5 ms·

Thanks 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 a

by bobsil1 13y ago

Thanks 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 ago
Aim 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 ago
  That. Is. Fucking. Genius.
- bobsil1 13y ago
  WhereShouldIDonate.com based on big data would be super useful. Rather than wading through political blog comments.
  - fleitz 13y ago
    Look at one of those voting record things from ACLU, CATO or a number of liberty oriented orgs.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  Diane 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 ago
    Most 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 ago
      Also, Hollywood money.
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    Not all of her constituents like her so much.
  - a3n 13y ago
    Incumbents 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.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > Is this because no one bothers to run against her? No, Republicans don't let either of California's Senate seats go uncontested. They don't run good candidates (that is, candidates that are good at appealing to any but already-committed Republicans as even the lesser of two evils), but that's pretty true of what they do for all statewide offices in CA -- there's a reason why they've been pretty much shut out elective statewide offices for a long time (and, the last one they had -- Governor Schwarzenegger -- was elected in an unusually-structured recall election which paid a high premium to name recognition in a crowded field, and then reelected with the power of incumbency.)

by bobsil1 13y ago

fleitz 13y ago

Aim 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 ago
That. Is. Fucking. Genius.
bobsil1 13y ago
WhereShouldIDonate.com based on big data would be super useful. Rather than wading through political blog comments.
- fleitz 13y ago
  Look at one of those voting record things from ACLU, CATO or a number of liberty oriented orgs.
CamperBob2 13y ago
Diane 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 ago
  Most 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 ago
    Also, Hollywood money.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  Not all of her constituents like her so much.
- a3n 13y ago
  Incumbents 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.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Is this because no one bothers to run against her? No, Republicans don't let either of California's Senate seats go uncontested. They don't run good candidates (that is, candidates that are good at appealing to any but already-committed Republicans as even the lesser of two evils), but that's pretty true of what they do for all statewide offices in CA -- there's a reason why they've been pretty much shut out elective statewide offices for a long time (and, the last one they had -- Governor Schwarzenegger -- was elected in an unusually-structured recall election which paid a high premium to name recognition in a crowded field, and then reelected with the power of incumbency.)