If Obama is re-elected, you'll be fired, CEO tells workers

[Francis]

The title of an article or thread is not evidence of a threat.

Again..If I found an article titled "the earth is flat"..is it evidence
No

Obviously your not willing to answer a straight question.. DONE playing games. :thumbdown

 

[Stone]

That's where your wrong.. Had I cut and pasted the whole article as if it was mine you would have a case but I indeed quoted it.. But I used it only as an example to my OP which was...

Don't threats like these actually discourage some people to vote a certain way. I mean bullying people into voting a certain party or else we close the doors is old school type politics that used to be the way in the 1970 and 1980s.. Everyone knows if there is a void in a market place it will be filled faster than you can say "money" so why bother.

Just my opinion but I think this will hurt Romney and not help..

I mean bullying people into voting a certain party

Perhaps you'd have more luck with a different example?
Your logic and argument isn't working well with the Siegel scenario.

 

[Francis]

Nothing has changed, slick.
My answer lies in past responses and I don't see any reason to keep repeating the same logic, which I point out ....you haven't even tried to refute.

Dude I thought you had more common sense, but you seem to have this logic all of a sudden that seems to have locked into thinking this is only a Siegle type of attack.. It's not but you can't think past the keyboard.

You seem to have this Win at all cost and not just debate to see new points of view without having winners and losers..

I'm done..

 

[The Man]

Obviously your not willing to answer a straight question.. DONE playing games. :thumbdown

I have responded accordingly

The title of an article or thread is not evidence of a threat.

Again..If I found an article titled "the earth is flat"..is it evidence
No

Francis
With your logic we would be convicting people off the charge alone rather than the evidence

You have not offered evidence of a threat.
Here is what you offered

"If Obama is re-elected, you'll be fired, CEO tells workers "


As we can see that comes from a third party....the clue being "CEO tells workers"
Clearly not a first person statement.

I am sorry..but you have nothing to offer as a threat...other than saying a threat was made.

 

[Stone]

Dude I thought you had more common sense, but you seem to have this logic all of a sudden that seems to have locked into thinking this is only a Siegle type of attack.. It's not but you can't think past the keyboard.

You seem to have this Win at all cost and not just debate to see new points of view without having winners and losers..

I'm done..

And the thread starter grabs up all his marbles and exists......or does he?

but you seem to have this logic all of a sudden that seems to have locked into thinking this is only a Siegle type of attack

Who else are you attacking?.......I have an inquiring mind and I want to KNOW! ( )



I was wondering when the ad hominem attacks would begin.

Dude I thought you had more common sense

.:eek

.

but you can't think past the keyboard

Shocking!....
Really....I'm not a mind reader.....I have tried to understand you.
Perhaps you ought to close this thread and start fresh with a different example that easily fits your argument?

You seem to have this Win at all cost

No.....I actually look for the easy win

and not just debate to see new points of view without having winners and losers..

Maybe if you posted a point I agreed with you'd feel differently

I'm done.

Actually, you did provide a topic of interesting discussion.
So don't go away mad, good debate threads involve controversy.

 

[The Man]

Let me ask you this Francis.
Is there a way for a boss to tell his employees that further tax increases will make the company perform cutbacks if the current president is re elected.
That these cutback will also include a reduction of workers. {without it being considered a threat by you}


Also....isnt it rather decent of the guy to tell his employees that if Obama is re elected that jobs will be cut....as compared to finding out later by being cut?

Wouldnt you want to know?

 

[Alien Allen]

That's where your wrong.. Had I cut and pasted the whole article as if it was mine you would have a case but I indeed quoted it.. But I used it only as an example to my OP which was...

Don't threats like these actually discourage some people to vote a certain way. I mean bullying people into voting a certain party or else we close the doors is old school type politics that used to be the way in the 1970 and 1980s.. Everyone knows if there is a void in a market place it will be filled faster than you can say "money" so why bother.

Just my opinion but I think this will hurt Romney and not help..

If it was bullying would it not require repeated communications?

 

[Stone]

If it was bullying would it not require repeated communications?

I would think so.

And don't forget......Siegel was relaying the threat of increased taxation forcing him to take actions that are easily seen as unwanted. From Siegal's pov......the supposed 'bullying' starts with Obama's tax plans. With the government demanding more......of Siegel.

This scenario isn't as simple as the sophistry previously posted.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Yeah he is a moron alright ...guess the business grew out of luck .
You do seem to have issue with his success...perhaps jealousy ?
TBO all I see is another attack of the "rich man"


So before you even read his email you already stated.




You appear to have me beat...you already insulted the guy before you read his mail
You may want to seek help with that jealousy...its not healthy

Another thing that you are really good at is making incorrect assumptions based on what you think you read, and then pointlessly splitting non-existent hairs.Just because I didn't specifically refer to reading this idiot's threats in full before commenting, it does not give you licence to base your argument on the premise that I didn't.

See, this is why I seldom bother with you any more, you are just not good at this.

The jealousy jibe? funny. Any man who is so emotionally crippled that he tries to blackmail his staff over a change of government gets scorn.If he doesn't have sufficient business acumen to frame his business to suit trading conditions, he'd probably be better off selling it, and so would his staff.
It's clear that he's a greedy prick who would most likely sell rather than shut up shop.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

If it was bullying would it not require repeated communications?

Nope. attempting to put people in fear for their jobs for extended periods of time is pretty scummy bullying on a personal level, and laughably poor business practice. Perhaps if he put his efforts into motivating his staff and empowering them to run his business well, he'd get a little bit more of that money that seem to drive his bad decisions.

 

[Alien Allen]

Nope. attempting to put people in fear for their jobs for extended periods of time is pretty scummy bullying on a personal level, and laughably poor business practice. Perhaps if he put his efforts into motivating his staff and empowering them to run his business well, he'd get a little bit more of that money that seem to drive his bad decisions.

where is your proof he did this over a period of time versus a one time letter?

unless you can find such proof then you are the one making assumptions on what others thoughts are it would seem

 

[Alien Allen]

as a side note I guess I am a bullying monster of a business owner because when ever I saw things looking bad I would warn the employees about future layoffs coming. Silly me I thought I was giving them a heads up so they would not be unprepared. Damn I had no idea I was being threatening. I guess I just had to do better at making silk out of a sows ear eh?

 

[The Man]

Another thing that you are really good at is making incorrect assumptions based on what you think you read, and then pointlessly splitting non-existent hairs.Just because I didn't specifically refer to reading this idiot's threats in full before commenting, it does not give you licence to base your argument on the premise that I didn't.

See, this is why I seldom bother with you any more, you are just not good at this.

The jealousy jibe? funny. Any man who is so emotionally crippled that he tries to blackmail his staff over a change of government gets scorn.If he doesn't have sufficient business acumen to frame his business to suit trading conditions, he'd probably be better off selling it, and so would his staff.
It's clear that he's a greedy prick who would most likely sell rather than shut up shop.

I read it correctly you had made a statement assaulting the character of the business man.

You then made another post stating "after reading....." assaulting his character further.

Its pretty obvious you read the thread title and perhaps the opening post ...then assaulted his character before reading the email.

And now you assault him further...while claiming he has poor business practices...more hollow claims.

Now you suggest he should sell.

Which only re enforces that the economy is putting his business in danger...an economy controlled by the current administration

 

[The Man]

Nope. attempting to put people in fear for their jobs for extended periods of time is pretty scummy bullying on a personal level, and laughably poor business practice. Perhaps if he put his efforts into motivating his staff and empowering them to run his business well, he'd get a little bit more of that money that seem to drive his bad decisions.

The fear comes from the Obama administration...not from the man relaying the message

 

[The Man]

as a side not I guess I am a bullying monster of a business owner because when ever I saw things looking bad I would warn the employees about future layoffs coming. Silly me I thought I was giving them a heads up so they would not be unprepared. Damn I had no idea I was being threatening. I guess I just had to do better at making silk out of a sows ear eh?

you darn bully you

 

[Minor Axis]

Let me ask you this Francis.
Is there a way for a boss to tell his employees that further tax increases will make the company perform cutbacks if the current president is re elected.
That these cutback will also include a reduction of workers. {without it being considered a threat by you}


Also....isnt it rather decent of the guy to tell his employees that if Obama is re elected that jobs will be cut....as compared to finding out later by being cut?

Wouldnt you want to know?

Wouldn't you want to know the truth? You must consider the prejudices of the boss and try to figure out what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

 

[Alien Allen]

Wouldn't you want to know the truth? You must consider the prejudices of the boss and try to figure out what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

only problem with this the owner has no clue how people voted

makes no difference his motives

since he can not actually influence their votes unless he has a way to find out how individuals voted

and lets not let the facts get in the way when there is a difference between being fired and laid off eh

damn those facts just are so inconvenient

For the record does his comment end up different from the liberals claiming electing Romney would mean polluted water and air, electing Romney would mean killing grandma, Romney etc. etc. Is that not a threat to voters then?

Does it matter if liberal members of congress make such threats?? (which they have) Or do they get to make any absurd claim and it is ok but any comment by a conservative business owner is not?

Just wondering

 

[Stone]

Wouldn't you want to know the truth? You must consider the prejudices of the boss and try to figure out what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

Wouldn't you want to know the truth?

Seriously, what do you care about 'truth'?
As a generality, boss/owners tend to be capitalistic.
Isn't that enough of a biased pov for you to bushwack Siegal?
He's obviously not a socialist and will likely never be supportive of liberal/socialist agendas.

But the issue of this thread isn't about his integrity..........it's all about how accurate his claims are about his business failing if a certain candidate wins and taxes increase at a time when his business is under financial duress.
If his claims are accurate, all he's doing is relaying the financial consequences (to his company) from a specific candidate's position on taxation.
Up to this point, no one claiming that Siegel is threatening his employees... has bothered to research this angle other than admitting Siegel's business is in bankruptcy.....and that isn't supportive of 'threat ' in the implied context of this thread.

what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

Like I posted.....what do you really care about 'truth' when you post a condemnation like that with out knowing shit about the situation?



( or am I still on ignore? .......TM, please quote this post so MA will see it, even if he closes his eyes really, really quick :24: )

 

[The Man]

Wouldn't you want to know the truth? You must consider the prejudices of the boss and try to figure out what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

TM
prejudices or lack of dont determine a threat ...A threat is based on its validity not on motivations.

Wouldn't you want to know the truth? You must consider the prejudices of the boss and try to figure out what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

MA

Wouldn't you want to know the truth?

Seriously, what do you care about 'truth'?
As a generality, boss/owners tend to be capitalistic.
Isn't that enough of a biased pov for you to bushwack Siegal?
He's obviously not a socialist and will likely never be supportive of liberal/socialist agendas.

But the issue of this thread isn't about his integrity..........it's all about how accurate his claims are about his business failing if a certain candidate wins and taxes increase at a time when his business is under financial duress.
If his claims are accurate, all he's doing is relaying the financial consequences (to his company) from a specific candidate's position on taxation.
Up to this point, no one claiming that Siegel is threatening his employees... has bothered to research this angle other than admitting Siegel's business is in bankruptcy.....and that isn't supportive of 'threat ' in the implied context of this thread.

MA below

what the motivation is for blatantly trying to influence your vote.

Stone

Like I posted.....what do you really care about 'truth' when you post a condemnation like that with out knowing shit about the situation?



( or am I still on ignore? .......TM, please quote this post so MA will see it, even if he closes his eyes really, really quick :24: )

Done.

 

[The Man]

only problem with this the owner has no clue how people voted

makes no difference his motives

since he can not actually influence their votes unless he has a way to find out how individuals voted

and lets not let the facts get in the way when there is a difference between being fired and laid off eh

damn those facts just are so inconvenient

For the record does his comment end up different from the liberals claiming electing Romney would mean polluted water and air, electing Romney would mean killing grandma, Romney etc. etc. Is that not a threat to voters then?

Does it matter if liberal members of congress make such threats?? (which they have) Or do they get to make any absurd claim and it is ok but any comment by a conservative business owner is not?

Just wondering

We have several threatening signs out here by businesses ..the signs tell people how to vote and why.
They could have sent emails...but this way they are reminded everyday when they pull into the parking lot.