I think that this pamphlet simply encouraged people to vote for who they thought was best

and this simply said who the boss thought was best

Come on, it could have been worse

Quite surprising to say the least. :o

...can't say more, must go to work.

They used a metric to measure the news shows that is also used to rank congressional candidates (note they only examined news shows, not shows that were explicitly opinion (so no O'Reiley, Hannity, Olbermann, etc). Just the straight news.

Anyone who has seen US news (or heard it in the case of NPR), would have no trouble believing the results. Fox is right, the rest are all left, some much farther than others.

Other stats show that the large majority of reporters are personally "left" so again, it's unsurprising.

I've seen that mentioned several time recently, but I keep forgetting to look into that. Does anyone have a link handy to any of these studies?

Was a university study before the 2008 election. I think in CA.

The polling of reporters was a similar time frame (over 80% self-IDed left of center I think) (certainly true for the people I know at NPR and the NYT).

And pick up a pay check.....:O:

To me It looks like a pretty clear attempt to coerce a response. If it would have been a note saying "oh by the way employees, I like X candidate because of X reason". But instead it's a not telling them if they don't vote republican bad things will happen. That a clear case of holding negative consequences over their employees head to illicit a response. The fact that they can't see the employees votes is moot. They still attempted to use empty threats to change voters habits.

Thanks. That gives me a bit more to start searching with.

That's probably why the results seem a bit off from what I expected.

Absolutely. I'd not argue that the overall roster on fox news is not farther right than that, it probably is. Of course then you need to similarly analyze the non-news schedules of all the other outlets.

So when ranking ABC, you then need to not just look at the NEWS, but then also the comedies, etc. How many "conservative" sitcoms are there, exactly? Such a broad analysis will clearly throw the other outlets even farther to the left given the other ~20 hours of programming they air every day.

We know people of both parties. Pretty high level, actually, I find myself at functions with governors, senators, etc a couple times a year (the last, sadly was Friday at the memorial for my neighbor who was killed in a ballooning accident over the Adriatic—was odd to hear Gary Johnson say sh*t so many times giving a eulogy). This one couple we're friends with are hard core democratic players. They are docs, and highly partisan. They send invites to $1000 a plate dinners at their house for dem candidates. They send them to people they work with. You think the employees at one of their very large practices are not intimidated by being asked to donate? We typically manage to avoid politics much of the time, and I can avoid some pushiness because I will flat-out state I'm an independent to them. There is enough libertarian (lower case ;) ) crossover on some issues, they likely don't know exactly where I stand compared to them. I do that intentionally, because they'd retaliate with fewer referrals to my wife, likely. They're that partisan.

There are many places in the US where merely being more conservative is "intimidating"—at least as much as this pretty benign paycheck note. (try being conservative in NYC, Santa Fe, or San Francisco... it's just easier to not be political than to be honest and try to "network" there)

I agree with this sentiment. Who their employee's vote for is none of their business, so they are way out of line here. It makes me wonder what else they've been doing to try and pull political strings.. on that note, i'll add, SHADY, to the above list. Very shady.

No it's not. What if every single McD employee votes republican like they *suggested* (ie did NOT demand) and the dems still win? It ain't like the McD vote holds much sway in an election.

Most of my exposure to Fox News has been due to the fact that my mother-in-law leaves it on all the time, and I only usually see it when I'm there in the evenings. That seems to be when they're running the opinion stuff.

But that would mean I'd actually have to watch TV, and I find that there is really nothing that I can stand to watch anymore...
:nope:

You guys are just trying to make political hay out of a few lawn clippings because your party is going to get a bloody nose* tomorrow night. Well learn to deal with it.





* Lest you start accusing me of making threats I meant politically.

I already said, I'm not voting for either party, and i dislike both equally. Screw em both, because their both the same BS, under a different wrapper. One blue, one red, but the end result is the same BS. So your "your party" line, isnt applicable in my case. On that note, i find this, "us verses them" attitude, is a crock of excrement that needs to go. Your making yourselves into hyphenated Americans, only instead of using ethic backgrounds, your using political ones.

All i was saying, is that McD's is out of line. They're sticking their noses in places it doesn't belong. No employer has any business in their employee's dealings with politics and religion. None what so ever, in any shape or form. Not through direct means, nor implied ones. Doing so, is HIGHLY unethical.

Furthermore, if McD's were telling people to vote for democrates, you (and a few others here) would be having a cow. So i find any defense of McD's, hypocritical at the very least.

:sign_yeah:

I'd not have a cow with a private business doing that at all (telling them to vote dem).

heck, a construction firm that works off the government porkbarrel crap likely tells the employees to keep the trough filled by voting democrat.

How is an employer endorsement worse than if the employer is, say, the editor of the newspaper you work for?

Again, if this is unethical, then it is not ethical for unions to get political, either. They ARE political, because they think they'll get pork, or special treatment from one party, so they ARE political. There is no difference whatsoever between unions being political, and management doing the same. None at all.

tater, second time, unions endorsing and financing is every different than sticking letters in paychecks that use fear tactics to scare them into voting republican.

but don't unions scare members too?
saying that you would lose your job if you voted for this guy.

How, exactly? It's a NOTE that explains that the election of some critters might cause laws that force the business to constrain growth.

That is a simple reality.

The boss has exactly zero way to "enforce" this, so there is zero coercion. How are they "scared?" It's an argument, not yelling "boo." Several huge companies have already raised their employee premium on health plans as a result obamacare, for example. Others WILL be booted to medicaid over time as it is cheaper to do this and pay the penalty than actually insure.

I doubt the average McD's voter even shows up on "likely voter" rolls, anyway.

This is a total non-story, and is no different at all than being "intimidated" by a union boss (who might be your foreman, and give you crap jobs if you don't show up for political stuff, etc). Unions are worse, frankly, particularly since member dues are paifd out as contributions to candidates, regardless of the political side of the member.

Said the guy at court who was sued for rape: "I did not coerce or demand her to get naked and lie down with me when showing her that knife of mine. Nobody can prove that I meant that knife to be a threat to her. I only suggested to her that lying down with me is an option available to her. It's a free country and I just spoke my mind. She then got undressed all by herself, I never told her to do so."

Translates into: "I did not coerce or demand employees of mine to not vote for that wrong party but for the right one, when waving with their paycheques in my hand and telling them they may face financial cuts if they don't do the "right" thing. I only suggested to them that they are free to make that choice of marking their ballots where I want them to mark them. I just spoke my mind."

Some of you guys just erect a smoke screen. You could as well argue that advertisement is not meant to make people stay with or try a given brand, and that all that money is wasted just for fun, with no return in use and effect.