What does anyone, esp. JAG make of this? Holy civil war!

[carlimac]

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19?recruiter=74045837&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-reason_msg

 

Is this even legal? 

[carlimac]

Here's another outrageous reaction. Is THIS legal?   http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/10/boss-tells-pro-trump-employees-to-resign.html

[zil]

Did you read the email? The headline, like apparently every headline anymore, is misleading.

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, zil said:

Did you read the email? The headline, like apparently every headline anymore, is misleading.

I don't see how it was misleading.  Even if it wasn't a literal translation of the email, it accurately portrayed the rhetoric from the email.

I found it particularly hypocritical that he touts "inclusion and diversity" while he told all who disagree to resign.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Guest

[Guest]

1 hour ago, carlimac said:

Is this even legal? 

Yes, it's legal.  As I recall it has actually happened twice in our nation's history.

[Guest Godless]

1 hour ago, carlimac said:

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19?recruiter=74045837&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-reason_msg

 

Is this even legal? 

Technically, yes. The general public does not vote for the president. We vote for the elector in the electoral college whom we want to select the president on our behalf. These electors, technically, can legally go against the will of the people of their state. Several states have laws to prevent this, but the penalty in most cases is a small fine that I'm sure the opposing party will gladly pay.

The original idea behind this was a compromise between those who wanted Congress to select the president vs. those who wanted the people to select the president, keeping in mind that this was all set up at a time when pertinent national news was delivered by messengers riding horses, so public education about candidates wasn't great. In the event that the electors felt that the peoples' choice was uniquely unqualified for the office of president, they could select someone else. Theoretically, an elector could also change his/her vote to reflect the national popular vote.  

What does all this mean in 2016? It means that, yes, there is still a chance that Hillary could be selected by the electoral college over Trump if enough electors believe he is unqualified or if they want to honor the national popular vote. And like I said, I'm sure Hillary would be more than happy to pay their fines. Will this actually happen? Probably not. I think the chance is slightly higher with the GOP maintaining control of Congress (Hillary, while a Democrat, may be easier to work with than Trump), but I'm definitely not holding my breath.

[Just_A_Guy]

Re electors:  https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html

Re bosses:  firing due to political purposes seems dodgy to me; but if that employee routinely engaged in dishonesty, vulgarity, and slander (like Trump does) and had confessed to sexual assaults in the workplace (like Trump has)--I don't see how I could avoid firing him.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[Vort]

The problem I see is his overt threat to demand the resignation of (a.k.a. fire, terminate, let go) anyone who disagrees with his assessment of Trump.

[anatess2]

16 hours ago, Vort said:

The problem I see is his overt threat to demand the resignation of (a.k.a. fire, terminate, let go) anyone who disagrees with his assessment of Trump.

What a difference a day makes... he recanted that email and replaced it with a company-wide broadcast of acceptance of political diversity.

There's hope folks!

[Backroads]

On 11/10/2016 at 2:50 PM, zil said:

Did you read the email? The headline, like apparently every headline anymore, is misleading.

I would have worded the email differently, but no, it certainly doesn't say Trump supporters should resign. 

I had a nutty coworker try it, though.

[Blackmarch]

On 11/10/2016 at 2:21 PM, carlimac said:

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19?recruiter=74045837&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-reason_msg

 

Is this even legal? 

depends on the state. however the states where doing such is  illegal, the penalty for doing that is extremely light. something like a 500$ dollar fine and possibly a revocation of your votes at the worst.

 

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Backroads said:

I would have worded the email differently, but no, it certainly doesn't say Trump supporters should resign. 

I had a nutty coworker try it, though.

Then what do you think it does say?  It sure sounded like it to me.  And apparently I'm not the only one.

Even after he posted the retraction (which wasn't a retraction, simply a denial that he said what he said) people were asking how the email says otherwise.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Guest

[Backroads]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Then what do you think it does say?  It sure sounded like it to me.  And apparently I'm not the only one.

Even after he posted the retraction (which wasn't a retraction, simply a denial that he said what he said) people were asking how the email says otherwise.

I read it simply as saying hateful actions weren't permitted at work.

[estradling75]

1 hour ago, Backroads said:

I read it simply as saying hateful actions weren't permitted at work.

I agree.. that is how I read it...  However given the charged and polarized climate I also knew there would be plenty that took it the other way

 

 

[Backroads]

4 hours ago, estradling75 said:

I agree.. that is how I read it...  However given the charged and polarized climate I also knew there would be plenty that took it the other way

 

 

And I don't blame them. just by dumping in Trump's name he made the letter risky.

[Guest]

23 hours ago, Backroads said:

I read it simply as saying hateful actions weren't permitted at work.

22 hours ago, estradling75 said:

I agree.. that is how I read it...  However given the charged and polarized climate I also knew there would be plenty that took it the other way

You both know I'm no fan of Trump.  But here are the statements that I find DO support the interpretation I (and many others are taking).

Quote

I'm trying to reconcile my worldview with the overwhelming message delivered last night.

What message?  He's automatically assuming that the message was that if Trump was elected, then the messages that he outlines later in the letter are being supported by those who voted for Trump.  There is a subtext/assumption that those beliefs and rhetoric were firm positions that Trump supported and espoused -- which isn't necessarily true.

Quote

I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant ... politics...

If you do not agree with this statement...(send your resignation) because you have no place here.

So, if we're nationalist, we're hateful?  If we don't want illegal immigration, we're hateful?  These are not inflammatory statements that would make those who espouse nationalism and enforcement of immigration laws in fear of losing their jobs?

He flat out said that if you don't believe in his politics, you should resign.  How can you interpret that last quote any other way?

Edited November 14, 2016 by Guest

[Backroads]

I interpreted by the last statement for the prior paragraph, that no one should feel exposed/threatened.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Backroads said:

I interpreted by the last statement for the prior paragraph, that no one should feel exposed/threatened.

That's true.  But that ignores the body of the letter.

What if I were to go off on a rant about how Republicans are all racists and hate poor people, etc. etc. (just as liberals often say).  Then I finish the rant by saying:

Quote

No one ought to hate poor people.  So if you disagree, you're fired.

What would your take away be?

Edited November 14, 2016 by Guest