[ExI] what to do politics

[William Flynn Wallace]

John wrote:  I disagree, recent history indicates the last thing in the
world you want are experts that know what they're talking about because
they might utter truths that the hayseed rednecks in political rallies
don't want to hear.

NoNoNO - you keep these people strictly behind the scenes, so as not to
confuse anyone, as you said.  But if you win you have to have a program
that is much elevated from campaign rhetoric, and that is where these
people come in.

So - run based on pr and Hollywood, and govern based on scientific data, or
at least as close as you can come.

bill w ​

On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 10:53 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 9:36 PM, William Flynn Wallace <
> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ​> ​
>> I think what has to happen for anything to change is to find a likely
>> candidate and pour tens of millions into his fund, and start a new
>> political party.
>>
>
> ​I like to think I could vote for a candidate supported by a majority of
> Extropians, but I'm no longer certain I could.
>
>
>>
>> ​> ​
>> George Wallace, no relation, did pretty good with "There's not a dime's
>> worth of difference"  Re the two parties.
>>
>
> ​Wallace said that in 1968 when the election was between Nixon and Hubert
> Humphrey, and looking back with a historical perspective I think most would
> have to say Wallace was wrong, there was a dime's worth of difference
> between the two parties. And in 2016 the difference was even more clearcut;
> behind one was the possibility of becoming a below average Presadent and
> behind the other was the certainty of a increase in existential danger.
> Guess who won.
>
> ​> ​
>> The thing is to me, as a social psychologist, that the most important
>> thing is name recognition,
>>
>
> ​Yes, that's why a ​TV
> game show host
> ​ is now the most powerful man in the world.​
>
> ​> ​
>> Don't have planks.  Be vague at all costs. You want sound bites, not
>> details easily argued with, which give away your strategy.  You have to
>> keep it simple, because there are more simple people than anyone else.
>>
>
> ​There is no better evidence that you are correct than the most recent
> election, one produced detailed position papers and the other simple (in
> both meanings of the word "simple") soundbites. Guess who won.   ​
>
>
> ​> ​
>> Assemble a team of experts on every subject; mixture of left and right,
>> libertarian and authoritarian.
>>
>
> ​I disagree, recent history indicates the last thing in the world you want
> are experts that know what they're talking about because they might utter
> truths that the hayseed rednecks in political rallies don't want to hear.
> ​
>
>
>> ​> ​
>> I am behind Warren; lots and lots of people wanted a woman but not
>> Hillary; not ready for a black, though if I had had the chance I would have
>> voted for Barbara Jordan.
>>
>
> ​You could do worse. Much worse.
>
> John K Clark​
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20170624/5ba6c1ab/attachment.html>