Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: Unbelievable – Ted Cruz Campaign Sends Out Personal “Shaming Letters” To Iowa Voters
Source:
The Conservative Treehouse
URL Source: http://theconservativetreehouse.com ... haming-letters-to-iowa-voters/
Published: Jan 30, 2016
Author: sundance
Post Date: 2016-01-30 08:24:10 by Roscoe
Keywords: None
Views: 7538
Comments: 41
The personalized letters target individual Iowa voters and identifies them as having failed to vote in prior elections. They are admonished and then encouraged to vote this year. In addition the letters identify the neighbors of the voter, and provides their voting history. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
It's now official. Ted Cruz is a scumbag.
A Canadian scumbag.
A Texan Canadian. Those are the worst kind.
In general, when you try to use guilt on people, they attack you instead. Cruz is doomed. Trump is going to run the table.
He just needs to repackage himself.
Assembling voter report cards and then snitching people out to their neighbors is truly a bad idea. It's such a bad idea, I have to wonder why I haven't read it elsewhere. I notice Cruz's campaign is tight-mouthed about it but said it was a "narrowly targeted" mailing. I think Cruz's deep-data operations have indicated he will get most of these votes if he can just get them to turn out to the caucus. And it does make people aware that their voter participation record is a public record that lots of .orgs and others (like employers) can get hold of. So there may be some backlash but it still might be a smart move if they get more votes doing it than by not doing it.
He is American. His mother was American, and the law had changed by the time he was born. It wasn't the same law as in 1961, when Obama was born in Kenya. Cruz is natural born.
The ends justify the means.
Of at least two, if not three, nations.
So people that haven't voted in the past are going to vote against Cruz now? I think it is more likely that they will laugh and either not vote, or vote for Cruz.
These are professional pols. What did you expect?
The Cruz campaign said "narrowly focused" mailing. I think they have identified something like lone non-voters in a social circle of hot-blooded Cruz supporters. So if they guilt them into voting, the Cruz campaign can be confident that they will be caucusing in a location with all their Cruz-supporting friends/relatives/fellow-churchgoers. It is a little cold-blooded but I can how it might really pay off, help Cruz to pick up an extra 5-10 thousand votes. This is no doubt the result of Cruz's deep-data operation.
Unethical incompetence. And they didn't let me down.
That says exactly nothing.
With social media and smart phones ,the whole country ,many for the 1st time, is going to get to witness an archaic form of polling in Iowa. There is a bunch of cajoling ,and pressuring people to switch sides inside the caucus room. This voter report card is tame by comparison. I do have to amend comments I made on a different posting about the process. The Republicans have taken steps so that the final tally is a private vote. The Dems still caucus the way I previously described . The emperor's campaign ,through Moveon.org ,did similar mailing in 2012 .There was negative reaction ;but it was mostly tepid . The Republican org “Grow Missouri” did it in 2014 . http://fox2now.com/2014/11/03/political-groups-using-voting-report-cards-to-get- voters-to-the-polls/ Let's assume it is legit that the Cruz campaign sent these out (and no one has convinced me yet that this isn't a false flag dirty trick by one of the other campaigns ). A study was done in Michigan in 2006 ,and it found that shaming is as effective way to increase turnout . A large-scale field experiment involving several hundred thousand registered voters used a series of mailings to gauge these effects. Substantially higher turnout was observed among those who received mailings promising to publicize their turnout to their household or their neighbors. These findings demonstrate the profound importance of social pressure as an inducement to political participation. http://isps.yale.edu/research/publications/isps08-001#.Vq0AiDb2Zjp Applying social pressure has been proposed as a way to increase voter turnout in the United States. To study the effect of increased social pressure on turnout, researchers sent households one of four randomly selected mailings eleven days before Michigan’s August 2006 primary election. All four mailings increased turnout, but informing households of their neighbors’ past voting records raised turnout among registered voters by 8.1 percentage points, making the mailing about as effective as in-person canvassing. Waiting for Trump to tweet that Cruz is running a tacky campaign. lol . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Cuba sometimes achieves turnouts in excess of 98%.
In the Cruz org, they have a young guy who ran exactly this kind of voter shaming operation in Alaska. Worked well by all reports in Alaska. This is pretty hardball campaigning though.
yes they do ,and other democracies like Australia makes voting mandatory . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
They also have mass gun confiscation. Happy?
They also have mass gun confiscation. Happy? I wasn't defending it . I think voting should be a choice. A report card like that would not 'shame ' me either because I think it is a legitimate expression of preference to not participate in the franchise . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I think it's ethically impaired.
Like me, you have but just can't remember the details. I believe that the DRats were pushing this in upstate New York. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Like me, you have but just can't remember the details. I believe that the DRats were pushing this in upstate New York. Also one or more unions did or where threatening to do this. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
How do you dez apples? Colorado Republicans cancel presidential vote at 2016 caucus "Colorado will not vote for a Republican candidate for president at its 2016 caucus after party leaders approved a little-noticed shift that may diminish the state's clout in the most open nomination contest in the modern era. The GOP executive committee has voted to cancel the traditional presidential preference poll after the national party changed its rules to require a state's delegates to support the candidate that wins the caucus vote. The move makes Colorado the only state so far to forfeit a role in the early nomination process, according to political experts, but other caucus states are still considering how to adapt to the new rule. "It takes Colorado completely off the map" in the primary season, said Ryan Call, a former state GOP chairman. Republicans still will hold precinct caucus meetings in early 2016 to begin the process of selecting delegates for the national convention — but the 37 delegates are not pledged to any specific candidate. The Democratic Party still will hold a presidential straw poll March 1 — a Super Tuesday vote in a key swing state that is attracting attention from top- tier candidates. For Republicans, no declared winner means the caucus will lack much of its hype. The presidential campaigns still may try to win delegate slots for their supporters, but experts say the move makes it less likely that candidates will visit Colorado to court voters. The Colorado system often favors anti-establishment candidates who draw a dedicated following among activists — as evidenced by Rick Santorum's victory in 2012 caucus. So the party's move may hurt GOP contenders such as Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Rand Paul, who would have received a boost if they won the state. State Republican Party Chairman Steve House said the party's 24-member executive committee made the unanimous decision Friday — six members were absent — to skip the preference poll. The move, he said, would give Colorado delegates the freedom to support any candidate eligible at the Cleveland convention in July. Republican National Committee officials confirmed that the change complies with party rules. "If we do a binding presidential preference poll, we would then pledge our delegates ... and the candidates we bind them to may not be in the race by the time we get to the convention," House said in an interview Tuesday. The caucus is likely to occur in February, but party officials will meet next month to finalize the date. In 2008 and 2012, die-hard Republican voters gathered at caucus meetings to begin the delegate-selection process of selecting delegates to the national convention and voice support for presidential candidates in a straw poll. The votes, however, didn't require Colorado delegates to support any particular candidate at the national conventions. This allowed for delegates that supported a losing candidate to vote for the nominee and demonstrate party unity at the convention. But the freedom also opened the door for political mischief, as Colorado saw in 2012 when Ron Paul supporters managed to win a significant portion of the delegate slots, even though Paul finished far behind other candidates in the Colorado caucuses. The RNC tightened the rules in 2012 to eliminate nonbinding straw polls and help prevent similar stunts in the future, forcing Colorado Republicans to re- evaluate their process. An effort earlier this year to switch to a presidential primary system failed amid party infighting. "It's an odd scenario," said Josh Putnam, a political science lecturer at the University of Georgia who runs a popular blog on the presidential nominating process. "It's not to say the campaigns won't be there. ... But you won't have a good reflection of support at the caucuses, much less Colorado Republicans as a whole." Other caucus states are grappling with the rule change in different ways as they finalize their plans before the deadline at the end of September, Putnam said, but he is not aware of any state that has abandoned the presidential caucus vote. With the change, the only way Colorado Republican delegates would remain relevant is the remote chance that no candidate emerges as a clear winner in the primary contest. In this case, the state's unbound delegates would receive significant attention and may hold the key to victory in a floor fight. "If there's the potential for a brokered convention in any way, the unaffiliated delegates become extremely important," said Joy Hoffman, the Arapahoe County GOP chairwoman who attended the party meeting. "If there is someone who becomes a front-runner, ... then nobody's important. So I think the view became that if we were not bound, it's not the worse thing that could happen." John Frank: 303-954-2409, jfrank@denverpost.com or twitter.com/ByJohnFrank" Any wonder why I no longer register as a Republican in Colorado? POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!! Well.......maybe not. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
The insiders are running scared.
What is ethically impaired ? The mailers ? Compared to what ? This is politics . They are not running for sainthood ;and you are probably not supporting the most ethical person in the race anyway. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Explain what, if anything, is ethical about them.
There's no shame in not voting for REAL Republican losers like McCain and Romney. Voting for establishment neocons is the equivelent of voting for Obama. They should be ashamed that they didn't vote for a candidate with electability, like Ron Paul. But no, they'd rather vote for a GOPe loser, and have 4 more years to complain about resident Obama. Once again many plan on voting for that loser Trump, so they can whine about Hillary. So, THIS Is how the Republicans are going to try to steal it: by handing it back to the party itself.
Unbelievable, what a humongous UNDERSTATEMENT !!!! This is absolutely the dumbest, most idiotic thing a political campaign could do. Might as well had they run a TV Ad, with Cruz saying " Hey, all you dumass voters out there, Ef You, and eat shit " then drop his drawers and taking a dump on a map of the state he is campaigning in " . Man, you cannot fix stupid. If somebody had not confirmed that they did send this out, I would have guessed it was put out by some anti Cruz org. That is what I thought when I first read the headline. Cruz is done! Si vis pacem, para bellum Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. There are no Carthaginian terrorists. President Obama is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. --Clint Eastwood
Let's start with Ben Carson . Not an unethical bone in his body . .How about Cruz ? You talk about his ethics .He was one of the most prominent trial lawyers in the country . He could've sold out and made a fortune in the finest law firms in the nation . Instead he became the citizen statesman the founders envisioned .Instead he chose public service ;and on top of that ,has been one of the few in Congress who has taken on the Speaker Bonehead and McConnell establishment . So instead of applauding his selfless sacrifice ,his critics get on his case over some BS technicality in his campaign finance filings where he put up all his assets as collateral to finance a campaign. Instead the idiot critics say that he is bought and sold .....absolutely preposterous .....Instead they call him the insider ? and now the most unethical candidate in the Republican race (Trump) challenges his eligibility to run ? You haven't scratched the surface of unethical behavior until you explore the Trump relationship to organized crime . Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
He did.
He's depending on his sycophants to lie and cover up for him.
Cruz was not among the lawyers doing the arguing part of it, and did not appear in court. He assisted the firm in the case ;a case that earned the whole law firm $5,000 whoooo hoooo !! BUT he did successfully argue a $5 million intellectual theft case before SCOTUS AGAINST a Chinese company .[ Global Tech v. SEB ]At Cruz urging, SCOTUS decided 8-1, upholding a $5 million verdict against a Chinese counterfeiter; and adopted a strict legal standard against those who misappropriate U.S. intellectual property. You should review the facts before you post the propaganda. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I dunno. Trump already got away with calling Iowa "stupid" because his polls dropped. Then he bragged he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Ave and his supporters wouldn't even blink. So, sure, there is at least one very cheeky pol in the race. Actually, a bunch of them.
He's an even cheaper whore than Jim Robinson.
At least the REP Party in Colorado. IMO they can go f*ck themselves. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Like me, you have but just can't remember the details. I believe that the DRats were pushing this in upstate New York. http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/mailings-that-list-voting-records- set-off-some-neighbors-me5lip3-157049485.html http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/11/02/peer-pressure-and- voting/1675019/ Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Thanks. The first link didn't work. But bottom line, this is a disgusting practice that should inure to the detriment of the practictioner.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
So, sure, there is at least one very cheeky pol in the race. Actually, a bunch of them. Trump is different because he's not a pol. He's an entertainer. He's done WWE events. He's done comedy sketches. He has been playing with the public for decades. The people know him, and they like him, and they are able to tell when he talks about shooting somebody that he isn't serious. Cruz is a creepy politician. It's not the same.
Will try to find it again, in the meantime here's another... BTW I got one back in 2008, laughed and threw it away. When they called to ask me if I was going to vote that time I told them "The only good politician is a dead politician", needless to say it got real quiet on their end real quick and they hung up and they haven't called me back... Shaming people to the voting booth - Study's letters ID those who skipped election 7:07 AM, Aug 4, 2006 | 0 comments Share Print - A A A + FILED UNDER News Headlines Paige Nicholson opened her mail Tuesday and found something strange - a letter with the names and addresses of her and her neighbors, showing who voted in 2004 and who didn't and promising an updated list after Tuesday's primary election. Nicholson, 32, of Plymouth was one of 80,000 voters statewide to receive a letter about voting, part of an ongoing study into whether being publicly outed for not voting can shame people into casting a ballot. But Nicholson said she wasn't chagrined to have her neighbors told she didn't vote in the August 2004 primary - mainly because only one of the 20 on her list did - and it won't affect whether she votes Tuesday. "I didn't feel that embarrassed," she said. "I don't want to vote just to vote." But if the letter doesn't scare Nicholson into voting - she said she hasn't yet decided - it has sent other recipients scurrying to the polls, Mark Grebner, an East Lansing-based political consultant and specialist in putting together lists of voters for candidates, said Thursday. Grebner started the study in 2004 when he sent out a similar letter to groups of 2,500 voters before the August primary and the November election, and then before the 2005 Detroit mayoral election. Those studies showed that the percentage of voters who cast ballots in the group that received the letter was 2 percentage points higher than those that did not. That may sound small, but if applied statewide, that could mean about 150,000 more voters at the polls. "My suspicion is that one of the reasons we have relatively low turnout in the United States is it's completely private," Grebner said. "What I am trying to do is figure out if we change the context of voting to a public context, does that dramatically change voter turnout?" In the study, Grebner sent out four different letters, with each going to 20,000 people. The first is the one Nicholson received. Another tells the resident only of his or her own voting record. A third simply urges everyone to vote, and a fourth informs the resident that a study is taking place examining records of who votes and who does not. Another 100,000 voters will receive no communication to serve as a control group for comparison. The letters are not sent at random. Grebner is targeting those most likely to vote in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate between Michael Bouchard and Keith Butler, because that is the lone marquee race on the ballot next week. But the study has angered some recipients. Grebner said the voice mail of his business, Practical Political Consulting, is filled every hour with demands to be removed from the study. "I think it's completely invasive," said Nicholson, who called but didn't get through. "If someone chooses not to vote in my neighborhood, I don't need to know that, personally." Grebner said he's not trying to upset anyone and honors requests to be removed from the study. But if recipients were upset about this study, Grebner's next study could draw more howls. In 2007, he plans to target certain neighborhood blocks to receive several mailings like the one Nicholson received - before the February, May and August municipal and school elections. "It's just a continuous rain of mail," he said. Contact ZACHARY GORCHOW at 313-223-4536 or zgorchow@freepress.com. Staff writer Brian Dickerson contributed to this report. BY ZACHARY GORCHOW FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER http://archive.wzzm13.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=58975 Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
#2. To: Roscoe (#1)
"It's now official. Ted Cruz is a scumbag."
#3. To: misterwhite (#2)
#4. To: Roscoe (#0)
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Cruz is doomed.
#6. To: Roscoe (#0)
#7. To: Roscoe (#5)
#8. To: TooConservative (#6)
So there may be some backlash but it still might be a smart move if they get more votes doing it than by not doing it.
#9. To: Vicomte13 (#7)
Cruz is natural born.
#10. To: Roscoe (#0)
#11. To: Roscoe (#8)
The ends justify the means.
#12. To: jeremiad, Roscoe (#10)
So people that haven't voted in the past are going to vote against Cruz now? I think it is more likely that they will laugh and either not vote, or vote for Cruz.
#13. To: TooConservative (#11)
These are professional pols. What did you expect?
#14. To: TooConservative (#12)
The Cruz campaign said "narrowly focused" mailing.
#15. To: Roscoe, TooConservative, redleghunter (#0)
#16. To: tomder55 (#15)
shaming is as effective way to increase turnout
#17. To: tomder55 (#15)
Let's assume it is legit that the Cruz campaign sent these out (and no one has convinced me yet that this isn't a false flag dirty trick by one of the other campaigns ). A study was done in Michigan in 2006 ,and it found that shaming is as effective way to increase turnout .
#18. To: Roscoe (#16)
Cuba sometimes achieves turnouts in excess of 98%
#19. To: tomder55 (#18)
Australia makes voting mandatory
#20. To: Roscoe (#19)
Australia makes voting mandatory
#21. To: tomder55 (#20)
I think it is a legitimate expression
#22. To: TooConservative (#6)
It's such a bad idea, I have to wonder why I haven't read it elsewhere.
#23. To: TooConservative, All (#22)
It's such a bad idea, I have to wonder why I haven't read it elsewhere.
#24. To: tomder55, Roscoe, TooConservative, redleghunter (#15)
#25. To: SOSO (#24)
#26. To: Roscoe (#21)
I think it's ethically impaired.
#27. To: tomder55 (#26)
#28. To: Roscoe, *Neo-Lib Chickenhawk Wars* (#0)
(Edited)
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#29. To: SOSO (#24)
#30. To: Roscoe (#0)
" Unbelievable – Ted Cruz Campaign Sends Out Personal “Shaming Letters” To Iowa Voters "
#31. To: Roscoe (#27)
(Edited)
Explain what, if anything, is ethical about them.
#32. To: tomder55 (#31)
He was one of the most prominent trial lawyers in the country . He could've sold out
#33. To: Stoner (#30)
Cruz is done!
#34. To: Roscoe (#32)
#35. To: Stoner (#30)
Might as well had they run a TV Ad, with Cruz saying " Hey, all you dumass voters out there, Ef You, and eat shit " then drop his drawers and taking a dump on a map of the state he is campaigning in " .
#36. To: tomder55 (#34)
$5,000 whoooo hoooo !!
#37. To: Vicomte13 (#29)
So, THIS Is how the Republicans are going to try to steal it: by handing it back to the party itself.
#38. To: SOSO, TooConservative (#22)
It's such a bad idea, I have to wonder why I haven't read it elsewhere.
#39. To: CZ82, TooConservative (#38)
#40. To: TooConservative (#35)
I dunno. Trump already got away with calling Iowa "stupid" because his polls dropped. Then he bragged he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Ave and his supporters wouldn't even blink.
#41. To: SOSO (#39)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]