What I can't believe is how there may be any influence on how someone votes, because a person gets hired in Apple (or in fact any employer)\, even though Apple or any other employer may compensate someone for their time out of the office to vote.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Providing U.S. Employees With Up to Four Hours Paid Time Off to Vote in November Election
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pure speculation, at best. Fetching for arguments rather. The vote is completely up to the employees.
And you seriously believe they select employees by the part membership?
It is ignorant to dismiss facts that don’t suit your beliefs. When it comes to voting it doesn’t matter if fraud happens, it matters if fraud could. Here it absolutely could.
[automerge]1596227480[/automerge]
You all keep using that word but I don’t think it means what you think it means. Listing facts isn’t speculation.
Last edited:
They only employ people who hold beliefs they align with. If you show behaviors they disagree with you stop being employed by them.
I agree Apple, or any employee of a publicly held company will or should only hire people who are suitable for the job. Nobody will ask a candidate who they are voting for nor expect them to vote a certain way.
Will there be some exceptions? Maybe, but I’m fairly sure it’s not legal. As it relates to Apple, no.
Why are people so focused on if Apple asks who you vote for? They don’t do that, and no one is saying they do. But you can select people who answer hypothetical questions in a way you like. You can set behavior expectations that include actions done outside of work and terminate people for violating them. You can exclude people associated with organizations who conflict with your ideals. Do you think Apple HR doesn’t google applicants? Of course they do! Most companies look into social media account applicants have. You don’t have to issues orders to find people who will vote the way you want. Policy will, for the most part, lead to that.
Than all you have to do is encourage them to vote.
Because that’s the ultimate issue. They aren’t encouraging all people to vote. They are encouraging their people to do so.
Last edited:
Oh really, I believe you are mis-informed. Here is a link for you to do some research and learn. Enjoy and God Bless!! https://www.heritage.org/election-i...the-vulnerabilities-absentee-and-mail-ballots
It should never take hold. Here ya go. https://www.heritage.org/election-i...the-vulnerabilities-absentee-and-mail-ballots
Your point is that you all expect them to vote for one party (when there are so many choices, like 2?).
My point is party membership is hardly related to somebody’s corporate culture.
People make up all different stuff to get a job. Nobody can stop that. Nobody can influence you to vote a specific way. The vote is secret and your choice not shared with your employer. The fact that they get time to vote has zero impact on the party they vote for.
Well to add what I sent you, just reported on FoxNews, over 80,000 ballots disqualified in NYC primary. 1 out of 4 ballots were disqualified for arriving late, lack of postmarked and other defects. That should be concerning no matter what way you lean. God Bless!!
None of that points to fraud. I was an Election Day Worker for a few years. I can tell you from my own experiences, and from conversations with Election officials and supervisors that tons of ballots are disqualified for lack of a signature. Because voters write in the day's date instead of their birthdate. Because they fail to seal the ballot in the correct inner envelope. Because they wrote in the incorrect address.
Given the amount of mail-in ballots in the NYC primaries -- upto 10X norms -- there were bound to be many disqualified ballots.
Last edited by a moderator:
you're last statement in itself is alarming to me and we should have vote in person with voter id. If mask work lets mask up and go vote in person. Its all good. God Bless!!
At the rate the pandemic is going, it'll be much safer to employ mail-in ballots in several hotspots. More voters have been denied the right to vote due to voter ID (and other restrictive) laws then mail-in ballots that were improperly completed or that arrived late (often through no fault of voters). Given that so many used mail-in ballots in primaries, voters have more experience and I'm hopeful that the rejection rate will be much, much lower.
I will say it again. All that matters is that they could do it. They don't have to. Anything that might undermined a vote should not be allowed as it could make people think the vote is fraudulent.
There is no logic that the vote is influenced in any way. A bunch of voters go. It’s open to everyone. These people can do it during work and they get a chance to exercise their right to vote. Seeing fraud here is paranoid at best.
Of course such important days could just be Sundays or public holidays which would be preferable.