• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police union: Clinton snubbed us

manise said:
I would like to see the police union questionnaire first before passing judgement.
Click to expand...
The questionnaire is linked in the article. It was pretty easy to find. The link goes to a PDF file.
 
Deuce said:
Re-read the questions that he answered "states rights" to. How many of them feel like dodges?
Click to expand...

Having been a union contract negotiator for 18 years, on the employee side, none of them. They are all legally correct and appropriate. The federal govt should have no say in local negotiations unless said employer is a federal entity.
 
Deuce said:
Yeah but in other "states rights" questions he was happy to answer that he'd support such legislation.

Even the one where a federal law would override state concealed carry requirements.
Click to expand...

And off the subject you go. I always look for the "yeah but" statement.
 
Deuce said:
Some slanted questions there.
Click to expand...

Yeah, imagine cops wanting support that relates to cop stuff. Those selfish bastards. That is why they call it an "endorsement".
 
manise said:
The following is patently untrue: "There is a very real and very deliberate campaign to terrorize our nation’s law enforcement officers and NO ONE has come to our defense." Hillary did well to reject such a biased questionnaire.
Click to expand...

So groups of people calling for the deaths of cops isn't true? Sorry but there's plenty of video evidence showing otherwise. Not to mention people that have purposely killed cops due to all the rhetoric going around.

You might not want to admit the truth. But its there for all to see.
 
JANFU said:
Does BLM have significant support within the African American community?
Click to expand...

I would guess that they do.

They seem to relish sticking their fists in the face of everybody else, though.

Somebody should educate them that telling everyone else to kiss their ass will garner them no support.
 
@Kal'Stang I never said that nothing in the questionnaire was true. I responded to your fallacious claim that "Nothing stated there is untrue." In fact, plenty of people from across the political spectrum, including Clinton, have condemned the recent violence against cops, contrary to the excerpt I quoted and you ignored.
 
Last edited:
manise said:
@Kal'Stang I never said that nothing in the questionnaire was true. I responded to your fallacious claim that "Nothing stated there is untrue." In fact, plenty of people from across the political spectrum, including Clinton, have condemned the recent violence against cops, contrary to the excerpt I quoted and you ignored.
Click to expand...

Condemning violence against cops is different than supporting them. Hillary's statements about violence against cops don't carry much water with law enforcement. They come across as necessary platitudes.
 
SMTA said:
I would guess that they do.

They seem to relish sticking their fists in the face of everybody else, though.

Somebody should educate them that telling everyone else to kiss their ass will garner them no support.
Click to expand...

Yep. I was a supporter of the BLM movement at one point in time, but now I really can't stand the movement. It's gotten totally out of hand, and the movement went from trying to address police brutality to blaming all of their problems on white people.
 
Trump did a surprisingly competent job answering the questions. Are some of the questions obviously biased??? Of course, but there are still ways to answer them.

If Trump could thoughtfully write down his answers to every situation instead of tweeting or blurting out whatever comes in his head, he'd destroy Clinton.
 
Patrickt said:
Nonsense. The FOP is union first, police second. All unions put the unions well-being above the members, above the organizations, and above the customers.
Click to expand...

In this case if the FOP's endorsement is based on a polling of the rank-and-file membership, so your argument here is a bit off base.
 
Ahlevah said:
In this case if the FOP's endorsement is based on a polling of the rank-and-file membership, so your argument here is a bit off base.
Click to expand...

Not at all. If there has been an endorsement it wasn't mentioned in the article referenced in the orignial post. Or, are you saying the rank and file voted on whether or not the union leaders should meet with Mr. Trump?

Police unions exist to protect the incompetent, lazy, corrupt and brutal police officers. That's where they get their base. The union leaders, like all union leaders, get rich.
 
Patrickt said:
Not at all. If there has been an endorsement it wasn't mentioned in the article referenced in the orignial post. Or, are you saying the rank and file voted on whether or not the union leaders should meet with Mr. Trump?

Police unions exist to protect the incompetent, lazy, corrupt and brutal police officers. That's where they get their base. The union leaders, like all union leaders, get rich.
Click to expand...

Not all union leaders get paid so your statement is off base, incorrect, untrue, inaccurate and wrong. I don't know if those union leaders get paid but not "ALL" union leaders do. It is really a post based on emotion so I would guess that your post is more emotion based than rationale based.

An endorsement WAS mentioned in the article AND quoted in the OP.
He and other leaders of the police union — which says it represents 335,000 members — visited with Trump on Friday morning to sound out the Republican nominee about his positions on issues of importance to law enforcement officers. Politico first reported the meeting.

The union will not be meeting with Clinton because her campaign decided not to fill out a questionnaire that is required for seeking the police union's endorsement.

"We were talking to the highest levels of the campaign, and we had all indications that she was going to return the questionnaire," Canterbury said.

"And on the deadline date we were advised that they declined."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
SMTA said:
I would guess that they do.

They seem to relish sticking their fists in the face of everybody else, though.

Somebody should educate them that telling everyone else to kiss their ass will garner them no support.
Click to expand...

They are just realizing that Clinton is about lip service. Clinton needs them more than they need Clinton.
3) Sky-high African-American support and engagement is crucial for Democrats. Suppose African-American voters were to return to pre-Obama, 2004 levels of turnout and partisanship (turnout down from 66 percent to 60 percent and support for Democrats down from 93 percent to 88 percent). In that scenario, Democrats would lose Florida, and their overall margin of victory would be cut by more than half in Ohio and Virginia, giving them almost no room for error with other groups.
Click to expand...
Clinton hasn't really motivated the African-American vote. They don't need to kiss her ass, she is the one that needs to pucker up. African-Americans, on the whole, are in worse shape than they were 8 years ago.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Not all union leaders get paid so your statement is off base, incorrect, untrue, inaccurate and wrong. I don't know if those union leaders get paid but not "ALL" union leaders do. It is really a post based on emotion so I would guess that your post is more emotion based than rationale based.

An endorsement WAS mentioned in the article AND quoted in the OP.
Click to expand...

Sorry but not all have a salary. One way or another, they all get paid. Organized crime doesn't tolerate unpaid volunteers.
 
Patrickt said:
Sorry but not all have a salary. One way or another, they all get paid. Organized crime doesn't tolerate unpaid volunteers.
Click to expand...

And again you post something incorrect. Is this a habit with you? Do you do it on purpose or do you do it because of a lack of knowledge?
 
Deuce said:
"Hillary didn't fill out our paperwork! She's snubbing us!"

Surely a group of police officers has the investigative skills to determine where Hillary stands on various issues of concern.
Click to expand...

It is indicative of where their priorities are. Police unions are not high on their priority list. Republicans are told the same when it comes to campaigns avoiding targeted campaign stops or filling out position statements.

To turn it around on Republicans, the conduct of police unions as of late hasn't entirely been deserving of respect. Furthermore, one could make the somewhat reasonable statement that bending over backwards for unions is not ordinarily in the DNA of a Republican, but is for a Democrat. At least they wised up on some unions. Or at least, that's how I look at it. I'm skeptical of unions.
 
Patrickt said:
Not at all. If there has been an endorsement it wasn't mentioned in the article referenced in the orignial post. Or, are you saying the rank and file voted on whether or not the union leaders should meet with Mr. Trump?
Click to expand...

You can get all of the information you need here.

Since Clinton didn't return the questionnaire and Trump did, I note especially the following part of the statement from leadership of the 325,000 "incompetent, lazy, corrupt, and brutal" police officers who are members of the Fraternal Order of Police, the largest and oldest fraternal police organization in the country, which tellingly hasn't endorsed a Democrat since Bill Clinton in 1996:

Prior to the Fall Meeting of the National Board of Trustees, the members of the Screening Committee will meet with the candidates who completed the presidential questionnaire. That having been said, in a previous election cycle in which one candidate declined to complete our questionnaire, the Screening Committee opted not to meet with either campaign and let the completed questionnaire and the uncompleted questionnaire speak for themselves.

This, however, is only part of the process. Each State Lodge has (or should have) a process by which the members of the local lodges within the State Lodge would convey their preference for a candidate to their National Trustee. It is important that each member know about his or her State’s process for instructing their National Trustee so that all FOP members can meaningfully participate in this process.
Click to expand...
 
Ahlevah said:
You can get all of the information you need here.

Since Clinton didn't return the questionnaire and Trump did, I note especially the following part of the statement from leadership of the 325,000 "incompetent, lazy, corrupt, and brutal" police officers who are members of the Fraternal Order of Police, the largest and oldest fraternal police organization in the country, which tellingly hasn't endorsed a Democrat since Bill Clinton in 1996:
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you think all 325,000 police officers are incompetent, corrupt, lazy, or brutal. Perhaps you need to meet more police officers.
 
Patrickt said:
I'm sorry you think all 325,000 police officers are incompetent, corrupt, lazy, or brutal. Perhaps you need to meet more police officers.
Click to expand...

Don't be disingenuous. You wrote the following:

Police unions exist to protect the incompetent, lazy, corrupt and brutal police officers. That's where they get their base.
Click to expand...

Those aren't my words, they're yours. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence has duly noted your smear of the FOP membership "base," which at 325,000 members of local and state lodges around the country is substantial. Or perhaps you can clarify how you define the term "base." What is the FOP's "base"? I define it as the rank-and-file membership--police officers. If it's not that, then it isn't much of a base, is it? Unless you claim there are just A LOT of "lazy, corrupt, and brutal" police officers? :confused: Can you give a figure? I'm guessing not.
 
Patrickt said:
Police unions exist to protect the incompetent, lazy, corrupt and brutal police officers. That's where they get their base. The union leaders, like all union leaders, get rich.
Click to expand...

Of the 325 K members, estimate how many are lazy, corrupt & brutal???
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Rest assured that Hillary would have to dump on BLM to get that union's support.
Click to expand...

I don't like this false choice narrative that some are pushing. It's either BLM or Cops. That's just BS that people want to use to divide us all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom