'Trump for President' signs available at Republican office

Wowzer. What incisive coverage. And setting bold new standards for newsworthy!

Look out, Pulitzer.

It's a press release, Scott. Give 'em a break.

I guess then with press releases we have no need of editors. Party communication by way of media -- why not!

There is no news here. It's free advertising, Joshua.

If anyone needs a sign, I can open for a few hours on Friday (today), since I would love to pass out some signs. Just let me know, please?

Scott, you've been reading The Batavian long enough to know that we publish all local press releases. We also do original reporting. We try to treat The Batavian as an open forum. We make no distinction about what to publish based on party or politics.

Yeah....I need about 20 or 30 of them to use as kindling for the huge bonfire I'm going to start in my yard to celebrate when this nitwit gets beat on Tuesday

Howard, I don't dispute what you say -- but it's not the point I'm making. My complaint is not about bias, but about the distinction you mention.

I think publishing press releases, especially willy-nilly, is basically poor practice. That’s my bias. But there's a huge qualitative difference in candidate X's explaining their latest scheme in a press release, or incumbent Y's defending their latest perfidity -- and the release of "news" regarding the availability of political yard signs, which are in themselves a form of advertising. It's not a matter of the party involved, the press release in question can be defined as advertising far more convincingly than it can be excused as newsworthy. And one only presumes it's free advertising.

Say, I have a political action committee, and I'll be a candidate next cycle, and I need to sell my car. Will you publish that press release? You'll make no distinction, even then?

Dave. I'm (kind of) hoping a (3rd) candidate garners a state or two, and forces a showdown, via the Twelfth Amendment. It's a long shot, but, it IS possible.

And, if I'm understanding the 12th Amendment correctly, we could end up with a president from one (political) party, and, the VP from a totally different party. That'd definitely add intrigue to the White House.

Not expecting it to happen, but, it could.

"I'm (kind of) hoping a (3rd) candidate garners a state or two, and forces a showdown, via the Twelfth Amendment. "

Ed, why on earth would you wish this on the nation? Are you that bored?

While you were all arguing over bias, there was a press release stating that the Democrats had signage. I did not notice any Republicans feeling slighted or threatening to collect and burn signs on election night. You should possibly get a hobby to work off some of that anger.

Scott, think of The Batavian as a community bulletin board.

At least, unlike our competition, we disclose prominately and clearly that we are publishing a press release. We trust each readers intelligence to decide for themselves the relative merit of each item.

As for the newsworthiness of this item, we know from a previous interview with Dick Seibert, there is strong interest in signs this cycle, from all sides. That's a pretty compelling r a son in my view to provide new information.

And I, as a reader appreciate that.

"Scott, think of The Batavian as a community bulletin board"

Fair enough, Howard..

Scott, go back to your little neighborhood watch site where you can ban anyone who doesn`t agree with you! People are allowed to speak their minds here!

Scott. I'm assuming you copied and pasted the words from my previous comment. You did read them, didn't you?

Just wondering, how do you make the leap from "(kind of) hoping" to assuming that I might "... wish this on the nation"?

I didn't wish anything on the nation.
----------------------------------
Here's a question for you, Scott.
From what I've read, there IS a process that "kicks in", should a candidate die (or become incapacitated) just before Election Day.

My question is, what happens to the (early) votes that have already been cast for the dead/incapacitated candidate? Do they just assume that the "early voters" would've voted for the replacement candidate?

In other words, I might want to vote for someone, but, I might not necessarily vote for the person they choose to replace the candidate with. As I've already voted (for the dead person), would I be allowed to vote AGAIN?

I believe the "answer" to that question should be added as an amendment to the Constitution.

Oh, and also, Scott. Please don't twist my question to "Ed must want one of the candidates to die". That's not my wish.

I just believe that, if you're going to write "rules" to cover situations, then the "rules" should cover as many situations that might pop up.

Okay, Ed. You "kind of hoped", but did not wish. My error. Thanks for the clarification!

That's quite alright, Scott. No harm, no foul.

As the late, great Nina Simone sang in 1964, "But I'm just a soul whose intentions are good; Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood". (Although, in all honesty, I must say, I liked Yusuf Islam's cover of it more).

Ed, I can't really speak to your 12th Amendment concerns at this time, but I have to say, your musical sense is unimpeachable. Couldn't agree with you more, especially on the Yusuf Islam cover.

Thanks, Scott. As for Yusuf, he's been a favorite of mine for almost 50 years (albeit, under his Christian name). Don't know if you've heard the entire "An Other Cup" album, but, I think it's exceptional.

As for my musical sense, it's all over the place. It ranges from Lynda Trang Dai, singing her rendition of "Caravan of Life", to C@ in the H@ playing "Stick Up Kid", to R. Carlos Nakai on the Native American flute.
From "Ain't Nobody Here But Us Chickens" by Louis Jordan, to Richard Thompson singing "1952 Vincent Black Lightning". Then, there's Irene Reid's, "One Eyed Man", or songs from the group Blackmore's Night. Of course, there's always the old "standards", like AC/DC, ZZTop, The Beatles, The Bee Gee's, Leonard Cohen, Harry Chapin and Taj Mahal.

But, I also like a lot of "oddball" stuff - like Suzzy & Maggie Roche's version of "Clothes Line Saga", or, Mason Williams performing "The Prince's Panties", and Fred Eaglesmith's "I Shot Your Dog".

My "personal" library contains well over 13,000 songs, including a couple hundred "one-hit wonders". And, with access to Youtube, Pandora, and the myriad of other sites available nowadays, we're not limited to "what's in the record cabinet".

Scott Ogle -- While I have no idea where your musical interest lies, I thought I might share a recent discovery with you (and, of course, with anyone else that might be interested). And, of course, I do so with the knowledge that I'm probably "way behind the times" (when it comes to "newer" groups).

A couple days ago, I was catching up on the "Longmire" series, and there was a song playing in the background. I had no idea who it was, so I grabbed a half-dozen words from it (the words were, "can't go on without you"). Then I typed "song lyrics" (plus the words I had) I had into Google, and found the band's name.

The name Kaleo popped up (I'd never heard of them). I typed Kaleo into the Youtube search box, and found a whole bunch of songs by them. I haven't listened to all of them, but, I thought there was some really good stuff there. I especially liked "I Can't Go On Without You", and, one titled "Broken Bones".

I guess one of the most shocking parts was when I researched the band's history. I would have bet they were a (Mississippi) "delta blues" band, straight out of the south. Couldn't have been much more wrong, especially after hearing the two songs referenced above. They're an Icelandic rock band. Can't get much more "northern" than that!

Just thought I'd share that with you, in case you were interested.