Uhh, saying you won't get any raises or bonuses unless this guy gets elected is pretty much coercion.

Yeah whatever Ducimus. I think you're "having a cow" now about this McD thing because you care about the Dems more than you and mookie will admit here.

By the way, one of my neighbors is a union electrician (IBEW) and he tells me that they are indeed constantly asked to support democrat candidates. Between that and the fact that their union dues are also used to support the dems this McD story is nothing by comparison.

No it's not. Are you seriously trying to claim that McDonalds employees, even if they voted en masse for one side or the other would have any really measurable effect on an election?

never happened to me. Im in a union

unions asking to support a candidate is WAY different than putting a shady letter top scare your employees. You guys are just breaking your backs to find a way to make it seem like its not coercion

How? They all vote for the dem. How does the boss know, exactly?

Be specific.

BTW, if policies already passed by the supermajority, filibuster-proof, Democrat Congress are going to harm the business, causing fewer raises or even layoffs, that happens regardless of the election unless it gets repealed.

Your rape analogy (talk about smoke screens, sheesh!) just does not jibe with the fact that McDonalds (the "rapist") has absolutely no way of determining whether their employees (the rape victims) are complying with the "suggestion".

Your use of such an innacurate and incendiary analogy like rape just illustrates how weak your argument really is.

You know what that statement tells me. It tells me you are so consumed by partisan hatred, it's blinded you. What i said, was the truth where I'm concerned. I have no reason to lie about personal beliefs. If i supported one party or the other, i would say so. I have nothing to gain by lieing about it, and if i am known for anything on subsim over the last few years, it's usually being brutally honest about what I think.

Tell me where McDonalds "demanded" anything. You can't because they didn't.

Anyone want to comment on the fact that, ethical or not, the company seems to be in violation of the law?

yes but instead of talking up the positive points of candidate saying what he can do for you and why you should vote, Mickey D's started twisting their employees arms telling them that if they didn't vote republican bad things would happen to them.

So what?

If it's illegal, it's illegal, though I'd argue it as a 1st amendment thing and try to get the law thrown out.

so, when you start using fear tactics and throwing out consequences to gain votes, you go from promoting a candidate to trying to coerce a group of people

No.

Coercion requires a credible threat of force.

A credible threat in this case requires that the employer be able to read the employees' minds, or has access to how they voted.

Paramilitary looking guys with nightsticks blocking a polling place... there's a credible threat of force.

saying that someone will lost their pay or not get a raise IS a threat

No it's not. It's not credible.

Here, I'm going to threaten YOU. Personally, right now. If you don't vote Republican tomorrow your employer will have space aliens vaporize your retirement fund!

How will I he know how you vote?

hey tater, you're splitting hairs.

the point is, were not discussing wither or not the threats were credible, were comment on the fact that McDonalds attempted to threaten their employees to make them vote republican. Even if what they say is an empty threat, it's still a threat.

Indeed, well let me tell you Ducimus. I am no more blinded by partisan hatred than you are, and that's also being "brutally honest" in my opinion.

It's no threat at all if no one could possibly take it seriously on a personal level.

The "threat" is the argument that more intrusive government policy will hinder business. The threat is REAL if you believe the argument. That is a CHOICE on the part of the employee. If they think the "threat" is overstated, they vote dem (if they were so inclined anyway). If they think it's a reasonable argument, and could be swayed anyway, then they don't vote dem.

In no case are they actually worried about retribution.

Note that the law violate probably doesn't apply to union stuff going out in the mail. Business constrained from political speech, unions get a pass.