We’d make him a king. How amazing would that be?
2 Likes
Yeah, I get that, and that’s not my concern at all. What would be prompting me to leave is the notion that the state party (either party, since Joe was historically D, seems to be open to R or independent) has such a narrow bench that yet another D list celeb seems to be taken seriously. That’s a deeply scary place to be, especially since NJ seems to be intentionally electing blue legislatures and red governors – that sounds like intentional gridlock. California got relatively lucky with Ahhhnold, but Ventura was not good for Minnesota, and well… The Mango Mendacity. NJ doesn’t have a weak Gov system like Texas, so the governor matters a lot more.
I watch the bench problem a lot in my home state. It’s getting pretty dire, on both sides, in multiple states.
2 Likes
My sense on the ground is that Christy has burned the majority of GOP good will. No well meaning clown is going walk away with the Governorship.
Independent campaigns by well- (or ill-) intentioned but profoundly ignorant of process candidates with name recognition. Hm. Ross Perot. Jesse Ventura. Various spoilers whose goals are to punish the party that’s not ideologically pure enough. Because this ends well so very often. And Independents often have a problem with the concept of dancing with them that brung 'em – they either won’t at all, or do nothing but. Neither of which is actually healthy for a representative government.
I hate FPTP, and would give an arm for instant runoff. I’d give up both legs for a parliamentary system. But the system we have is the one we have to deal with. Given the R good will is toast, that means Indys have a real shot.
1 Like
I’ve lived in Mass for my entire (now, rather longish) life. I have no idea what this statement means? The Democratic party in Ma. is entrenched. That’s problematic. Bound to get a backlash.
Deval Patrick’s answer to everything was, “more casinos”. Not exactly inspiring to potential Democrat voters.
In fact, the Democratic party in this blue state is so complacent that they don’t even try to represent the vast majority of working people or their interests. How this is because of trade union pressure is puzzling to me. I’m a member of a union. It’s never been weaker. There is no support for the working class here, as with the national Democratic party. Maybe you’re referring to public unions? They’re in give-back mode too.
What the fuck are you talking about?
1 Like
i tried to say something ridiculous about this process of the cops being able to steal, make a joke about it . . . but it made me sadder and sadder as I wrote things . . . 
I wish we could help our Cousins get free of this crowd, it is a damned crying shame that America of all places is . . . evaporating away into thin air.
1 Like
Many unions are corrupt as hell. That is public knowledge.
As you’re in “what the fuck??” mode, I’m not interested in discussing it further, sorry. It’s pretty self explanatory.
1 Like
How does this protect the police?It harms citizens a lot more. It is so easy to have money and property seized with this law. It breaks basic rights of Americans.“innocent till proven guilty” and the illegal seizure of property. Police and Pros. abuse this law and fill their budgets. Everything Chris Christie does at this point is to get favor with Trump and obtain a position in this admin.as their previous picks are dumped.Christie has become a desperate, spineless mass of obsequious jelly.
3 Likes
Tying that to your original statement explains nothing. “we often end up with Republican governors because the trade unions here are so widely corrupt”
I gave a few explanations why Charlie Baker is the governor. Blaming unions, especially in the way you did is just flinging poo against the wall. I don’t care if you dismiss me, but you are not making any sort of a viable point.
1 Like
I disagree. I made my point very directly and clearly. Let me repeat it.
• Our trade unions are quite corrupt.
• Many of our Democratic elected officials have been closely tied to trade unions.
• When those Democratic elected officials come into office, people realize how lousy it is to have an elected official who is corrupt.
• Then they elect a Republican who isn’t a staunch union supporter.
This isn’t a hard-and-fast rule, it’s just something that tends to happen here and other places.
I just have to say, though, that your response to me saying that there’s a lot of union corruption – “Hey! I’m in the union! What the fuck are you talking about?” – is about the most Bostonian response ever, so thank you for that.
2 Likes
[quote=“Kirk, post:48, topic:95047”]
How does this protect the police?
Police and Pros. abuse this law and fill their budgets.
[/quote] Asked and answered, councillor. Got it in one.
3 Likes
Our trade unions? What union is yours? Anyway, it’s a blanket statement without any support other than “I say so”. Not much of an argument. If you are going to state this, and it isn’t obvious to anyone except you, you ought to give some background. For instance, some example of how our corrupt unions use their corrupt methods to corrupt the Democratic party that leads the “people” to decide that the Democrats lost the gubernatorial race because the Democrats are so corrupted by unions that they don’t deserve to win elections. If you think you made that point clearly, then it’s time to go back to school.
Ducks float on water. Wood floats on water, Ducks are made of wood. . How this sort of reasoning leads you to make a statement that you regard as direct and clear regarding that the Democrats lose elections because of corrupt unions, which you infer are unbelievably corrupting power brokers seems to me to be muddled thinking. Given that union membership is at a post WWII low and really are extremely weak now compared to any other time since WWII, I think it’s a hard sell.
Yeah, they respond to perceptions of corruption. I agree. For instance Deval Patrick had a one word answer for any issue, “casinos!”. I don’t recall him pushing new union strengthening or union giveaway legislation, Maybe Charlie Baker got elected because the Democrats weren’t responsive to their constituents needs and actually only represented themselves and their monied interests. I just don’t see any union today that has any comparable power. They sure do gets lots of blame though from ideologues.
Then they elect a Republican who isn’t a Democrat.
Western Mass here. I didn’t limit my response to you to,“Hey! I’m in the union! What the fuck are you talking about?”. I really gave you a lot more meat about why I thought you were wrong and also why the Democrats lose elections than you put out. And you’re a pretty dismissive person considering how much more thought I put into my response to you than you originally stated and then replied to me. You could strengthen your argument quite a bit by actually fleshing out what was just some weak blanket statements.
2 Likes
As a western Mass resident, you are apparently unaware of the blatant and thorough corruption in the Boston trade unions.
And that’s why, again, I’m not interesting in debating with you, thank you.
2 Likes
I don’t know… seems like you’re being a bit reductive here with regards to unions. Is there corruption - you bet, as is the case in any large-scale organization (governments, corporations, religious organizations, hell, even PTOs can be corrupt). But it’s also pretty undeniable that union membership is correlated with some real world positives for people (both union members and non-union employees). These are real positives that we can point to that would not exist if it were up to the corporations. A corrupt union might be compromised, but they also often still bring in the goods for their members in ways that are reflected in their daily lives. Most anti-union movements come from the elites, because a union means that they have to deal with a large organization rather than an individual worker - who they can play off others to their benefit.
Corruption doesn’t necessarily mean that an entire mode of organizing should be thrown out the window - and of course, many of the people looking to take down labor unions are also themselves involved in various kinds of corruption. We might as well say “governments are corrupt as hell” and just summarily ignore the very real good that a government can do for people. An end to unions would mean an end to secure employment with living wages and safe working environments. We can see that in places where there is little to no union membership. they come in with good promises, but often fail to deliver a decent wage, benefits, or retirement for their employees, especially when the employees have nowhere else to go to work.
[ETA] As for this leading to the election of more Republicans? I’d say that might be part of the story, but it’s not all of it. The democrats have essentially paid lip service to unions for a while now and have not really brought about real benefits for unions for a long time. Additionally racism and “cultural” issues play a role in making republicans more attractive - I doubt that many of the union members who voted for Reagan on the basis of cultural issues (and race, gender, etc) imagined that the union’s power would be eroded so much in the next few decades. Unions (in many places) were just a fact of life among blue collar workers for decades and were something that they just took for granted. Much like many people who probably do care about clean air and water are now taking it for granted that it just will exist and we don’t need the EPA, because it’s already done it’s job.
4 Likes
Don’t get me wrong; I have no problem with unions in general, unionization, or organizing of workers as a concept, by any means. It’s had massively positive impact on the workplace and how workers are treated.
I’m specifically talking about the notoriously corrupt builders and Teamsters unions here in Boston. I’ve had so many conversations with local businesses, restaurants or little shops, who were routinely delayed in opening their stores when union inspectors would bribe them on site, demanding payments to get permits approved. “Well, I don’t like the look of that door. I can overlook it for a hundred bucks, or else your place won’t open for another three months.” That kind of thing.
Things really came to a head locally when Top Chef filmed a season locally and brought their own crew of set builders in. Teamsters picketed, then started harassing the crew, slashing tires, and physically intimidating people. One restaurant cancelled shooting when an anonymous call told them the non-union crew would get beaten up and there’d be violence. That call was traced to the Mayor’s office – and the mayor is an ex-Teamster head. It’s been messy.
2 Likes
Have the meatloaf.
1 Like
1 Like
While I certainly don’t back intimidation tactics, bringing in an outside crew is genuine union busting.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
