|
My Imaginary GF posted:Another common strategy is totally not receiving checks on purpose up to the closing of an amendment period via overnight mail while someone else you work with receives other checks of same ammounts. Why would thid ever happen? Can you trade totalmax donors? Is that coordination beyond a reasonable doubt? Yeah the "forgetting" about checks poo poo is so insidious because its so easy and so effective.
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:25 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yeah the "forgetting" about checks poo poo is so insidious because its so easy and so effective. Is it prostitution if you have a staffer sleep with someone to secure a quadmax contrib? And that's the inside view of campaigning and politics in America. I hope this stuff answered the dude's question about how he can get involved and achieve actual change.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
and is this all known and accepted by everyone or are you speaking from behind the curtain?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
Miltank posted:and is this all known and accepted by everyone or are you speaking from behind the curtain? Nobody knows nothing when they're smart enough to know where not to ask. E: Realistically? Its how you play the game well. Not everyone knows how to, hence why experience is necessary to weed out the idiots who you won't have chide by My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 07:27 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Is it prostitution if you have a staffer sleep with someone to secure a quadmax contrib? Hey now, I'm sure the candidate never directly told in a recordable medium anyone to sleep with anyone. Good people don't need to be told.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Hey now, I'm sure the candidate never directly told in a recordable medium anyone to sleep with anyone. Good people don't need to be told. That's exactly what I mean by needing experience so that idiots are weeded out from the real power-politics. E: Idiots, being people who need to be told what to do rather than know what they'll have to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
Hold up, since he was /ten/? You sure you didn't mean /twenty/? I think anyone seriously playing major for-real political games (as opposed to running for class president or whatever) at ten years old is probably the Antichrist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
Miltank posted:so how exactly are politics even an option if everything is so corrupt? Dehumanize and face to bloodshed? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Hold up, since he was /ten/? You sure you didn't mean /twenty/? I think anyone seriously playing major for-real political games (as opposed to running for class president or whatever) at ten years old is probably the Antichrist. I mean /ten/. He's clouted now. drat well clouted. He plays the game drat well. Only question remaining in my mind, how far up does he want to go. E: TheRamblingSoul posted:Dehumanize and face to bloodshed? Sell the machettes and make a profit off the bloodletting. E2: From a thinktank perch, write a policy brief on how machettes deserve a tax subsidy due to their use in bloodletting creating wage-growth and lowering unemployment in middle America. E3: From a K-street shop, arrange meetings to express your view that machettes have too damaging a reputation attributed to them, here, have a machette and a coconut and see how delicious you can make the rum in the coke, you nut, and host a coconut/rum machette party at your firm. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 07:34 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Hold up, since he was /ten/? You sure you didn't mean /twenty/? I think anyone seriously playing major for-real political games (as opposed to running for class president or whatever) at ten years old is probably the Antichrist. The Leslie Knopes of the world have nothing wrong with them.  My Imaginary GF posted:In money and politics, there's 'illegal' and then there's "HOLY gently caress ILLEGAL AND SUPER EASY TO CATCH DO NOT DO THIS EVER YOU loving IDIOT WHAT THE CHRIST." Please tell you have some 'Teachable Moments' anecdotes about that kind of thing
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
Miltank posted:and is this all known and accepted by everyone or are you speaking from behind the curtain? Well you definitely wouldn't be getting someone at 2AM in the morning just talking on SomethingAwful.com if it was confidential.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:Well you definitely wouldn't be getting someone at 2AM in the morning just talking on SomethingAwful.com if it was confidential. There was that airman in Ask/Tell who posted a thread about nuclear weapons that, according to posters in GiP, ruined his life
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:36
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:There was that airman in Ask/Tell who posted a thread about nuclear weapons that, according to posters in GiP, ruined his life Never post anything about anyone living or anything specific is generally a good rule for SA. Accretionist posted:
Not online, no. In person? Well, depends. Usually, I can't recall anything nothing notime nohow. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 07:43 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:There was that airman in Ask/Tell who posted a thread about nuclear weapons that, according to posters in GiP, ruined his life Yeah that is pretty bad. Edit: But that Illinois politics are incredibly corrupt isn't nuclear secrets. It's not as bad everywhere but you can think of it like a scale. Berke Negri fucked around with this message at 07:50 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:There was that airman in Ask/Tell who posted a thread about nuclear weapons that, according to posters in GiP, ruined his life Haha I'll assume he wasn't posting blueprints but who thinks posting confidential and potentially classified information on nuclear weapons is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:44
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:From a thinktank perch, write a policy brief on how machettes deserve a tax subsidy due to their use in bloodletting creating wage-growth and lowering unemployment in middle America. You can't be unemployed when you're dead!  But seriously speaking, as someone who's only interned in Congress and a lobbying firm in DC before by comparison, I'm not shocked at someone being groomed for politics that young. Any sufficiently politically connected family would know your best chances of succeeding in politics comes from a spotless personal record of success, starting from high school. Prepping for high school performance would start from before then, so 10 isn't hard to believe in that context. Hell, a lot of the Congressional office interns were still in high school from this and that state (eg New York City high schooler interning for a Georgia Democrat), so I can imagine others being involved in some way even earlier than that. Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
Oh, one teachable moment while I was on an official trip to Israel (free travel on government dime? Yes, please): Two finance staffers, campaign CoS, at district office. Candidate ain't best at CT, better in-person making asks. Two staffers organize event through the richest family in district. Nascars get raced, go drinking at mansion after. Staffers doing checkin ask host for contribution, refuse to let them into event until I get a call on an unofficial line. "WHAT THE EVERLIVING CHRIST YOU MOTHERFUCKERS I'M IN THE loving MIDDLE EAST AND I GET A CALL FROM X THAT YOURE PISSING THEM OFF? MOTHERFUCKERS I AM GETTING MY rear end BACK FROM ISRAEL AND YOU ARE GRASS. FIX THIS NOW. FIX IT FOREVER. I DONT GIVE A poo poo HOW, FIX IT, AND DONT MAKE ME CALL YOU MOTHERFUCKERS FROM HERE AGAIN." 2 weeks later, they were out of campaigns forever, the CoS was changed for a warmanager from Da Whipz office, and DCCC sent two emergency staffers: one completely incompetent who was sn intern there and they wanted her GTFO in a polite manner and one who knew enough his poo poo that he'd know what to do without being told. So yeah, don't call me on my unofficial emergency line for your poo poo while I'm on official business in the ME. E: Lesson? If someone tries to get into an event, let them in. If they know of the event, they know enough that refusing entry can carry more a risk than accepting a potential tracker in. Trackers are easy to spot when you know how, and easy to isolste for a discussion with a 'sperg the entire time. They try to leave sperg zone? Then you get to gently caress with them. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 08:09 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Oh, one teachable moment while I was on an official trip to Israel (free travel on government dime? Yes, please): you make my bones weary
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 08:17
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Oh, one teachable moment while I was on an official trip to Israel (free travel on government dime? Yes, please): All these stories don't really seem to lend credence to the argument that working within the Democratic party is the best way to go about getting left policy implemented.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
So, switching subjects a bit, Obama tweeted this yesterday: @WhiteHouse The UK is an extraordinary partner for America and a force for good in an unstable world. I hope it remains strong, robust and united. -bo Is it just me or does this strike me as a little inappropriate? I mean if the actual Queen stays out of I feel like our President should as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 09:02
|
|
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:So, switching subjects a bit, Obama tweeted this yesterday:
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 09:05
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:The Queen hasn't stayed out of it, which is a pretty big deal because the Queen almost never comments on politics. She said to think very carefully before voting which hardly strikes me as a strong statement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 09:21
|
|
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:She said to think very carefully before voting which hardly strikes me as a strong statement. She means think very carefully before voting; a gentle threat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 09:26
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Oh, one teachable moment while I was on an official trip to Israel (free travel on government dime? Yes, please): Are you laying the jargon on thick on purpose? This is almost impenetrable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 11:08
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:There was that airman in Ask/Tell who posted a thread about nuclear weapons that, according to posters in GiP, ruined his life Link? Backstory? Awful, but I need to know more!
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 11:31
|
|
|
All of this corruption talk reminded me of something. Recently I was told by someone "in the know" that Bob McDonnell of Virginia didn't actually do anything that bad and the entire trial was a show. I was under the impression that he was gifted a hundred thousand dollars of stuff with *wink, wink* you'll pay me back in the style of John Roberts not-bribes. Did he really get railroaded? I find it kind of hard to believe in our system that a prominent politician would get sent to jail over nothing and no one along the line would step in to stop it. I know he was offered a plea deal and he didn't take it but even then that it got that far if he didn't do anything seems absurd.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
Uranium Phoenix posted:All these stories don't really seem to lend credence to the argument that working within the Democratic party is the best way to go about getting left policy implemented. Yeah, it sounds like you're basically useless to the Democrats if you aren't upper-middle class at least, better if you're independently wealthy or merely wealthy and well-connected.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 12:41
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:Yeah, it sounds like you're basically useless to the Democrats if you aren't upper-middle class at least, better if you're independently wealthy or merely wealthy and well-connected. Or ruthless. Don't forget ruthless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:Yeah, it sounds like you're basically useless to the Democrats if you aren't upper-middle class at least, better if you're independently wealthy or merely wealthy and well-connected. If you're trying to single-handedly change your entire state party, sure. So don't be single-handed about it, and get a bunch of like-minded friends involved. Or start on it, make like-minded friends along the way, and drag them with you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 13:05
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:Yeah, it sounds like you're basically useless to the Democrats if you aren't upper-middle class at least, better if you're independently wealthy or merely wealthy and well-connected. I don't think it's any secret that if you really want to change politics, step one is to get rich.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Why is it okay for Democrats to take leftists for granted? Because there aren't enough of them to matter. You live in a representative democracy, and if you're significantly left of the general population, you have to accept that you're also going to be left of the mainstream political parties. You're always going to be either voting for someone who has no chance or holding your nose and voting for (from your perspective) the least bad candidate. Your options are to try and move the general opinion leftward (which you don't do from the top-down, so doesn't involve getting leftists into power) or to advocate a non-democratic system.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
Just get drunk on a vodka bottle labeled "Republican Tears" after the 2016 election. Be the best Democratic you can be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Smaller parties having influence over policy making doesn't require a non-democratic system. In fact first-past-the-post is in many ways the least representative democracy possible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Petr posted:Why is it okay for Democrats to take leftists for granted? Because there aren't enough of them to matter. You live in a representative democracy, and if you're significantly left of the general population, you have to accept that you're also going to be left of the mainstream political parties. You're always going to be either voting for someone who has no chance or holding your nose and voting for (from your perspective) the least bad candidate. Your options are to try and move the general opinion leftward (which you don't do from the top-down, so doesn't involve getting leftists into power) or to advocate a non-democratic system. This isn't necessarily true, though. Like, what Socialist Alternative did in Seattle was the right move, because people are more sympathetic to socialism/socialist policies in their local community, and local/state politics have less inertia. What leftists need more than anything else right now (barring silly poo poo like 80% popularity) is organization, and a political party with people in power provides that organization. The key sticking point is that you're not going to start with a Senator or even a Representative, you're going to start with a city councilman, then a few state legislators. Note that focusing on the local government can go too far (see: The Green Party), but I think explicitly what you need is local legislators on your side more than anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Petr posted:Why is it okay for Democrats to take leftists for granted? Because there aren't enough of them to matter. You live in a representative democracy, and if you're significantly left of the general population, you have to accept that you're also going to be left of the mainstream political parties. You're always going to be either voting for someone who has no chance or holding your nose and voting for (from your perspective) the least bad candidate. Your options are to try and move the general opinion leftward (which you don't do from the top-down, so doesn't involve getting leftists into power) or to advocate a non-democratic system. Public opinion is pretty malleable though. What the public will support is in large measure determined by what politicians say and do. You probably can't convince the general public to start redistributing the means of production in a top-down manner, but if the Democratic Party comes out in favor of nationwide All-Day Kindergarten and our candidates start stumping on it, that's going to move the polls on the issue. Also, while America is a democracy, that's no guarantee that popular stuff is necessarily going to happen - 90% of Americans want less money in politics, but that's not going to happen in the near future unless we get better parties and a better Supreme Court. Pot legalization gets narrow majorities nationwide now, but you know our politicians at the national level will have to be dragged into it kicking and screaming unless it hits 70% support or something. NSA/FISA reform is another one - dramatic cutbacks in spying are broadly popular, but it's not going to happen if our politicians just refuse to talk about it. Jackson Taus fucked around with this message at 15:13 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
quote:but if the Democratic Party comes out in favor of nationwide All-Day Kindergarten If Democrats really wanted to make Americans sit up and take notice, they'd offer to pay one parent to stay home with their kids til age 5. No income requirement, just if you choose to stay home, you get x dollars a month. This would appeal to the people who whine about the deterioration of the nuclear/traditional family as well as those who can't make enough to earn money for child care, help single mothers immensely, and people who'd make more working can just keep doing what they're doing. Oracle fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Isn't this now the norm? I haven't seen half-day kindergartens since I was in one over thirty years ago. Half-day daycares, yeah, but anymore full day K seems to be the norm, at least in public school. Too many people work anymore and lots of kids come in right from daycare already knowing the drill, as it were. When I was in kindergarten it was half day but that was about 15 years ago and it was in Idaho.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Isn't this now the norm? I haven't seen half-day kindergartens since I was in one over thirty years ago. Half-day daycares, yeah, but anymore full day K seems to be the norm, at least in public school. Too many people work anymore and lots of kids come in right from daycare already knowing the drill, as it were. Not in my area - some counties have it, some don't. And I'm in a relatively wealthy county in a purple state, it's not like I'm in Backwater Parish, Louisissippi. Oracle posted:If Democrats really wanted to make Americans sit up and take notice, they'd offer to pay one parent to stay home with their kids til age 5. No income requirement, just if you choose to stay home, you get x dollars a month. This would appeal to the people who whine about the deterioration of the nuclear/traditional family as well as those who can't make enough to earn money for child care, help single mothers immensely, and people who'd make more working can just keep doing what they're doing. The problem is that the folks who whine about the deterioration of the nuclear family are the same folks who whine about handouts to single blah-people mothers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
quote:The problem is that the folks who whine about the deterioration of the nuclear family are the same folks who whine about handouts to single blah-people mothers. Hell if advertisers can use it to sell diamonds Democrats can use to to sell something actually beneficial.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:25 |
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Politics Now I'm wondering if its possible to plan this on a generational scale. Say I'm too old to do politics, with too much online. Can I use a nest egg to get my kids into this power structure? Where would I send the kids for schooling so they are ready to go by ten?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 15:54
|
|
