I don’t want to take the time to write a proper diary. Hence this sketch.
The purpose of this sketch is mostly to illumine how to use Voter’s Revenge in the US political scene. While I hope the translation into Voter’s Revenge mechanism is obvious, it’s worth mentioning that the need to influence people related to a particular Congress critter is also made clear. (In the quotation below, the influencers/influenced are other Congress critters, also.) That there also needs to be effort directed at political relations to the primary target is (as I understand it) well known in political game theory. See the NY Times article on Bueno de Mesquita “Can Game Theory Predict When Iran Will Get the Bomb?”. While Voter’s Revenge targets are typically elected officials (as I originally envisioned it), the dysfunctional US response to covid 19 clearly indicates targets should be widened to include non-elected public officials. E.g., I highly recommend this lecture by Scott Atlas, who regularly tried to argue science (complete with referenced studies!) at task force meeting with the likes of Fauci, Birx, and Redfield. Fauci, Birx and Redfield never argued nor presented any science at the task force meetings. Fauci, Birx and Redfield should be shamed out of office, even if we can’t vote them out. (I don’t know whether Birx or Redfield are still collecting a Federal paycheck, while they betray the American people.) The SARS2 Pandemic: Will Truth Prevail? | Scott Atlas | Academy for Science & Freedom | LIVESTREAM
The SARS2 Pandemic: Will Truth Prevail? | Scott Atlas | Academy for Science & Freedom | LIVESTREAM
I recommend everybody watch the following documentary about the Israeli Lobby, which punches FAR above it’s weight, in terms of America’s percentage of Jewish population. (Indeed, the Israeli lobby promotes elite and conservative Israeli policy, which is often at odds with more liberal American Jews).
The Israel Lobby in the US – VPRO documentary – 2007
In particular: 26:40 – 30:54.
26:40
I also
26:43
wanna mention former member of Congress
26:45
impact does an excellent job of
26:49
constantly testing the loyalty of people
26:52
in Congress to their cause and so
26:55
there’s a constant stream of resolutions
26:57
that get proposed on the Mideast
27:00
expressing support for Israel about
27:04
something it’s done or sympathy with
27:06
victims of a suicide bombing or
27:09
condemning Iran or other people in the
27:12
region who are being hostile to Israel
27:15
and these become tests of sort of
27:17
loyalty of people in Congress on this
27:20
issue and those who vote in the way that
27:23
AIPAC wants will ultimate well in many
27:27
ways be rewarded ultimately with with
27:29
campaign contributions from people
27:31
sympathetic to a better day back itself
27:33
does not give money but they sort of
27:35
this whole series of votes and and
27:40
they’re very careful cataloging of how
27:43
people vote very much affects where
27:45
people make decisions about who to give
27:48
the money to money does not flow into a
27:50
particular congressman’s coffers or
27:52
senators coffers and unless he supports
27:55
positions taken by the lobby that’s
27:57
that’s their first I think major
27:59
influence is money and this
28:02
administration is awash in money more so
28:07
probably than any administration in
28:10
American history
28:11
for two months we’ve been trying to get
28:14
in contact with Congress people who
28:16
voted nay to certain of the bills that
28:18
were supported by a bank but nobody
28:22
wanted to speak to us is that normal
28:25
yeah this is an issue where Congress
28:28
person will see no gain to be made by
28:30
speaking on it just even voting against
28:33
a pax recommended positions is is
28:35
perilous for them because it can lead to
28:38
a reduction in campaign funds it can
28:41
create all kinds of problems in their
28:42
home district but they voted nay I mean
28:44
they did but they don’t want to go even
28:48
more public about it a film clip in
28:51
particular can you imagine a campaign
28:53
opponent using that it could become the
28:55
basis of a of a negative campaign ad and
28:59
look this person is against Israel’s
29:02
interest so when I whenever I have
29:07
spoken to people on Capitol Hill about
29:09
this it’s almost always on a not for
29:11
attribution basis
29:22
I was told off the record once by a very
29:29
prominent Democratic senator we were at
29:32
a meeting in Paris and it was late in
29:35
the evening sitting in the hotel he was
29:37
talking about the Middle East and he was
29:39
saying things about Israel which were
29:40
very similar to the criticisms that I
29:42
would make and so I said to him but you
29:45
never say these things in the Senate why
29:48
not
29:48
is it because you’re worried about the
29:50
Jewish vote you said forget him it’s
29:52
nothing to do with the Jewish vote I
29:54
come from a state I can’t tell you where
29:56
because I wasn’t um where there are very
30:00
few Jews and they all going to vote for
30:02
me anyway so it doesn’t matter so it’s
30:04
not the Jewish vote that’s not the issue
30:05
it’s not money I don’t get money from
30:07
the Israel lobby that’s not the issue
30:08
but he said suppose that I walk onto the
30:12
Senate floor and say in a moving speech
30:15
why we need to take our distance from
30:18
Israel understand better what has
30:21
happened to the Palestinians maybe I
30:23
would win five ten senators over to a
30:27
general motion criticizing his for
30:31
maximum he said but that’s all I could
30:34
get and he said in return I would be
30:37
finished in the Senate because no one
30:40
would ever vote again for my needs if I
30:45
wanted to move something from my state
30:48
or an education bill or a financial bill
30:51
or a tax bill or anything to do with
30:52
domestic policy nothing to do with
30:54
Israel I would be punished
As most of the resolutions are “tests of loyalty”, and not major policy bills, it makes sense to me to use the less extreme punishments inherent in Wrangler actions, as opposed to the terminal Voteslinger action of punitive voting