> Sobatka sees involvement in "politics" as a
> means to an end, while Stern seems to see it as an end in itself. But
> Sobatka is nevertheless always political because he tries to influence and
> shape political situations that benefit the membership, while Stern just
> wants to make the union a player.
This makes no sense. Stern's electoral engagement is aimed very clearly at building union density and, once a critical mass is reached, using that density to improve existing contracts. (These, by the way, are two things he does very well.) You can bad-mouth his strategy as much as you like, but don't pretend he doesn't have one. It would be impossible to more than double the represented members of the nation's largest union in a little over a decade without it.
-- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað."