The Something and the Someone
olivermellors
______________
Much effort is being devoted to discussion of the procedure for choosing a candidate in the forthcoming presidential election. Attention is being given to the drawbacks and consequences of various forms of voting. That is good. Here is what is being lost.
The reasonable concern about technical matters ignores the absence of substance. No one is demonstrating that they have a concrete plan of campaign, no one has yet gone past statements of broad superficial intention, no one has yet given us anything to vote for. We will have someone to vote for, to be sure.
The someone is important. We hope and seek competence, skill, judgement, activity, a networked and decisive leader motivated by the general common good. Those people are quite common.
The something is more important. We seek a concrete plan of campaign, competently thought out, demonstrating skill, judgement, evidence, a high likelihood of success and benefits for the community at large.
There is no reason the something has to wait for the someone to become president. Indeed, an election campaign is the time when the competent demonstrate that they are ready. They provide the electors with something to vote for in addition to someone. They explain, elaborate, justify, and promote concrete steps that are predicted to lead to concrete quantifiable results. In office, they execute that plan.
Undoubtedly, they periodically measure gains against predictions and make adjustments when the result is different than anticipated. They communicate failures, successes and results to the public in a timely manner. That is what competent management is about. That is what party presidents and two clickers and active citizens will be attracted to. That kind of management is incredibly attractive.
Want to gain new voters for the “unity” program? Have a credible campaign, a believable concrete program, measurable results: communicate a vision and its fruition. Give the elector something as well as someone.
Comments
If you want to encorage Cerb to push further and others to start, consider shouting:
http://tinyurl.com/9w3lk4k
You are right Oliver, taking shortcuts because of the PTO threat will not improve the electoral process, in quality or safety. We will not succeed unless we feel good about how we vote.
~hyuu~
Voted, damn right.
We need to have a legit campaign even if we are being PTOed, there is no need to alienate people in the process because they feel we haven't been fully democratic with them.
"there is no need to alienate people in the process because they feel we haven't been fully democratic with them."
x2
"there is no need to alienate people in the process because they feel we haven't been fully democratic with them."
x3
Ralph Klne, ; You are right Oliver, taking shortcuts because of the PTO threat will not improve the electoral process, in quality or safety. We will not succeed unless we feel good about how we vote.
X2
"there is no need to alienate people in the process because they feel we haven't been fully democratic with them."
x4
And this is back-firing the anti-PTO efforts. The lack of "someone" in the current eUSA CP is making voters choose AFA as a punishment vote.
'We need to have a legit campaign even if we are being PTOed, there is no need to alienate people in the process because they feel we haven't been fully democratic with them.'
'...taking shortcuts because of the PTO threat will not improve the electoral process, in quality or safety. We will not succeed unless we feel good about how we vote.'
x2 You don't have to vote for the AFA, just don't vote....
"there is no need to alienate people in the process because they feel we haven't been fully democratic with them."
x5
Well said as always Oliver. This has been increasingly troubling to me as the ATO efforts wear on. We are being told that we must vote against something, but without anything of substance being given to vote for. Tyranny through lack of choice is not an acceptable substitute for the threat of tyranny by those who actively would work against us.
Great article from another Young writer.
Artcle has been featured
https://www.facebook.com/eRepublikUSA
Very nice.
Agreed completely. The process BS is really only a discussion between a few people. Candidates are not exempt from campaigning just because we have a real need for a Unity candidate.
Actually, you'd think that makes it even more important.
Oliver, we're going to have the candidates on eNPR on Tuesday. I'd love it if you would submit some questions for me to ask them. I think you are interested in the right things.
😁😁😁😁
I will give you two right away namely:
1. do you agree with the AFA candidate's published opinion, speaking of a serbian PTO: "PTOs destroy the game by killing the ability of indigenous communities to grow generically. I hope you all join with me in condemning this activity. "
2. Why have you (including AFA) not created and published, in advance of the debate, a concrete agenda with appropriate metrics, so that the public can ask you intelligent questions during the debate?
I've been waiting for someone to step up and take the reins, but very few people have put in the effort or spent time learning the finer aspects of the meta-game. If you want true American democracy, GRAB eLIFE BY THE HORNS. Work in State or Defense. Run for POTUS. Etc and so forth.
Fg says ~ "The process BS is really only a discussion between a few people." Yep. And it shouldn't be my friend.
@Cerb
'...few people have put in the effort or spent time learning the finer aspects of the meta-game.'
You mean few citizens spend time kiss' Fluffer's' bum...you sit here and complain that few citizens take part and then ban anyone who stands against you...you want citizens to participate stop banning them....
You idiots troll, belittle and banish those who stand against you and then wonder why America is turning their backs...all you are doing is pushing citizens into the AFA....
Candor, we've had a couple months now and only a few people choose to be involved in this conversation about process.
What do you want me to do about it? We've pumped out plenty of media on the matter.
At some point do we recognize that only a couple of us care and then do our best to make the fairest decisions possible? Cause that's what I did.
fingerguns shut up better if you do not have anything intelligent to say....because as far as I saw no knowledge or invitation is not a public space. no articel or State new....
The process means more than the selction.
If the process seems rigged or lacking in participation, the whole affair only adds to the people's lack of confidence in their leadership.
A popular vote is what they expect mechanically, and what we should therefore provide in any meta-vote we attempt to replace it with.