Trump Spent $20,000 For Rally Featuring Non-Union Workers Holding 'Union Members For Trump' Signs

Trump Spent $20,000 For Rally Featuring Non-Union Workers Holding 'Union Members For Trump' Signs

Former president Donald Trump points at Drake Enterprises in Clinton Township, Michigan on September 27, 2023. Photo: Photo by Nic Antaya for The Washington Post via Getty Images (Getty Images)

Hey remember last year when Donald Trump held a rally at a non-union auto supplier shop in Michigan while President Joe Biden was taking his historic walk along the UAW picket line? Well we now know that strange stunt cost the Don $20,000.

Ryan Blaney On The Bond Between Driver And Spotter

We knew back in September of 2023 of course, that the Drake Industries plant in Clinton Township, Michigan, was non-union, but campaign finance documents now show that the stunt cost President Deals $20,000:

Workers at Drake Industries had some entertaining reviews of their non-union employer before and after the forced-rally:

“Crabs in a bucket mentality,” someone who said they were a former production worker reportedly wrote on Indeed.com. “Nothing about this job is good longevity wise and McDonald’s pays more.” Despite this, the person still gave Drake three out of five stars.

Someone who reportedly identifies as a current technician called Drake the “worse [sic] place to work,” and gave the company two stars. Slate says that across 35 total reviews, Drake got its lowest marks for “management” at just 2.8 stars out of a possible five.

While paying people to attend your rallies is pretty sad (and exactly what Trump and his ilk accuses the other guys of doing) I’m just impressed that Trump, a notorious shirker of responsibilities, actually paid his bill this time. Of course, none of the workers who had to sit through his spittle-throwing tirade ever saw any of that money. Now if only they had some sort of united representation that could bring worker’s concerns and needs to the forefront with management…

See also  Panel Rehearing Denied by Ninth Circuit