I am a constituent of Susan's. Ever since I have moved here I am astonished at how incredibly effective she is at harnessing people's hope and her words like a damn magician.
Though she is a consistent conservative vote, she is able to focus all eyes on her.
Susan spins people's desperate attempts to try anything to feel heard into claims of bribery and hand-picks a small selection of threats as if they represent the majority of calls.
Susan repeatedly seems open to thoughtful consideration of constituents, letting them pour their hearts out to her when she had no intention of seriously considering their message.
Drawing protests, energy writing letters, phone calls, the donations, media of Maine away from 2018 races...while the GOP has continued to door knocking and fundraising for their candidates.
Cheers Susan you are a smashing success at the ick side of politics!
It's for all the wrong reasons and nasty causes...and I say this as an actual moderate. Whether GOP or Dem, constituents deserve a good faith ear. They deserve representation, not an operative.
Even if someone did not vote for you, they matter. It is a responsibility of the job. If you can't effectuate that job without making it a competitive sport instead of a collaborative one, you are simply unfit.
Twitter, if you want people who don't pull this BS in office, you have to use your power and float us up. If you focus 10% of the energy on my race you've focused on Susan's shenanigans, I will win.
Then your family and community will look at you different.
Your behavior will be questioned, and even if you has zero responsibility, many will blame you for being a tease, wanting it, being irresponsible for choosing what should be a totally innocuous setting.
In this hypo traditional campaigning requires around $1+ million per year to get and/or keep a house seat (plus all the other energy you have to expend to keep the peanut gallery PACs happy).
Let's assume they're at it 5 days/week and take a couple weeks off per year.
Too many really lovely people hoping for their partner, child, parent, etc to be the person they could be if that partner, child, parent, etc if they only changed, which of course they have no desire and/or resources to do.
I've been asked this a lot - what is the benefit of ranked choice voting?
If you feel like politics keeps pushing far left or far right as candidates differentiate, RCV lets you pick the moderate with the back-up of "not the other one".
Maybe you think of yourself as an independent, moderate, etc, and really don't love either party (but probably like one party less) - you can select me as your first choice, and still have the back up of another candidate if not enough people agree with you. #mepolitics
In this race, folks who like Bruce probably don't like Jared, folks who prefer Jared probably aren't keen on Bruce.
A lot of folks would like (or find less annoying) someone who really isn't a party. With RCV, you can do that! It removes the risk of vote-splitting.