Pondering: Big Money vs Big Numbers

[Cosmic Kitten]

Lots of talk about getting big money out of politics.
That is an important step to restoring representative government.

What does big money buy? It buys people. It buys politicians.
It buys the people who run campaigns. It buy the people who work for the candidates.
So is the problem big money donors, or ethically challenged candidates?

Obviously, campaign cash is a necessity.
But isn't what happens AFTER the elections where the real problems begin?
If elected representatives were moral and ethical would we have the
levels of corruption and horrible policy making we all suffer?

So what are the answers? Maybe one answer is Big Numbers?
If the Public can't outspend big money, big numbers of people
can answer the problem through smart participation?
Wouldn't BIG, I mean HUGE, numbers of people tip the scales?

Rather than accept the apathy, disenfranchised, "what can I do"
mentality, get involved, get psyched to make a change!
Everyone has a stake in this "game", though it's no game.
Everyone's health, wealth, and futures are contingent on what happens next.
So is it going to "happen to you" or are you going to make it "happen for you"?

[Warpy]

1. The Democratic Party still relies heavily on small donors

I target mine to specific candidates who have a chance of unseating morons who need to go in major elections where there is enough turnout to do the job. I've given up on the national organization and wish the candidates would turn down their "help" in supplying campaign handlers who are lobbyists the rest of the time.

Yes, numbers count in our party, while only big numbers count in theirs.

[Cosmic Kitten]

3. Hmmm? interesting POV

You're saying donate to specific candidates who
are expected to have enough turnout to get elected?
If so that's very pragmatic, but is there any downside?
Most local election swing based on hundreds of votes...
meaning most local elections are winnable.

As to campaign handlers, it seems handlers can be
bust or boon depending on the handlers loyalties.

Not clear what you're suggesting in saying...
"numbers count in our party,
while only big numbers count in theirs".

[aspirant]

2. Counting up, numbers can become big

Ethical candidates is a toughie! Sometimes I wish I could elect a monkey, then at least I could tell him what voting button to push. Somehow we have to lock in politicians to vote exactly as the majority of their constituents demand.

Big numbers = many boots on the ground and how can we fund an Acorn #2

[Cosmic Kitten]

4. If ethical candidates is a "toughie" THAT is the problem

So is the US so corrupt and people so unethical
that out of tens of millions of individuals
finding ethical people is a challenge?

There are a few ethical people in congress
but they are the minority.

Funding Acorn 2?
Is that what Populists need, another institution?
Why can't individuals organize, and do what
is necessary to change this situation?

People organize community yard sales, BBQs,
community gardens, but need another Acorn to help themselves?
People have time for little league, scouting, going dancing
watching sports, etc but no time to elect people who can make
a difference in their families lives?

It's puzzling?

[aspirant]

5. Can you give me a list of ethical candidates nationally for 2016?

You give examples of short-term temporary events, so do you think temporary activism well bring the success we seek?

When individuals organize and get larger and larger, when does it become and organization?

Acorn #2 doesn't need to be an institution this time, it can be an organization with populist goals

[Cosmic Kitten]

6. Temporay activism is a good idea!

Perhaps hubs of more committed individuals
surrounded or branching out to temporary participants
reaching from the streets to dinner table conversations?

Or maybe an organic, intertwining information stream
that illustrates the context and necessary choices?

As to candidates, it's the candidates responsibility
to make themselves known and build support.
There are plenty of social media forums for such actions.
Picking candidates is less appealing process.
Shouldn't candidates say to us voters, "HEY I can do this!"?
And then we can decide if they are what we want?
Primaries are supposed to work that way except, corruption.