Kansas Nerd Uses Net To Shake Up Political Fundraising 179
ghostlibrary sends a note about Sean Tevis, an information architect in Kansas, who is running for state representative with the help of an xkcd lookalike cartoon and grassroots Net-based fundraising. Tevis had garnered more than 6,000 contributions, most of them small, from around the country, far out-fundraising his opponent. Major news outlets have picked up the story as a harbinger of 21st-century Net-based political campaigning. Reader ghostlibrary adds, "As a bonus, Tevis cites xkcd intentionally (rather than just ripping it off without crediting it) and, well, it's actually funny."
Re:breaking news! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Exactly.
Also, an eye-opener was, that that same guy originally had some weird attitude about immigrants, a la "american jobs only for american people", which he switched, when a huge cryout from the /. rolled over him...
And I really think he already was mentioned on /. some time (weeks-months) ago, at least I recall a particular cartoon, that with the 20$ thing.
Please chaps, please think twice before giving a guy money just because he is "from the internets".
And please stop political advertising on /., it really sucks, no matter who it is.
View Source (Score:5, Interesting)
View page source (on his xkcd-style ad) for a hidden message to geeks.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, while there is nothing wrong with having a good technology policy and so earning the election and funding bonus for (almost) being a nerd, there is something wrong with getting money through it AND indulging in policies about topics like immigration in the way he did. Irritating that he didn't leave neither his original policy ("american jobs for american people"), nor his reaction to the community ("ok, now i see my primary source of funding (the internets) doesn't like that, so i revert and remove it from my programme").
At least, there is something wrong with people giving him money without being informed about his *other* policies (or his general mindset, that is).
I'm sorry to say this, but he plays you guys like sock puppets.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, what's that you say? We should send them to the special education room? Which one, the underfunded, thus understaffed and overworked one? I'm sure that's going to do wonders for those kids. But let's face it, the parents of the "normal" kids don't want to pay for some "special" kids to get "special treatment" just because they're not as smart as little Jimmy Normal.
I think the better idea is to simply fail the schools and take away all their money and then have the district pay to send all the kids to another school district. You know, pay with all that money that's rolling in from the magical fairy elves who love education. You know the ones, they're imaginary.
And about your standards, I'm guessing you want some sort of test for this standard? You know what will NEVER happen, each state definitely won't have their own standard for each grade and therefore each state definitely won't have their version of the test. That will NEVER happen. And since that will NEVER happen, we shouldn't go and set a nationwide standard or anything, because that would be TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT and that would be BADDDDDDDD. Instead, if anything like the above happens we should simply ignore it and move on. Oh and take their money away. Because after all, the kids must be learning something, right? Right? Aren't they?
All of this comes from a teacher of 30 years who is really sick and tired of all of this shit. Seriously, if I have to teach another kid how to JUST pass a test and nothing more, I'll probably %!$*%& [NO CARRIER]
Re:Why? (Score:1, Interesting)
Nah. He is like "I don't have a policy on immigration, so give me money for my policy on technology." - but indeed, he HAD and very probably still has a policy on immigrantion. But where can I read about it?
Quibble. He probably has an opinion on immigration.
There's a qualitative difference between having an opinion and having a policy.
Re:Saw this last week... (Score:3, Interesting)
I live in Canada... and I donated $10.00. Hell, I don't care where this guy is getting elected: If I can help influence an election by my tiny donation toward a tech-literate progressive, I'll do it.
Re:he should not be beholden to those outside (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeeeahhhhh.....
And his opponent expects to raise about $3,000 from local voter contributions, out of his anticipated $35,000 or so warchest.
You are sooooooo right! The only proper politician is one beholden to the lobbyists and corporate contributors that supply 90+% of the money to buy his election.
-
Re:Wait, you're telling me... (Score:3, Interesting)
I think what is most important in a candidate is being able to logically think about things.
This means listening to opposing opinions, thinking things through, and not bending one's values in compromise votes, if the issue is important (like Constitutionality).
Re:he should not be beholden to those outside (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, campaign finance laws mean you can't just drop your own wealth into someone else's pocket. At least in Kansas, donors are limited to a $500 per year. You'd have to set up multiple PACs and whatever else instead.
But fuck it. This is the way the system works. There's no law against outside donations. In the past year, the incumbent has recieved [ks.gov] large contributions [ks.gov] from Humana, based in Kentucky. Sure they have a national reach, including Kansas, but why should corporations be granted some right to interfere that others don't get? You are a citizen in the state in which you reside -- Humana has chosen Kentucky. Many people might consider returning to Kansas depending on an election outcome; Kansas City is half Kansas, half Missouri, let alone the thousands of people who leave each year in search of a better community.