205
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ZeroCool@feddit.ch to c/politics@lemmy.world

FORT DODGE, Iowa — Sen. Tim Scott said during a Monday campaign event, when asked about the United Auto Workers strike, that former President Ronald Reagan “gave us a great example” when he fired striking federal workers in the 1980s.

It’s the latest of several critical comments Scott has made about the auto workers, even as other GOP presidential candidates steer clear of criticizing them amid a strike at three plants so far.

Scott’s remark came in response to a question at a meet and greet in Fort Dodge: “Would you as president … insert yourself in the labor talks?” an Iowa voter asked.

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 101 points 1 year ago

I don't know why people are surprised. The Republican party gave us the wonderful Right to Work legislation that is designed to break unions.

I'm a Teamster and there are motherfuckers who vote republican in our union. Literally voting against the Union that gives us healthcare, a living wage, and protection against unjust retaliation. Stupid bastards.

[-] ChihuahuaOfDoom@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nearly everyone in my union votes republican, it blows my mind, I try to explain that they are voting against their own self interest and they flatly refuse to believe history, facts, logic, etc.

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

But what about the ~~blacks~~ ~~Mexicans~~ ~~gays~~ ~~CRT~~ ~~globalists~~ ~~blm~~ ~~coastal elites~~ ~~antifa~~ transes? I've never actually seen one in the flesh, but the man on the news said they'll take everything from us - you'll see...

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I've represented a lot of union workers when they get hurt. Hands down, every time workers' comp. legislation comes up, it's Republicans that are trying to gut benefits as a handout to insurance companies.

[-] spider@lemmy.nz 21 points 1 year ago

Stupid bastards.

Four decades of them.

See: Reagan Democrat

[-] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago

He's saying what ALL these Republicans are thinking.

[-] 0110010001100010@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

Which begs the question, how in the ever living fuck are people still voting for them?! They have made it clear time and time again that they are 100% against the working class.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago

Single issue voters, identity politics, and they are fucking dummmmmb.

[-] satanmat@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

This. It just effing kills me.

But yes, so many republicans, would rather vote for God, Guns, and Freedumb while not carrying, knowing or understanding that every republican policy is aimed against themselves

[-] TechyDad@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Because they are fine with their lives being miserable as long as the lives of people that they hate are even worse.

[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Propoganda. Propoganda that is paid for by repub donors.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago
[-] odelik@lemmy.today 7 points 1 year ago

Both are correct. But the idiom "beg the question" is more correct here.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago

Begs the question isn’t an idiom, it’s a rhetorical device and it actually doesn’t apply here.

[-] whynotzoidberg@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

You made my morning. I’m dead on the hill of the proper use of ‘to beg the question.’

Unfortunately for me, our English language now accepts the improper way as proper.

I’ll go hang out with the Oxford comma nerds.

[-] ArugulaZ@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

There are no good Republicans.

[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

This guy is more of a useless fuckstick than a toothpick sized dildo

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 9 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Scott’s remark came in response to a question at a meet and greet in Fort Dodge: “Would you as president … insert yourself in the labor talks?” an Iowa voter asked.

Scott’s campaign declined to comment on why he referenced firing federal workers when asked how he would handle the current strike by the autoworkers.

“Part of the challenge that we have today with President Biden is — and I don’t mean this to be disingenuous, I mean this to be sincere — I’m not sure if the words are bought and paid for, but certainly he has been leased by the unions,” Scott said Monday.

While introducing his economic plan during a policy roundtable event in Duncan, South Carolina, last week, Scott criticized the union’s demands as they reached the end of their contract with the big automakers.

Ron DeSantis took a question on the UAW strike — but he opted against directly criticizing the union workers, instead saying he didn’t have enough information before turning his answer to Biden’s “push for electric vehicles,” which he said was “destructive of the automobile industry as a whole.”

Doug Burgum, meanwhile, called the UAW strike “a battle of the future of American transportation” but did not criticize the union workers.


The original article contains 699 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

What's he gonna do? Fire every auto worker and replace them with National Guardsmen?

this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
205 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19082 readers
3320 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.
  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