salient excerpt that shows how mad they are at Obama for not coming to stump for their candidate in June (even though they wrote it in March)



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/14/afl-cio-boosts-ground-support-for-obama-democrats-2/#ixzz1xhi3UQEx

What backpedalling? Did you not read what I said earlier?

I don't doubt that they are and that this indeed has been in the works for months.

How exactly are they going to do more door-to-door canvassing, phone banks, and registrations WITH FEWER MEMBERS AND LESS CASH?

Those things take people and money and the unions are low on both. And, with Obama going MIA in Wisconsin, their motivation to give him money just DROPPED further.

As for their claim that they fear they can't compete with conservatives in raising money, I don't buy that one bit. Since when have unions been afraid of being outspent?

[Straw Man]

What backpedalling? Did you not read what I said earlier?

I don't doubt that they are and that this indeed has been in the works for months.

How exactly are they going to do more door-to-door canvassing, phone banks, and registrations WITH FEWER MEMBERS AND LESS CASH?

Those things take people and money and the unions are low on both. And, with Obama going MIA in Wisconsin, their motivation to give him money just DROPPED further.

pay attention:

plan to spend less money this year on specific candidates and political party organizations and more on door-to-door canvassing, phone banks and registration drives to help President Barack Obama and other Democrats