4 ms·

OK, sorry, maybe I was confused -- we're talking caucuses weren't we? I definitely agree with that for voting at large, but I always thought the whole point of

OK, sorry, maybe I was confused -- we're talking caucuses weren't we? I definitely agree with that for voting at large, but I always thought the whole point of a caucus was the messy political "fun" of it all. (Disclaimer, I am not American.) Anyways thanks for the reply, I am familiar with that book and these arguments. I just don't understand why they should apply to a caucus, which is once every few years, and mostly for more politically-involved folks by definition already.

komali2 6y ago
If it were up to me, every American would have the time and financial stability (as well as the accessibility resources necessary) to participate in a caucus. Until we can achieve that kind of safety net, though, I think it's important that ALL forms of engaging with democracy are available to ALL Americans. The political parties get away with far too much shenanigans imo.
- macspoofing 6y ago
  >If it were up to me, every American would have the time and financial stability "Time" and "financial stability" is not an absolute measure, but is relative to your level of 'care' about the issue. I don't have 'time' to visit someone I don't care about. I make time to visit someone I do. Someone of modest means who has to work many hours a week and raise kids, won't have time (or 'financial ability') to attend a political rally if they don't really care a lot about it. They WILL make the effort if they did. If they don't care about your political cause, but you go ahead and remove all the perceived barriers, they still won't care, and they will prioritize other things they care about over your political rally or caucus. That's what you're missing here. You're under the impression that the reason why many people don't attend caucuses is that they aren't able to - that's not reality. As a counter-example, many many many people who have all the free time in the world and all the money in the world, also don't attend caucuses. Why is that?
  - komali2 6y ago
    > As a counter-example, many many many people who have all the free time in the world and all the money in the world, also don't attend caucuses. Why is that? That the choice exists for others doesn't automatically mean it exists for all.
    - macspoofing 6y ago
      It should imply to you that there are reasons other than barriers that come out of your imagination that is preventing people from caucusing ... like they don't want to. They aren't interested.
      - komali2 6y ago
        Sure, I bet there are lots of people that aren't interested! Me, for example, and I'm rich as sin. I'd rather pick up trash on the side of the road with that time - and I do have ample free time. Doesn't change the fact that there are still Americans that don't have that freedom. Though I wish we all did!

komali2 6y ago

If it were up to me, every American would have the time and financial stability (as well as the accessibility resources necessary) to participate in a caucus. Until we can achieve that kind of safety net, though, I think it's important that ALL forms of engaging with democracy are available to ALL Americans. The political parties get away with far too much shenanigans imo.

macspoofing 6y ago
>If it were up to me, every American would have the time and financial stability "Time" and "financial stability" is not an absolute measure, but is relative to your level of 'care' about the issue. I don't have 'time' to visit someone I don't care about. I make time to visit someone I do. Someone of modest means who has to work many hours a week and raise kids, won't have time (or 'financial ability') to attend a political rally if they don't really care a lot about it. They WILL make the effort if they did. If they don't care about your political cause, but you go ahead and remove all the perceived barriers, they still won't care, and they will prioritize other things they care about over your political rally or caucus. That's what you're missing here. You're under the impression that the reason why many people don't attend caucuses is that they aren't able to - that's not reality. As a counter-example, many many many people who have all the free time in the world and all the money in the world, also don't attend caucuses. Why is that?
- komali2 6y ago
  > As a counter-example, many many many people who have all the free time in the world and all the money in the world, also don't attend caucuses. Why is that? That the choice exists for others doesn't automatically mean it exists for all.
  - macspoofing 6y ago
    It should imply to you that there are reasons other than barriers that come out of your imagination that is preventing people from caucusing ... like they don't want to. They aren't interested.
    - komali2 6y ago
      Sure, I bet there are lots of people that aren't interested! Me, for example, and I'm rich as sin. I'd rather pick up trash on the side of the road with that time - and I do have ample free time. Doesn't change the fact that there are still Americans that don't have that freedom. Though I wish we all did!