20 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumblePublished Saturday, Jan. 19, 2008 | 1:53 p.m.
Updated Thursday, Oct. 30, 2008 | 2:14 p.m.
It looks like the Culinary Union's endorsement couldn't carry Barack Obama to victory in Nevada, who lost most of the at-large caucuses on the Strip to Hillary Clinton.
So it's no surprise that the Culinary Union apparently couldn't watch the results on today's caucuses on the news channels.
At a viewing party at the Culinary Training Academy in North Las Vegas, all three television sets were turned to the USC-UCLA basketball game. No CNN, Fox News, MSNBC. No Univision. Just hoops.
The mood was subdued as about 60 union members ate food -- catered by the Culinary workers -- and milled about.
The Culinary Union was right to back Obama's integrity over corruption, real change versus Bush-Clinton establishment, unity over division. The Union can and should hold their heads high. Those who want a fresh and honest America agree with you.
Today the workers held their head high.
Wait til the Republicans take the White House again.
A draft will wake up these women voters when we invade iran with borrowed money next year.
The People Have Spoken ! Take Notice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Congrats Clintons you've turned Brown against Black, union against union, and absolutely killed the Democratic party. Obama supporters will never vote for the Clintons now. I voted for the Clintons twice but Obama was the new intelligent face this year. The Clintons have sunk to being such slime. I'd vote for a dead dog before I'd vote for the Clintons a 3rd time.
Democratic party is dead, dead, dead for 08.
The next president will be McCain or (hopefully) Bloomberg.
Nationally 65% of the Hispanic electorate favors Clinton as compared to 15% for Obama. Because they did not consult their membership, the Culinary Union leaders could not deliver the votes to Obama. His candidacy is doomed because Obama’s strength is regional, and not national. He could win in neighboring Iowa, and in certain Southern primaries where African-American voters are in the majority, but he will lose in Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania etc., all the big states.
Dear Tomdc and Katy--
I guess you both skipped the Democratic debate where Senator Obama admitted his campaign was playing the race card.
That's whats wrong with you Obama supporters. Even when your man admits it, you still don't believe it. It's politics, ok? Let the electorate decide who they think is the best candidate.
"Congrats Clintons you've turned Brown against Black, union against union, and absolutely killed the Democratic party. Obama supporters will never vote for the Clintons now."
It's like listening to 3 year olds--
I'M TAKING MY BALL HOME NOW!!!!
Sheesh!
I would never vote Obama so I am glad hillary won!
In case anyone forgets, Obama was trailing by about 27% in Nevada just last month.
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/12/po...
Obama may not have won the popular vote in Nevada, but he walks away competitive, with half of Nevada's delegates and the lead in overall delegates thus far. South Carolina looks to be a more likely Obama win, however.
The big issue is, will Obama be able to make greater inroads into the latino community in upcoming races... because if he can't, he will have a harder time winning.
Nobody ever said this would be easy. Hopefully, he can pick up more Edwards supporters in upcoming elections and make inroads against the Clinton's connections and party machinery.
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurn!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Relax everyone! The democratic party is still more alive than ever. Hope for the repubs to nominate Huckabee and his plan to (in his words) "spiritually rape" us. See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXBNl7Rlw...
mkraft...now that all blacks are voting by race you might be right...congrats on making the USA more racist!
1971guy, take a look at the results today... more women are voting by sex. Does that this mean that Hillary Clinton is making the race more sexist?
Black voters are supporting Obama and not the old party elite, because they believe he is simply more relevant and more likely to bring about improvements in their lives.
Really, their support for Obama mirrors their support for Democrats in general over Republicans... They feel, quite rightly, that Obama is the real candidate of change and reform, and that Hillary Clinton's record is one of a closet Republican, more in line with her friend Joe Lieberman, who she campaigned for over the Democratic candidate.
The Union supported the future --
The result proves they did not strong arm people and let their people caucus as they would
They were likely very disappointed with the CW turn out and they started late with their endorsement
But the CW leaders are no match to former President Bill Clinton walking into caucus rooms (he is a rock star) and through kitchens etc
And obviously this was a huge factor as Pres Clinton just announced he will go church to church in S Carolina to convince African Americans to vote for Hillary
No matter what they do - this is not a third term for President Clinton --
buyers remorse will be too late for the country to turn the page
The CW leaders should be proud - they chose the future -- too bad the women (which I am as well) and the older voters (which I also am) chose the past
Obama won 13 delegates - Hillary Clinton won 12
As Howard Wolfson said "it's all about delegates"
I just canceled my subscription to The SUN and I encourage everyone else to do the same!
The Leaders of the Culinary Union clearly failed in achieving the first, basic principle of union support in a political campaign. What's that? Delivering what is promised.
What involvement did the rank and file union member have in the endorsement of the candidate?
Did the union leaders approach all three candidates with a list of what they wanted?
Did the union leaders report to the members the position of each candidate on what the union leaders asked on behalf of the members?
Did the union leaders allow, rather, encourage discussion of these responses among the members?
Most important--
DID THE MEMBERS THEMSELVES VOTE ON WHO THE UNION SHOULD ENDORSE, BASED ON RESPONSES OF THE CANDIDATES REVEALED TO ALL, AND ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF SAME BY THE LEADERSHIP?
If you are a Culinary Union member and these processes didn't take place, then, you have been treated like sheep, not individuals.
Traditional union practices among its members and leadership demand this kind of a give and take.
Whatever methods were used, clearly it didn't work. It seems time for the Culinary workers to consider new leadership.
Clinton's wins at the majority of the Strip caucuses proves one key point. Union leaders who do not pay careful attention to what the members think are doomed to humiliation.
Unless D. Edwards and Pilar Weiss resign, the Culinary Union will become a running political joke in Nevada.
The culinary union's legendary turnout strength has always been largely overestimated by our media. The culinary union is with out a doubt the largest union in the state but when it comes to registered voters, their influence is marginalized because many of their members can not register to vote. Clinton has more union members behind her nationally and in this state (including many members of the culinary union). The leaders of the culinary union chose Obama but, at the end of the day, they could not force their members to caucus for him. The other unions who endorsed and turned out for Clinton today did well for themselves. The culinary union leaders should listen closer to their members next time. We shall overcome!
Within the Democratic Party the dominance of the Hispanic vote is growing daily. Hispanics have a highest birth rate in the US and there are millions of them crossing the border. They seem not to like to vote for a black candidate.
nnbctc: I appreciate the information. May you and others overcome; just remember, that can only happen if you and others orgainize and plan a substantial slate of candidates to put up in your next union officer and representative elections. That can take time . Get moving. Long live unions; their rise and wane correlate to the rise and wane of the middle class in this country. In fact, there would be no middle class in this country without the hard fought, hard won battles of unions. Educate the young about that history. Where did the 40 hour work week come from? Unions. Where did overtime come from? Unions. Where did even having a bar of soap or a bathroom come from? Unions. Where did any decent working condition come from? Unions. Educate the young. By the way, Barack Obama's comments about Ronald Regan and the Republicans being the party of ideas of the last 10 or 15 years is a ridiculous comment coming from any Democrat..and absolutely untenable for anyone who says they support unions. Ronald Reagan's actions against the air traffic controllers union signaled and began an assault on unions by Republicansand corporations that continues to this day and has been responsible for the wane of unionism in this country. One may support Obama as is one's right to do in this country. But he is no friend of unions with that comment.From what I have observed so far, he is more a chamelon than black, more a mirror of the moment and its pragmatic, immediate neccesities than a standard bearer of pragmatic issues, like the need to have unions and strong ones.