The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 14:55 last edited by
The PA Steelworkers Unions publicly endorsed Trump at that rally.
Link to video -
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:00 last edited by
860,000 members. That's a lot of votes.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:04 last edited by
@Mik said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
860,000 members. That's a lot of votes.
That are historically Dem.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:31 last edited by
Just curious. HOw effective do you think these union endorsments are for both sides?
Do you think that a large part of the union will vote just because the leadership says that.
(I agree that they may take an internal vote and the majority candidate will be who they endorse)
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:45 last edited by
@Mik said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
860,000 members. That's a lot of votes.
That’s the total across the US and Canada. This was just PA.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:54 last edited by
You think the rest will endorse Harris? I doubt it.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:56 last edited by
If there’s any group that likes protectionism it’s the steelworkers.
-
@Mik said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
860,000 members. That's a lot of votes.
That’s the total across the US and Canada. This was just PA.
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:56 last edited by@jon-nyc said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
@Mik said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
860,000 members. That's a lot of votes.
That’s the total across the US and Canada. This was just PA.
No, that’s around 1.2 Million.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:57 last edited by
If you include retirees.
-
Just curious. HOw effective do you think these union endorsments are for both sides?
Do you think that a large part of the union will vote just because the leadership says that.
(I agree that they may take an internal vote and the majority candidate will be who they endorse)
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 15:59 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
Just curious. HOw effective do you think these union endorsments are for both sides?
Do you think that a large part of the union will vote just because the leadership says that.
(I agree that they may take an internal vote and the majority candidate will be who they endorse)
Historically, the union endorsements were very powerful. It wasn’t too long ago that if the union found out you didn’t go with the flow, you would be spending a couple of months on Workman’s Comp, if you get my drift. In recent years it has been as monolithic and has even forced Union leadership to change their approach.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 17:38 last edited by George K
@jon-nyc said in The Thing Jon et al missed while focusing on Trump and Arnold Palmer’s Package:
If you include retirees.
They vote too.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 18:05 last edited by jon-nyc
Fair enough but theres still nowhere near 800k USW in their PA chapter. They have 850k-ish member and another couple hundred thousand retirees across 13 districts. I have no doubt PA is a large district but no way it’s almost the entire whole.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 18:22 last edited by
About 125K currently employed in the steel industry in PA. Add in another 15K Mineworkers (can’t effectively make steel without coal) that are members of the UMW, which conducted internal polls and decided not to endorse a presidential candidate this year (though they did endorse Casey, and a straight Democratic ticket on the local campaigns). Both the Steelworkers Union and the UMW carry a lot of weight in Pennsylvania beyond their direct members.
-
wrote on 23 Oct 2024, 20:27 last edited by
True that. Had a different point been made my objection wouldn’t have applied. But…