- From: Jason P Sorens
" We have to make friends with the voters, and the voters would react
badly to something that appeared to be cynically manipulative, like using a
couple of states because of their low populations to impose a political
agenda. 20,000 isn't enough to simply overpower local voters in any
state, so we have to be careful about image & methods."
Mykl>> So, you mean if we use only ONE state they won't think we are being "manipulative"?
What we are doing is choosing between a few "states because of their low populations to impose [our] political agenda" there. Your logic of doing it in only ONE state and not in two, doesn't fly.
From: "Jeffrey A. Robertson"
"I agree that this is an ideological battle: a battle of principles. I
think, however, that you overlooked what Jason said about those to whom
we would look bad. The people in the state we are trying to win over
from the statists currently in power are the ones we have to consider.
Perception is reality. If the locals perceive that they are being used
as tools for our own ideology (however righteous), they will be a
roadblock to our success, not an asset. That is what would look bad. . . . "
Mykl>> Of course it could make us look bad. A bad PR campaign in any number of states is still a bad PR campaign. And your 25 years in the Marines using words like "firepower," "force," and "assault" won't help our project either.
This project is the latest in a long line of unsuccessful libertarian projects. I think we will learn a lot in the FSP process and shouldn't expect FSP,Inc to get it exactly right the first time.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]