Reading through the ambiguous to vaguely positive remarks made by Republican pols about the historic auto workers strike, one of them jumped off the page, and I wrote about it at New York:
One of the great anomalies of recent political history has been the disconnect between the Republican Party’s ancient legacy as the champion of corporate America and its current electoral base, which relies heavily on support from white working-class voters. The growing contradiction was first made a major topic of debate in the 2008 manifesto Grand New Party, in which youngish conservative intellectuals Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam argued that their party offered little in the way of material inducements (or even supportive rhetoric) to its emerging electoral base. Though Douthat and Salam were by no means fans of Donald Trump, the mogul’s stunningly successful 2016 campaign did follow their basic prescription of pursuing the economic and cultural instincts of white working-class voters at the expense of doctrinaire free-market and limited-government orthodoxy.
So it’s not surprising that Trump and an assortment of other Republicans have expressed varying degrees of sympathy for the unionized autoworkers who just launched a historic industry-wide strike for better wages and working conditions. But there was a conspicuous, even anachronistic exception among nationally prominent GOP politicians: South Carolina senator and presidential candidate Tim Scott. As NBC News reported:
“It’s the latest of several critical comments Scott has made about the autoworkers, even as other GOP presidential candidates steer clear of criticizing them amid a strike at three plants so far …
“’I think Ronald Reagan gave us a great example when federal employees decided they were going to strike. He said, you strike, you’re fired. Simple concept to me. To the extent that we can use that once again, absolutely.’”
Scott’s frank embrace of old-school union bashing wouldn’t have drawn much notice 40 or 50 years ago. And to be clear, other Republicans aren’t fans of the labor movement: For the most part, MAGA Republicans appeal to the working class via a mix of cultural conservatism, economic and foreign-policy nationalism, nativism, and producerism (i.e., pitting private-sector employers and employees against the financial sector, educational elites, and those dependent on public employment or assistance). One particularly rich lode of ostensibly pro-worker rhetoric has been to treat environmental activism as inimical to the economic growth and specific job opportunities wage earners need.
So unsurprisingly, Republican politicians who want to show some sympathy for the autoworkers have mostly focused on the alleged threat of climate-change regulations generally and electric vehicles specifically to the well-being of UAW members, as Politico reported:
“’This green agenda that is using taxpayer dollars to drive our automotive economy into electric vehicles is understandably causing great anxiety among UAW members,’ [Mike Pence] said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
“Other Republicans followed suit, with a National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesperson calling out Michigan Democratic Rep. Elissa Slotkin — Democrats’ favored candidate for the state’s open Senate seat — for her Thursday vote allowing state-level limits or bans on gas-powered cars as choosing her ‘party over Michigan.'”
More strikingly, Trump, the 2024 presidential front-runner, is planning to hold an event with Michigan workers at the very moment his GOP rivals are holding their second debate next week, notes the Washington Post:
“While other Republican candidates participate in the Sept. 27 event in California, Trump instead plans to speak to more than 500 autoworkers, plumbers, electricians and pipe-fitters, the adviser said. The group is likely to include workers from the United Auto Workers union that is striking against the Big Three automakers in the country’s Rust Belt. The Trump adviser added that it is unclear whether the former president will visit the strike line.
“Trump’s campaign also created a radio ad, to run on sports- and rock-themed stations in Detroit and Toledo, meant to present him as being on the side of striking autoworkers, the adviser said.”
There’s no evidence Trump has any understanding of, much less sympathy with, the strikers’ actual demands. But in contrast to Scott’s remarks endorsing the dismissal of striking workers, it shows that at least some Republicans are willing (rhetorically, at least) to bite the hand that feeds in the pursuit of votes.
Meanwhile, the mainstream-media types who often treat Scott as some sort of sunny, optimistic, even bipartisan breath of fresh air should pay some attention to his attitude toward workers exercising long-established labor rights he apparently would love to discard. Yes, as a self-styled champion of using taxpayer dollars to subsidize private- and homeschooling at the expense of “government schools,” Scott is constantly attacking teachers unions, just like many Republicans who draw a sharp distinction between public-sector unions (BAD!) and private-sector unions (grudgingly acceptable). But autoworkers are firmly in the private sector. Maybe it’s a South Carolina thing: Scott’s presidential rival and past political ally Nikki Haley (another media favorite with an unmerited reputation as a moderate) famously told corporate investors to stay out of her state if they intended to tolerate unions in their workplaces. For that matter, the South Carolina Republican Party was for years pretty much a wholly owned subsidiary of violently anti-union textile barons. Some old habits die hard.
One of the useful by-products of the current wave of labor activism in this country is that Republicans may be forced to extend their alleged sympathy for workers into support for policies that actually help them and don’t simply reflect cheap reactionary demagoguery aimed at foreigners, immigrants, and people of color. But Scott has flunked the most basic test threshold compatibility with the rights and interests of the working class.
I think it is hilarious that some of you wannabe trolls are picking on Ron Reagan. He inherited the best of his father in that he can put more than two words together and make sense. And hell, let’s face it, w is an idiot who can’t think or speak. DUH!
Well, the Wall Street Journal gets it right, and CBS falls flat on its face (in multiple ways.) Perhaps it’s time to rethink our assumptions about what media to trust.
Traditionally, I have viewed Gallup as the most authoritative poll, based on tradition and its constant polling on many subjects (not just politics). But after reading about their LV projections, I don’t think I can do that anymore, at least for this election season, unless they change the formula. Guesswork is always unreliable, but the disproportionate overweighting of the GOP vote (or underweighting of the Democratic vote) means that their polls should be viewed as overstating the Republican vote by several points (maybe this explains Kerry’s Gallup non-bounce after the Dem convention.) And if the parties were reversed and Gallup (or anyone else) used an LV sample with considerably more Democrats than the general population, then that result should be discounted too, as much as many of us on here would like to believe otherwise.
LD,
Read the article in the New Zealand newspaper, you’ll see where my criticism originates. As far as Ron Jr., this guy is such a loser that he trades on his good name but dishonors his fathers strongly held befiefs.
Yeah, everyone can form their own opinions but it’s kind of sad to see a teenage rebellion from a guy that’s in his 40’s. My point about his looks, is that he sure didn’t get the MSNBC gig because of any qualifications most TV personalities must have. He has no background in news, he is not handsome in the traditional sense, and he obviously has an axe to grind (which NBC is all too happy to indulge).
Jeez, you fat chicks are so sensitive!
4 More Years!
RUY ROCKS!
I think it is time for everyone to completely ignore BJ. When he has to stoop to criticizing an opinion (Ron Reagan) based on that person’s looks, he obviously has nothing of substance to say. An added benefit of totally ignoring BJ is that it will infuriate him and perhaps drive him away.
Oh bruhrabbit, don’t throw me in that briarpatch!
You’re not far off with the; you get one, we get one analysis. But you’ll be surprised on election day. Coors in Colorado, for example. In an off year, he probalbly loses, but in a Bush landslide, he’s a down ticket winner. You’re going to be a sweating a lot of districts Nov 2nd.
About the Bush/Reagan thing. It’s like Roger Staubach and Troy Aikman for a Cowboys fan. Both great in their own ways and both winners. Different teams and different eras, but the same intangible—leadership.
Other than Chuck Hagel, Luger, and once in a while McCain (can you blame him) Republicans don’t need to be disciplined to the party line. We are all united behind Bush.
4 More Years!
BJ
I don’t know you, but here’s piece of advice. If you are going to make predictions, at least make realistic ones. I am not going to argue the presidential election b/c frankly I think it is pointless given what I have read to expect solid polling in a volatile election with two relatively weak candidates such as the Demo and Rep are fielding this time. I mean honestly do you really think George Bush is a Ronald Reagan. I certainly don’t think Kerry is a Bill Clinton. These two, Reagan in 84 and Clinton in 96 had their presidency in full force at this point in the game. The thing I find funny about leftist and rightist is what my ole govt affairs prof in graduate school used to say- when you listen to your partisan rhetoric, there is not much difference in its outlandishness. In your case, you are seeing landslides where they won’t be happen. Bush make indeed eck out a win, but it wont have any coattails. I mean you got Republicans acting like Dems today, and showing a lack of descpline in attacking their party leader during an election year (if they thought (and they are in a better place than you or I to decide this) that there would be any coattails or repercussions, they wouldn’t have been out there saying Iraq is going to crap in a hand basket). My prediction on the Congressional side is more status quo with not enough votes to do anything (ie, you pick off Daschle, we get Salazar, you pick off the seat in North Carolina we get of all places Oklahoma- I got to believe that even Oklahomans find sterilaztion w/o consent egregious unless they truly aren’t as concerned with their biblical teaching as they say they are). I am sleepy. So good night gracie.
Bel,
Best wishes to you as well.
Poor Ron Jr., god bless him, with that receding chin and Nancy’ worst features. No I don’t agree with him, I pity the child.
Hate won’t carry you guys to victory. I know from your posts that you are invested in Kerry’s success (more like Bush’s defeat) but you’re going to get your heart broke, brother. Three months from now, the conventional wisdom in your party will be that Kerry ran a bad campaign, Kerry didn’t fight back, Kerry was ill-advised.
It’s worse than that, Bel. The GOP will pick up seats in both houses of congress. The big news story will be how long Bush’s coattails were. Kerry will be accorded the same standing as Dukakis. He’ll never speak at the Dem Convention again…Ever. Heck, you guys didn’t really like him before anyway.
Don’t worry Bel, all will be well. Once the world sees that it’s Bush for another term, the press will get off this “everyone hates Bush” kick and start reporting the real deal (oh my, sounds like a slogan).
Someday, you’ll even claim you voted for Bush.
4 More Years!
Tommy Pain.. its for the reasons outlined on your site that I cant quite grip how the media and others can take so much stock in these polls. To me, (I am no analyst) there seems to be so many gaping holes in the entire polling system.
There seem to be so many methods and hence I cannot see how these guys expect to arrive at the same conclusions. Its all airy fairy to me. I discount them all and simply take my cue from people on the ground, people I talk to, crowds at the rallys and the things the candidates are saying (and from the frantic postings of GOPers on this site.. (BJ and crew.. lol..lol)), which is prob all wrong too.
I dont take my cues from either the press or the polls. The only thing that interests me in the polls however, is that the results can influence how the undecideds and the loosely planted souls will vote. So that if the public is really rooting for Kerry but the polls say Bush is way ahead, such polls will and can influence the above mentioned crowd because they are more likely to believe the polls and follow the general opinion as stated in the stats.
This is dangerous and hence I think the plan from here in, should be to call the media and the poll houses to account for the way they are handling their end of the business. Maybe that will work.. I dont know.
Ruy, you are getting recognition you deserve.
If you think the trolls have been here lately, wait until they they get their panties in a bunch over the WSJ mention.
“Blogosphere ghetto”? Aw, c’mon, the place is looking pretty spruced up lately.
BJ… you are way too funny about a serious subject.
I note that you dont seem to like what Ron Reagan says in his NZ mag. but you dont refute what he says about the Bush clan. I suppose you know its all true what Ron says but you prefer to stay with bush because of the qualities which Ron outlines.
So how are you BJ? I hope you are prepared to accept the news in Nov. I know you will be disappointed that bush loses but at least Kerry will have had your vote and thats all that matters.
You and I agree with Ron Reagan and thats why you and I agree that we need a president in the white house who has some measure of integrity.
Best Wishes BJ and may the better man win in Nov.
Its time to hold the media accountable for how it covers this election. The polls are bunk.
http://tommypain.blogspot.com/2004/09/polling-madness.html
Please, forward this along, and get everyone you know to write to every media outlet they frequent and tell them to start treating this election like it is something that’s important.
Nice to see the WSJ (that ultra-leftist screed!)highlighting the problems with Gallup’s (and others)polling methodology. Let’s face it, Gallup has become a joke and is increasingly unable to deal with the realities of tracking a presidential contest in this day and age. I wonder how long it will be before Gallup wakes up and admits it needs to revamp its approach to polling. Ah, its probalby easier for them to stick their head in the sand and continue to trade on their (declining) reputation.
Yeah, Harwood has been kissing up to the Dems all year. I think he’s a graduate of the David Gergon school of “Getting a Job in Television”.
Another alumni of that fine institution is Ron Reagan Jr. He’s written a screed in a New Zealand (New Zealand—what is that about?) paper titled “It’s time we stopped beating about the Bush. The Bush regime is a cabal of liars and fanatics.” Wow, that ought to guarantee Ron a gig at MSNBC for at least another two months.
Hey, I’m not complaining, you guys can have Ron (I don’t have children, I have cats) Reagan. He’s rather an embarressment to us anyway. Tell you what, we’ll throw in Patty for good measure. We’ll take Zell Miller, Ed Koch, and Ron Silver anyday.
Hell, some of you are welcome too.
4 More Years!
Thanks Again Ruy
I am very happy to see that the main stream is taking a cue from this site. I think your analyses are excellent and can be very useful as a comparative tool, if made available to the public by the main stream media.
Cheers
It’s nice to see these important arguments escaping the “ghetto” too, but I think it says as much about the sloth of the professional journalist community as it does about the diligence of the bloggers!