Organizations Try To Shame People Into Voting By Revealing How Often They & Their Neighbors Voted

from the that's-just-going-to-piss-people-off dept

It's election day. While your actual ballot is (supposed to be) secret, a lot of people don't know that whether or not you voted at all is public information. A few weeks back, On the Media covered some ways that campaigns try to get out the vote and looked at some research suggesting that letters to people with a "voter report card" showing when they've voted in the past was a somewhat effective way of shaming people into voting. An even more extreme example was given as well: a letter that specifically shows how often your neighbors have voted. In the piece, OTM producer Chris Neary noted that while such things were effective in the lab, people shouldn't be expecting such letters for real, because, while they may be effective in getting out the vote, they also freak people out on privacy grounds, and no campaign wants to risk freaking people out:
And, by the way Brooke, you’ll never get that last letter. Campaigns hate to send out anything that prompts virulent hate mail in return, and one of those researchers got some of that mail.
Except... Neary has now posted an apology blog post after some OTM listeners reached out to share exactly the kinds of mailers discussed. While campaigns might shy away from such tactics, apparently third party organizations read the exact same research and took it to heart -- as they're a lot less worried about hate mail:
First, listener Rachel Lieberman got a voter report card mailing from MoveOn.org. (She notes that the report card isn't accurate, she just voted at a different address. Here's hoping it doesn't lower her citizen GPA.)

And from listener Taylor Maxwell, exactly the sort of letter I went out of my way to claim she probably wouldn't get. It's from Americans for Limited Government. Names and addresses redacted, or else we'd be co-shaming.
So, yes, this tactic appears to be in use across the political spectrum, and yes, it's likely mostly serving to creep people out... though it may also get them to go out and vote...


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:28am

    This is an outrage that goes against what the people who have gone before have done for everyone. They did not fight for the right to vote, they fought for the right to choose whether or not we want to vote. Politics has forgotten that, and so has the public if I'm honest.

    I get it all the time on the Internet where people say that if I don't vote I have no right to complain. This is bollocks. If I decide not to vote, it does not mean that I am apathetic or that I could not be bothered. It just means that I have done my research and I know that the 'choices' I am given are not choices at all. Quite frankly, under our current 'democracy', I see voting for candidates (no matter who they are) as an example of the turkey voting for Christmas.

    The greatest freedom is the freedom to make my own choices. Sadly, politicians hate people doing that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:32am

      Re:

      Would it help if there were issues to vote upon?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:40am

        Re: Re:

        It would help if candidates were actually interested in governing for the benefit of the whole country rather than being shills paid off by multinational corporations to govern in their interests to the detriment of the general populace.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:20am

          Re: Re: Re:

          It would help if candidates were actually interested in governing for the benefit of the whole country...

          It would help if more people were less interested in cheering for the red team or the blue team.

          VOTE   ANTI – INCUMBENT.

          Vote for change: If they're in office, vote them out.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:45am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            That just feeds into the problem by creating a culture of 'vote for the other guy'. We need politicians who are independent of corporate interests and that won't happen by simply voting against the person in power.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:53am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              'vote for the other guy'

              It's election day TODAY.

              If you want to build culture... well, good luck and all that. You're not going to build culture between now and when the polls close. We go to the polls with the politicians we've got—not the politicians we wish we had. And face it, they all suck. Every last one of them.

              So the choice NOW boils down simply:   Status-quo or change. Take your pick.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                FarSide (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:59am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                "So the choice NOW boils down simply: Status-quo or change. Take your pick"

                I think this statement misses Zakida's whole point.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:00am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                Do you really think voting Obama out will bring change? It won't, just like people in the UK voting Labour out in 2010 thought it would bring change, it has not. Voting in the current system is a vote for maintaining the status quo regardless of who you vote for.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:49am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Do you really think voting Obama out will bring change?


                  Has fuck-all to do with Obama.

                  (Unless you happen to live in one of those magical swing states—and even then...)

                  Lots of other down-ticket races.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  hmmmm, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 9:18am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Do you really think voting Obama out will bring change? It won't

                  yeah i know.

                  and niether will keeping him in.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:35am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                I don't envy you Americans.

                You are basically down to choosing between getting a brick to the face and getting kicked in the jaw.

                Either choice is going to hurt, status-quo or not.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  hmmmm, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 9:27am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  I don't envy you Americans.

                  You are basically down to choosing between getting a brick to the face and getting kicked in the jaw.

                  Either choice is going to hurt, status-quo or not.

                  your being to kind ac.

                  its more like voting for a rapist who will do the deed and then kill you on the third day. and a torturer who will do his deed and then kill you on the third day. and you know what? america is the one to blame for it. they will vote sure. but will they keep the guy in line? will they keep congress in line? people will talk on there high horse when it comes to voting people in but where are they when the guys turn against them? america has breeded a culture of permissiveness with politicians. and you know what? after a while voting is just worthless. becuase the next guy knows he can get away with anything just like his predeccesor becuase he knows nobody will step up and the very few that do he knows he needs to apply a little pressure.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Mr. Applegate, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 11:17am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "That just feeds into the problem by creating a culture of 'vote for the other guy'. "

              Actually, it creates a different problem if it is followed religiously. That being that you have no real stability in the government.

              However, for the short term, it would serve notice to those elected, of who they actually work for.

              What is really needed is term limits and no corporate money in the system, but the courts have pretty much ensured that won't happen.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:28pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                However, for the short term...


                Take the U.S. Congress: This Congress had the lowest approval rating ever. It dropped to 9% last year, and is now around 15%. The overwhelming majority of Americans do not believe that the institution is performing acceptably.

                Yet, today, the majority of Senate races will go to the incumbent. The majority of sitting representatives in the House will be returned to that dysfunctional institution.

                The only reasonable conclusion: You, the voters who vote for the same old same old —you are insane.

                Insane.

                Seriously. Bat-shit crazy: Wanting a different outcome, but doing the same old thing.

                Or you're just lying. You say you want different results, but you keep on doing the same thing. Maybe you don't really want different results. Maybe you want a dysfunctional Congress—that's sure what you're voting for.

                If you're not insane —if you the voters are just lying to everyone— well, I guess it's not so bad that you have lying politicians to represent you.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Mr. Applegate, Nov 7th, 2012 @ 9:19am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  I am but one man. I voted for exactly 0 incumbents in the Federal Elections and only 3 for state and local.

                  The problem is there all the choices suck! The other problem is most people only care about one thing themselves. They don't care about the country, just what can you do for me, and then they vote for them knowing full well it was a bucket of lies.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Just Another Limey (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:46am

      None of the above

      I always wanted to see on the ballot card a tick-box for "None of the above", as a way of conscientiously opting out, recognising that;

      a) I'm not lazy and I did turn up to vote

      b) I don't believe any of the candidates (or parties) are worth voting for.

      The only option (Britain) is to vandalise our card so it's recognised in the system as "spoilt", implying that the voter is an imbecile.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:24am

        Re: None of the above

        Implying correctly that the voter is in imbecile as would any ticked box marked non of the above in anything other than a 1 party state.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        weneedhelp (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 9:04am

        Re: None of the above

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 10:22am

        Re: None of the above

        The better option is re-open nominations, which if it wins forces a re-election with new candidates.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Chosen Reject (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 10:59am

        Re: None of the above

        I think everyone should have a ballot cast with a default of "None of the above". If you want to change that, then you have to show up and vote, but None of the Above should still be available for any choice on that ballot. With this approach, I still think a candidate should have to get more than 50% of the votes to win. Meaning, if <50% of voters don't vote at all, then it would be impossible for a candidate to win. In that case, another election will be held every month or so until a candidate wins, with all candidates in that election dropped for at least one election.

        This approach has several benefits:
        * A candidate actually has to appeal to more than 50% of the population to get elected.
        * Removing candidates forces a refresh of candidates, positions, and platforms.
        * Even though there will be a seeming non-ending election process, even the billionaires funding the campaigns (whether PACS, superPACS, mainstream media, or individuals) will eventually run out of money, thus removing a lot of money from politics.

        In addition, we should get rid of first-past-the-post and move to elections more like Instant-Runoff-Voting.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Miff (profile), Nov 7th, 2012 @ 5:45am

        Re: None of the above

        At least in my jurisdiction, you can vote "none of the above" by submitting an unmarked ballot. This is for people that only care about a handful of issues and only want to vote for the ones they care for. (For example, yesterday I only voted for President, Congressman, and on a handful of state laws; I didn't vote for any local state positions.)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mike (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:28am

      Re:

      Actually, I think you've got it wrong.

      If you really want to make it known that you deliberately didn't want to vote for any candidate, you have to go to the polls and do just that.

      Deliberately not voting for any candidate in an election counts for a lot more than not showing up.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      BC, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:03am

      Re:

      Sadly, the biggest outrage is your perspective of this nations greatest liberty - to vote. Agreed, there are times that neither candidate is ideal, and the primary candidates may not be what you want in the presidential office. You have your right to vote or not, and as you say - you have done your research. Good for you, as many have not and go with what they think is popular.

      Still, your perspective is mis-guided and skewed. You don't vote, forget about complaining - you have made the conscious choice to give up the right, free and clear. This is your to exercise, but not yours to change how the country is run. There is a right-in for you to put in whomever you believe is the best candidate. If you don't vote, fine. I don't want to hear you complaining for the next 4 years. You don't like it, move to another country.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Machin Shin (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:17am

        Re: Re:

        This whole "you did not vote so you can't complain" argument is such bull shit. Yes I can complain and I will. I don't want either of these guys in office. My voting WILL NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT ONE OF THEM WILL WIN. So yes, I could go and vote and write in someone or some bull shit. It will not change the fact that one of these two guys will win.

        So I am excising my right to not vote for either of them. I will also exercise my right to be vocal about how they are worthless and going to destroy this country, not that there is much of it left to ruin at this point.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:49am

          Re: Re: Re:

          My voting WILL NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT ONE OF THEM WILL WIN.

          And, statistically, it's likely to be the incumbent.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 2:13pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Waaaaaaaah

          In a democratic election my vote isn't the only one that counts WAAAHHHHH

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:42pm

      Re:

      You're kidding right? Voter turnout hovers in the mid 60%s. Not only has the public not forgotten you have a right not to vote so many remember to exercise that vote they could swing any election they chose to their favor at any time.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Boden, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:45am

    Zakida Paul

    If you don't vote, your opinion doesn't count at all. There's no point in your comments on the interwebs, because YOUR OPINION DOESN'T COUNT. Unless you vote, fool.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:50am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      But it's against the law to spoil your ballot in the US, if I recall correctly. So, what, precisely, is someone who wishes to voice that no-one best represents them to do? The only option is to stay away, which doesn't really help matters.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 4:54am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      Then, why give people the option of not voting?

      Just make voting mandatory. And add a "none of the above" option while you're at it.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 2:16pm

        Re: Re: Zakida Paul

        The option of not voting for adults is available as is the option of picking your nose in public.
        You don't expect to hear anyone boasting about either, but strangely some people who should know better don't seem to.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:52am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      I have the right to choose whether or not to vote and I have the right to air my opinions. A bitter little man like you will never shut me up.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Glitch, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:27am

        Re: Re: Zakida Paul

        You do realize that Election Day is not just about voting for Team Red or Team Blue and frequently (if not always) has State and City issues to vote on.

        Saying you don't vote because you don't like the choices you are given for representatives is BS when the public issues that are also on the ballot affect you or those around you directly.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:31am

          Re: Re: Re: Zakida Paul

          Well, in the UK, election day is all about voting for parties as a vote for independents (on the rare occasion there is a decent one, in which case I do vote) is a wasted vote.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 2:20pm

          Re: Re: Re: Zakida Paul

          Also this entitlement attitude of, you people must bring me the choices I want and if you don't I'll whine in the hope that will persuade you to do what I want and only what I want.
          Easy choices with no downsides, don't ask me to think things through that's your job.

          There aren't really politicians and the electorate, there are active politicians and inactive ones with a large proportion of the inactive ones complaining they don't like what the active ones are doing but who still can't be bothered to do anything themselves.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      gorehound (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:00am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      Everyone Must vote !
      I dislike Washington Politics and I always Vote for the one I hated the least.
      One Day I will get to Vote for someone I actually really like.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Machin Shin (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:23am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      That is where you are wrong, I'm not going to vote, and my opinion does count. Sure it does not "officially" count as for who will win, but that does not matter as my vote would not count even if I did go cast it. I would not vote for either guy who has a chance.

      It is about like the stupid duck and cover commercials from the cold war. Yeah, you can get under your desk and pretend, but your just wasting your fucking time. Really very similar thing here, sure I could go vote, but it is not going to save me from the hell that is coming.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 8:02am

        Re: Re: Zakida Paul

        I'm not going to vote, and my opinion does count.

        Yes: In almost every race, in almost every gerry-mandered district—if you don't vote, then you are expressing an actual preference for the incumbent.

        Do you need a link to the statistics? Or maybe you've got some kooooky argument why the statistics don't really mean what they say...

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:30am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      Turd or shit sandwich? You decide. Is that really a better option? One that makes my vote magically mean I have the right to complain?

      I posit that those who choose between a turd and a shit sandwich are the ones who have no right to complain as they know neither option will do anything to give them the hopey changey feelgoodiness they crave, yet they gladly gobble it up - commenting on the subtle taste differences as they choke it down.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      oh zakida..., Nov 6th, 2012 @ 9:05am

      Re: Zakida Paul

      i really love the whole your opinion does not count line from you guys.

      its even better when it come from people who do vote whos opinions are discarded anyway as soon as there guy walks through the door.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:03am

    So, "Americans for Limited Government" aren't above using public government records? That seems about right.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:44pm

      Re:

      Because when they say 'limited government' what they meant was limited government record keeping? You're kidding right? A government can be limited and still keep records of what its doing. In fact the more limited it is the easier that becomes.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Drizzt, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:04am

    One wonders if that matters at all

    Maybe it doesn't even matter, whether people go to vote or not. At least one could get that impression, when reading http://harpers.org/archive/2012/11/how-to-rig-an-election/?single=1

    If your system is really that broken, it's hard to fathom how American politicians still try to tell developing countries how democracy works...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:10am

    a "Don't Vote for Us" letter

    aka Big Brother

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:19am

    I got the Limited Government card in the mail yesterday, I found it funny how they trying to shame me by telling me I didn't vote in the past two presidential elections considering I only turned 18 in time for the 2010 elections.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:35am

    Why are these groups so concerned about quantity? They should go for quality instead.
    Instead of browbeating tons of random people into voting haphazardly, they should try to support the minority who are willing to invest time and effort into researching candidates and issues; the people who take voting seriously.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:44am

      Re:

      researching candidates and issues
      The incumbent is a liar and a shill.

      the people who take voting seriously.
      So is the challenger: But the challenger is less invested in the status-quo.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Zakida Paul (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:56am

        Re: Re:

        "But the challenger is less invested in the status-quo."

        Wow, that is patently untrue. Here is a little secret - when the challenger/opposition make promises about reform, they are lying to gain support. The reform never comes. Politicians promised banking reform, where is it? Several generations have been promising reform of tax loopholes, where is it?

        Promises made during an election are as empty as the souls of the people making them.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:59am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Promises made during an election are as empty as the souls of the people making them.


          Either you're mad as hell and you're not going to take it anymore—or you're a sucker content with what's going down.

          Either you do something about or you just talk: Bitch and moan in blog comments.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Togashi (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:43am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Because doing both isn't an option, right? There's absolutely no way he's trying to do something about it and bitching about it in blog comments?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Machin Shin (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:28am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Hmm, you forget the option of, bitch and moan in blog comments while waiting for things to hit critical point. Sadly I think this country is quickly headed for that point. We have not had a good all out war on American soil lately after all. Good revolution could be interesting.

            Not saying I plan on trying to start one, but looking around at how things are and how they keep going... I do not think we have much longer before this government becomes unstable and starts to fall.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            hmmmm, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 9:16am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Promises made during an election are as empty as the souls of the people making them.


            Either you're mad as hell and you're not going to take it anymore—or you're a sucker content with what's going down.

            Either you do something about or you just talk: Bitch and moan in blog comments



            its not that people dont care its very few other people do. you will see hundreds of people put a ballot in a box but thats not the important part. the important part is when the guy gets in and people are supposed to keep them in line. and you will see those same people either not caring. THATS the problem.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          nospacesorspecialcharacters (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 8:15am

          Re: Re: Re:

          The challenger really does want reform, they really do want to make a difference, they've (hopefully) worked on a local level for the people in their designated region and done some good things and now they want to take that to the rest of the country.

          So they win, they get elected, they have a parade and make some speeches, everybody cheers. Then they get to move into the important building - where they will lead from and bring their reform.

          Except what happens is on the first day, they are brought into a little room with a small gathering of the highest ranking unelected officials of each department.

          Then they sit the new incumbent down and they say "Listen, this is how it's going to be, this is how we do things... and if you try to change anything *these people here* won't cooperate... or *this information here* will find itself in the public domain and *these people here* will die/be pissed/revolt".

          That's how I imagine it. That's why people who promise change don't bring it. Think about the first day of your new job. It's relatively easy to walk in and see where things are going wrong, however it takes a strong will to then turn around to all your new co-workers and tell them they're all doing it wrong... Especially if there's a highly politicized and hostile atmosphere.

          Now think of walking into the top job in the country where every single thing you say is going to be recorded, analyzed and possibly (most likely) used against you at some date if you fire the wrong person or make the wrong decision.

          Personally I think a large part of the problem is simply this fact that it's treated like a job, rather than service. A leader should have the will power to make unpopular decisions if they know it's going to benefit the whole. Of course if you view it as just a job, you're going to do what you can to save it. And when you're trying to save your job you'll be focused on that rather than serving; you'll be willing to make compromises and hide things.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            nospacesorspecialcharacters (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 8:17am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I meant to add the line to the subject "In my mind it goes something like this..."

            Some reason the reply cut it off.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 8:32am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Now think of walking into the top job in the country...

            The presidential race is not competitive in most states.

            The majority of people in this country have no realistic chance whatsoever of influencing the presidential election.

            So ignore the red team leader. Ignore the blue team leader. You can't affect that outcome. But you can affect the outcomes at the Senate level, at the House level, in the state legislature, at the county, in your city or town, on the local school-board...

            That's why people who promise change don't bring it.

            If you leave the current teams in place, there's no hope at all of any change. If you toss all the bums out, then there's perhaps a chance you'll get something worse—but also a chance you'll get something better. No matter what, you'll at least get something slightly different.

            You want a chance? Or do you want no chance at all?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:45pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Obama promised civil liberties would be restored, where are they?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    NullOp, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:44am

    Voting

    Whether I vote or not is my business. Voting is still a right. Just for those who don't know, a right is something you can do or not do without asking anyone's permission. Rights are not required actions! The greatest crimes in the election process is the electorial college and the "Two Party" system. Both of these exist because our leaders think we, the people, are really too dumb to vote "properly". I would recommend everyone vote Libertarian, if for no other reason, to send Washington a message that their days are numbered as they should have been all along.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:46pm

      Re: Voting

      Whether you vote or not is everyone's business. How you vote is your business but everyone has a right to know who voted so the process can be vetted by the public.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mike, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:55am

    libel

    I got one of these mailers the other day and so did all of my neighbors. It claimed that I did not vote in 2008. This is a false statement published about me to all of my neighbors that has harmed my reputation. I voted in 2008 when I lived in a different state. What is my recourse?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:47pm

      Re: libel

      Same situation for me but for 2004.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:48pm

        Re: Re: libel

        Well, that and the abject lack of reputation harm. I wasn't really sure what the point of the mailer was until techdirt insisted it was to shame people.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Mike, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 5:08pm

          Re: Re: Re: libel

          How do you figure there is no reputation harm? Would you vote for someone that doesn't vote themselves? I think this has definitely affected my chances to win a local council seat. I need to spend my resources to counteract the effect of this false publication.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    EngineerZ, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:15am

    George Carlin was wrong...

    Maybe I should email my neighbors this classic George Carlin bit:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk

    --z

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    EngineerZ, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:15am

    George Carlin was wrong...

    Maybe I should email my neighbors this classic George Carlin bit:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk

    --z

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      EngineerZ, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:19am

      Re: George Carlin was wrong...

      What I meant to say was "George Carlin was wrong... when I'm finished I have these post cards that get emailed to my neighbors to tell what I was doing."

      --zawada

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mike (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:42am

      Re: George Carlin was wrong...

      Thanks for that! It was very funny, Carlin was a comedic genius.

      And I do still believe in voting. And sometimes my individual voice added to others does make a difference, just not as often as I would like. (see the defeat of SOPA for 1 instance, I'm less sure about my vote for politicians).

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    ASTROBOI, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:44am

    Why bother?

    I got one of those cards. I am a "fair" citizen, seeing as I missed one election. This is where my money goes, mailing this stuff. And it IS my money, and yours since we are the ultimate source of the campaign donations.

    So I can vote for more spying, whistleblowers going to jail, bogus insurance that doesn't work and a VP who sleeps with the MPAA and calls me a thief, "plain and simple."

    Or I can vote for a sociopath meglomaniac who will solve all our problems by ending Roe v. Wade, dirty pictures and sex. We can all wear white dress shirts, "turn back to god" and obey our betters and trust him 'cause he's got a PLAN.

    This wasn't why I worked for decades. Still, there is nothing they can do that Bush has not already done. So flip the coin folks. Tomorrow we can sit back an watch Jonathon Stewart crack wise on the abusrdity of it all. Could be worse. We could be living in Greece. Or Egypt.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Deirdre (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:52am

    Darn, I voted early and have been tossing campaign flyers without looking at them. Saturday I had so many in my post office box that I couldn't get my mail out of the box without ripping some. Now I'll never know if my neighbors know I have a perfect score for showing up at the polls.

    Oops, maybe they do know. I voted early because all of the election day poll workers are my neighbors.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 7:21am

    What I wish to know is why are detailed records of voting being kept past the pony that the election is settled and why are they being made available to political campaigns? It is one thing to record the turnout percentage, but is entirely different thing to keep every-bodies voting record, even if it is just that they turned out.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:51pm

      Re:

      So the public can vet the electoral process. There's no reason to hide any of this information. Voting is a public process. How you vote is private. That you voted is not and cannot be.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Nov 8th, 2012 @ 7:33am

        Re: Re:

        The "voting is a public process" defense of these shame-on-you report cards misses the point. If the organzations sending these cards based them on a valid interpretation of accurate information, your argument might be interesting. But the information used to create these report cards is wrong or misinterpreted for many people: for example, new voters, folks who have moved, and the deceased. It is irresponsible to publicly deride private citizens without first getting your facts straight.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 9:23am

    Your vote doesn't count. You and your neighborhood do not elect the president.

    That's why they count electoral votes. That's who elects the president. Most of them are not bound to vote how their citizens voted as a majority in their state. It's a dog and pony show for an election.

    Honestly? I don't like this choice of which is less evil. It's an evil no matter who gets in as they are already bought and sold.

    When was the last time you heard both parties agreeing on the budgeting or at least trying to compromise? When was the last time you heard of a drive to fix the nations' infrastructure without which this nation would die given it couldn't transport food and necessities without them? It's more important to them to fight over ideas than to do what they were elected to do and see to the welfare of the country.

    Last time this country's politicians were this divided was right before the civil war. That doesn't bode well for this country.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 1:56pm

      Re:

      This divided? You're joking right? How you could clai the electoral college is a dog and pony show when they do vote with the popular vote in their state and not notice that the political 'conflict' between the two major parties is just a dog and pony show I have no idea. Obama and Romney are more similar than any two opposing candidates since before Bush Sr. was in office.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    MikeVx (profile), Nov 6th, 2012 @ 6:05pm

    More electoral clutter...

    I keep telling people that they need to vote for who they think is best suited for the job, and I always get that they don't want to waste their vote. How is it not a waste if you vote for someone you don't think is qualified just so that you voted for the winner?

    As far as I am concerned, any vote for the two big parties is the wasted vote. Unless the big boys feel threatened, the overall condition of the US will continue to deteriorate, because there are no differences of any significance between the parties.

    I say, if you can't figure out someone from lesser parties based on what you can learn, which the big players also make as difficult as possible, then pick some smaller party candidate at random and vote for them. If the entrenched players are not deprived of political oxygen, they will continue to screw things up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    William Chambers, Nov 6th, 2012 @ 11:55pm

    No issue

    I see no problem with this. It's all public record and if it even gets a single person to vote, I'm all for it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 7th, 2012 @ 12:22pm

    What I learned from yesterday's election.

    For the Presidential race, my vote doesn't count. I fully understand how the Electoral College works, but it never hit home just how badly broken that system is until yesterday. It might have made sense back in the days it was developed, but it doesn't now. There are so many problems with it and I'm so frustrated that I'm not going to go into a long-winded explanation. Suffice to say it sux.

    The end result is I doubt I'll bother with that part of the ballot anymore. (Maybe I'll write in Mickey Mouse or Darth Vader.)

    My vote only counts for Congressional and local elections, so that is where I will concentrate my efforts from now on. On the plus side I can ignore all the hype and BS (is that redundant?) around the Presidential races. That should free up some time, so I'll call that a "win".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This