“Remember, elites have no party. Elites have no nation,” he said. “Their loyalty is to the balance sheet and the stock price at the expense of the American worker.”
He added: “The Teamsters are not interested if you have a D, R or an I next to your name. We want to know one thing: What are you doing to help American workers?”
“Never forget, American workers own this nation. We are not renters. We are not tenants. Wut the corporate elite treat us like squatters, and that is a crime. We’ve got to fix it,” he said.
I watched the speech live. I actually agree with a lot of what he said, but the dead silence in the crowd when he wasn’t kissing Trump’s ass was all I needed to hear. That speech wasn’t trying to convince Republicans to revolt against their leader, it was trying to soften moderates to vote for a dictator who will crush them at the first chance.
Yours is a thoughtful and well reasoned take. I didn’t think it was trying to soften anyone. I thought it was making a call for more workers to unionize with a list of corporate horrors as the thing to unite against. That said, I do agree that having that message set in the RNC may be a permission structure for moderates. Moreover, I’m certain they let O’Brien speak as a means of wooing low-info voters, but I’m not sure how that’d work since those people aren’t going to hear any of it.
It’s fair that maybe he felt like he could still insert a pro-labour message in the minds of working class Republican voters who were tuned in, but it’s confounding for him to not call out Trump who is representative of the exploitative capitalists he was talking about. That’s the silent endorsement to me, making it seem like the two are not completely at odds.
“This face eating leopard is good! It’s those other face eating leopards you should be worried about…”
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
I watched the speech live. I actually agree with a lot of what he said, but the dead silence in the crowd when he wasn’t kissing Trump’s ass was all I needed to hear. That speech wasn’t trying to convince Republicans to revolt against their leader, it was trying to soften moderates to vote for a dictator who will crush them at the first chance.
Yours is a thoughtful and well reasoned take. I didn’t think it was trying to soften anyone. I thought it was making a call for more workers to unionize with a list of corporate horrors as the thing to unite against. That said, I do agree that having that message set in the RNC may be a permission structure for moderates. Moreover, I’m certain they let O’Brien speak as a means of wooing low-info voters, but I’m not sure how that’d work since those people aren’t going to hear any of it.
It’s fair that maybe he felt like he could still insert a pro-labour message in the minds of working class Republican voters who were tuned in, but it’s confounding for him to not call out Trump who is representative of the exploitative capitalists he was talking about. That’s the silent endorsement to me, making it seem like the two are not completely at odds.
“This face eating leopard is good! It’s those other face eating leopards you should be worried about…”