[lbo-talk] WI recall FWIW

James Leveque jamespl79 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 6 06:48:33 PDT 2012


This is, of course, keeping in mind that the Dems were never really a union party to begin with. But I am saying that it's had a functional, if deeply exploitative, relationship with unions. Now it just looks like the party is willing to sacrifice even that relationship.

James

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:41 PM, James Leveque <jamespl79 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Listening to Doug's show this weekend, it really looks like the DNC
> was reluctant to fight this one. Obama never went out to Wisconsin,
> and even with the loss, the state looks like an uphill battle for
> Romney so President Kill-List isn't all that damaged by it. Looking at
> the recall, what also happened in San Diego and San Jose (under
> Democratic governership, no less), and the last couple of years of
> Obama's education reform, which in many ways works as a cover to
> destroy teacher's unions - I'm wondering if the Democrats are looking
> to a post-labor-union period. I ran across a chart on opensecrets.org
> that showed that unions' contributions to the Dems made up only about
> a third - which isn't nothing, but it has been getting smaller over
> the years relative to business/finance, and the DNC has done nothing
> to stop that trend. Given the importance of unions, at least as
> on-the-ground organisers for Dem elections, is it conceivable that the
> party can operate either materially (money and manpower) or
> ideologically ('Of course we're progressive! Look how the unions
> support us!') without any organized labor? Because it really looks
> like the Dems are starting to see themselves a post-union party.
>
> James



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list