This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
How to run a winning campaign... in any democracy.
As the elections come to a close in my nation... The politicians of the future, are building their campaign for 2014, and 2016. Most of them, already hold office, and simply want a larger one, so they will spend most of their time, meeting with people who can help them accomplish that goal, and crafting a series of platforms, positions, and arguments for and against legislation already on the docket, in a way that will appeal to the largest number of voters in their district.
Some will also write legislation, and attempt to make changes, through governance... but for the most part, this is the accepted way of gaining popularity, and moving into a higher position of power... I propose a different way.
You wish to be elected to the United States Congress, in your district, and you promise to do x, y, and z… Well… Who’s stopping you? You want a better local education system… What’s your model? Build a school. When it works better, then maybe I’ll trust you to fix education. You want to be head of the water board… Well, what are they doing wrong? Do you have a well? How do you filter your water? How many people in the community does it serve?
The campaign of the future... Should be perpetual. If you want to hold office in 2014, your quest should begin now. Create a volunteer network, designed around creating a stronger connection between citizens in your district, fixing problems, not when you get elected... NOW. Your network will not cold call, or buy advertising, it will inspire citizens to take action fixing broken aspects of their community.
How? You create a charity organization, or super pac, I know I hate them too. A charity infused with your political platform, which you use to fund raise, and solve problems in the area you wish to govern. The only advertising you do, is on the ground helping people, fixing problems, and creating social work jobs, in the district you wish to govern. Then try to stop people from voting for you.
noclegi białobrzegi
Juan Donado
Most people just criticize that things are not done. But why? Maybe congress is not passing the laws, maybe there is not enough budget, maybe there were some other things that turned out to be priorities in the middle of the way. I think that something that needs to be taken into account are the WHYS.
My utopian view about government is one where humans are not in power. If you don't like something or you want to put something forward, you'll go to your local "government machine" and submit your complaint, idea whatever. The machine processes the information, and if there is a vast majority of people asking for more streetlights it is done. The machine automatically balances the budget and evaluates what is feasible and what is not.
This way we would get rid of emotional, self interested, money driven, liar, unfair, and even stupid humans that are just that, too human to govern.
David Hamilton 50+
I think we can do better. The same would be true at a small level in student council. You have a great idea to help the school. Get a few people who agree with you to actually implement that change... Without any help, or vote, etc, just gather the resources to accomplish your goal. If someone running for president next year was doing that... I'd lay good odds on them to win that election.
I'm not a fan of the idea of a machine governing my life... A machine would certainly outlaw vice, and... good luck with that.
Random Chance 30+
You need food, medical, housing, education, etc.
Can you wait a few years more for food? I promise if elected I will then build a model that I have already begun building in my head to solve this most pressing problem. Promise. If all goes well and according to plan, you'll have food and clean water to drink even though no one is doing anything about the water. On that issue I just trust in God and have faith that all will work out.
Quote from Andres Aullet: " Main problem with politicians is that they don't really know how to "do" the things that ultimately help or affect the electorate."
That is so correct and that is why politicians are irrelevant to solving the problems of America. They not only do not know how to, are not trained to, they also have no intention of doing so. Frothy appeal, pleading and even demanding does not, has not, and will not, work.
One should ditch what is irrelevant and doesn't work. Actually, hasn't worked for decades.
You cannot get what you want here with a system that is primed and tilted for unethical, dishonest, greedy, selfish and evil behavior. You just can't.
Quote from Henry Woeltjen: "The real problem with elections is nobody pays attention."
Wrong. The real problem with elections is that voting doesn't work. It too is irrelevant in that regard. To continue to believe that voting works, is to continue to see the truth right before your eyes and then to deny it to yourself.
Henry also went on to say, "Elect the right people." The right people rarely come along and are truly part of the electoral/debate process. If someone comes along, they are marginalized, pushed aside and kept out of the mainstream media except as a punch line. And if there is a third choice that could be taken or written in, Americans never take the chance because they prefer lies and the fear that goes with those lies as their all too comforting security blanket.
A blanket they will sorely need when more lose all they have to the rich.
David Hamilton 50+
Andres Aullet 10+
You are correct. Main problem with politicians is that they don't really know how to "do" the things that ultimately help or affect the electorate.
Their main function nowadays is to channel money they collect from people into projects that may or may not even have merit
But here is a different proposal for your consideration:
Let the politicians do what they do today, namely create budgets with estimated costs of certain projects, and propose legislation initiatives
But now, build a voting and collection system by which each voting individual can decide which legislation initiatives they support, as well as which budget items they want their taxes applied to.
That would not only streamline the politicians agenda (large scale lobbying would lose some power, for example), but it would also encourage real individual involvement in the decision making process
yes i know... too idealistic... but hey! it is past midnight, i am allowed to dream!
cheers
David Hamilton 50+
Henry Woeltjen 10+
Our government has a responsibility to foresee potential conflict. If we intend to base our countries choices on what we want right now...we fail to consider what our children's children may need. Our government is a very sensitive organism. Its power is only present through cooperation of the people. We vote and obey laws to facilitate organization and progress.
The creation of laws is not usually a tool for campaigns. Legislation can have unforeseeable long-term impacts. Therefore, it is risky to create laws as a means of boosting your credibility. Unless of course you created a law that actually worked. Then you would definitely take credit for it.
Our government isn't meant to be flexible. We do use precedent in our courts and in the creation or application of laws. However, we also have politicians that spend hours debating word-usage and the ramifications of a proposed bill twenty years from now. Therefore, changing anything about our government is rather difficult.
The real problem with elections is nobody pays attention. People base their views on the media and have no real grasp on local elections. We fill our congress with people elected by lobbyists in each state. We do not make an attempt to educate our youth on the importance of local and state elections.
It is our fault. The politicians are feeding us what we ask for. They are elected officials. That means they are a direct reflection of you and me. Our government is primed for change. We just haven't figured out the correct way to do it.
We live in a world of cause and effect. How do you change our government?
Elect the right people.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
David Hamilton 50+
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
As John Smith has rightly stated, there is no one-size-fits-all approach.
David Hamilton 50+
To be a bit tangential... We often, in my country, and others hear of Christian politicians... Yet I have never met one who started as a carpenter... Not one who feeds the poor, or builds parks with their own hands. The disconnect which exists between politics, wealth, and actual labor doing good deeds, is enormous... and my country is not alone in this problem. I think it has been so long, since we've seen a wealthy and powerful person, truly dedicate themself to spending 40 hours a week laboring to help the community, we have forgotten what a leader of citizens should look like...
John Smith 30+
David Hamilton 50+
Anywhere private charity is legal, this could be used as winning philosophy, though obviously one must be wary of the legal issues involving being the head of both the charity and the campaign... but still... I'm not describing the type of activities which many democracies would prohibit.
This is the type of thing, that I think would work best, for a mildly successful member of a small community. If you live in a small town, and can get the ball rolling with a few thousand dollars, I think you could easily take a run at local politicians through charitable action in the community. In building a network of people valued by the community, volunteering at the schools, filling in pothole, teaching prisoners how to read etc... you will create an image which is not based on rhetoric, or promises, and will be almost impossible to defeat using modern political strategy.
I think it could work on a larger scale as well, but obviously it becomes more difficult, as the scale of charity to have an impact on the common person becomes much greater.
David Hamilton 50+
Elizabeth Gu 30+
1. Be smooth when it comes to dealing with what you’ve missed or what you've lied.
2. With lots of promises, make a good impression that would last for a while—in the mean time, you'd prepare another plan for making your images more trustworthy without lifting your finger to keep those promises.
3. Lastly, try to look better than your rivals. See if you can find out their other weak points.
Which all shouldn't be what they keep in mind in the first place if we look forward to some changes...
David Hamilton 50+
pat gilbert 50+
Fund raising is almost non stop for most politicians. Which has it's obvious problems.
David Hamilton 50+
pat gilbert 50+
IMO we need a better educated constituency even here on TED most are ignorant to the economics of what they espouse. The problem is that most people are asleep with no real desire to wake up. The bigger problem is that when the United States falls the entire world is going to fail with it.
David Hamilton 50+
If someone really wants to do good for their community, they need to do it... The election should be an afterthought. The most important task is bringing together volunteers who believe in your solutions to problems and are willing to help you experiment with them... That is real leadership. Someone who can do that, will dominate modern political strategy, in almost any nation... Is what I'd bet on.
pat gilbert 50+
David Hamilton 50+
As you suggest, it has shrunk dramatically, though the NDAA, and no public option for health insurance, have far more to do with it than ACORN. How that's even on your radar as important, is a bit beyond me, but to each their own. This is neither a plug for, nor a dig on the President of the United States.
My point is very simple, someone who can mobillize volunteers and donations, on that level, has incredible potential to actually fix problems, without ever obtaining the instrument of government power. No one currently uses their volunteers in the manner I describe. With the right money, and organization however, I believe this is a winning strategy, especially in the local square. Start fixing problems with people of like mind, then run on your success.
pat gilbert 50+
David Hamilton 50+
You have stated the problem quite elegantly... I am suggesting the solution. What if the people who wanted a public option, and education reform, just started showing up at hospitals, and schools, to volunteer on behalf of their candidate? I think that would be a positive change. Right now those volunteers call you at dinner and say "are you planning to support x"... Seems like a waste of their time.
pat gilbert 50+
Use the TED conversations for example, how many people come and go from this site? IMO most, meaning very few come back for any length of time. How many visit the videos? 50 k to a million each how many go to conversation linked to the site? a handful.
How come? because the videos align with the purpose of TED the conversations don't.
The purpose is to teach and learn something which occurs when you have experts discussing the subject. It does not when you just have a soap box for someone to opine. There are some people on the TED conversations who I have learned a lot from but they are the minority.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Many discussions, then, have such potential.
What is tricky and either takes some education or a "good nose" is to recognize who actually does have a solid understanding in an area and who actually doesn't. It is the same issue people confront in examining published sources to distinguish expertise and sound evidence from something that isn't there yet or is actually only marketing.
I know, David, this is off the course of your discussion. Forgive me for that.
David Hamilton 50+
You then run for office on the same platform... Nothing illegal about it. In fact, most societies would love it.
pat gilbert 50+
I'm not sure that most people have the good nose that you speak of.
The good nose imo would come from the touch stone of conceptual understanding and how to use the ideas in application.
pat gilbert 50+
I disagree. I have said all that I have to say about this.
Rick Ryan 10+
I agree with Fritzie...actions speak louder than words.
But words can also make the most successful actions look like the implementor of those actions was a moron, as long as the general public is succeptable to propaganda. That's the way all political campaigns are conducted today. Regardless of how good an opponant's previous actions may have been, their opponant is going to "say" (use words) whatever is necessary to make those actions look like they ended up as disasters.
I'm not convinced any "judgement organization" could maintain total impartiality in the judgement process. They would be just as succeptable to outside influence. Or at the least, the ACCUSATION of outside influence (propaganda if the accusations were not factual), just like many politicians today are accused of being influenced by lobbyists and/or special interest groups (which can and does happen).
David Hamilton 50+
Rick Ryan 10+
Gerald O'brian 50+
george lockwood 20+
David Hamilton 50+
Roberto Garcia
Candidate A wants to run for president, during his campaign Mr. A proposes a major change in the school system, proposes building roads bridges, better salaries etc..
well according to the Accomplishment Standards System i am proposing.
Candidate A must certify his set of proposals.
if Candidate A is elected he will go through constant auditing. To check if he is accomplishing what he promises before being elected. If after a fixed period of time President A has not made what he promised. The Accomplishment Standards Committee has the authority to remove President A from the White House and call for new elections. I know this sounds weird and even funny. But when a politician wins a seat he knows he will stay there for the next 4 or n of his period if nothing bad happens. Even if he does not accomplishes even 1 of his campaign promises he will stay there. But what if there is a legal way to take out the Politicians that don't stand for the promises they gave to the voters?
There are sets of standards for everything ISO, ANSI, ASTM, IEC, And the world of politics works like an underground organization under no standards.
David Hamilton 50+
Ian McPike
David Hamilton 50+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
David Hamilton 50+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I absolutely hear what you are saying about the general view of politicians, that resigned acceptance/tolerance many of us have and, along with that, the serious consideration of engaging instead in bottom-up interventions to make positive changes in the environments where we believe we have potential to make a difference.
David Hamilton 50+
Also, if Buck McKeon, wins my district again, which he likely will... I'm going to begin fundraising to do exactly what I'm describing, to take a run at him in 2 years... I don't think I have the credentials, or will have the name recognition/money to build a school, but maybe a small aquaculture farm. I'm going to lose, badly... He is very well financed, but yes, I believe people should hold themselves to exactly the same standard they hold others.
Being unwilling to make enough money to pay taxes, does not excuse inaction.
Ken brown 30+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I believe you, David, that you hold yourself to high standards. I think many people, though, believe they hold themselves to high standards while actually viewing themselves through rosy glasses and viewing others through mucky ones.
David Hamilton 50+
I would prefer we learn to view ourselves through the muck... and work hard to clean our lens. I have as much disgust for my own complacency, lethargy, and cynicism, where it exists... as I do for those aspects of my culture, and leadership.
I may have an incorrect perspective, on exactly how dirty the lens is... but it is fair, in its own way.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
I also understand how easy it is for people to lose their way in life's confusions and that the challenges we all face are not the same.
David Hamilton 50+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
David Hamilton 50+
History is hard to know, because of all the hired bullshit, but even without being sure of "history" it seems entirely reasonable to think that every now and then the energy of a whole generation comes to a head in a long fine flash, for reasons that nobody really understands at the time—and which never explain, in retrospect, what actually happened.
There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda.… You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning.…
And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting—on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave.…
So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark—that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back."
Hunter S Thompson
Fritzie Reisner 100+
David Hamilton 50+