Wisconsin votes anti-union bill in

[Zander]

As Obama so ineloquently reminded us after passing Obamacare in the middle of the night on Christmas Eve, "We uh um, uh, won. Elections, um ah, have, ah ah ah um, consequences". So now the poor petulant whining Democrats don't like it when they are on the losing side? Too fucking bad! I think Democrats better get used to it, because they are going to be losing a lot of elections over the next few years.

Did they really think we'd forget the sleazy way they rammed Obamacare through? We didn't.

 

[boedicca]

^^^ What he said, underscored by my siggie:

 

[Gadawg73]

I asked you a question. If you don't know the answer please admit that.

From what I have read on the internet teachers are NOT required to belong to the union.

Wisconsin is a closed shop union state and not a right to work union state.
You have to join the union to teach in Wisconsin. Period, no exceptions.
Wisconsin is a forced unionism state.
The VERY FACT of the law that Walker wants to pass is:
"It will be against the law to force someone to join a union or pay dues to a union".
They want to make Wisconsin a right to work union state. Do you even know what that means?
Facts sure are a bitch, aren't they?

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

 

[Annie]

I asked you a question. If you don't know the answer please admit that.

From what I have read on the internet teachers are NOT required to belong to the union.

Wisconsin is a closed shop union state and not a right to work union state.
You have to join the union to teach in Wisconsin. Period, no exceptions.
Wisconsin is a forced unionism state.
The VERY FACT of the law that Walker wants to pass is:
"It will be against the law to force someone to join a union or pay dues to a union".
They want to make Wisconsin a right to work union state. Do you even know what that means?
Facts sure are a bitch, aren't they?

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

I'm not going to go through all these posts, but I've seen no one actually address the fact that while 'closed shops' are illegal, the union shops are alive and well. In effect, those that want to work at a union location, must pay dues whether or not they want to belong to the union. Thus a defacto closed shop. WI and IL are two examples. It's wrong. If more people wish to belong to the union, they'll have no problem collecting their dues.

 

[DiveCon]

I don't give a fuck about your whiny hypotheticals. I do, however, welcome you to support charges being brought against the Senators. However, they are INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY and you, Sarge, are not the arbiter of such things.

In other words ... Neener, neener. Tough shit. Deal with it.

You prove you are a waste of space. You cheer on Senators violating the law, violating their oath of Office, the trust of the people that voted them in and all the rest of the State. I repeat you shit stain, SHOULD the Republicans have fled DC to prevent the passage of a bill that was LITERALLY being rammed down the peoples throats as you claim these turds have done?

Remember you lying sack of human excrement that the Health care bill was OPPOSED by a MAJORITY of Americans.

I can pull a useless poll that shows the majority of Americans were for the bill or something stronger but that's neither here nor there because like I said, I don't give a fuck about your hypotheticals but here's one for you to chew on:

Can you IMAGE if Obama, sounding like subordinate reporting to his boss, spilled his guts to a fake George Soros and admitted to seriously considering planting troublemakers in protest crowds but decided against it only for political reasons, reveled a plan to pretend to be ready to negotiate in good faith as part of a political ploy to crush GOP opposition to a major piece of legislation, and accepting airfare and a trip to California to celebrate the win?

i doubt you can since ALL the polls showed the exact opposite

 

[Trajan]

If there is another thread - please merge it...couldn't believe I couldn't find one.

After 59 hours straight of Democrat speeches...bill passes.
Then the Democrats complained they hadn't been heard....now that's funny.

Wisconsin Assembly Passes Bill Limiting Union Rights - FoxNews.com

I just watched a vid of the house assembly vote and the pandemonium there after.


I am really trying to figure out why, our msm who spent no small amount of time denigrating the tea party at just about every townhall they could grab vid of, yet, all you hear ( I saw a panoply of network anchors) doing the same gig, the lead off being as Bernie lays out-


Point number three: NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams opened his newscast the other night with these words:

“Good evening. From the Mideast to the American Midwest tonight, people are rising up. Citizens uprisings are changing the world. … Tonight, we’re going to begin in Wisconsin. The state capitol has been taken over by the people.”

Get it? The good guys in the Middle East were the courageous demonstrators. The good guys in the Middle West are the courageous demonstrators. The bad guys in the Middle East were the monsters running the government. The bad guys in the Middle West …

Get it now?

The Lamestreams Strike Again — This Time in Madison | BernardGoldberg.com

I am not down with his description of “lamestream” media, but he certainly has a point and a very good follow up in the link as to the double standards employed.



who here thinks there is any connection with Alexandria or Cairo and Madson Wi.? frankly I find their comparisons appalling.

 

[Trajan]

funny... i think that's thanks to their governor.

but whatever.

Ohh look Jillian agrees with Democrats that refuse to follow the rule of law, the policy of their chamber and the will of the people. Go figure.

They are doing everything in their power to stop a bill from being rammed down the people's throats. Isn't democracy fun?

Irony alert yo...

 

[DiveCon]

I can pull a useless poll that shows the majority of Americans were for the bill or something stronger but that's neither here nor there because like I said, I don't give a fuck about your hypotheticals but here's one for you to chew on:

Can you IMAGE if Obama, sounding like subordinate reporting to his boss, spilled his guts to a fake George Soros and admitted to seriously considering planting troublemakers in protest crowds but decided against it only for political reasons, reveled a plan to pretend to be ready to negotiate in good faith as part of a political ploy to crush GOP opposition to a major piece of legislation, and accepting airfare and a trip to California to celebrate the win?

Yes, becauase any poll that showed most Americans supported the passing of the hc bill would indeed be useless. All reputable polls, like Gallup, Rasmussen, Fox, CNN, NBC, USAToday, etc, etc, showed over 50% of Americans didn't want the HC bill.


And his hypothetical is spot on. The HC bill was just as much a hot topic as this union bill. Did the GOP flee and refuse to show up to vote? Nope. They stood in there and took their defeat. Now Dem's won't do the same. They flee like children.

In this unlawful absence, if they drove 1 government car, used 1 government credit card, spent one single penny of gov't money on an unapproved, unlawful absence from duty, I'd have them criminally charged with Breach of Trust, or the charge would probably actually be Embezzlement since it is government money being spent without authorization on an unapproved absence from duty.

Liberals are such sore losers. Maybe being losers their whole life would've trained them better, but no such thing has occurred. After an entire life of being a loser, they still get pissed over it.

Oh well. We won. It's all a formality from here on out, but the end result is settled. And hopefully, God willing, other states such as OH, NJ, PA, MI, IL, CA, etc, etc, will follow with similar laws and bust up these thuggish unions.

Opinion polls are crap don't try to cite them at me. Here a CNN poll showing that the majority of Americans are for the healthcare bill or something stronger.

funny, your link say 54% OPPOSE it

FAIL

 

[DiveCon]

Wisconsin is a closed shop union state and not a right to work union state.
You have to join the union to teach in Wisconsin. Period, no exceptions.
Wisconsin is a forced unionism state.
The VERY FACT of the law that Walker wants to pass is:
"It will be against the law to force someone to join a union or pay dues to a union".
They want to make Wisconsin a right to work union state. Do you even know what that means?
Facts sure are a bitch, aren't they?

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

ravi is an idiot

 

[Trajan]

just as a benchmark it does well to remember that Federal employees have NO collective barging rights...PERIOD, none of the 2 million of them.

 

[Tea Bag Partier]

Wisconsin is a closed shop union state and not a right to work union state.
You have to join the union to teach in Wisconsin. Period, no exceptions.
Wisconsin is a forced unionism state.
The VERY FACT of the law that Walker wants to pass is:
"It will be against the law to force someone to join a union or pay dues to a union".
They want to make Wisconsin a right to work union state. Do you even know what that means?
Facts sure are a bitch, aren't they?

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

In spite of your girlish "LOLs", it took me three minutes on google to find out I was 100% correct, and you were 100% wrong.

Union membership is not compulsory in any state. Its against the law.

I tend to get legal information from lawyers, not from obscure rightwing message board posters.

Here's the scoop on this, from a rightwing legal website. Which corroborates everything I said.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Question: Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union?

Answer: You may not be required to be a union member. But, if you do not work in a Right to Work state, you may be required to pay union fees.

Employment relations for almost all private sector employees (other than those in the airline and railroad industries) are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the NLRA, you cannot be required to be a member of a union or pay it any monies as a condition of employment unless the collective bargaining agreement between your employer and your union contains a provision requiring all employees to either join the union or pay union fees.

Even if there is such a provision in the agreement, the most that can be required of you is to pay the union fees (generally called an "agency fee.") Most employees are not told by their employer and union that full union membership cannot lawfully be required. In Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985), the United States Supreme Court held that union members have the right to resign their union membership at any time.

Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union? | National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

There you have it bunky. I was right.

You never are forced to join the union. But, if you are greedy enough to want to accept the compensation package union lawyers and negotiators spent time fighting for, you should chip in a few bucks to pay them. Why should you accept a union contract and a union-negotiated wages, but get a a free ride from helping to pay for the people who spent time and money negotiating a gold-plated union contract?

 

[Ravi]

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

ravi is an idiot

no YOU

 

[The T]

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

ravi is an idiot

no YOU

 

[Charles_Main]

If there is another thread - please merge it...couldn't believe I couldn't find one.

After 59 hours straight of Democrat speeches...bill passes.
Then the Democrats complained they hadn't been heard....now that's funny.

Wisconsin Assembly Passes Bill Limiting Union Rights - FoxNews.com

How can you call a bill that will save 12000 Teachers jobs, anti Union lol.

You, and the Union are all Idiots.

 

[Charles_Main]

Subsequent posters have basically proven you wrong.

How many laws are written when no law is needed?

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

In spite of your girlish "LOLs", it took me three minutes on google to find out I was 100% correct, and you were 100% wrong.

Union membership is not compulsory in any state. Its against the law.

I tend to get legal information from lawyers, not from obscure rightwing message board posters.

Here's the scoop on this, from a rightwing legal website. Which corroborates everything I said.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Question: Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union?

Answer: You may not be required to be a union member. But, if you do not work in a Right to Work state, you may be required to pay union fees.

Employment relations for almost all private sector employees (other than those in the airline and railroad industries) are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the NLRA, you cannot be required to be a member of a union or pay it any monies as a condition of employment unless the collective bargaining agreement between your employer and your union contains a provision requiring all employees to either join the union or pay union fees.

Even if there is such a provision in the agreement, the most that can be required of you is to pay the union fees (generally called an "agency fee.") Most employees are not told by their employer and union that full union membership cannot lawfully be required. In Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985), the United States Supreme Court held that union members have the right to resign their union membership at any time.

Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union? | National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

There you have it bunky. I was right.

You never are forced to join the union. But, if you are greedy enough to want to accept the compensation package union lawyers and negotiators spent time fighting for, you should chip in a few bucks to pay them. Why should you accept a union contract and a union-negotiated wages, but get a a free ride from helping to pay for the people who spent time and money negotiating a gold-plated union contract?

If only that was all they did with Union Dues. Truth is what they do is use them to buy Candidates, and the Entire Democrat Party. Who then send people Favorable to the Union to Negotiate on Behalf of the Government on Union Contracts. Yeah, All that power in the hands of 12 to 19% of the American Work Force. Let's all celebrate the wonders of Unionized Labor. The oldest Old Boys club on the block.

 

[The T]

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

In spite of your girlish "LOLs", it took me three minutes on google to find out I was 100% correct, and you were 100% wrong.

Union membership is not compulsory in any state. Its against the law.

I tend to get legal information from lawyers, not from obscure rightwing message board posters.

Here's the scoop on this, from a rightwing legal website. Which corroborates everything I said.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Question: Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union?

Answer: You may not be required to be a union member. But, if you do not work in a Right to Work state, you may be required to pay union fees.

Employment relations for almost all private sector employees (other than those in the airline and railroad industries) are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the NLRA, you cannot be required to be a member of a union or pay it any monies as a condition of employment unless the collective bargaining agreement between your employer and your union contains a provision requiring all employees to either join the union or pay union fees.

Even if there is such a provision in the agreement, the most that can be required of you is to pay the union fees (generally called an "agency fee.") Most employees are not told by their employer and union that full union membership cannot lawfully be required. In Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985), the United States Supreme Court held that union members have the right to resign their union membership at any time.

Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union? | National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

There you have it bunky. I was right.

You never are forced to join the union. But, if you are greedy enough to want to accept the compensation package union lawyers and negotiators spent time fighting for, you should chip in a few bucks to pay them. Why should you accept a union contract and a union-negotiated wages, but get a a free ride from helping to pay for the people who spent time and money negotiating a gold-plated union contract?

If only that was all they did with Union Dues. Truth is what they do is use them to buy Candidate, and the Democrat Party. Yeah, All that power in the hands of 12 to 19% of the American Work Force. Let's all celebrate the wonders of Unionized Labor. The oldest Old Boys club on the block.

Legalized MONEY LAUNDERING

 

[Tea Bag Partier]

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

In spite of your girlish "LOLs", it took me three minutes on google to find out I was 100% correct, and you were 100% wrong.

Union membership is not compulsory in any state. Its against the law.

I tend to get legal information from lawyers, not from obscure rightwing message board posters.

Here's the scoop on this, from a rightwing legal website. Which corroborates everything I said.

National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Question: Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union?

Answer: You may not be required to be a union member. But, if you do not work in a Right to Work state, you may be required to pay union fees.

Employment relations for almost all private sector employees (other than those in the airline and railroad industries) are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the NLRA, you cannot be required to be a member of a union or pay it any monies as a condition of employment unless the collective bargaining agreement between your employer and your union contains a provision requiring all employees to either join the union or pay union fees.

Even if there is such a provision in the agreement, the most that can be required of you is to pay the union fees (generally called an "agency fee.") Most employees are not told by their employer and union that full union membership cannot lawfully be required. In Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985), the United States Supreme Court held that union members have the right to resign their union membership at any time.

Can I be required to be a union member or pay dues to a union? | National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

There you have it bunky. I was right.

You never are forced to join the union. But, if you are greedy enough to want to accept the compensation package union lawyers and negotiators spent time fighting for, you should chip in a few bucks to pay them. Why should you accept a union contract and a union-negotiated wages, but get a a free ride from helping to pay for the people who spent time and money negotiating a gold-plated union contract?

If only that was all they did with Union Dues. Truth is what they do is use them to buy Candidate, and the Democrat Party. Yeah, All that power in the hands of 12 to 19% of the American Work Force. Let's all celebrate the wonders of Unionized Labor. The oldest Old Boys club on the block.

Nice backpedaling.

You conservatives need to stop with the canard that union membership is mandatory. Even a fringe rightwing legal website says its not.

If you want to work in a union shop, and accept a cushy, gold-plated union compensation and benefits package, its only fair that you chip in a few bucks in dues to help pay for all the union lawyers and negotiators who fought for those contracts.

Otherwise, you can choose not to work in a union shop. Problem solved. Or you can negotiate your own individual compensation package which likely will not be as good as the union contract. Its a free country, don't work in a union shop if you don't want to - and I hate freeloaders who want union contract wages without doing shit.

 

[Trajan]

In spite of your girlish "LOLs", it took me three minutes on google to find out I was 100% correct, and you were 100% wrong.

Union membership is not compulsory in any state. Its against the law.

I tend to get legal information from lawyers, not from obscure rightwing message board posters.

Here's the scoop on this, from a rightwing legal website. Which corroborates everything I said.




There you have it bunky. I was right.

You never are forced to join the union. But, if you are greedy enough to want to accept the compensation package union lawyers and negotiators spent time fighting for, you should chip in a few bucks to pay them. Why should you accept a union contract and a union-negotiated wages, but get a a free ride from helping to pay for the people who spent time and money negotiating a gold-plated union contract?

If only that was all they did with Union Dues. Truth is what they do is use them to buy Candidate, and the Democrat Party. Yeah, All that power in the hands of 12 to 19% of the American Work Force. Let's all celebrate the wonders of Unionized Labor. The oldest Old Boys club on the block.

Nice backpedaling.

You conservatives need to stop with the canard that union membership is mandatory. Even a fringe rightwing legal website says its not.

If you want to work in a union shop, and accept a cushy, gold-plated union compensation and benefits package, its only fair that you chip in a few bucks in dues to help pay for all the union lawyers and negotiators who fought for those contracts.

Otherwise, you can choose not to work in a union shop. Problem solved. Or you can negotiate your own individual compensation package which likely will not be as good as the union contract. Its a free country, don't work in a union shop if you don't want to - and I hate freeloaders who want union contract wages without doing shit.

so you agree that the collective bargaining bruhaha is basically a smoke screen?

 

[DiveCon]

LOL, no.
Right to work laws are statutes enforced in 22 states, Wisconsin NOT being one of them and you damn well know it, allowed under THE TAFT HARTLEY ACT, which PROHIBITS AGREEMENTS BETWEEN LABOR UNIONS AND EMPLOYEES MAKING MEMBERSHIP OR PAYMENT OF DUES OR FEES A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
Enforced ONLY in right to work states.
All others can have it as a condition of employment, such as Wisconsin teachers, that you have to be a dues paying member of the union AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT.
DUH.
Facts are that hard for you to understand???

ravi is an idiot

no YOU

ah, the art15 response
you can even be original
fuck off pissant

 

[Article 15]

Yes, becauase any poll that showed most Americans supported the passing of the hc bill would indeed be useless. All reputable polls, like Gallup, Rasmussen, Fox, CNN, NBC, USAToday, etc, etc, showed over 50% of Americans didn't want the HC bill.


And his hypothetical is spot on. The HC bill was just as much a hot topic as this union bill. Did the GOP flee and refuse to show up to vote? Nope. They stood in there and took their defeat. Now Dem's won't do the same. They flee like children.

In this unlawful absence, if they drove 1 government car, used 1 government credit card, spent one single penny of gov't money on an unapproved, unlawful absence from duty, I'd have them criminally charged with Breach of Trust, or the charge would probably actually be Embezzlement since it is government money being spent without authorization on an unapproved absence from duty.

Liberals are such sore losers. Maybe being losers their whole life would've trained them better, but no such thing has occurred. After an entire life of being a loser, they still get pissed over it.

Oh well. We won. It's all a formality from here on out, but the end result is settled. And hopefully, God willing, other states such as OH, NJ, PA, MI, IL, CA, etc, etc, will follow with similar laws and bust up these thuggish unions.

Opinion polls are crap don't try to cite them at me. Here a CNN poll showing that the majority of Americans are for the healthcare bill or something stronger.

funny, your link say 54% OPPOSE it

FAIL

Heh

For the unchallenged here:

Favor (from Question 19) 43% 40% 39%
Oppose, too liberal 37% 41% 43%
Oppose, not liberal enough 13% 13% 13%
No opinion 7% 6% 5%