TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#33451: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:37:41 AM

Grizzly, there is a marked difference between believing something will harm your business and then issuing a statement that basically threatens a person with losing their job if they vote a certain way. The first is understandable, and excusable so long as you don't try to manipulated people with it. The second is not, and should be held accountable.

We're not seeing this in a bad light because we hate businesses (which if you were paying attention you would realize we don't), or are inclined to see CE Os a certain way. We're seeing this in a bad light because it is genuine bullying and an attempt to manipulate people's votes. You're bending over backward to excuse a violation of people's rights. (To employment and to vote in any way an individual sees fit.) You're bending over backwards to excuse the violation of rights I'm fairly certain you hold very dear to yourself. And it is mind boggling that you would do so.

We don't hate big businesses, or CE Os. We hate the actions of those who are trying to curtail people's rights in order to maintain their power and unfair advantage. And we hate that they can do it with near impunity, or at least seem to operate under the assumption that they can.

Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#33452: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:38:17 AM

@Fighteer

That's not what's said though. The mail doesn't outright say "I'll quit". It's more like, "If Obama does not get reelected, the corporate workers' rights will be in decline", meaning that there may be less incentive to be employed in a corporation. This can be construed by the employer as "I will have to quit from working in this company". Grizzly is saying that this possible implication is not enough.

Is there a difference between active coercion and a possible implication like this? You're saying no and Grizzly is saying yes.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:41:03 AM by Trivialis

ch00beh ??? from Who Knows Where Since: Jul, 2010
???
#33453: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:39:10 AM

@Fighteer: this post

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter
#33454: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:40:57 AM

I as an employee walk into my boss's office and demand that he vote Democrat or else I will use my knowledge of the company's workings to sabotage operations.

That would be unacceptable. But were you to say "please vote for Obama because if Romney is elected I won't be able to afford health insurance on what this job pays and will have to look elsewhere", that would be completely fine.

<><
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#33455: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:43:06 AM

[up] That is certainly a valid argument, but it's between me and my boss and is not coercive. Stating, "I could be unable to work if I can't get health insurance," is factual. Now, how about a company that threatens to cut its employee health benefits if Obama gets reelected?

@ch00beh: If you are replying to a specific post, please indicate that; otherwise we think you're making a general statement.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:44:00 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
#33456: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:43:24 AM

Grizzly, there is a marked difference between believing something will harm your business and then issuing a statement that basically threatens a person with losing their job if they vote a certain way.

As far as I can tell, no one is being threatened with the loss of their job based on their voting choice. There has been absolutely no indication that should these layoffs actually take place they will be targeted at supporters of Obama. If there was, and I missed it, then please point me to it, and I will agree with you that it is an example of extortion.

<><
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#33457: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:45:13 AM

@Grizzly: http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/17/1037881/leaked-audio-romney-employers/

Romney actively encouraging businesses to issue exactly such threats. And it's not that they will be targeted at Obama supporters. Who you vote for is none of your employer's business. That's not necessary for the claim of extortion, though. The implication that "if candidate X wins, you could be laid off" is all that's required. It creates a climate of intimidation in which an employee might feel pressured to vote a certain way.

You, of all people, should be in favor of voting rights free of coercion.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:46:37 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
ch00beh ??? from Who Knows Where Since: Jul, 2010
???
#33458: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:45:41 AM

It was semi-general, too, since I usually get a mild anti-corporation vibe from this thread at any given time.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter
#33459: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:45:57 AM

@Fighteer 33455: The equivalent statement to this situation would be "if Obama is elected we will probably have to cut benefits because Obama's policies will make them prohibitively expensive", or as was actually stated "we will have to cut staff because the market will continue to be bad", both of which are no different from the health insurance example I gave.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:46:51 AM by EdwardsGrizzly

<><
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#33460: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:47:59 AM

@Fighteer

Can you define what is coercive and what isn't, and provide examples to show that it works both ways?

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#33461: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:48:08 AM

[up][up]You do not send that out as a general email to all of your employees. That's the difference. You put it in your company reports and forecasts. You may even issue press releases. You do not get all your employees together (physically or virtually) and confront them with, "if X wins, you may get fired".

[up] I would think that was obvious, but again, general employee communications should not be used for political advocacy, period. I don't care which side it's on. That is, of course, unless you work for an organization that is explicitly political — obviously you'd expect people working at Romney's campaign office to vote for him.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:50:30 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#33462: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:50:05 AM

That would be unacceptable. But were you to say "please vote for Obama because if Romney is elected I won't be able to afford health insurance on what this job pays and will have to look elsewhere", that would be completely fine.
That might be fine, depending on the balance of power. Most employees are replaceable and simply can't make this a threat.

If you're a highly paid, highly skilled employee in an indispensable position, and your employer can't replace you, then I'd be a bit more skeptical of such a line. Of course, a highly paid employee saying that he wouldn't be able to afford health insurance would draw skepticism, just like an extremely wealthy business owner building his own personal Palais de Versailles in Florida should draw skepticism when he claims he'd have to lay people off if Obama gets reelected.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
#33463: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:51:13 AM

@Fighteer 33457: Um, no, that article states nothing whatsoever of the kind. Maybe you misread my post:

As far as I can tell, no one is being threatened with the loss of their job based on their voting choice. There has been absolutely no indication that should these layoffs actually take place they will be targeted at supporters of Obama. If there was, and I missed it, then please point me to it, and I will agree with you that it is an example of extortion.

As far as I have seen, no one is being threatened with the loss of their job as punishment for voting for Obama. They are being warned that, in the company's assessment, a win for Obama will put the jobs of all the employees at risk, democrat and republican, because the company believes that a win for Obama will harm their company and force layoffs.

<><
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#33464: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:51:50 AM

[up]x3

So would you see the reformulated version I posted here as coercion?

edited 18th Oct '12 11:54:53 AM by Trivialis

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#33465: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:53:37 AM

Grizzly, here are two articles previously linked (before anyone learned about Romney encouraging this) which is what started this particular issue in the first place.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/09/978211/david-siegel-fire-employees/

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/14/1009651/ceo-fire-employees-obama/

Basically, both are threatening their employees to not vote for Obama. When their employees even collectively (there being a lot more voters not working for those companies than are, and they have no control over how other people vote) with losing their jobs if Obama wins. This is what we're pissed about. We're not just seeing corporations in a bad light just because, we're seeing them in a bad light because someone is behaving like a manipulative jackass.

TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#33466: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:53:41 AM

There is an implication through the letter. The reason the letter was circulated was because it was a legend to begin with, back in 2008, which basically was already established as "Boss man is throwing weight around."

Let me put it this way. Grizzly, how exactly would you determine whether or not this was extortion? Surely you see that it could be extortion, but what would it take to convince you that it IS extortion?

DrunkGirlfriend from Castle Geekhaven Since: Jan, 2011
#33467: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:55:24 AM

@Grizzly: It depends on which company we're looking at. Murray Coal is also threatening layoffs, and while they're not threatening specifically for those who vote Obama, they do send out regular memos with lists of employees who have not yet attended a GOP fundraiser.

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#33468: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:56:02 AM

depending on the balance of power. Most employees are replaceable and simply can't make this a threat.

Especially if they don't have collective bargaining rights.

they do send out regular memos with lists of employees who have not yet attended a GOP fundraiser.

Oh, that's just wrong. That's like if my prof were to dink our grades because we weren't attending the Obama rally tomorrow or something.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:57:38 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#33469: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:57:13 AM

"they do send out regular memos with lists of employees who have not yet attended a GOP fundraiser."

Again, what? Corporations of any sort should not be engaging in political advocacy. God damn Citizens United.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
ohsointocats from The Sand Wastes Since: Oct, 2011 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#33470: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:57:31 AM

Yes, it should be like vote Obama or we strike or have a walkout or something.

RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#33471: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:58:25 AM

As far as I have seen, no one is threatened with assault or vandalism for not giving money to the Corleones. They are being warned that, in the Family's assessment, a failure to raise sufficient funds for protection efforts will put all the residents of the neighbourhood at risk, related by blood or not, because the Family believes thugs† will come in and start roughing things up.

†Worth noting that were these thugs come from is unspecified. A good vague threat doesn't give details about the mechanism by which the bad consequences come about. Was it ever mentioned why Obama would be bad for the economy again?

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#33472: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:58:38 AM

^^^ I don't think Citizens United opened any door for this sort of low-key coercion; it was there all along.

^^ Yeah, that's more like a comparable threat. Though you may want to flesh out the details to give a proper justification.

edited 18th Oct '12 11:59:13 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#33473: Oct 18th 2012 at 11:58:47 AM

In point of fact, I can't think of any examples of strikes where the condition for returning to work was "the corporation's management voting for a candidate". That's kind of absurd. Most strikes are for much more prosaic things like pay, benefits, and working conditions.

[up][up] "You know, that Obama guy. If he gets into office, terrible things might happen. You know, economic collapse. Famine. Dying kids. A thousand years of darkness. And yeah, we'll have to have some layoffs. Sucks, but what can you do?"

(Imagine this said in a stereotypical Italian accent.)

edited 18th Oct '12 12:00:57 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
#33474: Oct 18th 2012 at 12:00:00 PM

@Tomu: Testimony from employees who were contacted on a individual level and told "promise to vote for candidate X, we will be recording your response". As long as the employer does not know who their employees vote for, they cannot be threatening their employees with punishment for voting a particular way.

they do send out regular memos with lists of employees who have not yet attended a GOP fundraiser

That is something I disapprove of, though I'm not certain it should be illegal.

<><
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#33475: Oct 18th 2012 at 12:01:16 PM

That's an arbitrarily high burden of proof.

I think we're done with this conversation.


Total posts: 417,856
Top