He's not trying to "vote them out", he's trying to fix the electoral process.
Hiring a lobbyist group to change the laws is very different from running a grassroots campaign to vote for change. The lobbying approach may actually work because it involves speaking the only language these creatures understand: money and power. You offer them something in exchange for dropping electronic voting.
Basically, you have to offer a bigger bribe to get the system fixed than they stand to receive from the system being broken. It won't be cheap, but it might be the only way short of secession or violent revolution.
That's why you hire the lobbyists. If you had an answer to that, you would be the one doing the lobbying.
There's always something more you can offer these folks. An extreme example would be offering them a billion dollars each to fix the elections and resign their positions. They'd probably take that deal. If you just offer them a dollar, they'd laugh you out of the room. Lobbying is the process of finding out where in the middle of those two options you can find a mutually acceptable deal.
We are the side of mostly rural and suburban people. The opposition is the side that has every big business on its side (except for mypillow). We are not where the money is. Other than gun ownership, our biggest points of leverage are probably truckers and farmers.
We’re not going to beat them by throwing money their way. In addition to the fact that we have less money, that’s also adding more to the corruption since you’re still just bribing politicians either way.
Depends on what you mean by "money." In terms of real assets (not Wall St monopoly notes) the red states do most of the heavy lifting in the real economy. In a civil unrest scenario, the opposition is poorly positioned.
Agree. Where did this rhetoric come from that the liberals control the money? Liberals want to tax and spend money and redistribute money to the farmers (corn subsidies for example). Big businesses likes conservatives because it saves them tax dollars.
There is no bigger bribe than leftists controlling the federal government with unlimited money printing powers. This doesn't even factor in the blackmail and threats. Left can give the order and the media will dig up some woman from a govoners past and pay her to turn him into a rapist...unless he plays ball.
He's not trying to "vote them out", he's trying to fix the electoral process.
Hiring a lobbyist group to change the laws is very different from running a grassroots campaign to vote for change. The lobbying approach may actually work because it involves speaking the only language these creatures understand: money and power. You offer them something in exchange for dropping electronic voting.
Basically, you have to offer a bigger bribe to get the system fixed than they stand to receive from the system being broken. It won't be cheap, but it might be the only way short of secession or violent revolution.
yeah, but you are going after the thing that gets them the job - how are you going to lobby turkeys to vote for christmas?
That's why you hire the lobbyists. If you had an answer to that, you would be the one doing the lobbying.
There's always something more you can offer these folks. An extreme example would be offering them a billion dollars each to fix the elections and resign their positions. They'd probably take that deal. If you just offer them a dollar, they'd laugh you out of the room. Lobbying is the process of finding out where in the middle of those two options you can find a mutually acceptable deal.
The evil is too deep for that shit too matter
We are the side of mostly rural and suburban people. The opposition is the side that has every big business on its side (except for mypillow). We are not where the money is. Other than gun ownership, our biggest points of leverage are probably truckers and farmers.
We’re not going to beat them by throwing money their way. In addition to the fact that we have less money, that’s also adding more to the corruption since you’re still just bribing politicians either way.
Depends on what you mean by "money." In terms of real assets (not Wall St monopoly notes) the red states do most of the heavy lifting in the real economy. In a civil unrest scenario, the opposition is poorly positioned.
Agree. Where did this rhetoric come from that the liberals control the money? Liberals want to tax and spend money and redistribute money to the farmers (corn subsidies for example). Big businesses likes conservatives because it saves them tax dollars.
They need corn for the corn syrup they put in everything. Farmers should refuse to plant corn.
There is no bigger bribe than leftists controlling the federal government with unlimited money printing powers. This doesn't even factor in the blackmail and threats. Left can give the order and the media will dig up some woman from a govoners past and pay her to turn him into a rapist...unless he plays ball.
You'll never be able to bribe bigger than all fortune 500 companies combined.