this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
165 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3222 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I mean sure, that may just be an "innocent" poll and Uihlein might just be genuinely curious about what the percentages are, there is no way I would trust a conservative to not connect those survey answers to people.

Shit, they wouldn't even have to explicitly note down who answered what in the database where they count answers, since employees have to be logged in they can probably look at server & auth logs to deduce who voted for who

[–] Beldarofremulak@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

My work sends out "anonymous" surveys about random stuff to get a feel for what's working and what's causing problems. If you don't fill it out you get an email from HR reminding you that you haven't filled out the "anonymous" survey.

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I mean it's absolutely possible and pretty trivial to do in-house online surveys so that you know whether someone has answered but can't immediately connect answers to individuals, especially if the survey didn't use an in-house web service.

Whether I'd trust a corporation that says some survey is anonymous is another matter entirely though, because I absolutely wouldn't

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 9 points 1 week ago

Work surveys are never anonymous.

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Ugh I keep forgetting Uline is run by fascists. The company i work for buys tons of shit from them. Not many other one-stop warehouse and packing suppliers that are as good as them sadly.

[–] IHawkMike@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Grainger seems alright. Better than Uline anyway.

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

Their coffee (which I wasn't expecting that they make) is actually pretty decent, for a packing supply company lol

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

It’s legal for private company owners to urge their employees to vote a certain way. It’s not legal for them to condition promotion or pay or continued employment on them voting that way. The Uhleins might be stepping beyond the line here. As soon as Garland wakes up from his nap, maybe he'll find out.

[–] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Voter intimidation

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 week ago

“Anonymous”

[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's shit like this that makes me never want to answer a poll ever, what's the incentive especially when the questions may be coming from an antagonistic, powerful source?