What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Political yard signs and free speech (1 Viewer)

Politician Spock

Politician Spock

Footballguy
The mayor of our city posted this on Facebook yesterday:

Years ago, [redacted] City Council passed a sign ordinance regarding campaign signs which states “It is recommended, campaign signs not be displayed prior to 10 days before absentee ballots.” It is unfortunate when candidates choose not to follow this rule and puts the other candidates in a distinct disadvantage and dilemma. We appreciate all the candidates in all the races that respect our sign ordinance.
Click to expand...
The response was mixed with those supporting the ordinance, as well as those opposed to it because limiting content or time of political yard signs was ruled by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional.

The mayor responded to those opposed to it for constitutional reasons by saying the ordinance intentionally used the word "recommended" because they know they can't enforce it. He then went on to say that it's not a law that candidates need to follow, but instead a rule they agreed to play by when they decide to run for city council. 

Does the mayor have a valid argument that the rights of the candidates and those that support them are NOT being violated by the time limitation on political yard signs, because it's only a rule they agree to in order to run for city council, and not a law that is being enforced?

I understand the hatred of seeing political yard signs every election season, but again the Supreme Court has ruled that property owners have the right to place them. So if all you want to post is that you hate them, then lets just all agree that there is a lot of hatred of them, and focus on whether or not they mayor is violating people's rights with his "it's only a rule, not a law" approach.

Thoughts? 

 
Politician Spock said:
Does the mayor have a valid argument that the rights of the candidates and those that support them are NOT being violated by the time limitation on political yard signs, because it's only a rule they agree to in order to run for city council, and not a law that is being enforced?
Click to expand...
Can they run for office while not agreeing to the "rule"?  What is the penalty for not following the "rule"?

 
Yes, he’s right.  The constitution doesn’t prohibit unenforceable recommendations. Many cities have similar ordinances to try to avoid having signs everywhere all the time.  Yard signs have been proven to have nearly zero impact anyway.   They’re mostly just pollution and I support cities fining the hell out of people that don’t take them down immediately after an election.

 
-fish- said:
Yes, he’s right.  The constitution doesn’t prohibit unenforceable recommendations. Many cities have similar ordinances to try to avoid having signs everywhere all the time.  Yard signs have been proven to have nearly zero impact anyway.   They’re mostly just pollution and I support cities fining the hell out of people that don’t take them down immediately after an election.
Click to expand...
Hate yard signs. Political or otherwise. I live on a corner and people think it is ok to just put signs right on my corner. They have even started parking in my driveway to put them up. 

As if people were going to vote the other way but see your sign and change their mind. 

 
I think signs matter.

Not necessarily a single, specific sign (though a key location in a high traffic area could help).  But, maybe more importantly are the quantity of signs.  People like to vote for the popular candidate - particularly if they are not really paying attention to politics - so the number of signs is an indication of the "popular" candidate. 

 
-fish- said:
Yes, he’s right.  The constitution doesn’t prohibit unenforceable recommendations. Many cities have similar ordinances to try to avoid having signs everywhere all the time.  Yard signs have been proven to have nearly zero impact anyway.   They’re mostly just pollution and I support cities fining the hell out of people that don’t take them down immediately after an election.
Click to expand...
Nobody is taking issue with the ordinance given the ordinance is unenforceable.

They're taking issue with the mayor interfering with the election by coming out on social media claiming that a candidate broke the rule they agreed to when they decided to run. The mayor is talking out of both sides of his mouth by saying that he agrees that the ordinance is not enforceable, but that by choosing to run for city council candidates agree to abide by the rule.

The rule "of what" is the question. If it's a rule of a homeowners association, then the people that are part of that HOA have to abide by the rule of the HOA, because that's a private entity that the constitution does not limit.  But If it's a rule of law, or a rule of his mayorship, then the rule is unconstitutional, because laws and mayors can't make rules that take constitutional rights away. Unless the source of the rule is some non-government entity, then he is interfering with an election with a rule that is unconstitutional. 

 
Guess I just file this in the "who really give a ####....even a little bit?" category of problems.  Seems like he's a moron and should be voted out when the opportunity arises.  

 
The Commish said:
Guess I just file this in the "who really give a ####....even a little bit?" category of problems.  Seems like he's a moron and should be voted out when the opportunity arises.  
Click to expand...
Why?  They can’t enforce the rule, but they agreed to follow it when they ran.  He called out the person that broke the agreement.   I don’t see the problem.

 
-fish- said:
Why?  They can’t enforce the rule, but they agreed to follow it when they ran.  He called out the person that broke the agreement.   I don’t see the problem.
Click to expand...
I thought it was said above that it's really on the person running to know the ordinance.  That seems to me like they don't really put it out there, rather it's a rule that you have to go look for.  :oldunsure:  

But the general overarching issue here is a "rule" that has no consequences....at least IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cities can’t ban political yard signs while allowing non-political ones. But they can ban all yard signs without regard to content. They should do that.

”For Sale” signs are stupid anyway now that listings are easily searchable on the Internet.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Cities can’t ban political yard signs while allowing non-political ones. But they can ban all yard signs without regard to content. They should do that.

”For Sale” signs are stupid anyway now that listings are easily searchable on the Internet.
Click to expand...
You can have my “no solicitors” sign when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

 
If commercials can be shown on TV why can't I have a sign in my yard?  If corporations are people, aren't people also people?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The mayor's arguemment is too convoluted and makes no sense.  It seems like he is doing everything he can to try to violate free speech he can without actually crossing the line.  I don't like the tactic nor do I like his logic.  Not the kind of person I would want to be running my city.  

 
Politician Spock said:
Nobody is taking issue with the ordinance given the ordinance is unenforceable.

They're taking issue with the mayor interfering with the election by coming out on social media claiming that a candidate broke the rule they agreed to when they decided to run. The mayor is talking out of both sides of his mouth by saying that he agrees that the ordinance is not enforceable, but that by choosing to run for city council candidates agree to abide by the rule.

The rule "of what" is the question. If it's a rule of a homeowners association, then the people that are part of that HOA have to abide by the rule of the HOA, because that's a private entity that the constitution does not limit.  But If it's a rule of law, or a rule of his mayorship, then the rule is unconstitutional, because laws and mayors can't make rules that take constitutional rights away. Unless the source of the rule is some non-government entity, then he is interfering with an election with a rule that is unconstitutional. 
Click to expand...
The world was civilized by social pressure, friends. The flaw in it was that too few were included in how it was arbited, but i was brought up in a world where one's behavior affected not only their own social standing but that of their entire family and i must say it was extremely effective. This is not a vote for a return to that but it has always seemed that casting away the central force for regulating society with as little consideration as a candy wrapper was not thoroughly sensible.

Even in government - tacit agreements between candidates, on sourcces of funding & the like, required good reason for violation without consequence and, before targeting by lobby groups, things like Sen Wm Proxmire's Golden Fleece Award to cohorts' most egregious pork programs and such chided, if not defeated, legislators who got to greedy for themselves or their districts. A central part of the dozen or so departments, companies, orgs i've run over the years has been a kangaroo court which regulated and, rarely, targeted malfeasance in a social rather than official manner and every one was highly effective. If folks didn;t take EVERYTHING personally, they'd find themselves with a lot less to take personally in the first place.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Cities can’t ban political yard signs while allowing non-political ones. But they can ban all yard signs without regard to content. They should do that.

”For Sale” signs are stupid anyway now that listings are easily searchable on the Internet.
Click to expand...
This is sarcasm right? 
Click to expand...
No, "For Sale" signs are dumb. I don't like them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
No, "For Sale" signs are dumb. I don't like them.
Click to expand...
Do you like strangers knocking on your door wanting to get in? Do you like people driving down the street slowly and not paying attention to the road? 

For sale signs help prevent this, at least real estate for sale signs. 

Eta: pretty sure i posted this story on this site, i will try to find it, where a contractor showed up in my driveway and he was supposed to be at my next door neighbors. Neighbors house was getting a major addition put on. Like 5 trucks in the driveway. Huge dumpster. Bobcat. Trusses. This guy pulled into my driveway because his "gps said this was the place." Cant even imagine how often this would happen without for sale signs in a cookie cutter neighborhood.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
Do you like strangers knocking on your door wanting to get in? Do you like people driving down the street slowly and not paying attention to the road? 

For sale signs help prevent this, at least real estate for sale signs. 
Click to expand...
Nobody ever knocks at my door, and people driving too slowly is definitely not a problem where I live, and yet I don't have a For Sale sign.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Nobody ever knocks at my door, and people driving too slowly is definitely not a problem where I live, and yet I don't have a For Sale sign.
Click to expand...
The for sale sign tells the numb nuts gps user which house he is showing up to look at. I assume you dont have a for sale sign because your house isnt for sale. 

 
jon_mx said:
The mayor's arguemment is too convoluted and makes no sense.  It seems like he is doing everything he can to try to violate free speech he can without actually crossing the line.  I don't like the tactic nor do I like his logic.  Not the kind of person I would want to be running my city.  
Click to expand...
I completely agree. And apparently so do a lot of people responding to him on facebook.

I think he just ended his political career with this move. 

 
Sounds like you live in a pretty messed up city. Even the name has been redacted. What an oppressive place. Do they outlaw dancing there too?

 
-fish- said:
Yes, he’s right.  The constitution doesn’t prohibit unenforceable recommendations. Many cities have similar ordinances to try to avoid having signs everywhere all the time.  Yard signs have been proven to have nearly zero impact anyway.   They’re mostly just pollution and I support cities fining the hell out of people that don’t take them down immediately after an election.
Click to expand...
Get off my lawn!

 
Much ado about nothing IMO.  The Mayor is just giving the City's recommendation lip service so that when angry constituents (the same ones who demanded action against this alleged nuisance) call his office to complain, he can say "I did what I could within the parameters that the law gives me."  

 
Sinn Fein said:
I think signs matter.

Not necessarily a single, specific sign (though a key location in a high traffic area could help).  But, maybe more importantly are the quantity of signs.  People like to vote for the popular candidate - particularly if they are not really paying attention to politics - so the number of signs is an indication of the "popular" candidate. 
Click to expand...
BOOM....Its as much name recognition as anything else in an election.   Especially "smaller" positions.   The more that name is seen by the general completely uninformed voter, the better chance that person might say "I know that name" and punch out the chad.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
No, "For Sale" signs are dumb. I don't like them.
Click to expand...


parasaurolophus said:
The for sale sign tells the numb nuts gps user which house he is showing up to look at. I assume you dont have a for sale sign because your house isnt for sale. 
Click to expand...


They are a necessity.  True story: When we were searching for our house several years ago one house was on the market and was difficult to find, it didn't have a for sale sign.  Well, the house right next door had a realtor's sign with balloons on it and looked like an open house (lots of people) so we went in with our real estate agent in tow.  Turns out that house wasn't for sale and the person who put the sign out did it so all their friends could find out where the party was.  Awkward, but fun.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

glvsav37
Hulu and the Political Ads Issue
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
Desert_Power
Desert_Power
A
  • Poll
The Supreme Court to hear coach's right to pray on the 50-yard line
6 7 8
Replies
386
Views
7K
bigbottom
bigbottom
A
Freedom From Religion
2 3
Replies
141
Views
5K
Amused to Death
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top