My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania • Hacker News Board

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#181

Post by jetpks » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:12 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #179

sk5t wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd probably get upset as well if some poll worker tried to tell me I'm not allowed to wear the American flag on my clothes The flag of the United States is not adulterated with text or anything else in place of its stripes, stars, and field.

> The flag of the United States is not adulterated with text or anything else in place of its stripes, stars, and field. I could give you a billion examples where it is. Just do a Google image search.

Then it is not the flag of the United States.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#182

Post by stouset » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:12 PM UTC

listenallyall wrote: post #155

stouset wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MAGA hats wouldn’t be allowed (in California) since they’re official campaign merchandise and part of that campaign’s branding. Source: am an SF election inspector. That said, it’s all up to the specifics of state law.

Just curious, but how much is up to personal discretion? What if the hat was red and said "Make USA Great Again"? or simply "Make America Great"? These wouldn't be "official" merchandise, and to be honest, I have no idea how a random pollworker or inspector decides what is "official".

If a pollworker or election inspector deemed something to be electioneering, they would first let the person know and ask them to remedy the situation. 99% of cases are handled this way without incident. Of course, any citizen can do the same if a pollworker is unwilling to do so.

In the event that the person refuses to cooperate, you can call the election center to get confirmation that they're electioneering and—if so—you can simply call the police and have them deal with it if it's egregious enough.

Realistically, the situation you're asking about just doesn't happen often enough to be of concern. Most of the time, people aren't "trying" to electioneer. They're just excited about their candidate, and when told about the law and asked to take down a sign or remove a hat, they'll do so even if begrudgingly. The people who actually want to electioneer aren't shy about it and step way over the line. For anything in the middle, simply make a judgment call and go with it.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#183

Post by pjc50 » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:14 PM UTC

zeveb wrote: post #110

ddevault wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a universally held belief.

The earth being round is not universally held, either, but it is true. The military is patriotic , yes, as are its members (it is difficult to imagine how they could be effective were they not), but the military tries very, very hard to be apolitical. Yes, individuals in the military have strong political opinions, just like many other individual Americans. It seems to me that any country at a point where the combina…

> political rather than patriotic

Unfortunately patriotism itself is highly political; the ultimate question of "my country, right or wrong" results in some people noticing that it is in fact wrong in some cases.

Do they not teach Clausewitz in the US military? "War is the continuation of politics by other means". Every shot fired in anger is a political act. Not the politics of the person firing it, but those directing the fire.

It is possible to try to be non-partisan, but an apolitical military is an oxymoron.

The US military is the guarantor of a host of political lines across the world; supporting South Korea or Taiwan or Israel or Germany or Bosnia is a political act.

You can't sign up and then disclaim responsibility for the political results of following orders "apolitically". The last people who tried that got shot at Nuremberg.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#184

Post by lurker345 » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:16 PM UTC

drewdevault sounds like a cuck

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#185

Post by macintux » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:17 PM UTC

tomohawk wrote: post #149

Another POV: https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/11/06/a-pro-bono-lawyer-for...

It’s hard to trust allegations like “our switchboard was hacked”, especially coming from someone who starts out with saying the Dems always cheat.

I’d much rather hear concrete allegations with evidence from someone who isn’t a lawyer for the losing party.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#186

Post by Schiendelman » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:18 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #166

no-dr-onboard wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason I can't imagine many people utilizing that sort of logic with the transgender flag on a hat.

If you were working as an election official, that would still be a problem.

No, it wouldn't be. The thin blue line flag is a racist dog whistle. The transgender flag is inclusive.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#187

Post by takeda » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

sk5t wrote: post #39

dx87 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A "thin blue line" flag also doesn't fit any of the banned criteria. You guys are basically saying that supporting police and military is only done by republicans.

Are you seriously suggesting the "thin blue line" or "back the blue" flags are not political messaging? Lots of folks with different backgrounds and beliefs "support police and military"; however, the bootlick flags are closely tied to just one party.

The people wearing it made it political. You see them exclusively at trump rallies.

For similar reason wearing a red hat now became a political statement. In Poland for example now wearing something with a thunderbolt or 8 asterisks is sign that you support current protests. In France wearing yellow vests. Those things constantly change and at specific time it can be political. It's all about context and if you're voting you can't claim to be oblivious to it.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#188

Post by Schiendelman » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:19 PM UTC

throwaway377383 wrote: post #170

mmastrac wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a logo that is more strongly associated with one political party than another, being worn by someone who is presumably armed and in a position of authority. If you cannot see why this is a problem, I don't think I can explain it any more.

>It's a logo that is more strongly associated with one political party than another As long as you'll admit that BLM falls under this same logic, and should similarly be banned, then you're being consistent. If not, you're being hypocritical.

No, he should have just said the thin blue line flag implies racism and bigotry, which is the real problem. It intimidates.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#189

Post by giantg2 » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:32 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #180

giantg2 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps those with a contrary belief should review the UMJC, which restricts political statements/actions for military members, even off duty.

Sadly those lines are increasingly blurry. Isn’t there an issue right now with the new Secretary of Defence, for example, who technically has not been out of Green Berets long enough to be appointed...?

With any laws, some of the lines can be blurry. I'm not familiar with that specific situation. I just mention this because there are laws restricting military personnel pretty heavily from many political things, even just criticizing the president. The institution itself is absolutely forbidden from being involved in politics to prevent coups.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#190

Post by wavefunction » Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 11:32 PM UTC

macintux wrote: post #185

tomohawk wrote: post #149

Another POV: https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/11/06/a-pro-bono-lawyer-for...

It’s hard to trust allegations like “our switchboard was hacked”, especially coming from someone who starts out with saying the Dems always cheat. I’d much rather hear concrete allegations with evidence from someone who isn’t a lawyer for the losing party.

As well, this media outlet linked in the op is owned by The Heritage Foundation a far-right-wing "think tank". The other pieces of media on the site do not seem to be without a certain political bias.