So this dude has taken his scolding. Will I be receiving more incoming if I point out that putting my energy into "solutions" that analysis proves won't work is wasted energy?
Bad form on my part to grouse about the electoral college when you're rallying the troops.
So this dude has taken his scolding. Will I be receiving more incoming if I point out that putting my energy into "solutions" that analysis proves won't work is wasted energy?
Bad form on my part to grouse about the electoral college when you're rallying the troops.
How does one decide a solution that didn't work was a waste of energy? Is it because the desired outcome didn't happen? What if the solution didn't lead to the desired outcome such as winning the presidency but did something to increase voter turnout or made the conversations about the politics more civil or bring more people out to run for state and local office?
I think putting some effort into down ballot races in Trump states can make a difference. I will certainly put effort into getting Tester reelected in Montana and push the abortion issue. Somehow Beshear keeps getting elected in Kentucky so there is hope down ballot even in a solid Trump state.
Not at all, dude! You made a valid point and it wasn't a scolding. More of a grouse that, as I said, people higher up the food chain are not addressing this. And I have no desire to rally the troops; I have enough trouble rallying myself.
I would push back on one thing: analysis hasn't /proven/ anything ("Dewey Defeats Truman!"), though it's certainly discouraging. So are the other issues I mentioned. All of them could use better analysis and planning. We are not the first people in the history of the planet (or the US!) to face discouraging odds.
So if you feel that voter registration and get-out-the-vote are wasted energy, what are the other solutions that you're going to put your energy into instead?
I would locate our largest problem, not in facing discouraging odds, but in the stakes. The meaning of being on the losing side of an Obama-Romney race is entirely different than losing a Biden-Trump race. When we come down to specificities, I would note that the effectiveness of any one individual in their actions is highly dependent on that individual's circumstances. Does one live in George Santos's district or Wyoming or San Francisco. Does a person have the ability to contribute time or money. Or both. Does one have special skills that can be of use in a campaign.
Of course, in a district like the Santos district, an army of volunteers can make all the difference. These people are true patriots. And Party leadership needs to make sure that financial resources are not lacking in these places.
As for me and my particular circumstances and what it means for my own efforts: I live in Nebraska in a congressional district that is strongly Republican, but not at Wyoming levels. I happen to be part owner of a business where profitability depends heavily on my efforts. My ability to make financial contributions depends on that profitability. So, if I am true to the story I tell myself, my efforts might best be directed at maintaining the ability to write checks. My recent history: In the 2020 congressional races, I contributed to the Democratic candidates in my district and in the much more competitive race in the district that is largely the city of Omaha. The candidate in my district recorded a series of one-on-one conversations with supporters, and I did one of these as a Republican supporter. (Technically a former Republican by then.) I also tried the phone bank thing for her, but was really bad at it. I always understood the candidacy was a long shot, but I thought her messaging was positioning the Party in a place that could be a winner eventually. Long game . . . . My contributions in the Omaha district also went for naught as this race was badly fumbled by a too-progressive-for-the-district campaign. Won't bore you further, but we all find our own paths.
So this dude has taken his scolding. Will I be receiving more incoming if I point out that putting my energy into "solutions" that analysis proves won't work is wasted energy?
Bad form on my part to grouse about the electoral college when you're rallying the troops.
How does one decide a solution that didn't work was a waste of energy? Is it because the desired outcome didn't happen? What if the solution didn't lead to the desired outcome such as winning the presidency but did something to increase voter turnout or made the conversations about the politics more civil or bring more people out to run for state and local office?
I think putting some effort into down ballot races in Trump states can make a difference. I will certainly put effort into getting Tester reelected in Montana and push the abortion issue. Somehow Beshear keeps getting elected in Kentucky so there is hope down ballot even in a solid Trump state.
Yes, in no way can we not work on the SENATE as well as the WH, and even on keeping the House.
Not at all, dude! You made a valid point and it wasn't a scolding. More of a grouse that, as I said, people higher up the food chain are not addressing this. And I have no desire to rally the troops; I have enough trouble rallying myself.
I would push back on one thing: analysis hasn't /proven/ anything ("Dewey Defeats Truman!"), though it's certainly discouraging. So are the other issues I mentioned. All of them could use better analysis and planning. We are not the first people in the history of the planet (or the US!) to face discouraging odds.
So if you feel that voter registration and get-out-the-vote are wasted energy, what are the other solutions that you're going to put your energy into instead?
I would locate our largest problem, not in facing discouraging odds, but in the stakes. The meaning of being on the losing side of an Obama-Romney race is entirely different than losing a Biden-Trump race. When we come down to specificities, I would note that the effectiveness of any one individual in their actions is highly dependent on that individual's circumstances. Does one live in George Santos's district or Wyoming or San Francisco. Does a person have the ability to contribute time or money. Or both. Does one have special skills that can be of use in a campaign.
Of course, in a district like the Santos district, an army of volunteers can make all the difference. These people are true patriots. And Party leadership needs to make sure that financial resources are not lacking in these places.
As for me and my particular circumstances and what it means for my own efforts: I live in Nebraska in a congressional district that is strongly Republican, but not at Wyoming levels. I happen to be part owner of a business where profitability depends heavily on my efforts. My ability to make financial contributions depends on that profitability. So, if I am true to the story I tell myself, my efforts might best be directed at maintaining the ability to write checks. My recent history: In the 2020 congressional races, I contributed to the Democratic candidates in my district and in the much more competitive race in the district that is largely the city of Omaha. The candidate in my district recorded a series of one-on-one conversations with supporters, and I did one of these as a Republican supporter. (Technically a former Republican by then.) I also tried the phone bank thing for her, but was really bad at it. I always understood the candidacy was a long shot, but I thought her messaging was positioning the Party in a place that could be a winner eventually. Long game . . . . My contributions in the Omaha district also went for naught as this race was badly fumbled by a too-progressive-for-the-district campaign. Won't bore you further, but we all find our own paths.