this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
37 points (78.5% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2710 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Veedem@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Majority of large union supports candidate who has been clearly against unions.

Makes sense.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

“Neither major candidate was able to make serious commitments to our union to ensure the interests of working people are always put before Big Business,” Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien said in a statement.

He added, “We sought commitments from both [former president Donald] Trump and [Vice President Kamala] Harris not to interfere in critical union campaigns or core Teamsters industries—and to honor our members’ right to strike—but were unable to secure those pledges.”

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you don't withhold your vote if you don't get the concessions you need, you're not doing democracy right. Candidates are supposed to compete for your interests, not take your vote for granted while getting donations from big business.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not remotely related to what they said.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Neither major candidate was able to make serious commitments to our union to ensure the interests of working people are always put before Big Business," Teamsters General President Sean O'Brien said in a statement.

If you don't get concessions, why endorse? They'll take the votes and the corporate money and keep starving the NLRB of resources.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

If you're not going to make a point related to the comment you responded to, why comment?

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

Always worth mentioning amid the Teamsters dialogue: Kamala Harris was the Senate's tie-breaking vote on an $86 billion pension rescue that benefited the Teamsters more than any other union.

[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

She's female. It's probably that simple for many of them sadly.

Harris campaign spokesperson Lauren Hitt pointed to local Teamsters chapters that endorsed the vice president.

Suspect these are Dem-heavy areas.

In an email Wednesday, the Trump campaign highlighted the Teamsters polling.

I wonder if this is one of the underlying reasons why leadership at the top of the union declined to endorse.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for NBC News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/teamsters-union-declines-endorse-presidential-election-breaking-decade-rcna171711
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support