Originally Posted by
HerkDriver
If that was ALPA's concern, why did they back the guy sitting in the White House in the first place? Even my 11 yr old son could see that this guy wasn't qualified to be in the Oval Office.
If they were truly concerned about my "lifestlyle" (and not just my dues money) they would have supported a candidate that didn't have "I'm here to redistribute the wealth" blatantly painted across his forehead. Now ALPA seems shocked and surprised that he is actually trying to make "all animals equal"....
One reason may have been because the other guy sponsored a bill for "baseball style" arbitration which is a huge advantage to companies that have union contracts to negotiate. FWIW, I don't like the guy in the WH either and saw quite clearly he was totally unqualified to do anything that didn't involve a teleprompter or inciting class warfare. I voted for the other guy not because I thought he was awesome but because he was the only alternative. Some times you just have to pick your poisons. While ALPA never formally endorsed BO, I can see why they would have rather have had him in office then the guy who called airline pilots greedy and unpatriotic while sponsoring a bill to make forced arbitration with no appeals the law of the land. YMMV