4 ms·

I encourage you to run a campaign, just in a local county. You will find there are things one can't see from the outside that make this sentiment naively false.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
List them here! You aren't actually saying anything.
- paulgb 3y ago
  My wife was part of a congressional primary campaign so I got to see some of this close-up. It’s hard to list all the reasons, but there is definitely a sort of institutional inertia that makes it hard to primary someone on the story of merely being the better candidate, unless there is an a prior consensus among voters that the incumbent needs to go. Some examples: - Congressional elections are expensive; incumbents have deeper-rooted donor networks to tap. - Civic groups that are already working with the incumbent want to continue the relationship. - General voter apathy around primary elections; even regular voters often skip primaries so finding people who will actually vote gets harder. - Name recognition; if someone shows up to the polls to vote for another ballot item but hasn't followed the congressional race, they'll probably put a box next to the incumbent unless they have a particular reason not to. I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing -- high turnover of elected officials is disruptive to the system -- but there are clearly cases in which it overcorrects.
  - philipov 3y ago
    The part about voter apathy towards primaries is important. It means that the sort of people who vote in primaries don't represent an unbiased sample of their party: they skew towards the extremes, because those people can be more easily mobilized. This means that primaries don't produce candidates capable of representing the median voter very well, and we end up with a choice between the canonical Giant Douche and Turd Sandwich. That's why the Freedom Caucus doesn't want McCarthy to use funding to influence primaries in their states; it would allow him to enforce party discipline on them. This becomes even worse when combined with "safe" districts where whoever wins the primary for the district's ruling party is nearly guaranteed to win the general election as well. It makes one wonder how democratic we should consider such an election to be. All this is to say that it's important to not just look at whether an institution is democratic in form, but whether it is also democratic in outcomes. The Law of Unintended Consequences will be obeyed. [https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.html https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.h...]
    - bombcar 3y ago
      I feel that in the last 20+ years or so, the candidates have seem to forgotten the "appeal to the crazies in the primaries, pivot for the general". Then again, the whole point of democracy is that the voters will get what they want and get it good and hard.
      - philipov 3y ago
        The voters don't get what they want, they get what you offer them. With a good marketing budget, you might be able to convince voters to want what you're offering them. That's called Manufactured Demand.
- anonymouse008 3y ago
  Other comments have gotten at the nuts and bolts of administrations, and here's the PR side of it: Do the 'Mom Test' on any candidate and you will see why 9 out of 10 times a challenger to an incumbent fails [0]. The only challengers who succeed beat the 'good enough test' while simultaneously fending off the current administration's inertia (aptly put by paulgb) [0] https://www.momtestbook.com/ https://www.momtestbook.com/
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    what is "the mom test"? the link seems to be an entire marketing campaign selling a book and a brand, with no "test" clearly specified - can you summarize it, please?
    - anonymouse008 3y ago
      “Is it good enough” It’s running through questions like so: When you have an issue with county government, how do you handle it? Their answer will tell you many things. Is it actually a concern the county can address? If it is not an issue the county can address, why do they think it is? If it’s a strong held belief, what experiences solidified it (buying a lot and being told one thing by a realtor, for example) - etc. you then use all of that to create a product (a campaign messaging) that aligns with the candidate and public’s opinion / current default mode.
    - ativzzz 3y ago
      From chatGPT: "What is the mom test?" The "Mom Test" is a term from a book by Rob Fitzpatrick titled "The Mom Test: How to talk to customers & learn if your business is a good idea when everyone is lying to you". It is about customer development and strategies for entrepreneurs to properly validate their business ideas. The title refers to the notion that even your mom, who generally loves you unconditionally, would lie to you to spare your feelings if your business idea wasn’t good. So, the "Mom Test" suggests a method of asking the right questions to get honest and useful feedback from people, including those who might be predisposed to be nice to you. The key principles of the Mom Test are: Talk about their life instead of your idea: Ask about specific behaviors and thoughts in their past and present, not about hypothetical futures. Avoid asking whether they think your business idea is good. Instead, focus on their problems, pains, and needs related to the area your business is focused on. Ask for specifics in the past instead of generics or opinions about the future: People's predictions about their future behaviors are typically inaccurate. By asking about their past actions, you can gather more reliable information. Talk less and listen more: This is about them, not about you or your idea. The goal is to gather insights, so avoid leading questions and let them do the talking. By following these principles, entrepreneurs can gather real insights into customer needs and challenges, which is crucial for validating and improving business ideas.
hobotime 3y ago
I ran for a city councilmember: 1) You opponents campaign manager will lie about their candidate without qualms. 2) Donors will give money to a scoundrel, as long as they think the scoundrel will win. 3) Voters are actually good at picking up bullshit - in aggregate. 4) Rich white liberal female voters will not vote for a man. 5) Plenty of Black, Asian, and Immigrant voters are conservative, but many reflexively vote liberal. 6) Do it, even if you lose by a small amount like I did, you'll learn a lot and have a lot of fun
- SamPatt 3y ago
  That doesn't sound even the tiniest bit fun. I'm genuinely curious about what made it fun, presumably something you didn't mention?
  - hobotime 3y ago
    I grew a lot and made a lot of friends in so many communities, and I learned from immigrants about the values my great grandparents also had. I'm conservative and found that I have so much in common with so many people that I'm sort of pissed that our culture has done it's best to keep us apart.
- rdedev 3y ago
  Thanks for this analysis. I feel like there is a big diconnect between what groups of people are assumed to be like vs what they actually do. Point 5 being the most apparent for me

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

List them here! You aren't actually saying anything.

paulgb 3y ago
My wife was part of a congressional primary campaign so I got to see some of this close-up. It’s hard to list all the reasons, but there is definitely a sort of institutional inertia that makes it hard to primary someone on the story of merely being the better candidate, unless there is an a prior consensus among voters that the incumbent needs to go. Some examples: - Congressional elections are expensive; incumbents have deeper-rooted donor networks to tap. - Civic groups that are already working with the incumbent want to continue the relationship. - General voter apathy around primary elections; even regular voters often skip primaries so finding people who will actually vote gets harder. - Name recognition; if someone shows up to the polls to vote for another ballot item but hasn't followed the congressional race, they'll probably put a box next to the incumbent unless they have a particular reason not to. I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing -- high turnover of elected officials is disruptive to the system -- but there are clearly cases in which it overcorrects.
- philipov 3y ago
  The part about voter apathy towards primaries is important. It means that the sort of people who vote in primaries don't represent an unbiased sample of their party: they skew towards the extremes, because those people can be more easily mobilized. This means that primaries don't produce candidates capable of representing the median voter very well, and we end up with a choice between the canonical Giant Douche and Turd Sandwich. That's why the Freedom Caucus doesn't want McCarthy to use funding to influence primaries in their states; it would allow him to enforce party discipline on them. This becomes even worse when combined with "safe" districts where whoever wins the primary for the district's ruling party is nearly guaranteed to win the general election as well. It makes one wonder how democratic we should consider such an election to be. All this is to say that it's important to not just look at whether an institution is democratic in form, but whether it is also democratic in outcomes. The Law of Unintended Consequences will be obeyed. [https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.html https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.h...]
  - bombcar 3y ago
    I feel that in the last 20+ years or so, the candidates have seem to forgotten the "appeal to the crazies in the primaries, pivot for the general". Then again, the whole point of democracy is that the voters will get what they want and get it good and hard.
    - philipov 3y ago
      The voters don't get what they want, they get what you offer them. With a good marketing budget, you might be able to convince voters to want what you're offering them. That's called Manufactured Demand.
anonymouse008 3y ago
Other comments have gotten at the nuts and bolts of administrations, and here's the PR side of it: Do the 'Mom Test' on any candidate and you will see why 9 out of 10 times a challenger to an incumbent fails [0]. The only challengers who succeed beat the 'good enough test' while simultaneously fending off the current administration's inertia (aptly put by paulgb) [0] https://www.momtestbook.com/ https://www.momtestbook.com/
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  what is "the mom test"? the link seems to be an entire marketing campaign selling a book and a brand, with no "test" clearly specified - can you summarize it, please?
  - anonymouse008 3y ago
    “Is it good enough” It’s running through questions like so: When you have an issue with county government, how do you handle it? Their answer will tell you many things. Is it actually a concern the county can address? If it is not an issue the county can address, why do they think it is? If it’s a strong held belief, what experiences solidified it (buying a lot and being told one thing by a realtor, for example) - etc. you then use all of that to create a product (a campaign messaging) that aligns with the candidate and public’s opinion / current default mode.
  - ativzzz 3y ago
    From chatGPT: "What is the mom test?" The "Mom Test" is a term from a book by Rob Fitzpatrick titled "The Mom Test: How to talk to customers & learn if your business is a good idea when everyone is lying to you". It is about customer development and strategies for entrepreneurs to properly validate their business ideas. The title refers to the notion that even your mom, who generally loves you unconditionally, would lie to you to spare your feelings if your business idea wasn’t good. So, the "Mom Test" suggests a method of asking the right questions to get honest and useful feedback from people, including those who might be predisposed to be nice to you. The key principles of the Mom Test are: Talk about their life instead of your idea: Ask about specific behaviors and thoughts in their past and present, not about hypothetical futures. Avoid asking whether they think your business idea is good. Instead, focus on their problems, pains, and needs related to the area your business is focused on. Ask for specifics in the past instead of generics or opinions about the future: People's predictions about their future behaviors are typically inaccurate. By asking about their past actions, you can gather more reliable information. Talk less and listen more: This is about them, not about you or your idea. The goal is to gather insights, so avoid leading questions and let them do the talking. By following these principles, entrepreneurs can gather real insights into customer needs and challenges, which is crucial for validating and improving business ideas.

hobotime 3y ago

I ran for a city councilmember: 1) You opponents campaign manager will lie about their candidate without qualms. 2) Donors will give money to a scoundrel, as long as they think the scoundrel will win. 3) Voters are actually good at picking up bullshit - in aggregate. 4) Rich white liberal female voters will not vote for a man. 5) Plenty of Black, Asian, and Immigrant voters are conservative, but many reflexively vote liberal. 6) Do it, even if you lose by a small amount like I did, you'll learn a lot and have a lot of fun

SamPatt 3y ago
That doesn't sound even the tiniest bit fun. I'm genuinely curious about what made it fun, presumably something you didn't mention?
- hobotime 3y ago
  I grew a lot and made a lot of friends in so many communities, and I learned from immigrants about the values my great grandparents also had. I'm conservative and found that I have so much in common with so many people that I'm sort of pissed that our culture has done it's best to keep us apart.
rdedev 3y ago
Thanks for this analysis. I feel like there is a big diconnect between what groups of people are assumed to be like vs what they actually do. Point 5 being the most apparent for me