4 ms·

I'd have more sympathy, except that attempting to establish policy by soliciting on a public, unmoderated website is a ludicrous idea to begin with. It's got a

by lukev 16y ago

I'd have more sympathy, except that attempting to establish policy by soliciting on a public, unmoderated website is a ludicrous idea to begin with. It's got about the same validity as Fox News running a radiobutton poll on their website on "Is Obama really a citizen?"

hugh3 16y ago
Are you saying politicians shouldn't listen to the people when developing policy ideas? If people actually used such a website in good faith then it could potentially produce some useful ideas and allow them to percolate upwards to party policymakers. They shouldn't blindly pick whatever ideas turn out to be popular on their website, but it might bring up some things they hadn't thought of before.
- DrSprout 16y ago
  >If people actually used such a website in good faith But they don't, which is the point of his comment.
- lukev 16y ago
  The sad part is they feel a website like this is necessary. They're professional politicians in a democratic country. They should already be in touch with their constituency. They should have a chain of advisement and direction built all the way from local caucuses at the precinct level. And if they were serious about making the project more efficient by taking it online, they should have a registration-based website with registration tied to actual party membership and heavily moderated to allow only articulate arguments.
  - pyre 16y ago
    > they should have a registration-based website with registration tied to actual party membership So if I'm in an area that is represented by a member of another party, then my voice deserves less weight than the voice of someone that is a member of that party?
    - smallblacksun 16y ago
      You can be a Republican in a district represented by a Democrat.
      - pyre 16y ago
        Where is joining a particular political party (even 'independent' parties) a requirement for participation in the political process?
        eru 16y ago
        If it's the political process of that party, they may very well require joining them.
    - lukev 16y ago
      If this was a government or public institution website you'd be correct. But it's a website specifically for the GOP to garner ideas.
      - pyre 16y ago
        Yes, but in the example we're talking about elected officials. It's their duty to represent everyone in their constituency, not just the ones that are members of their political party. I was of the understanding that this thread had branched to discuss communication at the ground level with your elected representative, not a forum to discuss the direction of an entire political party as a whole. The discussion was just framed around each political party providing their elected officials with a way of communication with their constituents. [I could be way off here, though.]
        byrneseyeview 16y ago
        It's their duty to represent everyone in their constituency, not just the ones that are members of their political party. I'm not sure that's true. In that case, there would be a moral argument against voting for third parties, since they definitely don't represent the views of a majority of people. And there'd be a moral argument against voting Republican in Manhattan, or Democrat in Utah.
- sethg 16y ago
  I would not trust any politician who says “I have no idea what policies I should be proposing once I get elected, so I want to hear your ideas.” Such a politician is either an idiot or a liar. A politician with intelligence and integrity would say something like “If I’m elected, I will try to get the government to do X, Y, and Z. If you have any particular ideas about how to accomplish these goals, or if you want to try and convince me I’m wrong, I welcome your feedback.”
  - lallysingh 16y ago
    Indeed. Perhaps the site will provide good data for potential leaders to decide whether to run in Republican primaries?
  - tokipin 16y ago
    i'm pretty sure the site is just the republican congresspeople's attempt at looking like they have any policy-making clout whatsoever
fgf 16y ago
You seem to be under the impression that they give a shit about the results. I think it's just a publicity stunt. (They do, of course, care about getting votes but there are more effective methods for finding out what voters want them to say.)

by lukev 16y ago

hugh3 16y ago

Are you saying politicians shouldn't listen to the people when developing policy ideas? If people actually used such a website in good faith then it could potentially produce some useful ideas and allow them to percolate upwards to party policymakers. They shouldn't blindly pick whatever ideas turn out to be popular on their website, but it might bring up some things they hadn't thought of before.

DrSprout 16y ago
>If people actually used such a website in good faith But they don't, which is the point of his comment.
lukev 16y ago
The sad part is they feel a website like this is necessary. They're professional politicians in a democratic country. They should already be in touch with their constituency. They should have a chain of advisement and direction built all the way from local caucuses at the precinct level. And if they were serious about making the project more efficient by taking it online, they should have a registration-based website with registration tied to actual party membership and heavily moderated to allow only articulate arguments.
- pyre 16y ago
  > they should have a registration-based website with registration tied to actual party membership So if I'm in an area that is represented by a member of another party, then my voice deserves less weight than the voice of someone that is a member of that party?
  - smallblacksun 16y ago
    You can be a Republican in a district represented by a Democrat.
    - pyre 16y ago
      Where is joining a particular political party (even 'independent' parties) a requirement for participation in the political process?
      - eru 16y ago
        If it's the political process of that party, they may very well require joining them.
  - lukev 16y ago
    If this was a government or public institution website you'd be correct. But it's a website specifically for the GOP to garner ideas.
    - pyre 16y ago
      Yes, but in the example we're talking about elected officials. It's their duty to represent everyone in their constituency, not just the ones that are members of their political party. I was of the understanding that this thread had branched to discuss communication at the ground level with your elected representative, not a forum to discuss the direction of an entire political party as a whole. The discussion was just framed around each political party providing their elected officials with a way of communication with their constituents. [I could be way off here, though.]
      - byrneseyeview 16y ago
        It's their duty to represent everyone in their constituency, not just the ones that are members of their political party. I'm not sure that's true. In that case, there would be a moral argument against voting for third parties, since they definitely don't represent the views of a majority of people. And there'd be a moral argument against voting Republican in Manhattan, or Democrat in Utah.
sethg 16y ago
I would not trust any politician who says “I have no idea what policies I should be proposing once I get elected, so I want to hear your ideas.” Such a politician is either an idiot or a liar. A politician with intelligence and integrity would say something like “If I’m elected, I will try to get the government to do X, Y, and Z. If you have any particular ideas about how to accomplish these goals, or if you want to try and convince me I’m wrong, I welcome your feedback.”
- lallysingh 16y ago
  Indeed. Perhaps the site will provide good data for potential leaders to decide whether to run in Republican primaries?
- tokipin 16y ago
  i'm pretty sure the site is just the republican congresspeople's attempt at looking like they have any policy-making clout whatsoever

fgf 16y ago

You seem to be under the impression that they give a shit about the results. I think it's just a publicity stunt. (They do, of course, care about getting votes but there are more effective methods for finding out what voters want them to say.)