Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:32 PM
kpete (38,867 posts)
Leaked Audio Captures Romney Asking Employers To Tell Their Employees How To Vote
Source: Think Progress
Leaked Audio Captures Romney Asking Employers To Tell Their Employees How To Vote By Annie-Rose Strasser on Oct 17, 2012 at 7:00 pm Newly-discovered audio from a conference call in June captures Mitt Romney asking business owners to urge their employees to vote for him. Romney, speaking on a call to the very conservative National Federation of Independent Business, tells a group of business owners that they should “make it very clear” how they feel about the candidates. He also tells the business owners to “pass… along to your employees” how their jobs might be effected by who wins in November: I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections. And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view, I hope — I hope you pass those along to your employees. Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well. Listen at 26:44: Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/17/1037881/leaked-audio-romney-employers/
|
143 replies, 18016 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| kpete | Oct 2012 | OP | |
| scheming daemons | Oct 2012 | #1 | |
| ClusterFreak | Oct 2012 | #12 | |
| Cha | Oct 2012 | #48 | |
| fasttense | Oct 2012 | #128 | |
| connecticut yankee | Oct 2012 | #133 | |
| K Gardner | Oct 2012 | #139 | |
| Cha | Oct 2012 | #140 | |
| Happyhippychick | Oct 2012 | #2 | |
| Baitball Blogger | Oct 2012 | #3 | |
| Rosa Luxemburg | Oct 2012 | #142 | |
| imanamerican63 | Oct 2012 | #4 | |
| sabrina 1 | Oct 2012 | #104 | |
| goclark | Oct 2012 | #5 | |
| stubtoe | Oct 2012 | #44 | |
| robinlynne | Oct 2012 | #99 | |
| silvershadow | Oct 2012 | #100 | |
| Kingofalldems | Oct 2012 | #6 | |
| KamaAina | Oct 2012 | #7 | |
| Dustlawyer | Oct 2012 | #129 | |
| speedoo | Oct 2012 | #8 | |
| ailsagirl | Oct 2012 | #9 | |
| grantcart | Oct 2012 | #10 | |
| beac | Oct 2012 | #11 | |
| Plucketeer | Oct 2012 | #13 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #14 | |
| KansDem | Oct 2012 | #18 | |
| Comrade_McKenzie | Oct 2012 | #19 | |
| durablend | Oct 2012 | #20 | |
| frylock | Oct 2012 | #21 | |
| Control-Z | Oct 2012 | #24 | |
| Happyhippychick | Oct 2012 | #26 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #33 | |
| imanamerican63 | Oct 2012 | #37 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #41 | |
| spooky3 | Oct 2012 | #56 | |
| Sherman A1 | Oct 2012 | #61 | |
| imanamerican63 | Oct 2012 | #72 | |
| Happyhippychick | Oct 2012 | #38 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #43 | |
| Sherman A1 | Oct 2012 | #53 | |
| spooky3 | Oct 2012 | #57 | |
| Sherman A1 | Oct 2012 | #64 | |
| calimary | Oct 2012 | #112 | |
| Swede Atlanta | Oct 2012 | #123 | |
| madrchsod | Oct 2012 | #54 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #84 | |
| PSPS | Oct 2012 | #66 | |
| abelenkpe | Oct 2012 | #78 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #83 | |
| SemperEadem | Oct 2012 | #132 | |
| Major Nikon | Oct 2012 | #103 | |
| NBachers | Oct 2012 | #106 | |
| DainBramaged | Oct 2012 | #113 | |
| imanamerican63 | Oct 2012 | #30 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #90 | |
| imanamerican63 | Oct 2012 | #93 | |
| aquart | Oct 2012 | #34 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #46 | |
| patrice | Oct 2012 | #70 | |
| WestCoastLib | Oct 2012 | #87 | |
| doublethink | Oct 2012 | #49 | |
| patrice | Oct 2012 | #35 | |
| TheMadMonk | Oct 2012 | #52 | |
| exboyfil | Oct 2012 | #85 | |
| daleo | Oct 2012 | #75 | |
| Zoeisright | Oct 2012 | #101 | |
| Azathoth | Oct 2012 | #107 | |
| The Wielding Truth | Oct 2012 | #115 | |
| BlueMTexpat | Oct 2012 | #116 | |
| OldDem2012 | Oct 2012 | #127 | |
| KansDem | Oct 2012 | #15 | |
| kiranon | Oct 2012 | #16 | |
| skeewee08 | Oct 2012 | #17 | |
| sakabatou | Oct 2012 | #22 | |
| OKNancy | Oct 2012 | #23 | |
| Control-Z | Oct 2012 | #28 | |
| oldbanjo | Oct 2012 | #86 | |
| calimary | Oct 2012 | #111 | |
| aquart | Oct 2012 | #25 | |
| Kurovski | Oct 2012 | #27 | |
| AzDar | Oct 2012 | #29 | |
| tanyev | Oct 2012 | #31 | |
| JB126 | Oct 2012 | #32 | |
| Dustlawyer | Oct 2012 | #36 | |
| 99th_Monkey | Oct 2012 | #39 | |
| 2on2u | Oct 2012 | #40 | |
| patrice | Oct 2012 | #42 | |
| hootinholler | Oct 2012 | #45 | |
| mountain grammy | Oct 2012 | #47 | |
| Pab Sungenis | Oct 2012 | #50 | |
| annabanana | Oct 2012 | #51 | |
| glinda | Oct 2012 | #55 | |
| workinclasszero | Oct 2012 | #58 | |
| allinthegame | Oct 2012 | #59 | |
| jmondine | Oct 2012 | #60 | |
| imgbitepolitic | Oct 2012 | #62 | |
| MissNostalgia | Oct 2012 | #63 | |
| Aldo Leopold | Oct 2012 | #65 | |
| yellowcanine | Oct 2012 | #67 | |
| benld74 | Oct 2012 | #68 | |
| doublethink | Oct 2012 | #69 | |
| patrice | Oct 2012 | #71 | |
| doublethink | Oct 2012 | #81 | |
| lonestarnot | Oct 2012 | #73 | |
| Poll_Blind | Oct 2012 | #74 | |
| Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin | Oct 2012 | #76 | |
| aletier_v | Oct 2012 | #77 | |
| elbloggoZY27 | Oct 2012 | #79 | |
| harmonicon | Oct 2012 | #80 | |
| doublethink | Oct 2012 | #82 | |
| Digit | Oct 2012 | #88 | |
| onenote | Oct 2012 | #95 | |
| grammiepammie | Oct 2012 | #130 | |
| Digit | Oct 2012 | #138 | |
| onenote | Oct 2012 | #141 | |
| davidpdx | Oct 2012 | #89 | |
| surrealAmerican | Oct 2012 | #91 | |
| underthematrix | Oct 2012 | #92 | |
| JimDandy | Oct 2012 | #94 | |
| George II | Oct 2012 | #96 | |
| liberal N proud | Oct 2012 | #97 | |
| johnnyrocket | Oct 2012 | #98 | |
| lexw | Oct 2012 | #102 | |
| NBachers | Oct 2012 | #108 | |
| BlueStateBlue | Oct 2012 | #105 | |
| Tx4obama | Oct 2012 | #109 | |
| TomCADem | Oct 2012 | #110 | |
| judesedit | Oct 2012 | #114 | |
| Kablooie | Oct 2012 | #117 | |
| dchill | Oct 2012 | #118 | |
| sunwyn | Oct 2012 | #119 | |
| Hubert Flottz | Oct 2012 | #120 | |
| oldbanjo | Oct 2012 | #121 | |
| OhZone | Oct 2012 | #122 | |
| JHB | Oct 2012 | #124 | |
| oldbanjo | Oct 2012 | #125 | |
| OldDem2012 | Oct 2012 | #126 | |
| Pryderi | Oct 2012 | #131 | |
| Maineman | Oct 2012 | #134 | |
| Jankyn | Oct 2012 | #135 | |
| bamacrat | Oct 2012 | #136 | |
| Gregorian | Oct 2012 | #137 | |
| Pauldg47 | Oct 2012 | #143 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:35 PM
scheming daemons (21,273 posts)
1. this could be as big as the 47% video
Response to scheming daemons (Reply #1)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:43 PM
ClusterFreak (2,601 posts)
12. Boom goes the dynamite.
|
|
Response to ClusterFreak (Reply #12)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:30 PM
Cha (124,347 posts)
48. Koch a doodle do do..
|
"He also tells the business owners to “pass… along to your employees” how their jobs might be effected by who wins in November:"
|
Response to Cha (Reply #48)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:46 AM
fasttense (14,425 posts)
128. This is voter intimidation
|
Last edited Thu Oct 18, 2012, 08:56 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) This is coercion plain and simple. Here's the law, which is still on the books:
A condensed form of 18 USC Sec. 594 (US Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 29, Section 594): Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, at any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing such candidate, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. What Romney is telling these filthy rich RepubliCONS is to commit an illegal act. Plain and simple. |
Response to fasttense (Reply #128)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 10:38 AM
connecticut yankee (1,581 posts)
133. I hope
|
the Dems do something about this. Such as making a campaign commercial, or better yet, reporting it to the DOJ.
|
Response to connecticut yankee (Reply #133)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 04:10 PM
K Gardner (14,805 posts)
139. You'd think by now nothing would make my jaw drop. This does. GOOD GOD !! n/t
Response to fasttense (Reply #128)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 04:21 PM
Cha (124,347 posts)
140. Yes, like the Koch bros.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:35 PM
Happyhippychick (5,681 posts)
2. Ruh roh!
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:40 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) I hope this finishes this scum sucking piece of shit douchebag assmunch off.
Excuse my french. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:36 PM
Baitball Blogger (11,205 posts)
3. Yep. This kind of fascism is what you can expect if Republicans take over.
|
They will be telling you how to live your life and how to vote, if you're lucky to get employed.
|
Response to Baitball Blogger (Reply #3)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 08:06 PM
Rosa Luxemburg (21,955 posts)
142. yes
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:36 PM
imanamerican63 (508 posts)
4. Wow!!!!
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:45 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) I wonder how the right would react if Obama was out their telling the Americans how to vote???? I am glad he only asking for our vote. These self righteous people makes me sick!
|
Response to imanamerican63 (Reply #4)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:35 PM
sabrina 1 (34,027 posts)
104. And threatening their jobs if they don't vote 'the Right way'! This is reprehensible.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:36 PM
goclark (30,404 posts)
5. There must be something illegal about this...
|
"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections."
|
Response to goclark (Reply #5)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:23 PM
stubtoe (1,854 posts)
44. One would think so ...
|
but then the rules are always different for conservatives.
/sarcasm |
Response to goclark (Reply #5)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:08 PM
robinlynne (15,160 posts)
99. Apparently somehow Citiens United made it legal.
Response to goclark (Reply #5)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:19 PM
silvershadow (1,519 posts)
100. ^^What this person said.^^
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:39 PM
Kingofalldems (11,046 posts)
6. K and R for all the Cave visitors
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:40 PM
KamaAina (45,185 posts)
7. Guess what? I believe all the companies that have been caught doing this are NFIB members.
|
What a co-inky-dinky!
|
Response to KamaAina (Reply #7)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 08:37 AM
Dustlawyer (1,299 posts)
129. Rmoney is guilty of conspiracy to commit voter fraud! He threw in the "Obama" part to try to avoid
|
getting nailed for it, but a jury could find "specific intent" from the tape! If only we had a real A.G., instead we have Eric Holdup!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:41 PM
speedoo (11,229 posts)
8. Incredible. Well, not really. It's Romney.
|
And they are now doing his bidding. Wish Tweety had this before today's show.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:41 PM
ailsagirl (9,580 posts)
9. EM-ployees?
|
I've always heard it as em-PLOY-ees
This should get some play-- definitely |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:41 PM
grantcart (38,728 posts)
10. Putz and that "telling your kids how to vote" is going to work really well too.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:42 PM
beac (9,339 posts)
11. " And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama"
|
That's the part he'll try to use to say there's nothing wrong with what he said... as if he didn't know the "very conservative" group he was speaking to was extremely unlikely to have even ONE Obama supporter.
What an ass. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:45 PM
Plucketeer (6,267 posts)
13. If these Jacks take over
|
they'll be able to CHECK your ballot after you've voted to see if you get to keep your job!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:45 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
14. Smoke no fire
|
I don't see what is wrong about the boss expressing an opinion on the candidate as Romney suggested. You may not accept his statements, but he did not tell the owners to order their employees to vote for him or to tell them they would lose their jobs if Romney loses.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:53 PM
KansDem (24,313 posts)
18. Really?
|
Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well.
Kind of reminds me of the small-time hood who walks into a business and says to the owner, "Nice place you got here. Hate to see anything happen to it." -or- "Nice family you have there..." |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Comrade_McKenzie This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:55 PM
durablend (2,927 posts)
20. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:58 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) "Wouldn't want your position to be 'eliminated' the day after you voted for the 'wrong' person, now would you?"
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:56 PM
frylock (19,035 posts)
21. they aren't "suggesting" jack crap. what they're doing is extorting their employees
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:57 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:58 PM
Control-Z (8,242 posts)
24. It was implied
|
and recommended.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:59 PM
Happyhippychick (5,681 posts)
26. Wow that's sad that you think it's okay. Voting is a most precious right and attempts to
|
influence it are a heinous violation.
|
Response to Happyhippychick (Reply #26)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:06 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
33. You mean like unions
|
telling their members how to vote? Bosses have constitutional rights and opinions as well. The beautiful thing is that employers can't follow their employees into the voting booth. What if a candidate absolutely says I will shut down a particular business (which is your business) if elected. Don't you think the boss might want to communicate that information to his/her employees?
We have a marketplace of ideas for a reason. Trust me I am no supporter of Romney, but I still feel complaints about what he said in this regard are weak at best. He is absolutely wrong about hiking the marginal tax rate based upon what happened under Clinton or Bush, but the employer still has the right to say what he believes. |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:12 PM
imanamerican63 (508 posts)
37. It's wrong in both cases and you are not winning this arguement!
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:39 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) My father quit the union, because of them pushing him to do what these owners are doing. If you feel that you want to vote than don't. What your are doing is just as bad as the right wing nuts, looking to pick a fight when the facts are not in your favor!
|
Response to imanamerican63 (Reply #37)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:19 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
41. My employer sends around a summary
|
of the various policy positions of politicians that are running for election. I believe unions do this as well. Certain decisions in Washington, DC will have an impact on my employer and ultimately me if my employer cannot keep operating. I see nothing wrong with it (the PAC they have I do have a problem with though). If an employer says, "I will close this factory if Obama is reelected." I would have to question whether the owner was sincere in his/her belief or just trying to bully me. There are cases in which that will be true. Do you think green energy companies are silent in their communication to employees about what a Romney win would mean to them? Should they stay silent?
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #41)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:42 PM
spooky3 (15,223 posts)
56. The unions have less power over
|
Members than employers have over their employees. Unions can be voted out by employees. And unions are present in fewer than 10% of private workplaces today. Bosses are present in just about all of them.
|
Response to spooky3 (Reply #56)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:55 PM
Sherman A1 (11,530 posts)
61. Well Said
|
The Myth of "Union Thug Bosses" is Right Wing hyperbole.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #41)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:22 PM
imanamerican63 (508 posts)
72. I don't know if they are or not!
|
But when an owner of a company goes on tv and says it publicly what he is going to do if Obama win, is just wrong as is someone who force others to vote the same as they do! You are barking up the wrong tree and I think you belong to a right wing company who forces you to believe what they feed you for lunch. It's amazing when the facts are out there, some people can't believe the truth or say something that is not true. Hum?? Are you a republican??? Then quit trying to hide behind that shade of red!
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:17 PM
Happyhippychick (5,681 posts)
38. "Trust me I'm no supporter of Romney"
|
|
Response to Happyhippychick (Reply #38)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:22 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
43. Look at my other posts if you question
|
my veracity on this point. I think Romney is absolutely the worst candidate a major party has put forward in my memory (and that includes incredibly Bush II). I do like to be fair. I have given Obama a level of financial support that I have never given to another candidate for President before.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:39 PM
Sherman A1 (11,530 posts)
53. Huge difference here
|
Union members are Members of their particular Unions. The Union leadership works for the members and it is within their responsibility to report to their members the facts as they see them on issues that will have an affect on their members.
An employer does indeed have a right to their opinion and a right to express that opinion up to the point where it becomes voter intimidation. Telling their employees that they may lose their job if "Person A" is elected or if "Person B" is not elected to office just might be crossing that line. If my employer made such a statement through whatever means, they would get in return a lecture from me on the right to vote & the secret ballot along with a report to the appropriate Local, State & Federal agencies. |
Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #53)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:43 PM
spooky3 (15,223 posts)
57. Great post.
Response to spooky3 (Reply #57)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:02 PM
Sherman A1 (11,530 posts)
64. Thank You Kindly,
|
|
Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #64)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:20 AM
calimary (30,555 posts)
112. Love your sig line.
|
I really need to focus on that, today in particular.
|
Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #53)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:35 AM
Swede Atlanta (2,243 posts)
123. Yes.....
|
In 2008 I voted as soon as the polls opened and got to the office when the parking deck was fairly empty. When I went down at lunch there was a McCain/Palin flyer on every car, including mine. This is on private property.
I went to the office of the property management company and raised a verbal complaint which I followed up with a strong letter to them as well. I then contacted my employer and the other major tenants in the building. The basic thrust of my letter was that I feel the right to vote was very personal and I did not feel it was appropriate to be solicited, on private property, to be solicited to vote for any candidate or support any political issue. This is especially true when the owner of the property leases office space to a broad array of businesses that may not agree with the property owner. And the leasing businesses have employees that may not agree with the solicitation. The property management company wrote a letter of apology. They stated they were not aware the activity was going on but would look at surveillance video and pursue further. They have clearly posted "No Solicitation" signs. They agreed that solicitation means any manner of solicitation since this is private property. I never heard anything back from them but I do intend to contact them in advance of this year's election they may want to have someone monitoring the parking deck. |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:40 PM
madrchsod (55,705 posts)
54. unions telling their members how to vote?
|
you do not have a clue about how the unions pick candidates or what they can legally and ethically do during an election cycle.
|
Response to madrchsod (Reply #54)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:49 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
84. See my other post
|
At uaw.org "Solidarity - Obama/Biden".
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:05 PM
PSPS (4,190 posts)
66. LOL. The "and unions" canard again.
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:30 PM
abelenkpe (7,108 posts)
78. Do you belong to a union?
|
Because in 23 years mine has never told me how to vote or even made any suggestions one way or the other.
|
Response to abelenkpe (Reply #78)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:47 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
83. Many unions do make endorsements
|
http://educationvotes.nea.org/2012/10/15/obama-vs-romney-two-visions-for-education/
Listen to the candidates talk about education and two distinct visions quickly emerge: President Obama positions public education as the cornerstone of a thriving middle class and healthy economy, while Candidate Romney often refers to education as the exclusive domain of those with the means to attain it. Not saying I disagree. Romney is an utter disaster, but at least two unions endorse Obama over Romney. From uaw.edu - "Solidarity - Obama/Biden" |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #83)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 09:48 AM
SemperEadem (7,993 posts)
132. making an endorsement
|
Last edited Thu Oct 18, 2012, 09:49 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) is not saying "If you dont vote for our guy, we're kicking you out of the union".
That is precisely what these business owners are saying "If you don't vote for mittiot, then I'm kicking you out of your job". If you can't see that difference, then you are lost. Not only that, but these business owners are basing their employees livelihoods on what 300 million other adults do by Nov. 6--and now can those employees be held responsible for 300 million other votes? Do you not see how stupid that is on it's face? |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:32 PM
Major Nikon (9,618 posts)
103. False equivalency fail
|
People don't fear for their jobs if they don't follow their union's endorsement.
And while your employer may not be able to follow you into the voting booth, they can make reasonable assumptions if you have an Obama bumper sticker on your car or if you've ever made a statement supporting a Democrat. |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:46 PM
NBachers (3,685 posts)
106. Study It Out. Look at all the reich wing business owners who've said employees will lose jobs
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:50 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) if they don't elect Robme. Does this cross any lines in your opinion?
There's a pattern of threats like this. Now we have Romney urging business owners to influence their employees to vote for him. Connected? Coincidence? No connection whatsoever? What do you think? |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #33)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:29 AM
DainBramaged (37,776 posts)
113. You have a problem with unions too?
|
Trust me, is that like, I borrowed at prime, the Ferrari is paid for, etc?
Your endorsement of "or else" by these criminals is NOTHING like choice as given to Union members, because it's obvious you've never belonged to a Union. Not from around here are ya son? ![]() |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:05 PM
imanamerican63 (508 posts)
30. You're joking, right????
|
You can't tell me that Romney should be voted into office on the merits of a rich business owner telling his workers, that they would loose their job if Obama wins a 2nd term? This is not a 3rd world country, we have right to vote for who we believe is the best for the job and not who has influence or money. Also, we have heard from one owner who has told his workers that he would close down if Obama wins and I don't think this right! They are only adding to the discourse of the country. I usually don't argue with anyone, but you have hit my button. There are people who try to make some american's vote invalid, I will fight for my rights, your and everyone's else.
|
Response to imanamerican63 (Reply #30)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:11 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
90. Paraphrasing Romney
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:12 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) "Make it very clear to your employees what is the best interest of their enterprise. Pass it along to your employees". Now you may argue that Romney is wrong about what is the best interest of the enterprise, but I see no urge to threaten employees with this suggestion. I can give you one enterprise in which a vote for Romney would be better than a vote for Obama - defense contracting. Each has made their position clear. Now I agree with Obama on defense spending (actually I would like to see it cut even more), but the employer has the right to make the case with the employee.
Now making the case for shutting your business down for the difference between a 28% marginal rate and a 39.6% seems far more dicey, but don't employers have the right to at least make the case? Especially if the case also includes additional costs of hiring workers related to ACA. The Urban Institute says costs will go up for mid size employers with 100-1000 employees (spending up 9.5%). At some point a break point exists for employers in which they can no longer run a business if the profitability is insufficient to justify the effort (other options exist for their capital and entrepreneurial labor). What that break point is should be a discussion for employers and their employees. |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #90)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:37 PM
imanamerican63 (508 posts)
93. Paraphrashing???
|
Wow, he would be last person I would paraphrasing!
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:07 PM
aquart (67,508 posts)
34. Voter intimidation is a felony. This is a conspiracy to commit a felony.
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:08 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to aquart (Reply #34)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:27 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
46. How would you feel about a windmill
|
manufacturer sending around a summary to his/her employees of the policy positions of both candidates and stating that one favors them over another (to the point that they would probably have to close the doors if Romney is elected). Would that be considered voter intimidation?
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #46)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:16 PM
patrice (47,267 posts)
70. That respects the employees responsibility for their own jobs with direct cause & effect
|
rationale on a specific concrete issue.
Promoting less direct, possibly completely unrelated, distinctly probable fear about generalities that include questions about things like Roe v. Wade that are determinative to the outcome of the question, but NOT to the specific enterprises themselves in which people are employed and yet being threatened by those more global circumstances is not the same thing as the example that you cite. |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #46)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:59 PM
WestCoastLib (74 posts)
87. I don't think that's right either
|
Your employer should stay out of your political life...period.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:08 PM
patrice (47,267 posts)
35. Tell me how you have smoke without fire. If I said the future of your job depended upon your answer
|
to a certain question, what would your attitude toward ALL of the possible answers to that certain question be?
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:36 PM
TheMadMonk (5,779 posts)
52. Read some of the bloody memos.
|
Boiled down to essentials, they all pretty much say, "If Obama wins, your job is at risk."
They're not direct threats to the individual worker threatening termination based on their vote, minimally veiled warnings, that the workforce will be downsized if he does. Something those employees might want to consider, more terminations happen under a Republican regulatory environment than a Democratic. |
Response to TheMadMonk (Reply #52)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:50 PM
exboyfil (3,391 posts)
85. My comment regards Romney's comment
|
to the employer forum. No threat is found in it.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:25 PM
daleo (19,931 posts)
75. I agree with you
|
Politically, it looks dodgy, but certainly it's not illegal. It's bad optics for Romney.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:20 PM
Zoeisright (7,795 posts)
101. Oh bullshit.
|
If you don't see that as intimidation you are either naive or on the wrong board.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 12:01 AM
Azathoth (2,399 posts)
107. Come on dude, don't be naive
|
Last edited Thu Oct 18, 2012, 12:02 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) Romney suggesting that CEOs "encourage" their employees to vote Republican is the same as the Godfather suggesting that one of his captains "encourage" the local grocery store owner to pay protection money. Judging from the memos that are leaking out, it's clear that the CEOs, like the mob captains, got the implied message loud and clear.
|
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 03:10 AM
The Wielding Truth (8,436 posts)
115. No. They said that they would lose their jobs if they didn't vote for Romney. Smoke or (fired).
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 03:22 AM
BlueMTexpat (2,594 posts)
116. When I was a federal employee, I was subject to the Hatch Act.
|
While I - and others - have problems with that Act, its stated purpose was to insulate federal employees from perceived coercion by whatever political party was in power. Its true purpose may have been something else.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939 The action as suggested by Romney and as reportedly practiced by some employers is exactly the type of perceived - if not actual - coercion that is forbidden by the Hatch Act. So, as I understand your comments, you have no problem with this perceived - if not actual - coercion in the private sector. Your response about unions telling their membership how to vote is a red herring. A union does not have the power to hire and fire, as does an employer. |
Response to exboyfil (Reply #14)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:43 AM
OldDem2012 (3,526 posts)
127. You mean like the other CEOs have done? Maybe you don't quite understand....
|
....how it works when the leader of any group makes a suggestion...it gets carried out like an order.
Wise up. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:48 PM
KansDem (24,313 posts)
15. This extortion shit needs to stop!
|
When has "vote for me or you lose your jobs" been a winning political strategy?
It's merely extortion and nothing else! |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:48 PM
kiranon (1,406 posts)
16. Romney so loves the middle class that he wants their employers
|
to threaten them with loss of their jobs/livelihood, if they do not vote for him? Is this audio tape for real? Who would be so low to do this as a campaign strategy? Is this an Onion story - it's so hard to tell anymore?
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:50 PM
skeewee08 (1,892 posts)
17. Oh My!!!!! K&R
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:57 PM
sakabatou (29,057 posts)
22. How legal is this?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:57 PM
OKNancy (29,913 posts)
23. I can't wait for this asshole to get beaten
|
I don't want to see his face, hear his voice or read about him after Nov.
I thought I hated Bush... |
Response to OKNancy (Reply #23)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:01 PM
Control-Z (8,242 posts)
28. Exactly how I feel.
|
I really couldn't stand Bush. But this POS - damn, I loathe him.
|
Response to OKNancy (Reply #23)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:51 PM
oldbanjo (676 posts)
86. I'm as sick of him as I was of Palin.
Response to OKNancy (Reply #23)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:15 AM
calimary (30,555 posts)
111. Amen! I feel the same way, OKNancy.
|
Huffington Post ran this story too.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/17/mitt-romney-employees-voting_n_1975636.html?utm_hp_ref=politics#slide=1421303 Glad to see the story is starting to spread. To me, it IS extortion. Veiled maybe, but extortion nonetheless, or conspiracy to commit extortion. All I want is to see myth and her ladyship ayn of dressage go back to Utah. Or Massachusetts. Or Michigan. Or La Jolla CA. Or wherever-the-hell they claim as their home state this week. I hope we never hear from him OR her again. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 07:58 PM
aquart (67,508 posts)
25. Did Romney urge CEOs to commit a felony?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:00 PM
Kurovski (33,249 posts)
27. Pushy. Bossy. Pushy. Weird. Pushy. Creepy.
|
That asshole has no more captured half of America's votes than Wetzelbill/Kurovski did.
It's why he has to encourage people to do crap like this. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:05 PM
tanyev (22,075 posts)
31. Ooh, I didn't realize there was audio of it.
|
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:05 PM
JB126 (165 posts)
32. Yes, have your employees
|
vote for me so I can protect your right to send their jobs to China. Heartless asshat!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:11 PM
Dustlawyer (1,299 posts)
36. I will make a prediction. So far, the Repugs have done 1. Voter suppression; 2. Voter ID;
|
3. Voter registration fraud; 4. Outright lies repeatedly played on TV in commercials by not just the super packs, but by the Romney campaign; 5. The racists dog whistles used by, not only by surrogates, but by Romney himself, including the birtherism; and now 6. This, at a minimum, a grey area request which, depending on how far the employer goes with it, will be in many instances a felony of voter intimidation. They have spent almost 1 billion dollars to get elected and used almost every dirty trick except one, which can only occur during the voting. I predict that they will fix the election by tampering with the vote count. They will use what is called "King computers" which will be inserted in the middle of the connection between the reporting precincts and the election headquarters where the votes are tabulated. These King computers can pose as the Headquarters to the precincts, and the precincts to the Headquarters. In the middle they can review the totals reported and change them however they want to win, then report the fraudulent totals to the Headquarters. It was already done in Ohio in 2004. The man who was the link between the company in Tn. that did the hack, and Carl Rove & Co, died in a mysterious plane crash right before he was to testify (sorry I cannot recall his name but one of you can find it I am sure). For more information just Google Stephen Spoonamore and electronic voting machines. He is a Republican who is the expert that lived to testify before Congress and in the FBI's investigation.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:17 PM
99th_Monkey (7,192 posts)
39. CITIZENS UNITED MADE THIS LEGAL 4 FIRST TIME SINCE 1970!!
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:21 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) One of the most Evil Devils in the Details, that it appears we didn't even see coming,
but here it is .. BAM. Thom Hartman had someone on yesterday, who talked about this. Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=68153 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:18 PM
2on2u (1,843 posts)
40. Jury tampering.... sort of. I like this man less than I like stepping in dog doodoo, and I really
|
hate stepping in that stuff.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:20 PM
patrice (47,267 posts)
42. People can and DO get fired for politics and/or religion, not about the quality of their work.
|
At will employment assumes that employees have the same free will in regards to employment as employers have in regards to hiring them. It assumes that their powers and opportunities are equal and that isn't true.
An employee's life context limits their possible employers and their criteria for employers are limited to traits that are directly related to employment specific traits and characteristics. This is a severely restricted one to a limited few relationship. For a given job, employers have their choice, for WHATEVER criteria, of multitudes of employees for any given position and those criteria can include things that have little or nothing to do with actual job performance. This is an un-restricted one to un-limited many relationship. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:27 PM
hootinholler (20,609 posts)
45. I'm pretty sure that
|
1. This is illegal, or at least some of the people who did that did so in a way that is illegal
2. Rmoney is as dumb as a box of rocks. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:30 PM
mountain grammy (1,576 posts)
47. "I can pay half the working class to kill the other half", Jay Gould.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:31 PM
Pab Sungenis (8,922 posts)
50. Subornation of extortion.
|
RICO applies.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:31 PM
annabanana (45,529 posts)
51. “pass… along to your employees” how their jobs might be effected !!!!!
|
This is despicable. This is how he ALWAYS talks when he things ordinary people aren't listening.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:41 PM
glinda (12,063 posts)
55. Holy C**&&R!!!!!!!!!!!! Can we make this go viral?
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:51 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:44 PM
workinclasszero (3,062 posts)
58. The fascist takeover of the teapublican party is complete
|
Now Rmoney wants to do the same with the entire country.
His cult church members and the brownshirt teabaggers are salivating at the prospect I'm sure. Night is falling over America..... |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:49 PM
allinthegame (30 posts)
59. THIS
|
is what makes it so unbelievable that people actually claim to be "undecided". What more does Mitt have to do to turn voters
off? |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:54 PM
jmondine (1,467 posts)
60. This is voter intimidation
|
Pure and simple.
These employers are communicating to their employees in the role of their bosses, through official channels, that the result of an election, and therefore how they vote in that election, will affect their jobs, something that the employer has the power to take away from them. They can hide behind the specifics of the words, say they didn't threaten any specific consequence for any specific action against any specific employee, claim that they were just exercising free speech and expressing an opinion. But the inference is screamingly obvious. The purpose is to scare the employee in to voting a certain way by threatening their livelihood. And now we know that Romney encourages this. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:55 PM
imgbitepolitic (164 posts)
62. when you are playing the..
|
Rich and white = right, card; its easy to fool folks.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 08:55 PM
MissNostalgia (137 posts)
63. This guy -__-
|
He hates rules.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:04 PM
Aldo Leopold (186 posts)
65. The nervous, psychotic chuckle as he says "Nothing illegal about..." is the giveaway. He's lying.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:07 PM
yellowcanine (24,444 posts)
67. This may not be illegal but it just seems ......WRONG. And I think many Americans will see it that
|
way. Your employer should not be telling you how to vote. No way. Republicans would be screaming bloody murder if Obama had done this with Chrysler or GM for example.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:14 PM
benld74 (4,592 posts)
68. He said his 'out' - whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:15 PM
doublethink (6,097 posts)
69. Just got done listening to the whole tape.
|
First it is a 'Veiled threat' bordering on voter intimidation. Romney is again playing semantics here with his words just like he tried to do last night in his 'act of terror vs terrorism' rant etc... etc... He obviously looked into the the 'legality' of what he said in this tape to being held accountable here, otherwise he wouldn't of brought up the word 'Illeagal' in his comments. Yes he could be taken to court on this ...
Second ... and maybe more importantly right now is to get this whole tape to David Corn, Mother Jones ... other truth seekers .. etc.. spread it far and wide because ... there is a lot more in this tape to be picked apart, from what I heard on my first listen through, dealing with the EPA, OSHA, work safety, his use of the word Jobs and not using the phrase American Jobs, Using the phrase 'Individual Code' in finally nailing down his plan for a 20% tax break across the board, as opposed to his statement that higher income people will not pay any less in Taxes ... etc... the guy is a weasel !!! Backs right to work laws (meaning say goodbye to minimum wage) ON and on and on and on ... SPREAD THIS TAPE TO ALL YOUR CONTACTS. K&R. |
Response to doublethink (Reply #69)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:19 PM
patrice (47,267 posts)
71. My guess is that you make an important observation: the semantic globalness of a threat is different
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:20 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) from discussing specific issues that could have relatively probable concrete effects upon specific enterprises.
|
Response to patrice (Reply #71)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:38 PM
doublethink (6,097 posts)
81. Well he is trying to stretch it beyond any reasonable understanding ...
|
that the IQ of the average U.S citizen can understand, that is for sure.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:22 PM
lonestarnot (71,133 posts)
73. I'd for fucking sure go to jail if some fucking boss laid that crap burger with cheese on me!
|
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:23 PM
Poll_Blind (23,161 posts)
74. What a total fuckface plutocrat. nt
|
PB
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:26 PM
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (6,600 posts)
76. Mitt smells like desperation
|
Or is it because he soiled his magic underwear?
|
Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Reply #76)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:27 PM
aletier_v (1,773 posts)
77. It's not his fault. He couldn't get out of his binders in time.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:36 PM
elbloggoZY27 (283 posts)
79. Unqualified
|
The GOP are unqualified to be leaders no matter where. To intimidate your employees is an affront to all of your workers and is unacceptable.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 09:37 PM
harmonicon (11,927 posts)
80. It's always nice when you have to preface an idea by pointing out that it's not illegal. (nt)
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:03 PM
Digit (5,995 posts)
88. The biggest thing is how this will play in the court of public opinion
|
It will NOT go over well.....
|
Response to Digit (Reply #88)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:44 PM
onenote (22,006 posts)
95. Actually I doubt it will even cause a ripple
|
Instances where employers have actually made statements to employees about voting for Romney haven't scratched the surface. This one, where Romney explicitly covered his ass by referring to both himself and Obama ("whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view") means that this isn't going to be a mainstream story or even a significant viral moment.
|
Response to onenote (Reply #95)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 09:42 AM
grammiepammie (32 posts)
130. He was covering himself in the beginning, but what is damaging is the following quote
|
"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections." With this fragile economy and people afraid of losing their jobs, if the company tells them that a vote for Obama means that it could jeopardize their job, that is voter intimidation and Romney shows his true colors. All he cares about is winning at any cost. Shame on him. I think this is important.
|
Response to onenote (Reply #95)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 03:47 PM
Digit (5,995 posts)
138. I disagree. People know exactly what was meant and word is spreading.
|
Romney may have covered his ass "legally", but the intent is clear and I find it offensive romney would attempt this and so will many others.
|
Response to Digit (Reply #138)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:54 PM
onenote (22,006 posts)
141. I'm offended too, and I think it would be great if the mainstream media ran with this
|
Last edited Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:54 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) But I just don't think its going to happen. I certainly haven't seen any evidence of it so far, but would love to be proved wrong.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:08 PM
davidpdx (8,773 posts)
89. Christmas is coming early this year
|
Ho ho ho!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:12 PM
surrealAmerican (7,467 posts)
91. If he was this desperate in June ...
|
... just think how he must be feeling now.
k & r |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:24 PM
underthematrix (577 posts)
92. so first corporations are trying to buy the
|
election and now they are gonna tell their employees who to vote for of if that doesn't work threaten them with loss of employment. I believe that is illegal. RETWEETED
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:41 PM
JimDandy (2,169 posts)
94. NFIB - the business org that just endorsed Todd Akin.
|
Last edited Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:43 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) It's all just slimy!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:49 PM
George II (3,019 posts)
96. Isn't that a violation of the Federal Election Code?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 10:55 PM
liberal N proud (43,652 posts)
97. This needs more exposure
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:01 PM
johnnyrocket (1,325 posts)
98. What an asshole! These criminal corporate raiders are the LAST thing we need in the whitehouse...
|
...big business will screw over anyone and EVERYONE if Romney gets in there, with NO accountability, no checks on their power, and the people are going to get steamrolled.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:27 PM
lexw (804 posts)
102. Uh oh....this could just be the last of R$
Response to lexw (Reply #102)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 12:06 AM
NBachers (3,685 posts)
108. Mother of Mercy- is this the end of Romney?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Oct 17, 2012, 11:41 PM
BlueStateBlue (498 posts)
105. K & R n/t
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 12:36 AM
TomCADem (6,371 posts)
110. Joe Walsh Has Jumped ON The Voter Intimidation Bandwagon!
|
Walsh is now flagrantly encouraging business owners to threaten to fire employees for voting Democratic.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:47 AM
judesedit (1,190 posts)
114. I call it bribery. He is sending jobs to China, can't wait to abuse the Chinese & is giving you an
|
ultimatum basically. Or what? Obama is giving tax cuts to companys keeping the jobs here. What a total asshole. He should be exiled from this country. He's already bilked millions out of us. What a fake. What a fraud. What a creep. What a greedy, selfish, lying bastard Rob-me is.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 03:40 AM
Kablooie (8,845 posts)
117. I don't think it's illegal because they can't know how you ultimately vote.
|
They can say there will be dire consequences if one candidate owns and people may be fired but that doesn't force someone to vote a certain way.
And they can't threaten individuals over their vote because the vote is secret. We may not like it but I think companies are free to express their opinions and predict the effects of a vote. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 04:23 AM
dchill (7,870 posts)
118. I gotta tell ya...
|
At first I thought this thread was a joke! It's THAT far-fetched. This creature recognizes no decency. He is truly corrupt and weak-willed.
I realize that what I just typed would be true in any case. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 06:40 AM
sunwyn (443 posts)
119. Isn't this voter intimidation?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 06:48 AM
Hubert Flottz (36,716 posts)
120. I couldn't listen to the talking Douchebag long enough to
|
get to his pitch to the pigs.
|
Response to Hubert Flottz (Reply #120)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:29 AM
oldbanjo (676 posts)
121. I couldn't listen to all of it either.
|
listen to 26:44 area.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:30 AM
OhZone (217 posts)
122. Please let this get to the MSM! n/t
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:39 AM
JHB (17,792 posts)
124. If this was from June, then it would have been just after he sewed up the primaries...
|
...and was preparing his Etch-A-Sketch shake and expected to coast to a win on the economy (which he expected to work against Obama).
How many pot-holes has that plan run into since then? I can't listen to all of it right now. What other gems are in this little time capsule? |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:39 AM
oldbanjo (676 posts)
125. Are these people, the .01%, stupid
|
enough to think that the people of this Country, that is not ruled by a King, would allow them buy the Election and rule like they are Kings? That takes a lot bigger balls that any of them have.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:40 AM
OldDem2012 (3,526 posts)
126. Boom!! Time for anyone who has ANY contacts in the Democratic Party and the media....
|
....to make this go viral. An ad needs to come out about this immediately!
Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and any other social media should utilized to the fullest. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 11:39 AM
Maineman (582 posts)
134. Risk takers are scared. Duh!
|
I listened to the whole recording which included the often heard Republican talking point that small business owners are scared, and not sure what to expect, etc., etc. Empathizing with business owners, he also talked about how they take risks to start a business, borrowing money from family, maxing out their credit cards, going deeply into debt to start or run their business. No doubt most people starting small businesses know that the failure rate is high for new businesses. So, these people have gone deeply into debt, are taking a big risk to start a business that might not succeed, and oh my, they are scared. Duh!! It is not Obama's fault they are scared.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 12:54 PM
Jankyn (253 posts)
135. Well, that explains all those reports we've been hearing... N/T
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 01:56 PM
bamacrat (3,821 posts)
136. The media needs to pick it up.
|
Even if it isn't illegal, this tape in light of recent CEO telling employees to vote Rmoney or else is pretty telling. I tweeted Maddow. I always hope I'll tweet them a story or something I haven't seen on TV and they'll pick it up. Hasn't happened but I'll keep trying.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 02:02 PM
Gregorian (19,600 posts)
137. Romney is an authoritarian.
|
Remember Bush's comment about being a dictator?
One in the same. Just like all of the rest of the fascists. If only the stupid ones who vote could spot the difference between a vulture and a dove. |
Response to Gregorian (Reply #137)
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 01:08 AM
Pauldg47 (52 posts)


