This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Republican? Just scream and lie.

1243244246248249315

Comments

  • Isn't the New York Post also part of News Corp, meaning it's owned by Rupert Murdoch, the same guy who owns Fox News?
  • @Dragonmaster I believe so.

    As for my previous question, what would you guys do if your employer emailed you, telling you who to vote for? Laugh it off? Start looking for another employer? Go gangster, and reply all, giving him a piece of your mind (in other words get yourself fired.)
  • Probably that last one, even though it would be a terrible idea.
  • Laugh it off. It's happened to me before, and there is no way of them finding out who I actually voted for anyway. I also believe it's illegal for you to be forced to provide evidence of who you voted for.
  • I'd probably laugh it off, though if I were in a less desperate job market I'd probably do the latter.

    At an old secretarial job I had, I'd edit out some of the more politically charged statements my boss would include in letters to business partners, including how evil the president was, how he was going to take all of their guns away, and how we had to protect ourselves against the librulz. He never did notice.

    We were an elevator consulting firm, for chrissake.
  • @Dragonmaster I believe so.

    As for my previous question, what would you guys do if your employer emailed you, telling you who to vote for? Laugh it off? Start looking for another employer? Go gangster, and reply all, giving him a piece of your mind (in other words get yourself fired.)
    Sounds like the mailings from my union .
  • Well, the Democratic party has historically been more union-friendly than the Republican party, many of whom would love to return to the days when you could call in the National Guard to bust up any sort of union activities... but that said, they're perfectly allowed (just like employers, in general) to state an opinion as to who you should vote for. You're also perfectly allowed to disagree with them.
  • I'm pretty sure it used to be illegal to tell your employees who to vote for, and even if it never was, it should be.
  • edited October 2012
    @Dragonmaster I believe so.

    As for my previous question, what would you guys do if your employer emailed you, telling you who to vote for? Laugh it off? Start looking for another employer? Go gangster, and reply all, giving him a piece of your mind (in other words get yourself fired.)
    I work in the arms industry so it's not that hard to guess who my employer would rather I vote for, but it wouldn't bother me if he sent out an email stating it. This isn't just a matter of his earnings being taxed, a sufficiently anti gun administration could put all of us out of a job.

    That being said, I'm all ready well known as being one of the most liberal folks in the building and if I did give him a piece of my mind over it he'd probably just laugh it off.

    Edit: Was the question about the employer saying who he would prefer you to vote for, or trying to force you to vote a certain way? Those are two very different situations.
    Post edited by Drunken Butler on
  • I would think that your employer telling you to vote for so and so, with an implication it would affect your employment, would be something you'd take to HR. Right? That has to be violating some employment law, right? o_o
  • I would think that your employer telling you to vote for so and so, with an implication it would affect your employment, would be something you'd take to HR. Right? That has to be violating some employment law, right? o_o
    I think it's been mentioned here before, but HR is not really your friend.
  • Nope, the function of HR is to keep the company from being sued, using any means necessary while retaining deniability.
  • Hmm. We are constantly told that if we're harassed in any way by anyone, we should go straight to HR. I would think the person causing the harassment would be punished/sued/etc not the company? Whatever, nobody cares about us employees these days. ;-;
  • The laws concerning it are very fuzzy and vary from state to state. However, there is no way for them to get proof that you voted a certain way or not as they can't pay you to vote a certain way, nor can they walk into the voting booth with you. In other words, there is no way they can effectively threaten your employment based on who you voted for as there is no way for them to actually find out who you voted for.
  • Hmm. We are constantly told that if we're harassed in any way by anyone, we should go straight to HR. I would think the person causing the harassment would be punished/sued/etc not the company? Whatever, nobody cares about us employees these days. ;-;
    The topography of your relationship with HR changes drastically depending on whether it's a coworker or an executive harrassing you.
  • Hmm. We are constantly told that if we're harassed in any way by anyone, we should go straight to HR. I would think the person causing the harassment would be punished/sued/etc not the company? Whatever, nobody cares about us employees these days. ;-;
    The topography of your relationship with HR changes drastically depending on whether it's a coworker or an executive harrassing you.
    Sadly, this is often true. My sister experienced this a couple years back when she was being sexually harassed.
  • Yeah if the endorsement is made with the implication your employment might be affected if you don't then it's an issue.
  • My only problem with the union mailings is that they cherry pick how they portray the candidates. They only print the good for the guy they support and the bad for the guy they oppose. They ignore everything else. According to my union only Bush gave us wiretapping ...
  • I'm probably preaching to the choir but if you CAN vote you SHOULD vote, and vote however you feel. Write in Big Bird for all I care. Just go vote.
  • My only problem with the union mailings is that they cherry pick how they portray the candidates. They only print the good for the guy they support and the bad for the guy they oppose. They ignore everything else. According to my union only Bush gave us wiretapping ...
    That's no different than what anyone else does when trying to prop up their candidate. You should see some of the BS mailings and robocalls I've gotten from Scott Brown supporters...
  • I'm probably preaching to the choir but if you CAN vote you SHOULD vote, and vote however you feel. Write in Big Bird for all I care. Just go vote.
    I don't agree with that sentiment. If you know very little about what's at stake, I think it's better that you voluntarily choose not to vote than to go out and vote in an uninformed manner.

    An uninformed vote is little better than random noise and serves no useful purpose. If you have a duty to vote at all, it's a duty to make an informed vote.
  • Speaking of which, if you haven't done it yet...

    Go to your local board of elections website and get a copy of your ballot so you know who is on it. This election is about more than just the President. Look at who is up and what they have done. You might have a shitty Democrat or a really grat Republican incumbent. Voting straight party ticket without actually researching your party's candidates is negligence, so go forth and learn!
  • Normally I'd agree but I think that dumping as many Republicans as possible is the way to go in this election. We need to free up the gridlock and pave the runway for Obama to prove he's not all talk.
  • Normally I'd agree but I think that dumping as many Republicans as possible is the way to go in this election. We need to free up the gridlock and pave the runway for Obama to prove he's not all talk.
    That may apply at the national level, but at the local level things may be quite different. I'm going to be voting effectively straight Democrat for President and Congress, but I may vote Republican when it comes to the local/state candidates (our Republican rep in the state legislature actually seems to be pretty decent, for example).

  • edited October 2012
    But remember Conservative's vote on Wednesday :-p

    Actually I don't care if people vote in the presidential election years because usually they do. It's the fact people forget that there is an election EVERY year and those position actually have more effect on their day to day life which is annoying.
    Post edited by Cremlian on
  • I did my due diligence and researched all the local candidates in the vain hope that there would be a Republican or Libertarian worth voting for. Turns out they're all under-qualified, ignorant, or crazy.
  • edited October 2012
    I'm probably preaching to the choir but if you CAN vote you SHOULD vote, and vote however you feel. Write in Big Bird for all I care. Just go vote.
    I don't agree with that sentiment. If you know very little about what's at stake, I think it's better that you voluntarily choose not to vote than to go out and vote in an uninformed manner.

    An uninformed vote is little better than random noise and serves no useful purpose. If you have a duty to vote at all, it's a duty to make an informed vote.
    I can't disagree with this statement enough. The reason certain groups in America are so skewed is because of the most active demographics in the democratic process. Why do seniors get Medicare, social security, and countless other benefits? It's because they vote in record numbers. Why are 18-25 year-olds constantly shafted with crazy student loans, educational cuts, and oppressive prohibitions? Maybe it's because, as far as voting statistics are concerned, they are a total minority.

    This is a big issue to me. My town had a huge senior citizen complex in it, and local politics always pandered to them. Their tax cuts are the reason my grade school had to remove its art classroom and computer lab.

    A vote for "slightly less stupid crazy guy" can still do more good than staying home and grumbling about.
    Post edited by Schnevets on
  • The problem is that if you vote ignorantly, you may well just be contributing to the deleterious effects of those demographics you mentioned.

    I think a literacy test is a bad idea, but I think it's immoral to vote without being educated on the issues.
  • I think a literacy test is a bad idea, but I think it's immoral to vote without being educated on the issues.
    Well, "literacy" tests were one way they used to keep African Americans from voting back in the day...

    My main problem is that it's so hard sometimes to find much information on the local candidates. For national or state-wide office, you sometimes may be okay. However, I have had difficulty in trying to find out information on candidates running for things like county comptroller or whatever.
  • I think a literacy test is a bad idea, but I think it's immoral to vote without being educated on the issues.
    Well, "literacy" tests were one way they used to keep African Americans from voting back in the day...

    My main problem is that it's so hard sometimes to find much information on the local candidates. For national or state-wide office, you sometimes may be okay. However, I have had difficulty in trying to find out information on candidates running for things like county comptroller or whatever.
    That's why they're a bad idea. They're tools of disenfranchisement, too open to corruption.

    I think the reason you have trouble finding information on local candidates is that the candidates themselves tend to run mostly on personality and who they know in the community. Their platforms are not a big part of their campaigns. At least, it goes that way here. Even our Senatorial candidates spend 99% of their time disparaging each other rather than presenting their own views. Most of the information I have about Chris Murphy has come from Linda McMahon, naturally all negative.
Sign In or Register to comment.