Labor anger over Green New Deal greets 2020 contenders in California

From Politico


06/01/2019 09:00 AM EDT

LOS ANGELES — Blue-collar union workers in solidly Democratic California are rejecting “Green New Deal” politics, a possible preview of troubles for 2020 presidential hopefuls in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania and Ohio.

When Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti launched his “Green New Deal LA” plan last month amid cheers from environmentalists, hundreds of jeans-wearing, tattooed union members outside the event chanted “Garcetti’s gotta go” and denounced the move as a betrayal. The Garcetti protest was followed by disputes in the state capital this month over a large buffer zone that would block new oil and gas wells, as well as a massive hydro project near Joshua Tree.

Robbie Hunter, president of the state Building and Construction Trades Council — which represents more than 400,000 workers — says that dozens of his members plan a major “Blue Collar Revolution” demonstration Saturday morning at the California Democratic Party convention in San Francisco, which will be attended by 14 of the Democratic presidential contenders and 5,000 delegates and guests.

The effort aims to send a message that the party is in danger of eroding a critical base if it continues to back the Green New Deal resolution being pushed in Washington, D.C. by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and her allies. Hunter argues the measure’s goals could endanger thousands of jobs in the Southern California oil industry alone.

“All it does is do what the Democratic Party seems to be very good at lately — which is export our jobs, while doing nothing for the end game, which is the environmental,’’ Hunter said.

And California labor forces this weekend are also expected to also put their clout behind Rusty Hicks, who heads the Los Angeles Labor Federation — a candidate in a contentious race to chair the California Democratic Party. Hicks has signaled labor’s concerns by signing a letter opposing a move to ban a hazardous acid from refineries, saying it “will lead to the loss of tens of thousands of jobs for local people and cost our region millions of dollars in activity. We cannot dismiss these jobs or look at the women and as expendable: because they are not.”

“The Green New Deal may be the darling of the Democratic Party — but it really divides the Democrats on a fault line, which is more of the elites against the working class Democrats who are concerned about losing their jobs,” said Jessica Levinson, a member of the Los Angeles Ethics Commission and a professor who teaches politics and ethics at Loyola Law School.

Lifelong union members “don’t necessarily want to be retrained’’ for other, greener work spots — “nor is it even possible,’’ says Levinson. She predicts with the 2020 election looming, Democratic leaders will have to wrestle with the fact that “unlike the Mueller report and impeachment and indictment — people vote on whether or not they’re going to lose their job.”

While there’s no chance that President Donald Trump will take California, pushing too far on the Green New Deal could “make it difficult for Democrats to recapture crucial Western states” like Colorado and Nevada — both won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 — “and it would certainly be an issue in states like Pennsylvania,” said Jack Pitney, a veteran California political analyst and political science professor at Claremont McKenna College.

Read the full article here

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 4, 2019 3:01 am

Those folks in California need look no further than what happened here in Australia with the Australian Labor Party in the May 18 election. They tried to out “green” the Greens and got slammed for it. Sadly, like the Democrats and Hillary in the last U.S election, Labor is trying to pin its failure on everything BUT their policies.

Komrade Kuma
Reply to  Aussiebear
June 4, 2019 4:20 am

Whether is is raving about the deplorables who live in the rust belt, sneering at Brexiteers who don’t live in London or ignoring regional Australians who live in coal mining areas, the the self declared ‘progressive’ ‘elites’ on the moonbeam left just never seem to get it that they are increasingly seen as arrogant, narcissistic ideologues who in reality have little to contribute to the community except making a spectacle of themselves.

It seems to me they are increasingly looking like the self indulgent Roman catholic church in the 15th century whose self serving arrogance and corruption lead to the reformation. Their energy celibacy is a twisted self loathing manifesting as economic bulimia.

Time for the quiet Americans to give them the kick in the guts they truly deserve.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Komrade Kuma
June 4, 2019 2:26 pm

It’s good to see Monbiot’s nickname being used as a derogatory adjective. Him and they have earned the accolade.

Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
June 9, 2019 9:10 am

I thought his nickname is moonbat

Ulick Stafford
Reply to  Komrade Kuma
June 5, 2019 5:02 am

Agreed on your points except Brexit which is lunacy for the UK economy. Industrial and other jobs are leaving UK because of its intention to leave EU.

Reply to  Ulick Stafford
June 5, 2019 6:46 am

There were no jobs in the UK prior to joining the EU?
There were no jobs leaving the UK prior to Brexit?

There is no reason for jobs or anything else to leave the UK because of Brexit.

Reply to  Ulick Stafford
June 5, 2019 2:49 pm

Useful idiot.

Reply to  Cephus0
June 7, 2019 3:40 pm

Given a successful EU exit … useless idiot.

Reply to  Ulick Stafford
June 11, 2019 5:49 pm

According to the UK unemployment is at 3.8% – a 44 year low.

Where is your data coming from? The Grauniad?

High Treason
Reply to  Aussiebear
June 4, 2019 5:54 pm

What is most disturbing about the recent Australian election that was a “climate poll” is that 48% of the population bought the green lies. With children being indoctrinated with LGBTQIAZNP and climate rebellion propaganda and many voting at the next election, we still have an uphill battle.

To paraphrase Voltaire-A people that can be persuaded to believe absurdities can be persuaded to commit atrocities. The brainwashed generation are likely to be induced to turn on their parents and the society that reared and nurtured them.

Matthew Sykes
June 4, 2019 3:14 am

The British working class left our version of the Democrats, Labour Party, years ago.

They recognised it for the urban, smirking class, cesspit it had become.

Reply to  Matthew Sykes
June 4, 2019 4:17 am

“smirking class”

Hadn’t heard or seen that one before, but it’s perfect. I am soooo stealing that, Mathew.

June 4, 2019 3:31 am

The unions had their window, and it has closed. They are obligated to kneel before their moonbat masters.

Mike Lowe
June 4, 2019 3:48 am

Good news! It just shows that the blue-collar workers know more about this subject than the elitist environmentalists. Good news for Mr. Trump as he battles the Green Blob in the UK!

Maaz Kalim
Reply to  Mike Lowe
June 4, 2019 5:25 am

“Drumpf as he battles the Green Blob in the UK!”: Bwahahaha!

So a non-UK citizen can fight elections over there, eh? 😏

Javert Chip
Reply to  Maaz Kalim
June 4, 2019 10:49 am

Maaz Kalim

Just be sure NOT to call on non-UK citizens to fight your real wars (3 in the last century):

Faukland Islands…

Irritable Bill
Reply to  Maaz Kalim
June 5, 2019 1:49 am

Maaz Kalim….

[SNIPPED. Language, and insulting. Mod]

Reply to  Maaz Kalim
June 11, 2019 5:58 pm

Two points, Maaz:
1) You misquoted Mike. Try reading a litle closer.
2) In the US, Christopher Steele, a British citizen, has had considerable influence over US politics, providing original and unverifiable information that led to a Special Counsel and provided ammunition for the losing party, who still hope to impeach him.

If a non-US citizen, with no official standing with the British Government and little financial backing can have that kind of impact, imagine what a major figure like Trump could have.

If you have an imagination, and are not totally entangled by TDS.

June 4, 2019 4:05 am

Blue Collar Revolution – haven’t seen a real labor strike in a long, long time, not since Detroit went out of the business of building cars and all those jobs went elsewhere.

Generally, I don’t like unions because they can destroy the jobs they “protect” just as easily as not, but in this case – RIGHT ON!!!! POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!

If the idiots who “govern” California ever decide that getting rid of rats infested with typhus-laden fleas, (and now typhoid, too) is more cost-effective than letting people trash the streets and leave needles everywhere, I will be very surprised.

Everything ripens at its time and becomes fruit at its hour. – Divyavadana

Reply to  Sara
June 4, 2019 6:05 am

As one who tried a unionized job once (“Don’t work so hard, you’re making us all look bad”), I know that when you don’t have unions, you need them desperately. Then when you get them, they can be the worst thing for you. Until you don’t have them.
There are two kinds of us working animals, the farm ones who move in herds, are fed, protected, milked and sheared, and the wild ones, free, but one jump ahead of being eaten alive and one Jim behind the meal we need to survive. Put me in a union cage and I will die. Put a farm animal out here and it will be eaten alive.

Reply to  Richard
June 4, 2019 7:08 am

You never need unions.
All the advances that are claimed to have been caused by unionization were actually caused by capitalism.

Reply to  Richard
June 4, 2019 7:12 am

You never need unions.
All of the advances have been claimed for unionization, were actually caused by capitalism.
Worker safety: Has been increasing for as long as there have been records, long before the advent of unionization. Workers are expensive to train, and hence expensive to replace. Plus you have to pay extra to get people to work in dangerous environments.
Child Labor: Once again, as productivity increased, child labor decreased.
Wages and 40 hour week: Once again, the result of productivity increases. Paying a worker more than his labor is worth is a good way to bankrupt your company. Paying a worker less than his labor is worth is a good way to lose a good worker to another company.

Reply to  MarkW
June 4, 2019 8:27 am

The law of supply and demand has worked since forever.

Henry Ford paid his workers twice the going rate because turnover was so expensive. link He could do that because his production line made the workers much more productive.

What’s the alternative to Capitalism? One alternative is a planned economy (Marxism for example) I have a hard time imagining that a planned economy could produce the necessary productivity gains that would allow the kind of working conditions we now enjoy. So, yes, Capitalism seems obviously to be a necessary condition.

On the other hand, as always, simple mantras don’t capture all the nuances necessary to deal with every situation.

Rhys Jaggar
Reply to  commieBob
June 4, 2019 10:43 am

You really should think about social ownership models, not state ownership models.

Trains would run better if commuter franchises were owned by the season ticket holders. They have to get to work every day, so they will prioritise the needs of customers, not of management.

It would be an interesting experiment if purchase of an annual season ticket granted you one vote at every AGM.

Season ticket holders would want timely investment in newrolling stock, fair wages for drivers, guards, maintenance engineers etc.

So they would want solvency without profiteering, quality service without overengineering, there would be no point to dividends as it woud directly be cancelling out with season ticket prices.

It is not a panacea, but it is linking shareholding to stakeholders, not to faceless tax avoiding shells in some offshore haven.

Reply to  commieBob
June 4, 2019 2:00 pm

Social ownership is state ownership.

Any company that exists for the benefit of management will soon be out of business, because they will be out competed by companies that operate with customers in mind.
The only time when this fails to happen is when the government prevents competition.

If you think that turning control of a complex organization over to a group of people who know nothing about how to operate a business is the way to nirvana, then no wonder you consider the US to be “uber capitalist”.

Reply to  commieBob
June 4, 2019 2:01 pm

Rhys Jaggar June 4, 2019 at 10:43 am

My point is that planned economies of any sort tend not to produce the kind of innovations we desperately need in order that we can keep ahead of disaster.

We have a tiger by the tail and (to mix a metaphor) we had better not change horses midstream. link

Buckminster Fuller points out that we are doing more and more with less and less. That’s why the predictions of Malthus, and the Club of Rome, etc. haven’t panned out. When we stop innovating, things will probably get ugly real fast.

Jim Gorman
Reply to  commieBob
June 5, 2019 7:41 am

Rhys —> Why wouldn’t season ticket holders want the lowest prices possible? That would mean no new investment in rolling stock, the lowest wages possible, and maintenance only when absolutely necessary.

I think you overestimate how a large group of people would manage a “company”.

Ben of Houston
Reply to  Richard
June 4, 2019 7:29 am

I think the best comparison to a union is a lawyer. If you cannot get access to one, it is a big problem that becomes bigger over time. However, if you can possibly do what you need to do without one, it’s always better to be without, as they have a tendency to drag down everyone in a except themselves.

The threat of unionization as well as more general loss of employees to competitors, keeps the bad old days from coming back as much as any direct action from the unions themselves.

Reply to  Ben of Houston
June 4, 2019 2:02 pm

It wasn’t unions that made the bad old days go away.
So a lack of unions won’t make them come back.

Reply to  Richard
June 4, 2019 7:50 am

I concur, the world is made of sheep and wolves.
Beware the wolves in sheep’s clothing. However, the sheep who dress as wolves can be amusing until they cause trouble.

June 4, 2019 4:16 am

For decades, the Democrats have been working against the interests of American working people. That’s why we have President Trump. Lots of people have pointed to the problem including Michael Moore, not exactly a right wing extremist. The best analysis I have seen is Listen Liberal by Thomas Frank.

Apparently, the Democrats have learned nothing. Not only that but they are doubling down.

Leo Kenji
Reply to  commieBob
June 4, 2019 5:51 am

Isn’t that funny that the minority that voted for Trump, who lost the election, now is getting taxed by Trump?

You obviously aren’t a blue collar worker … Why don’t you tell them that installing solar panels pays way better, it’s not in the ground, does not require much of an education and most of all, doesn’t cause black death?

Tired Old Nurse
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 6:38 am

Blue collar workers got a tax cut. Trump won the electoral college, which is how presidents are elected in this country. The manufacture of Solar panels is very dirty and is bad for the environment and is dangerous work due to the toxic materials used. While black lung (not Black Death, that is caused by unclean environments… see any big California city) is on the increase aggressive steps are being taken but the problem isn’t as straight forward as putting masks on miners.

Jonathan Ranes
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 6:46 am

Solar panels don’t cause black death, got it, great analysis.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 7:00 am

I like you. You’re funny. Write something else silly.

Tired Old Nurse
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
June 4, 2019 7:23 am

As soon as you say something substantive and factual. And don’t get the plague confused with black lung.

Matthew Schilling
Reply to  Tired Old Nurse
June 4, 2019 10:21 am

I wasn’t/didn’t mean to reply to you, but to Kenji. And, looking at the indentation of my reply, I believe I successfully replied to him.

Tired Old Nurse
Reply to  Matthew Schilling
June 5, 2019 5:36 am

Belated apologies for the snarky response.

Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 7:06 am

Wow, so much delusion packed in such a small post.

Got news for you, according to the laws of the US, Trump won the election. I know you moonbats like to point out that allegedly Trump lost the popular vote, there are many problems with that claim.
1) Neither campaign conducted a popular vote campaign, there’s no telling what the results would have been had they done so.
2) Most places don’t count absentee ballots unless there are enough of them to impact the result, so the popular vote count does not count all the votes cast.
3) Illegal voting is a large and growing problem.
4) Your candidate lost, get over it.

Everybody gets taxed, they were taxed before Trump and they are still being taxed.

Installing solar panels pays better? Better than what?
Doesn’t require much of an education? Once again the moonbat displays his arrogance and stereotypical thinking.
Doesn’t cause the black death? I’m guessing you actually took seriously the articles that claimed that the population of rats was going up because of global warming. Those who live in the area point out that the increase in rats is being caused by an increase in trash in the streets.

Christopher Chantrill
Reply to  MarkW
June 4, 2019 8:12 am

Trump lost the popular vote. You can bellyache all you want about illegal votes, campaign strategies, and absentee ballots, but the certified vote counts from the states are all in, and guess what?……He lost the popular vote.

Phil R
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 9:45 am

Keep repeating that total irrelevancy to yourself if it makes you happy, but guess what?…The “popular vote” counts for f@ck@ll.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 10:26 am

Even if there were no illegal voters, so what?
The United STATES is a constitutional republic. (Sorry. I refereed to what the libs consider to be a four letter word … The Constitution.)
Hillary lost. Trump won.
Gore lost. Bush won.
Bill Clinton won both times even though most voters wanted somebody else.

Christopher Chantrill
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 10:43 am

Call it irrelevant if you wish, but you cannot dispute the fact that he lost the popular vote. That shows clearly that he does not have a “mandate.” Not to mention that he cannot accept the fact that the “illegal” vote claim is bogus:

Christopher Chantrill
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 10:52 am

By the way Mr. Phil R, do you know what “buyer’s remorse” is?

More people disapprove than approve.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 10:55 am

Guess what? – he WON the electoral vote – and THAT’S what decides presidents – because we are 50 individual states – and thus avoid the tyranny of two populated states.

That’s why progressives want to do away with the electoral college, because they believe that’s a permanent power base for themselves – tyranny’s the way to go with that crowd.

Guy’s like Christopher NEED to have this ‘popular vote’ to lean on, because of their base conformist philosophy – it provides a substitute for the moral high-ground.

Funny that they continue to present themselves as champions of the minority – like almost all progressive bass-ackwards logic, it’s exactly the opposite.

Of course, if it WAS a popular vote, Trump would have campaigned differently.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 12:08 pm

Christopher Chantrill

So what? Since around 1790, American presidential elections have been decided by the Electoral College, and candidates campaign accordingly.

Seven of the last 18 presidential elections conducted since WWII have been won by less than a majority of the popular vote (including JFK).

Rant ally want but be careful doing it in front of an audience that might consider it to be a display of ignorance.

Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 2:04 pm

You claim that he lost the popular vote.
I point out all the problems with the claim that he lost the popular vote.
You replay that it doesn’t matter since Trump lost the popular vote.

Once again the liberals demonstrate that math and logic are against their religious beliefs.

Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 2:08 pm

That Trump lost the popular vote is both not a fact and not relevant.
Winning is all one needs to have a mandate.
Funny how liberals are always inventing ever more outlandish reasons for why those who disagree with them have no rights.

Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 2:12 pm

Joel, the other reason why liberals want to get rid of the electoral college is because it makes cheating easier and more profitable.
Currently their ownership of various major cities makes creating all the votes they need to win a state easy. (Review the history of various districts that routinely have more votes than registered voters.) However with the current system, whether they win a state by 51% or 90%, they still only get the electoral votes of that state.
Eliminate the electoral college and every ginned up vote counts.

mike the morlock
Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 2:54 pm

Christopher Chantrill June 4, 2019 at 8:12 am
We have a odd result in our elections. The is due to when victories in states are reported.
Once one side has won the electoral college many people on the winning side in the remaining western states don’t bother to vote. Because they are not needed. California is a good example of this . The Democrats keep going to the polls in a effort to win the popular vote. Republicans in California need to learn to vote even if their side seems to have won. Also like the Democrats to harvest votes. Even go after the voters that the Democrats are targeting.


Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 4, 2019 6:38 pm

The popular vote only counts in the district it’s cast. Each district votes for a specific elector, according to the popular vote in the district.

The electors represent the POPULAR vote of the district that elected them.

The disparity comes about because the democrats decided not to run popular candidates in the key districts or states. Their base of voters is highly concentrated in voting districts in big cities or wealthy suburbs, so by choice they don’t get to vote for as many electors.

The system works exactly as intended. Large concentrations of one party in a small area are balanced against the rights of each state as a whole.

The objective is to prevent a few states with high concentrations of one party from dominating politics.

Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 5, 2019 8:16 pm

Chantrill: Buyer’s remorse? Trump currently has a 49% approval rating, easily enough for re-election at this point. Macron, in France, has a 40% approval. I can’t find a specific approval rating for May in the UK, but she is elected by the Conservative Party in Parliament, which has an approval rating of 12%.
More Americans support Trump’s government than the people of Britain or France support theirs.

Reply to  Christopher Chantrill
June 5, 2019 8:41 pm

Re the Real Clear Politics average voter approval: the abbreviations, ‘a’, ‘rv’, and ‘lv’ mean ‘all adults’, ‘registered voters’, and ‘likely voters’ (only those who voted in the last elections). If you want to discuss ‘voter’s remorse’, clearly you must only consider those who actually voted (‘lv’), but that’s likely way above Chantrill’s intellect. Trump at 49% approval of those who actually voted means there is absolutely no voter’s remorse.

Reply to  MarkW
June 4, 2019 8:13 am

I thought he just forgot the /sarc tag. It’s impossible to tell a genuine loon from a good parody thereof. Poe’s Law

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  commieBob
June 4, 2019 10:28 am

Thanks for that link to Poe’s Law.
I guess I’ve been guilty of not using the winking smiley.
I’ll do better.

Joel Snider
Reply to  commieBob
June 4, 2019 11:26 am

Nah – he’s genuine – you can tell by the utter lack of humor.

Ben of Houston
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 7:35 am

Due to the huge distortion of the electoral college, you cannot really use the popular vote to say anything. In solid red or blue states, people often vote for third parties, abstain, or even stay home largely due to the fact that their vote will not affect the presidency.

In 2016, I did a protest vote (I wrote in Ted Cruz) because I could not stand either Trump or Clinton. I knew Texas would go for Trump no matter what, so I protested. If I thought that Clinton had a chance of carrying Texas, I would have held my nose long enough to vote against her.

This is partly why California is so sweepingly Blue. Clinton gained 3 million votes more than Trump in CA, far more than her total lead in the polls. If the popular vote mattered, you would see more people rallying behind their least-hated candidate even if their state’s majority is already decided.

Reply to  Ben of Houston
June 4, 2019 9:17 am

Remember that there was no meaningful leading race in California to drive Republican turnout thanks to the “jungle primary” that so frequently pits Democrat against Democrat in the general election, especially for statewide offices. Newsom vs a guy who didn’t bother campaigning for Governor, two Democrats for Senator, ditto all the way down the line for statewide races. Why waste time figuring out which Senate candidate is slightly less worse on what issue, just skip straight to your local races and ballot measures.

Reply to  Ben of Houston
June 4, 2019 2:14 pm

In general, if I know that my vote won’t make a difference, I vote Libertarian.
If it had been a popular vote election, I would have voted for Trump.

Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 9:51 am

Bro — Stop credulously watching the media.

Joel Snider
Reply to  xenomoly
June 4, 2019 11:32 am

He can’t – that’s his support group.

Without them, he’s stuck lying to himself.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 10:18 am

A couple of folks here do not know the rules of the game (Presidential elections) about which they comment.
Perhaps this will help: Look at the 1960 World Series when the Yankees scored 55 runs. That’s more than twice as many runs as the Pirates, from Pittsburgh, who were the winners of the Series.

When you figure out why the Pirates won, perhaps you can figure out why Donald Trump won, and is President.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 11:10 am

Leo Kenji

If you are not an American (or if you’re an American who slept/skipped or simply wasn’t offered civics class in Jr High), you might read the Federalist Papers on the American Electoral College. It was explicitly implemented to ensure national elections were contested & supported in most (ideally all) geographic locations, not just New York City, Chicago, and LA.

Citizens living in New York City, Chicago, and LA are more or less free to elect whatever local powers (mayor, governor) they wish, but can’t impose their nonsense on the other 98% of the American geography.

TC in the OC
Reply to  Javert Chip
June 4, 2019 1:05 pm

Javert Chip…I don’t want to disagree with your post as it gives the general idea but Chicago and LA were not around in the time of the Federalist Papers.

A quick summation…the legislative branch is composed of two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate. The house is a 2-year term and more closely reflects the countries population whereas the Senate is a 6-year term and gives a more stable approach and allows each state it’s fair say. To get the small states to ratify the constitution, they were promised equal representation in the Senate regardless of population and were also guaranteed at least one representative in the House. This breakdown is reflected in the Electoral College and helps to keep one candidate from appealing to the larger population centers while ignoring the fly over states.

The election is run as the first to 270 in the Electoral College and usually comes down to a half dozen or so battleground states. For most of us our states Electoral votes are usually decided way before the election barring some huge last minute scandal.

The following maps help to illustrate how the Electoral College decides the election. The first is the breakdown of the 2016 election, the second is the current projection for the 2020 election and the third shows how each congressional district voted. Enjoy!

BTW for those who keep saying Trump lost the election…it was a pretty large margin in the Electoral College.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  TC in the OC
June 4, 2019 5:52 pm

Chicago and LA were not around in the time of the Federalist Papers.

True, but the notion is better if one writes Boston, Philly, and Richmond.
Without now reading the Federalist Papers, perhaps there was more of a ‘regional’ aspect to the thinking, and less individual cities. While most folks think of July 4th, 1776 as the beginning of the USA, the constitution was ratified by the minimum of nine entities (that became states) on June 21, 1788, and only then could the formation of the government begin. The Colonies – entities – States were very rural in the period of interest.

Reply to  TC in the OC
June 5, 2019 4:21 pm

First time I ever looked at county election map of my state I realized our founding fathers were truly geniuses when they came up with the idea of our electoral college. Not having an electoral college at the state levels is what has led to a lot of discontent around the US. One or two cities in each state can enact whatever they want no matter what the rest of a state wants.

Look at Oregon, a whopping 8 counties had a majority vote for Hillary and Hillary was awarded all of our electoral votes. Those same 8 counties typically vote the same way on statewide issues leaving the majority of the state by landmass in the lurch. But that not the whole issue, the real issue is what Portland wants Portland gets. A bit over half the states population lives in the greater Portland area and if they all vote the exact same way it doesn’t matter what the rest of the state wanted. What we end up with is big areas of the state needs/wants not getting met by our legislature. Run elections by electoral vote and suddenly what the rest of the state wants has to be considered for every election.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Leo Kenji
June 4, 2019 1:10 pm

Hey Leo – I”M a blue-collar worker – and Trump gave me the single biggest raise I’ve ever gotten in my life with his tax cuts.

YOU obviously aren’t a blue-collar worker – but like any typical progressive, you talk a lot about stuff you don’t know anything about based on your own pre-determined opinions. That’s why you’re all such good bigots.

Tom Abbott
June 4, 2019 5:29 am

The Union leaders are practical people. If they see a policy that is going to cost their members jobs, and themselves power, then they are going to oppose it whether it be an idea put forward by Democrats or Republicans.

The Green New Deal proposes to do away with fossil fuels, and internal combustion-engined cars, and airplanes, and cattle and all sorts of other goofy stuff and there is no way these union leaders are going to buy into that kind of plan.

The GND is a ridiculous plan on its face. Union leaders know it and are going to say so and keep saying so. And if the Democrats don’t get the message and drop the NGD then there are going to be a lot more union members voting for Trump the next time around. At least Trump is not going to cut their jobs.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 4, 2019 7:13 am

I would agree with you, except for the example of union leaders who ended up bankrupting the companies they worked for.

Joel Snider
Reply to  MarkW
June 4, 2019 12:06 pm

Or the states.

June 4, 2019 5:49 am

But we do need a big green economic shock with Grapes of Wrath poverty and forced migration to teach a lesson for all. I nominate California.

June 4, 2019 5:54 am

Non-union people advance themselves by providing goods and/or services.
Striking union people advance themselves by denying goods and.or services.

June 4, 2019 6:29 am
June 4, 2019 6:34 am

Back to the future on noncompetitive tax rates…..after the competition adjusted their respective rates lower recently.

June 4, 2019 6:57 am

“as well as a massive hydro project near Joshua Tree.”

A hydro project in the middle of the desert. Are they really that desperate?

On the outer Barcoo
Reply to  MarkW
June 4, 2019 8:38 am

Last time I looked, Lake Mead was in a desert?

Reply to  On the outer Barcoo
June 4, 2019 2:18 pm

Lake Mead is deep and narrow. Lot of volume without a lot of surface area.

Reply to  MarkW
June 4, 2019 9:00 am

It is a pumped hydro bulk storage using two old open pit mines at differential elevations. Problem is there is no water even to pump so they have to drill for ground water to fill the pits. But the enviro’s are against it because there is the park nearby. The immediate purpose is to use the surplus solar/wind to convert the intermittent energy to a firm power product and one with on demand synchronous spinning reserve. Which would be better and cheaper than a grid size battery/inverter.

John the Econ
June 4, 2019 7:13 am

Ever notice that when a Progressive suggests that someone should have to lose their job and be trained for another for the sake of Progressivism, it’s always someone else?

Reply to  John the Econ
June 4, 2019 2:19 pm

Ever notice that when a Progressive suggests that someone should have their taxes raised, it’s always someone else.

June 4, 2019 8:34 am

Democrats have been taken over by Progressives which are nothing more than Marxists in hiding. America had its’ brushes with Marxist oriented Presidents and it didn’t turn out well. Europe seems to be moving away from the Progressive ideology yet still remain firmly in its’ grip. Unions also seem to be moving away from Progressives world over as their workers lose jobs due to Progressive led globalism and AGW dominated platforms. “Workers of the world unite” has gained new meaning.

Reply to  markl
June 4, 2019 2:20 pm

A couple of the minor Democrat candidates for president have recently suggested in speeches that the Democrats open embracing of socialism is not going to help them win in 2020. These candidates are being openly boo’d by their audiences.

Rhys Jaggar
June 4, 2019 9:53 am

Well if all these guys think they have a caucus, they should register as democrats and shun any Presidential candidate in the primaries who they do not like.

Alternatively, they could just resign en masse from the Democratic machine and become Deplorable Hippies from California, or whatever Trump supporters get called in the far SW of the USA

Reply to  Rhys Jaggar
June 4, 2019 2:21 pm

Interesting. In your opinion, they have no right to try and change the Democrat party from within?
Instead, if they disagree with you, their only option is to leave and form a new party?
How left wing of you.

Bruce Cobb
June 4, 2019 11:54 am

They should try Biden’s GND-Lite. It tastes great, and is less filling.

June 4, 2019 8:54 pm

Sorry, the “Green Power Revolution” isn’t going to happen without mining. And mining isn’t going to happen without “blue collar” jobs.

Anyone who doesn’t know that or refuses to admit that just needs to go away and keep their mouths shut.

June 5, 2019 4:19 am

The current positions of the Democratic Party brings to mind a quote purported to be from Mark Twain: “A person who would pick up a cat by the tail will get a lesson he can get no other way”

Rudolf Huber
June 6, 2019 2:47 pm

The Green New Deal is the best campaign weapon Trump has for 2020. I mean, compared to those proposals Trump looks like a true example of statesmanship, reason and good manners. Sun Tsu said in his “Art of War” that you shall wait at the river until your enemies bodies just float by. patience, your enemy is going to hang himself. Why getting involved if they do it all by themselves? That’s my strategy – renewable energy and Electric Vehicles are an impossible position as we can’t afford it. Eventually, the people will reject it and then we need something that works. Methane for me. The Democrats will kick their own butts – worse than Trump could ever do it.

%d bloggers like this: