Yes, 100%! We need people to recognize that the parties are in it for themselves, not voters. And some of their tactics make voters, including those of their own party, worse off.
And I’d argue that what’s missing for Independents is the machinery itself. The county and state level volunteers, the consultants, the donor lists, the ad makers, etc. All vital for winning races (and being taken seriously by the press).
Too often the precious resources go to quixotic bids for the WH (instead of congressional & state / local races) which only serves to reinforce the perception of Independent candidates as spoilers.
In my view, when you’re the only group with a plurality of voters in your corner, it’s logically somebody else who’s the spoiler.
Focus on winning down-ballot races first. Then expand.
Austen’s perspective could not align more closely with my own, so thanks for having him on!
This is such important perspective. Focusing on the electoral / party machinery is so very vital if the goal is to give voice to the voiceless.
Yes, 100%! We need people to recognize that the parties are in it for themselves, not voters. And some of their tactics make voters, including those of their own party, worse off.
And I’d argue that what’s missing for Independents is the machinery itself. The county and state level volunteers, the consultants, the donor lists, the ad makers, etc. All vital for winning races (and being taken seriously by the press).
Too often the precious resources go to quixotic bids for the WH (instead of congressional & state / local races) which only serves to reinforce the perception of Independent candidates as spoilers.
In my view, when you’re the only group with a plurality of voters in your corner, it’s logically somebody else who’s the spoiler.
Focus on winning down-ballot races first. Then expand.
Austen’s perspective could not align more closely with my own, so thanks for having him on!