19 thoughts on “AFSCME Endorses Hillary Clinton for President”

1. I wonder if Edwards thinks they should be required to get rid of their lobbyists?

   Log in to Reply

2. I don’t know AFSCME’s internal polling results, but I note a distinct lack of anywhere in that statement that said that Clinton received the most support from the rank-and-file.

   Log in to Reply

   1. Has AFSCME not seen Hillary’s ties to and contributions from… WAL-MART!

      Log in to Reply

      1. If they can get over it why can’t you? 

         Log in to Reply

         1. I’ve down more for the movement than I’m sure you’d like to think.

            Explain to me why someome who served on the board of directors of WAL-MART, and has received more money from WAL-MART than any other candidate (rep. or dem.), just received one of the biggest Union endorsements?

            Log in to Reply

            1. because union leaders are out for what they can get for themselves and the workers be hanged?

               Log in to Reply

               1. I said why did AFSCME endorse, not why did WAL-MART endorse. Re-read my comments and it might help clear up that distinction.

                  Log in to Reply

3. Working stiffs who think Clinton will stick up for them instead of big health, big insurance, big business and  the  military industrial machine, from whom she hauls in more money than any other candidate, are seriously deluded. 

   If a male candidate had Hillary’s voting record, record of supporting NAFTA with no protections for American or foreign workers, record of supporting neocon legislation in the rush to war in Iraq and now in Iran, her fondness for secrecy on a par with Dick Cheney’s, no progressive Dem would be supporting that candidate.

   What have the unions come to?  Edwards is clearly the best friend American workers have in the field.

   Just asked AFSCME to unsubscribe me from their mailing list

   Log in to Reply

   1. Hehehehehe.

      This is the best entertainment I’ve had all day. Thanks.

      Log in to Reply

   2. from The NY Times

      “We looked for the candidate who will fight for working families and who has the greatest ability to win,” Mr. McEntee said.

      One official who attended today’s board meeting said 23 board members had voted to endorse Mrs. Clinton while 10 voted for other candidates or for no endorsement. At the meeting several officials argued against backing Mrs. Clinton, saying that she would have trouble beating a Republican in November 2008 because her negatives are so high.

      and to be clear:

      Mr. McEntee and his union were somewhat embarrassed in 2004 after they endorsed Howard Dean early on, only to see him fade quickly. Mr. McEntee said he would make sure that in this election his union’s leadership would not get too far out in front of its rank and file if and when it endorsed someone in the presidential primary.

      Who thinks they just stepped out in front of its rank and file?

      Log in to Reply

   3. this endorsement is bandwagoneering for Hillary. 

      Log in to Reply

      1. but that didn’t make a difference with these guys.  They are just voting with who they think will win.

         Log in to Reply
         1. Log in to Reply

         2. …And what will Hillary do for them when she’s in the WH?

            A big “nada.”

            Another example of labor shooting itself in the foot.  Instead of endorsing and helping fund and elect John Edwards, they just jump on the perceived winner bandwagon.

            It would be interesting to know where the rank and file is putting its money.

            They deserve the lack of audience that they will get. 

            Log in to Reply

            1. Some people support candidates because the people think the candidate will vote well.  Other people think the candidates will vote well because the people supported them.  Of course, the second category tend to be politically powerful already… which is exactly the case here.

               And who could blame them?  It’s not like they are endorsing a principled candidate who speaks up against the influence of money and powerful special interests in politics.  No, that would be Obama, with Edwards in second place.  Clinton is advertising that she’ll let herself be influenced by powerful lobby groups; she’s picked her battle in trying to distinguish between the good lobbyists and the bad ones.  Unions will certainly fall into the first category, and they can continue to play money politics.

               Log in to Reply
               1. Log in to Reply

   4. This endorsement, combined with the recent endorsement of corrupt machine-dem Congressman Al Wynn (D-MD), shows that AFSCME isn’t terribly interested in the interests of its members right now.

      Mr. McEntee says of challengers within the Democratic Party:

      I’m the sheriff of the incumbent-protection program, and if you need help, let me know. In Blue America, there’s no room for PACs to chase vulnerable members they have differences with.

      Yep, the AFSCME leadership is firmly in the incumbent-protection business, and nevermind what’s best for the country or district.

      This is why union dues should be separate from union political funds, just as corporate money should be separate from their employees’ political donations.

      Log in to Reply

4. How desperate is Labor to endorse the least Labor-friendly candidate so early on, just because it looks like she’s got the nomination locked up.

   Log in to Reply

   1. Focus on the Family endorsing Giuliani, which hasn’t happened… yet, but when it does…

      Log in to Reply