Is anyone really surprised that Unions would back a Trump candidacy?
Granted, it's tiny New England, but the move is representative of a bigger elusive issue, that being Marxism and organized crime via Unions.
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/police-union-stands-with-trump-next-president-of-the-united-states/
A New England police union is poised to formally throw its support behind Republican front runner Donald Trump at an event in New Hampshire Thursday.
Trump FlynnThe New England Police Benevolent Association will be holding a "presidential candidate's forum" in Portsmouth tomorrow night for the purposes of endorsing a candidate. Donald Trump is scheduled to appear, his campaign tells Seacoast Online.
According to NEPBA executive director Jerry Flynn, the union will be endorsing Trump, "or no one."
But if Flynn's personal Facebook page is any indication, the regional union will be standing with The Donald.
There, Flynn wrote Trump would be "The NEXT president of the United States of America," after a meeting with him in New York City December 1.
Flynn says he and three other union executives met with Trump in Manhattan as a part of a vetting process. After the meeting, Flynn said Trump has an "interesting vision for protecting police officers and correction officers on what he will do on his first day in office."
The NEPBA sent a letter to all the candidates inviting them to participate in the candidates' forum and only two committed: Trump and Jeb Bush. But then Bush backed out.
Quote
The NEPBA sent a letter to all the candidates inviting them to participate in the candidates' forum and only two committed: Trump and Jeb Bush. But then Bush backed out.
"In fact, the New England PBA will NOT endorse any candidate who does NOT personally attend our candidate forum," Flynn wrote to the candidates, according to the news site.
He wins the endorsement because he's the only one who showed up. :lol:
Quote from: mhughes on December 09, 2015, 06:39:32 AM
He wins the endorsement because he's the only one who showed up. :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Damn, you weren't supposed to notice that move of desperation.
An anecdote from history.
While the Industrial Revolution was creating hundreds of very rich men, much more important politically, it was creations millions among the working class w/a rapidly rising standard of living. Both Teddy Roosevelt and Samuel Gompers/AF of L; which then represented the craft unions (carpenters, electricians, masons, plumbers ect.), were personal friends. They grasped this and understood non-socialist Labor to be a natural Republican constituency. Roosevelt stated publicly that;" The Republican Party does not belong to the Corporations nor to Wall Street. It is the Party of Lincoln and of plain people." But the election of Taft in 1909, a big government corporatist, ended that potential alliance. Then w/the election of FDR in '32, Labor never looked back.
Regardless of the number of Trump's warts, he is an icon breaker; who has traumatized the establishment and galvanized the electorate, most critically among the 40% of the disaffected who longer vote. Dismissing him is beyond rash.
Quote from: Walter Josh on December 09, 2015, 10:01:30 AM
An anecdote from history.
While the Industrial Revolution was creating hundreds of very rich men, much more important politically, it was creations millions among the working class w/a rapidly rising standard of living. Both Teddy Roosevelt and Samuel Gompers/AF of L; which then represented the craft unions (carpenters, electricians, masons, plumbers ect.), were personal friends. They grasped this and understood non-socialist Labor to be a natural Republican constituency. Roosevelt stated publicly that;" The Republican Party does not belong to the Corporations nor to Wall Street. It is the Party of Lincoln and of plain people." But the election of Taft in 1909, a big government corporatist, ended that potential alliance. Then w/the election of FDR in '32, Labor never looked back.
Regardless of the number of Trump's warts, he is an icon breaker; who has traumatized the establishment and galvanized the electorate, most critically among the 40% of the disaffected who longer vote. Dismissing him is beyond rash.
Who is dismissing him?
My reference was to R establishment types not Tea Partyers.