So when do you expect Malloy to deploy his picking up litter skills? And Rohan can come get his crap. This is opposite my house I don’t want to see this little anymore.thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwlou31 wrote
Reply to comment by ProLicks in So when do you expect Malloy to deploy his picking up litter skills? And Rohan can come get his crap. This is opposite my house I don’t want to see this little anymore. by Rincewindisahero
Once someone else takes ownership of it, it is not their garbage anymore. Same as every other political signs left out.
ProLicks t1_iwluj1g wrote
…And yet, my lawn signs were picked up by volunteers or the candidates themselves, as has happened every year for decades. Is it legally required? No. But it sure shows me who gives a shit about Vermont.
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwlvum9 wrote
Really, your bar for who cares about VT is people picking up campaign signs?
We have very different expectationa of our politicians I guess.
ProLicks t1_iwlxtkg wrote
Those signs serve one purpose only, to get them elected. If they think that standing for office here doesn't involve picking up after your campaign, I don't think they have the correct mentality to take responsibility for spending my tax money.
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwpgf9i wrote
You already said you can’t take them off private land and towns are already empowered to remove them from public rite of ways so are you advocating for trespassing and theft of private property? Explain it like I’m 5. How does a sign cleanup driven by a candidate work? That is the candidate you want? The one who steals other people’s property?
ProLicks t1_iwpl5cx wrote
If a campaign places a campaign sign on your property, they come back and remove them. There are literally volunteer groups on (well run) campaigns that do this exact thing - usually the same people placing the signs requested online in the first place. Because they are they are representatives of the campaign for which the sign was printed, the understanding is that they will also remove any signs that they place.
The person who posted here is not a campaign volunteer or the landowner, they are a neighbor - a completely uninvolved party. That person has no right to remove any signs from anyone else’s land.
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwpnqlx wrote
So a volunteer run program. That makes sense. That in no way makes the candidate responsible though. The responsibility is still 100% on the sign owner to opt in and uncollected sign would still be a reflection on the individual, not the candidate.
ProLicks t1_iwpob54 wrote
Wrong. These are campaign volunteers who are organized at the behest of the candidate. Just let it go.
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwpomnn wrote
Ahhh, so now you are saying you won't vote for a candidates whose volunteers don't do this? That is not what you said originally. You are changing your story now.
ProLicks t1_iwpqfwe wrote
>Ahhh, so now you are saying ...
LOL, you've got me now, detective!
You're correct in your assertion, but I haven't changed anything with my argument. Because the candidate has control over who volunteers on their campaigns, and who they appoint to different campaigns. As you so cogently pointed out earlier, the candidate doesn't do all of the work themselves, they have people that they pay as well as people who volunteer their time in support of their candidacy...but in the event that the any of those people fail to meet the standards of conduct set by a campaign, the candidate is responsible for policing those actions. You haven't caught me in a loophole, and I haven't changed my argument friend - I wouldn't vote for a candidate whose volunteers didn't do this, because that candidate is probably terrible at managing the people supposedly working for them - they can't even coordinate volunteers to pick up their own garbage, how are they going to run a government?!
Look, this has been an absolute hoot, but I'm done explaining how electoral politics work. Please ask your civics teacher, or if you're someone who has already gotten beyond the reach of our educational system, volunteer on a campaign. I've done it multiple times over many decades - it's the source of most of this understanding - and it's taught me a lot.
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwprcqp wrote
Ohhh your done explaining now? That's very mature of you. Multiple times over multiple decades huh.
You changed your story twice at this point and again you still have not said anything. You seem very ignorant of how things work. What campain did you work on.
Can you cite any candidate who does this statewide? I kinda doubt it.
Intelligent-Hunt7557 t1_iwole5l wrote
You really think someone can litter like that and it doesn’t say anything about their campaign? It’s symbolic and predictive. ProLicks was clearly not saying it was the only requirement for office. Try to think past your hate-boner for Dave Z. I know, I know, bOTh SIDes!!!
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwpfgsd wrote
Again, as I said, once someone else takes ownership of the sign, it is no longer the campaign’s garbage.
The previous poster is directly correlating in the responsibility of a volunteer in a specific location to the overarching value of the candidate on the sign.
That is an extremely ignorant and shortsighted position to take.
Also, why do you bring up Zuckerman or boners? I used him once in this thread as an example in how a fine based system could easily be gamed. I think I actually used both gubernatorial candidates in that same post.
I don’t think I have once implied my political leanings here and yet you somehow come to the conclusion about my politics. The unfortunate part of Reddit is the hypocrisy. Politics has become a sport and fans of all teams are too blind to engage in critical thinking. People like you who say things like “Both sides” embody the problem. Rather than look at a candidate in a state of local election to determine if they represent you and your values you automatically assume whichever team you are on is right and the other team is wrong. Instead of assume that, in VT at least, most people are doing what they think is right you think all Republicans are closeted homosexuals who hate women or all Democrats want to make ever child change genders. You seem to lack the basic ability to make a decision based on the facts in front of you and justify or ignore facts about people on your team.
Maybe you will eventually realize it, maybe not, but the real issue is between the rich and the poor. A system has been designed which pitches poor people against each other fighting for scraps while the rich get richer. It is easy to convince people like you that the Republican Party is full of Nazis or the Democratic Party is full of pedophiles because when we fight each other, we won’t fight them.
Companies are about to start laying off hundreds of thousands as we enter an economic downturn and you want to argue about David Zuckerman because you think pointing out his past somehow equates to hate. (I also called him an asshole but really, spend even a hour with the guy trying to get something done and you will agree)
The world is going to shit and you are 1/2 the reason why. Read some history books, get off social media (Reddit is ok if you only troll /Vermont) and ask yourself, why does it seem that since 1980 regardless of who is in office, we only see minor change.
Anyway, hate is a strong word. I can happily say I don’t hate anyone today. I do think you are a fucking idiot but that is a different story, maybe you will decide to change, maybe not. Either way, I’m finishing my morning coffe and need to get ready for work. Have a good day, a bad day, in between, I don’t really care because to me, you are just another idiot on Reddit.
*I also just noticed that almost every time I post about David as it relates to this election you bring up Malloy and respond. Are you stalking me?
Intelligent-Hunt7557 t1_iwqkrtu wrote
I responded because you seem to intentionally misunderstand the nature of people’s posts and then haughtily complain about the low quality of Reddit posts in general. Like, show you care about having a normal interaction by not leaping to name-calling and escalation. Don’t crap on bystanders and wonder why Reddit is a cesspool.
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwqo4iz wrote
Do you have a hate-boner for me. Why are you stalking me. I think this needs to be reported to the site admins.
*If you read his post it has so far changed from candidates to volunteers to supporters. The guy is making shit up to fit his narrative and is pissy he is getting called out for it.
Intelligent-Hunt7557 t1_iwqthbz wrote
Again, responding to someone’s comments is not stalking, even if more than once. No need to escalate. There are different ways a sign can end up on public or private land. Ultimately it’s the candidate’s responsibility to pick it up if’s on public property or they put it up without expressed consent (which is alleged elsewhere)
thisoneisnotasbad t1_iwrru50 wrote
If it is on public property the town can and does collect and dispose of it. If it is placed on private property, then it is the property owner who should remove it, otherwise how do you know if the there is consent.
Neither of those represent only supporting a candidate who makes sure a team of volunteers pick up signs after an election because a failure to do so means they do not represent VT. (Which is what the other poster asserted)
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments