222

Summary

Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign failed to connect with low-income workers due to a perceived lack of listening, according to AFL-CIO, the largest federation of labor unions in the US.

While union members largely supported Harris, many low-income voters backed Trump, swayed by his messaging on economic insecurity.

Despite Biden’s pro-labor policies, including infrastructure investments, the AFL-CIO now faces challenges under a likely Trump presidency.

AFL-CIO emphasized labor unions’ resilience and commitment to fighting rollbacks while advancing organizing efforts.

With public approval for unions at a near 60-year high, the labor movement plans both defensive and offensive strategies to protect workers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 54 points 2 days ago

She literally said, "I will go after price gouging," which is 100% the reason prices are so high, but instead, the media focused you on starting a business. The whole price gouging thing was absent from every news article. The only time you heard it was when she spoke live. Absolutely wild.

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 days ago

One of the frustrations was that they would be talking about how the economy was doing great... if you were a homeowner. The inflation was also in things like rent which they have no intent on really addressing, but disproportionately gets omitted from broader stats regarding inflation despite people getting $500+ rent increases shortly after the end of the COVID eviction protections.

[-] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Can you give an example of Kamala saying that? I know Biden did, but I am pretty sure the campaign attempted to avoid this messaging.

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

I don't have a citation for you of Kamala saying exactly that- but yeah that was more a Biden line.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago

This message fell flat. She's the vice president, the message should have been I'm working with the AG now to investigate price to gouging, and will continue that when elected. Also the end result is just the government getting a small settlement check, that means fuck all to people.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Do... You know what the Vice President does? And she should have done all of this while she was campaigning?

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

If the vice president can't be the figurehead of a taskforce in a friendly administration for an important campaign issue, they aren't qualified to be president.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee -3 points 1 day ago

Watch this and you'll understand.

https://youtu.be/DnPmg0R1M04

[-] HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago

The message was weak though. The policy was fairly limited-- like limits on gouging in emergencies-- and not expressed in terms of a tangible achievable metric. And it's not like we have direct economic control that would allow for specific deliverables-- how exactly are you goung to get Kroger to bend the knee? A fine that's 12 seconds of their turnover?

'I'll get the 99-cent Taco Supreme back' (or the $2 gallon of milk/dozen eggs) would have helped-- a graspable specific rallying cry. "We'll tax gougers back into the stone age" maybe too. ISTR there's some rightwing scumball in Canada who achieved most of his political rise by literally campaigning on $1-per-can beer. Again, a tangible goal, and one more achievable because there's direct state controlled alcohol sales in much of the country..

[-] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

How the F does Trump get away with “concepts of a plan” while she should have the exact metrics in place for a very complex new policy. Are you seriously claiming that she would have attracted more voters if only she had been more precise about how to solve price gouging?

[-] HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago

Not necessarily precise, just a more resonant presentation. She didn't have a killer sound bite. If details actually mattered, we'd be in the closing months of the second Warren administration after all.

I literally saw scads of signs saying "Trump - Low Prices/Kamala - High Prices" and one that specifically claimed "Want $2.15 gas, vote Trump." She didn't counter well at the slogan/vibes level. There was no "Harris/Walz/$2-per-pound ground beef" signage.

It's also an audience problem. The Democrats, as incumbents, were stuck with higher expectations. They couldn't pad their numbers with low-hanging "I just want different" and "let's burn it all down" crowds, so they have to chase voters who are harder to activate.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

She literally said, “I will go after price gouging,” which is 100% the reason prices are so high

Right. She also said she wouldn't do anything different from Biden. Whose public-facing opposition to price gouging consisted of "knock it off, guys"

[-] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Harris: 'i will go after price gouging by firing the person actively going after companies price gouging...' and you believed her? 🫨🫠😮‍💨

this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
222 points (93.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2503 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