"During a speech Tuesday morning, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called out former President Barack Obama..."

"... for his buddy-buddy relationship with Wall Street and his questionable negotiations on trade.... 'He surrounded himself with Wall Street people who didn’t understand working people... He spent the last year of his administration fighting us on TPP... That probably cost [Democrats] the election.'... Beyond condemning Obama, the AFL-CIO penned a lengthy letter in opposition to the Green New Deal...  Trumka and Trump haven’t seen eye-to-eye in the past. The president has called him out over policy disagreements, claiming that Trumka’s leadership has driven the decline in union membership — which hit a record low in 2018....  It’s highly unlikely that the leadership at the AFL-CIO will be jumping on the Trump train anytime soon, but its public criticisms of Democratic policies and leadership signal that the Democratic Party may be losing grasp of the union votes it’s enjoyed for the past several decades."

From "Major Union Breaks From Political Norm to Slam Obama, Credit Trump: Here’s Why That Matters for 2020" (IJR).

ADDED: I remember, back in 2011, during the Wisconsin protests — which were intensely focused on union rights — there was a great deal of criticism of President Obama for not participating, not helping. Obama had promised, in a 2007 speech, to "put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself" and "walk on that picket line" with union workers:

"It don't get no better" says AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka referring to Elizabeth Warren.

Do you like the rhetorical use of the double negative? I can't get no satisfaction from some rich and powerful guy deploying the old double negative device as a way of seeming close to the working-class folk he represents.

There's much more to say about double negatives. (Check out the Wikipedia article on the topic. Do you know when a double negative is litotes?) What I want to talk about is what Trumka says can't get better. The "it" in "it don't get no better" is not Warren herself. Trumka doesn't commit the offense of referring to a woman as "it."

Trumka is talking about who ought to serve as President of the United States, and his preceding sentence is: "She has a very well defined set of values and unlike many politicians, she actually sticks by those values and fights to implement them." So the "it" that "can't get no better" is the quality of having a very well-defined set of values and sticking by them and fighting to implement them.

At some extreme, we're talking about an ideologue, a person who resists new information and who closes her mind to changing circumstances and practical realities. But the point at which we disqualify a candidate as an ideologue depends on whether we are averse to the particular well-defined set of values that person is sticking by and fighting for.

Is Elizabeth Warren an ideologue? Is Scott Walker?

Live-blogging Day 2 of the Democratic Convention.

5:34 Central Time: I jump in, watching C-SPAN, just in time to see the ever-bold, ever-confident Chuck Schumer stride onto the stage. He says: "Tonight, we welcome a New Yorker: President Bill Clinton as our prime time speaker." He does a little fist pump on "speaker." "It's no accident that Democrats celebrate" — a bigger fist pump — "our past Presidents, while Republicans virtually banish theirs" — biggest fist pump and a big smile.

6:40: Emanuel Cleaver gets the conventioneers fired up, but the hoarse-throated yelling doesn't play so well over the television, just like the Howard Dean scream seemed nutty outside of the room where the scream was screamed.

6:48: "Mitt Romney doesn't know a thing about hard work or responsibility," says the president of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka, who likes to portray work as "mopping, vacuuming, and picking up our trash."

7:01: President Obama has focused on jobs since Day 1, says Nancy Pelosi. So... do we get to judge him by the result, or does he get reelection for effort?

7:07: Lots of Dems tonight are talking about "the American Dream," as, of course, the GOP did last week. It's kind of nice to see so much consensus about the idea of individuals working hard — for themselves and their families — and succeeding economically, and interesting that everyone's enthusiastic about calling that "American," as though they're into patriotism, even though I imagine it's the dream among all human beings to be able to achieve economic well-being for themselves and their families through their own work. The real question, rather obviously, is which party will do better for these American dreamers of the American dream. What is the Democrats' argument here? I really don't see it. They seem to be copying the Republicans' theme, criticizing the Republicans for saying it, and insisting they have some dream-boosting methodology.

7:15: Another parade of women. Last night's was the women of the House. Now, it's the women of the Senate. This segment was preceded by a treacly video with a song about "a woman's voice," which apparently, "can sing any song." Okay. Sing "A Boy Named Sue." Gotcha! Didn't I?

7:25: American Idol runner-up Jessica Sanchez sings "You're all I need to get by...." And then a video of Barack Obama comes on.

7:28: A young woman promotes Planned Parenthood, where she found a nurse who was able to diagnose her endometriosis, after a whole lot of doctors had no idea what was wrong with her and even accused her of being some sort of drama queen. What the hell kind of crap doctors was she going to? Come on. Endometriosis is a standard ailment. Are we to think misogyny prevents its detection? (I can't be fact checking, but, seriously, who were these doctors who couldn't diagnose endometriosis?)

7:32: The president of Planned Parenthood asserts that "Mitt Romney says he'll get rid of Planned Parenthood." Can I get a fact check? I just don't believe that.

9:16: Sorry I haven't updated in a while, but I've been bored to tears. Now, it's Elizabeth Warren, so...  She's excited about going on before Bill Clinton, who "had the good sense to marry one of the coolest women on the planet."

9:20: "The system is rigged," Elizabeth Warren asserts.

9:36: I found Warren pretty boring. When the crowd chanted "Warren, Warren," it sounded like "boring, boring." What was boring was mainly what was boring about so many of the other speeches. So much talk about economic opportunity, with no noticeable plan for furthering it, other than statements about how other people out there — not you! — ought to pay their "fair share" of taxes, and this doctrine that you've got to build the economy from the middle out. She got fervent about the notion that corporation are not people. They don't have hearts, and they don't die, and so forth.

9:38: Bill Clinton says: "I want to nominate a man who's cool on the outside, but who burns for America on the inside."

9:58: Clinton goes on at great length on the topic of how Republicans won't cooperate and compromise and work with the Democrats. Then he says he watched the GOP convention last week:"Did y'all watch their convention? I did."

In Tampa, the Republican argument against the President's reelection was actually pretty simple, pretty snappy. It went something like this: We left him a total mess, he hasn't cleaned it up fast enough, so fire him and put us back in. But they did it well. They looked good. They sounded good. 

And he says he was convinced they were "honorable people," who really believe what they said and will keep their commitments, so the key for Democrats is to make sure people understand what they believe.

10:09: Wow, he's going on a long time. It's reminiscent of his DNC keynote speech in 1988, when his going on too long turned into a huge joke. That was Clinton's original national reputation: The guy who talked too long.

10:27: It's almost 20 minutes since I said "Wow, he's going on a long time," and he's still going. This is insane. His inflections are getting wacky, like he's in love with how cute he is.

10:38: Finally, it's over. He spoke for 50 minutes. That was really self-indulgent.

11:04 (my time, after pausing): Obama comes out to interact with Clinton. Clinton gives a low bow. And now, they still have to do the roll call. I feel sorry for the kiddies in the crowd. It's late! 

"The recall election in Wisconsin... 'sets the template for the fall campaign.'"

"If Walker wins... you'll never see Obama defending unions," says Nelson Lichtenstein, an American labor historian at the University of California – Santa Barbara. 

And, he suggests, public-sector unions will gradually lose support. "Out of sight," he said, "out of mind."

He also says:

"All these governors are under tremendous fiscal pressure... If they see the public sector unions can be defeated, this will be seen as an easy way out." Lichtenstein, who calls what Scott Walker is doing an "assault" on public sector unions, makes it clear that he personally doesn't think it would be an easy way out. But he acknowledges that "if Walker ekes it out and wins, it will embolden" other governors, both Republicans and Democrats.

Interesting, especially after the assertion by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka that if Scott Walker wins he'll be "a debilitated governor."

"We'll take out Scott Walker."

Says AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.