MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Wednesday, October 1, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 69.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

Wisconsin election reform

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Mean Scenester » Thu Jul 26, 2012 8:21 am

Meade wrote:Welcome to reality, Kevin. It gets better.

... said the batshit dildo.
Mean Scenester
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:56 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby christopher_robin » Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:14 am

You know I I like to do? I like to hand around social situations where people offhandedly call me horrible names. Daily.

It must be that I'm accepted and loved, right? That's why they say such mean things about me right? Right?!



Clue bat: Beat it, meade. You're a toad. You're the guy hanging around the party laughing boorishly and pouring drinks on the floor, picking your nose and wiping it on the linen, while everyone around recoils in disgust.

You're the Cable Guy on the basketball court: obliviously thinks he's part of the scene but regarded by all as a total dick.

Sucks to be you, man.

Sucks ever worse that we have to put up with you, though.
christopher_robin
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 10:46 am

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby MadDad » Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:26 am

Meade,

I have yet to see you participate in any discussion on this site as other than as sh*t thrower. But, I'll give you a chance.

Can you tell me how many of the following you support?

Gay Marriage
Abortion Rights
A mix (say Bowles Simpson-like) of revenue increases and tax cuts
Universal healthcare
Legaization of Marijuana
Paying the best public school teachers more
Limiting foreign corps participation in US politics
Current level of church/state separation
Increased benefits for returning veterans
An overall decrease in the Defense budget

Not which ones, just a number, thanks. I'm asking because even my most conservative friends (with Club for Growth insider credentials) would be somewhere in the 2-4 range. While I personally am a 10 on this scale, I find it hard to engage (and hard to believe, actually) with those who are at zero.

Sincerely,

Kevin
MadDad
Member
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby rabble » Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:28 am

Hm. I kinda thought Meade would have responded to that by now. Because he loves the free exchange of ideas so much.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6218
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Meade » Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:32 am

10
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Meade » Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:36 am

christopher_robin wrote:You know I I like to do? I like to hand around social situations where people offhandedly call me horrible names. Daily.

Is that what this forum is to you, Adam? A "social situation"?
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:31 pm

Detritus wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:When I was a member of MTI, our union polled its members about political contributions.

Yes, as Henry points out, unions already have to separate political activities from bargaining/grievance activities. Hence the difference between fair share and dues. Some unions listen to their members, while others do not, although union leaders, being elected positions, run the risk of losing their seats if they flout their members too long.

So if the Unions are already mostly functioning this way, what's the problem with making it the law? Ensure that Unions are actually representing their members rather than doing what the leaders believe is the best thing for the union.

Detritus wrote:I don't think it makes sense to include PACs and lobbying groups in the membership approval requirement, though. These are inherently political organizations. People who don't agree with what they do don't join

I can think of several groups I would consider donating too, if I had more say in who they supported. Since lobbying groups are generally narrow in focus, being able to have some say on who my money went to based on other issues would be nice. Mostly I just think it would be funny to make the NRA and AARP poll their members on every single campaign they weighed in on.
Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Francis Di Domizio » Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:41 pm

snoqueen wrote:I think #3 is a good idea but should be federal legislation not state.

First of all, most large corporations have an interest in federal elections, since they do business nationwide and globally. Trying to limit what is done within one state is pretty pointless.


Good point here, this really is something that should be addressed on a federal level more than state level.

snoqueen wrote:Robin Vos says (in the original link):
Noting that stockholders already elect boards to make decisions, Vos doesn’t see the need for additional stockholder input.


If Vos finds out the boards of the corporations in which he holds stock are making a bunch of donations with which he disagrees, I bet he'd change his tune on this one. Family planning services for all? Full civil rights and protections for gay people? Come on, Robin.


In that case doesn't Vos have the same right that every other stockholder has? to sell his stock in the offending company? Now it would definitely require more disclosure than currently required, but stockholders bailing out due to who or what a company supports could create a major issue for a company.
Francis Di Domizio
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 8:11 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby MadDad » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:16 pm

Meade,

I'm equally surprised that you are a 10 on my scale and that nobody has commented on it. Perhaps I have judged you too harshly.

I know I simplified things when I wrote that I've only seen you act as a sh*t thrower around here. I have actually seen you be a smart ass a number of times, too.

If you are actually as reasonable as your 10 would indicate, why do you spend your time on these boards wrecking havoc when you could be contributing positively to the discussions? Of course, I'd ask those on the other political extreme the same questions.

Is it just that much less fun to try to agree and move things forward than it is to call each other names?

Sincerely,

Kevin
MadDad
Member
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby jonnygothispen » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:52 pm

I think election reform should start with verifiable elections.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3155
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:53 pm

MadDad wrote:I'm equally surprised that you are a 10 on my scale and that nobody has commented on it. Perhaps I have judged you too harshly.


People didn't respond because he's full of shit and lying.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Meade » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:26 pm

Kevin,

I said 10 but as I look back over your list, I realize that I actually do not support current level of church/state separation. I would like to see more separation than we currently have.

So please revise my previous answer and put me down for a 9.

You may have me confused with someone else. I've never been a "sh*t thrower" here or anywhere else. I do contribute positively to the limited number of discussions I participate in. I've never attacked anyone who hasn't attacked me first. And I'm always very agreeable in the way I dissent and disagree.

If you point out for me examples where I have hurt someone's feelings by being a name-caller, I will acknowledge it and apologize to whoever's feelings I hurt. (Disclaimer: I may have once or twice called Stu Levitan "poopyhead" but everyone knows that that was used as a term of endearment.)

I don't call people "sh*t thrower" "toad" "Cable Guy" "dick" or "smart ass". And I never use clichéd childish taunts like "clue bat, _____" or "Sucks to be you, man" in order to insult people I don't like and try to make them go away. I reject juvenile elitism like that. In fact, I reject all elitism (which might be why some forons don't like me in their midst).

So you probably have me confused with christopher underline robin, Adam Vincent Powell, Adam Clayton Powell, or David Clayton Thomas, though surely not Vincent Van Gogh, Edgar Allan Poe, or David Allen Coe.

Sincerely,
Meade
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby lukpac » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:49 pm

Meade wrote:I've never been a "sh*t thrower" here or anywhere else.


What about a shit thrower?

Meade wrote:Okay but what's the deal with the Helen part? Why doesn't she just call herself Kelda Roys or Helen Roys? Either name seems distinctive enough. I just did a search - there is only one person in the U.S. named Kelda Roys and only 4 named Helen Roys. Come on, Helen (or Kelda), pick a normal American nomenclatural handle. Who do you think you are - Norman Vincent Peale? Adam Vincent Powell? Lee Harvey Oswald? John Wayne Gacy?

Less is more and more is less.
Get my point?

Does Jason Joyce go around calling himself Jason James Joyce? I think not. Even Stu Levitan uses the tried and true ordinary American custom of calling himself simply by his first and last name, eschewing the more pompous though understandably descriptive, Stuart "The Player" Levitan. http://www.thedailypage.com/isthmus/article.php?article=32992
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby Detritus » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:30 pm

Francis Di Domizio wrote:
Detritus wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:When I was a member of MTI, our union polled its members about political contributions.

Yes, as Henry points out, unions already have to separate political activities from bargaining/grievance activities. Hence the difference between fair share and dues. Some unions listen to their members, while others do not, although union leaders, being elected positions, run the risk of losing their seats if they flout their members too long.

So if the Unions are already mostly functioning this way, what's the problem with making it the law?

They function this way (separating political activities from bargaining/grievance activities) completely, not mostly, because that is already the law. That's the point--they are held to a different standard than corporations.
Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2406
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: Wisconsin election reform

Postby snoqueen » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:42 pm

In that case doesn't Vos have the same right that every other stockholder has? to sell his stock in the offending company? Now it would definitely require more disclosure than currently required, but stockholders bailing out due to who or what a company supports could create a major issue for a company.


Sure -- he can always sell.

But he's selling for a reason, based on facts that are now pretty hard to come by.

And selling stock in companies with whose policies one disagrees has a long and perfectly honorable history. When South Africa was emerging from apartheid, the pressure of stockholders in some of its corporations was a force for modernization. The University of Wisconsin has divested itself of stock in certain companies based on those companies' behavior. Ethical investing (however the investor defines that) is a whole subspecialty of financial planning.

Stockholders bailing out can definitely be an issue for a company -- that's the point. The issues can be anything: obscure religious preferences, treatment of women and minorities, manufacturing something the shareholder finds unpalatable... on and on. (I don't hold Monsanto stock, for instance. Do they care? No.) Does the pressure work? Only sometimes. Sometimes it backfires. But it's perfectly fair, and the more information the better.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11542
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar