By Teri Christoph | RedState.com
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin
Kamala's been looking everywhere for the union label, but she just can't seem to find one.
In the latest blow to her campaign, the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) has followed in the footsteps of the Teamsters union and declined to endorse a candidate in the 2024 presidential race. This breaks with a decades-long tradition of the IAFF endorsing nearly all Democrat presidential candidates.
A post that appeared on the IAFF's X account Thursday stated that their executive board voted not to endorse after "taking unprecedented steps to hear our members' views and the policy issues that matter most to them" over the past year. In other words, the union doesn't like Kamala, but also doesn't want the blowback they'd get from endorsing Trump. So they do nothing.
It sounds an awful lot like the Teamsters' decision to not endorse back in September. In a sentiment echoed by the IAFF in its decision, the Teamsters chose not to make an endorsement after taking into account the views and priorities of its members:
“Our mission as union representatives is clear: to be honest and upfront, to be inclusive and, above all, to be transparent with our membership. As the strongest and most democratic labor union in America, it was vital for our members to drive this endorsement process. Democrats, Republicans, and Independents proudly call our union home, and we have a duty to represent and respect every one of them."
As the tweet below shows, the IAFF's decision is not good news at all for Kamala, who is one of only two Democrat presidential candidates since 1984 to not receive the endorsement. The other candidate? Hillary Clinton.
This is going to ruffle a lot of leftist feathers. Many will undoubtedly see some kind of misogyny in the union's decision to not endorse the Democrat Party's two female presidential candidates. Leaving out the fact that the left collectively cannot define what a female or a woman is, the male-dominated unions will surely be excoriated for daring not to endorse the women.
Others will see it as a betrayal because, for decades now, Democrats took these kinds of union endorsements for granted. They were the party of the working man (wink, wink), therefore, deserved the endorsements. Democrats have bought union endorsements for time immemorial, so something has gone very, very wrong here.
Things are trending in a very bad direction for Kamala. As RedState reported earlier Thursday, Kamala has embraced the striking dockworkers, despite the potential devastating effects for the U.S. economy, calling for them to receive their "fair share" of the profits earned by the companies that keep the strikers employed. She, in return, is getting little or no support from the picketing longshoreman.
Bottom line here is that Kamala Harris is deeply unlikable to vast swaths of the electorate, even to traditionally Democrat voting blocs like unions, despite the best electioneering efforts of the corporate media.
