WTF is he smoking!?

[Quantum Windbag]

There is NO REASON for any boss or business owner to be "making it clear" to their employees how they should vote. None. It shouldn't be a cause for discussion, ever.

How can he NOT know that.

Since when? Do business owners give up their right to free speech when they hire people?

Tell me you are not defending this.

As long as they are not coerced I see no problem with it, no matter who is doing it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

There can be no intimidation because the employer has no way of knowing how his employees vote.

Secret ballots are secret for this very reason.

 

[BDBoop]

Romney: Employees Should Know Political Implications of Their Votes - The Ballot 2012 (usnews.com)

Mitt Romney is hoping business owners will "make it very clear" to their employees what their political views are and how the November election results could impact their jobs.

At least that's what he told about 100,000 members of the National Federation of Independent Businesses during a Wednesday tele-townhall.

"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," the Republican presidential nominee said. "And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view, I hope you pass those along to your employees."

Chuckling a bit, Romney added, "Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I believe that will figure in to their election decision, their voting decision."

Friendly reminder (from the comments section);

42 US 1971(b): "No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt 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, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate."

Oh come on Betty..it was a harmless prank..like having 6 of your bestest buddies hold down the class dandy..while he gave the boy a proper haircut..or dressing up like a police officer..to um..tee hee..pull over unsuspecting <chuckle> rubes.

Law? When you got as much money as Romney? The law doesn't apply to you..

I know. I understand that now. I was mistaken.

 

[Trajan]

Romney: Employees Should Know Political Implications of Their Votes - The Ballot 2012 (usnews.com)

Mitt Romney is hoping business owners will "make it very clear" to their employees what their political views are and how the November election results could impact their jobs.

At least that's what he told about 100,000 members of the National Federation of Independent Businesses during a Wednesday tele-townhall.

"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," the Republican presidential nominee said. "And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view, I hope you pass those along to your employees."

Chuckling a bit, Romney added, "Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I believe that will figure in to their election decision, their voting decision."

Friendly reminder (from the comments section);

42 US 1971(b): "No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt 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, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate."

Oh come on Betty..it was a harmless prank..like having 6 of your bestest buddies hold down the class dandy..while he gave the boy a proper haircut..or dressing up like a police officer..to um..tee hee..pull over unsuspecting <chuckle> rubes.

Law? When you got as much money as Romney? The law doesn't apply to you..

wipe your chin sonny...

 

[Two Thumbs]

Dear Two Thumbs;

Yes. Romney did EXACTLY that, and dinging me for 'lying' smacks of mental illness.

I've never seen denial running so deep.

And you lot! Seriously: When does it stop. You justify and justify. It's not okay. It never will be. An employer has NO RIGHT to pull shit like that. Hopefully, none of them will.

The fact that you think it's subversion is just fucking mental.

You're making shit up out of nothing, that's why you go negged.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Did he call Democrats "the enemy"?

An employed person voting for Obama is like asking Hannibal Lecter to "make me sometime for dinner"

I didn't know Obama was with Bain Capital. Learn something new, and all that.

Bain saved about 80% of the companies it took over.

so no, obama had nothing to do with the vast success of Bain.

 

[Inthemiddle]

He didn't demand that employers tell their employees how to vote.

My boss didn't demand that I perform sexual favors. But I was advised to decide on whether or not I would, based on the best interests of my job.

 

[koshergrl]

I'm pretty sure that the boss Boop is whining about hasn't implied that if people don't vote the way he says, he will fire them.

For one thing, he has no way of knowing how they vote.

For another, the article doesn't imply anything of the sort.

It's just yet another case of leftists trying to find ways to shut down freedom of speech.