After a well executed attempt to explain to Faust & Wayne on WSAR; I will now attempt to explain here. While people are arguing over the nonsensical premise, that Mayor Flanagan should also be a Candidate to Secede HIMSELF(If Recalled), by allowing his name to be listed among the Candidates listed on Part 2 of the Recall Ballot; only a few (including Myself and Councillor Miozza) are pointing out the absurdity, that the *NAME* William Flanagan will (if permitted to be listed among the potential candidates) appear 3 Times on the ballot. I was at last nights City Council Meeting. I talked with both Councillors Miozza and Mitchell. Mr Miozza specifically brought up the Name 3 Times issue. As I understand it; the councillors were provided with a description of how the ballot would be set up. It would basically go as followed: Part 1a) Do You Want To Recall Mayor William Flanagan.[ ] 1b) Do You Not Wish To Recall Mayor William Flanagan [ ], Part 2) If Recalled; List Of Candidates, INCLUDING(?) William Flanagan. ^^Thats 3 Times His Name Would Appear, on a single ballot. Simply Put: Thats 1 Person dominating a small amount of available advertising space. It becomes a Marketing Issue, with unfair odds playing in William Flanagans favor. The more you see a name, the more it will influence you. This is Branding. His Brand will be more visible on the Shelf; compared to the new Brands(candidates). Now if you head to the Store(Voting Booth) already focused on your desired Purchase, than this wont matter much. But, if you are 1 of the say 30% who straddle the fence- this heavy dose of Brand Marketing will definitely have a subconscious effect on your decision making. Now, whether that is FOR or AGAINST is irrelevant, because the point is- It Should Not Be An Influence AT ALL. No individuals name should appear more than once on a ballot.
Posted on: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:49:12 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015