* I’m not sure what this TV ad will accomplish, but the Chicago Federation of Labor is putting big money behind 1000 Chicago TV ratings points over two weeks. From a press release…
The Chicago Federation of Labor this week released a 30-second television ad aimed at bolstering turnout by working men and women in the November election and encouraging them to remain engaged when lawmakers return to work later in the month to address issues such as pension reform.
The ad, titled “Our Voice,” recalls that union members have worked for generation to build not only our cities but our communities as well. In recent years, however, politicians and others have tried to strip workers of their collective bargaining rights and cut wages, health care benefits and retirement plans. The best way that working men and women can fend of these attacks is by exercising their voice at the ballot box.
The Chicago Federation of Labor made a substantial buy for broadcast television for the week before Election Day. After the election, a modified ad will run for an additional week urging working people to keep a careful eye on politicians as they address issues such as collective bargaining and pension reform.
“There is so much at stake in this election for working people. They can make the difference in a number of close races by exercising their voice on Election Day,” said Jorge Ramirez, president of the Chicago Federation of Labor. “But that’s not the finish line. Working men and women need to stay engaged as elected officials go to work on issues that have a direct impact on them and their families.”
* Again, I’m not sure how much this will encourage union members to vote, but it’s still quite a dramatic and well-done video. You should definitely watch…
The thing I am not understanding about the unions and this ad is the fact that they are telling union people to get out and vote and be the deciding factor in protecting what they have. I am assuming then that the premise is vote for the people who have helped you and vote against the people who have hurt you. Plausible.
But then they send out mailings and place calls to all the union people to vote straight Democratic, in spite of the fact that people like Frank Mautino have hurt them by sponsering bills that cut their benefits. Don’t examine the record to see if there might be a candidate from the other side who has also helped the unions. Just vote Democratic, no questions. Not rational.
I personally am going to look at the record and if a candidate has done something that has hurt my benefits I will vote for their opponent.
Others on this blog have said that the unions will vote Democratic no matter what the Democrats do to them. I did not think that was actually true when there is blatant anti union action like SB1313 done by a Democrat. I guess I was a little naive.
I am supposing that in spite of the fact that Pat Quinn has declared war on the state workers, especially those in unions and has moved to side with big business and the IPI, the unions will ask us to support him in 2014. Well it ain’t gonna happen. I am going to start with this election to demonstrate that I am not a sheep. I can and will think for myself.
I saw the commercial and I thought it was more about asserting their value to their members in times of diminishing benefits, not so much about backing any one candidate.
Very well done ad. I agree with above comments about researching individual candidates as opposed to straight party lines. Dems seem to have turned into Republicans in many cases in my opinion.
- Because I said so... - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 11:52 am:
@Irish, I wouldn’t automaticlly vote for the opponent of the candidate “that has hurt my benefits.” Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.
Because @ 11:52- I beg to differ with you. My brother and I have had this same discussion on a couple of occassions. When my Representitive is arrogant and unresponsive to his constituents and has done nothing to help those who vote for him, I know what I have. And it is not good. My chances are 50/50 that his opponent might be better. So my options are keep the deadbeat or take a chance that the other guy will do something good. I’ll take the chance.
We all know that a few new people are not going to make a difference in Springfield where four people control the governing. But if refusing to march lockstep off a cliff just because someone tells me to, gets a reaction, or gives the leaders pause, then it is worth it to demonstrate that we are not all lemmings. And if all it does is show the deadbeat he isn’t a lock, it is still worth it.
I think it can motivate the union folks to go out and do GOTV work in the precincts, and it is also another “congrats to the Teachers” thing to annoy Rahm.
Adding - Rich’s post re: “A good look at the machine.” on today’s blog is a perfect example of why “Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.” is NOT the best thought process.
Speaking of unions Rich, take a look at proposition #2 in MI. This question on the ballot will put the right of unions to use the collective bargaining process in the State Constitution…
It’d be nice if a consultant would once in a while say, ‘why would you want to spend money on that?’. This ad is not about the 1%, the 99% or the 47%. It’s all about the 15% (plus production costs).
LIVE session coverage...
- Irish - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 10:34 am:
The thing I am not understanding about the unions and this ad is the fact that they are telling union people to get out and vote and be the deciding factor in protecting what they have. I am assuming then that the premise is vote for the people who have helped you and vote against the people who have hurt you. Plausible.
But then they send out mailings and place calls to all the union people to vote straight Democratic, in spite of the fact that people like Frank Mautino have hurt them by sponsering bills that cut their benefits. Don’t examine the record to see if there might be a candidate from the other side who has also helped the unions. Just vote Democratic, no questions. Not rational.
I personally am going to look at the record and if a candidate has done something that has hurt my benefits I will vote for their opponent.
Others on this blog have said that the unions will vote Democratic no matter what the Democrats do to them. I did not think that was actually true when there is blatant anti union action like SB1313 done by a Democrat. I guess I was a little naive.
I am supposing that in spite of the fact that Pat Quinn has declared war on the state workers, especially those in unions and has moved to side with big business and the IPI, the unions will ask us to support him in 2014. Well it ain’t gonna happen. I am going to start with this election to demonstrate that I am not a sheep. I can and will think for myself.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 10:50 am:
Great spot, but I’m not sure about the call to action, either.
Vote, but for whom?
- siriusly - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 11:02 am:
I saw the commercial and I thought it was more about asserting their value to their members in times of diminishing benefits, not so much about backing any one candidate.
- geronimo - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 11:14 am:
Very well done ad. I agree with above comments about researching individual candidates as opposed to straight party lines. Dems seem to have turned into Republicans in many cases in my opinion.
- Because I said so... - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 11:52 am:
@Irish, I wouldn’t automaticlly vote for the opponent of the candidate “that has hurt my benefits.” Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.
- Irish - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 12:12 pm:
Because @ 11:52- I beg to differ with you. My brother and I have had this same discussion on a couple of occassions. When my Representitive is arrogant and unresponsive to his constituents and has done nothing to help those who vote for him, I know what I have. And it is not good. My chances are 50/50 that his opponent might be better. So my options are keep the deadbeat or take a chance that the other guy will do something good. I’ll take the chance.
We all know that a few new people are not going to make a difference in Springfield where four people control the governing. But if refusing to march lockstep off a cliff just because someone tells me to, gets a reaction, or gives the leaders pause, then it is worth it to demonstrate that we are not all lemmings. And if all it does is show the deadbeat he isn’t a lock, it is still worth it.
- Newsclown - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 12:43 pm:
I think it can motivate the union folks to go out and do GOTV work in the precincts, and it is also another “congrats to the Teachers” thing to annoy Rahm.
- Irish - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 12:57 pm:
Adding - Rich’s post re: “A good look at the machine.” on today’s blog is a perfect example of why “Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.” is NOT the best thought process.
- Anonymous45 - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 4:46 pm:
Speaking of unions Rich, take a look at proposition #2 in MI. This question on the ballot will put the right of unions to use the collective bargaining process in the State Constitution…
- Hyperbolic Chamber - Wednesday, Oct 31, 12 @ 10:24 pm:
It’d be nice if a consultant would once in a while say, ‘why would you want to spend money on that?’. This ad is not about the 1%, the 99% or the 47%. It’s all about the 15% (plus production costs).