3 ms·
First settle on an objective that actually accomplishes what you want, I'm pretty sure your objective is not to get Diane Feinstein off the senate whatever comm
by fleitz 13y ago
First settle on an objective that actually accomplishes what you want, I'm pretty sure your objective is not to get Diane Feinstein off the senate whatever committee but to stop mass surveillance.
Second, find other candidates for which this issue trumps all other issues, example, image you could foresee the future, if there was someone running against Feinstein who if elected would result in Roe v. Wade being overturned would you still vote for them instead of Feinstein?
What about if they would cause a permanent government shutdown over the issue resulting in the US defaulting on its debt?
If the answer is no, then just give up now.
Now that you know what you want, and are willing to do anything to achieve it, go start fundraising for people who oppose mass surveillance and will do ridiculous things like shutdown the government to get it.
- bobsil1 13y agoThanks for the advice. I agree, but it seems like this is easier to accomplish. Should we aim to stop a system which emanates from Obama on down, and which is already about to get a vote in the form of multiple bills restraining the NSA? Or should we remove someone who represents me, and isn't providing effective NSA oversight? The question is can we peel away enough Dem votes for the #2 in the open primary to be a more liberty-centric candidate rather than her last challenger, Republican Elizabeth Emken. Also even a failed primary challenge could pressure her to swerve left. I do agree that "Stop spying on us" is way more appealing than "Remove Feinstein from the Senate Intelligence Committee" :)
- fleitz 13y agoAim to get what you want, all politicians are equally horrible, some are doing what you want, instead of what you don't want. Stop thinking locally, start thinking globally, a few thousand dollars could turn a congress race in a close district in the middle of nowhere. You're allowed to donate to where ever and whoever you want, as much as you want, you're allowed to vote once where you live. Which do you think is a more effective strategy? Ideally what you want is a kind of sabre metrics for politics, it's about dollars for seats, not votes. I'd say my idea is easier to accomplish, Diane Feinstein isn't going anywhere, she has consistent 20% margins. Diane Feinstein will only be unseated by her death.
- msandford 13y agoThat. Is. Fucking. Genius.
- bobsil1 13y agoWhereShouldIDonate.com based on big data would be super useful. Rather than wading through political blog comments.
- fleitz 13y agoLook at one of those voting record things from ACLU, CATO or a number of liberty oriented orgs.
- CamperBob2 13y agoDiane Feinstein isn't going anywhere, she has consistent 20% margins. Is this because no one bothers to run against her? Why exactly do her constituents like her so much?
- bobsil1 13y agoMost of that margin is because she's an incumbent in a state that votes Dem. She hasn't made enough waves for people to pay attention to her positions beyond rural voters who dislike her assault weapons ban. But techies should be paying attention.
- dllthomas 13y agoAlso, Hollywood money.
- dllthomas 13y agoNot all of her constituents like her so much.
- a3n 13y agoIncumbents collect the most money. Money wins. And there is no Dem equivalent to the Tea Party. She'll be there until she dies, and probably a little after.
- woah 13y agoYour attitude plays right into the red vs blue football game mentality that prevents any meaningful change in American politics. "Oooh, oooh the other guys are worse" Politicians know that they have a powerful machine, or a durable demographic advantage in their district, and that all kinds of tribal "the other guy is worse" defenses will come to their aid. It's time to start going after the individuals in the government who allowed this to happen, because they have proven themselves to be treacherous, as opposed to any hypothetical rivals that who might not agree with you on the finer points of government. What congress has allowed the NSA to do is inexcusable, and far more important than your personal preexisting political inclinations. EDIT: totally misread your comment, I agree with you.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- dllthomas 13y ago"Second, find other candidates for which this issue trumps all other issues, example, image you could foresee the future, if there was someone running against Feinstein who if elected would result in Roe v. Wade being overturned would you still vote for them instead of Feinstein?" Seeing as, here, we are discussing replacing Feinstein on the Senate Intelligence Committee and not replacing Feinstein as a Senator, you'd better believe I'd not care about the replacement's position on Roe v. Wade.