As a voter you are compelled to vote for the candidate with the largest campaign budget. Oh… wait, that isn’t true at all.
Money is important, but you still need to find voters that are interested in your message. If you have the money to activate them you can win, but they have to be there in the first place.
This also assumes voters are informed and engaged, and that political campaigns are honest.
As I understand it, mailers trashing Bowman were like 80% of the mail you received in that district and their ads showed up constantly on Tv. It is possible to manufacture a perceived reality when you have enough money.
Admittedly, I was foolishly hopeful that residents of his district would recognize a racist, conservative piece of shit and vote for Bowman even if they didn’t agree with his stance on Gaza so shame on me.
I agree, though I am super disdainful of any argument that is sort of reskinning “other people are really stupid”.
On the other hand, participation in a congressional primary is pretty low and should weed out the casuals. Nobody who is going to the polls without much info is probably going to show up for these right?
Further, when you have “safe” districts for your party, you sort of invite people from the entire political spectrum to participate in your primary. The parts of the American electorate that WANT muscular support for Israeli military operations are on the right. If those folks skip this primary, they have no influence over their representative at all. Activating conservative voters is probably easier than changing minds.
I agree, though I am super disdainful of any argument that is sort of reskinning “other people are really stupid”.
I don’t consider ignorance and susceptible to sophisticated influence campaigns to mean “really stupid”.
Perhaps I’m just using nicer language to say the same thing (or otherwise, ultimately, hold myself to be superior). That’s fair I suppose - but I’m aware of the circumstances and privilege that helped me achieve my perspective. I’m of the belief that, if given similar benefits, most would be just as “superior”.
Now that I’ve demonstrated I’m superior, and humble, I still feel like this could have been avoided if people in the district voted instead of just ignoring the campaign or assuming, like I did, that people in the district would do better.
To anyone reading this, if you are a resident in the district and didn’t vote for Bowman… do better next time for everyone’s sake.
This is why the education system is underfunded and the people are kept in poverty. So that they don’t have the means to inform themselves.
Also, tribalism is a thing. They just need to find one issue that gets people riled up enough to vote on it. It’s why 99% of American political discourse focuses on social issues like abortion and then both parties enact economic policies that disadvantage the working class. Because everyone feels strongly one way or the other about abortion.
As a voter you are compelled to vote for the candidate with the largest campaign budget. Oh… wait, that isn’t true at all.
Money is important, but you still need to find voters that are interested in your message. If you have the money to activate them you can win, but they have to be there in the first place.
This also assumes voters are informed and engaged, and that political campaigns are honest.
As I understand it, mailers trashing Bowman were like 80% of the mail you received in that district and their ads showed up constantly on Tv. It is possible to manufacture a perceived reality when you have enough money.
Admittedly, I was foolishly hopeful that residents of his district would recognize a racist, conservative piece of shit and vote for Bowman even if they didn’t agree with his stance on Gaza so shame on me.
I agree, though I am super disdainful of any argument that is sort of reskinning “other people are really stupid”.
On the other hand, participation in a congressional primary is pretty low and should weed out the casuals. Nobody who is going to the polls without much info is probably going to show up for these right?
Further, when you have “safe” districts for your party, you sort of invite people from the entire political spectrum to participate in your primary. The parts of the American electorate that WANT muscular support for Israeli military operations are on the right. If those folks skip this primary, they have no influence over their representative at all. Activating conservative voters is probably easier than changing minds.
I don’t consider ignorance and susceptible to sophisticated influence campaigns to mean “really stupid”.
Perhaps I’m just using nicer language to say the same thing (or otherwise, ultimately, hold myself to be superior). That’s fair I suppose - but I’m aware of the circumstances and privilege that helped me achieve my perspective. I’m of the belief that, if given similar benefits, most would be just as “superior”.
Now that I’ve demonstrated I’m superior, and humble, I still feel like this could have been avoided if people in the district voted instead of just ignoring the campaign or assuming, like I did, that people in the district would do better.
To anyone reading this, if you are a resident in the district and didn’t vote for Bowman… do better next time for everyone’s sake.
Insert “you are not immune to propaganda” here
This is why the education system is underfunded and the people are kept in poverty. So that they don’t have the means to inform themselves.
Also, tribalism is a thing. They just need to find one issue that gets people riled up enough to vote on it. It’s why 99% of American political discourse focuses on social issues like abortion and then both parties enact economic policies that disadvantage the working class. Because everyone feels strongly one way or the other about abortion.