Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 246 posts

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#141

Post by slacka »

Bud wrote: post #125
dankohn1 wrote: post #34

I supported Lessig's presidential campaign monetarily, even though I never thought he had a snowball's chance and also didn't think that his model of affecting change was fully thought through. As entrepreneurs, I think many of us can sympathize with the idea of knowing that there is a huge, massive problem that needs to be fixed, without necessarily having the solution fully formed. It would have been so easy for Le…

Getting into the debate would have had a huge impact? I disbelieve. I think it reflects poorly on Lessig's judgment that he even considers himself qualified for the Presidency. If he wants to advance a view on a single political issue, running for leader of the free world is kinda overkill, and there's also no evidence that him becoming President would have the slightest impact on the issue Lessig cares about, unless…

> huge impact? I disbelieve.

Of course he could have. Every debate has a huge impact on the news coverage and national discourse for days afterward. Bernie is forcing Hillary outside of her establishment comfort zone, just today saying she'd let "big banks fail". If Lessig's was in 2nd we'd be hearing a lot more talk of Super PACs/Citizens United.

> Lessig's judgment that he even considers himself qualified for the Presidency.... has no political experience

Compared to Trump, a bully and intellectual lightweight. Or Carson, a neurosurgeon who promotes in creationism? His poor judgement was not running, but saying he'd quit after he accomplished his goal. No one could take him seriously talking like that, and he even later admitted it was his biggest mistake.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#142

Post by tptacek »

mindslight wrote: post #136
tptacek wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument might make you feel better, and it sure sounds sympathetic, but it doesn't change the fact that Nader's hopeless campaign gave the election to Bush. It's not as if the concept of spoiler candidates is new to US politics; it's how we got Clinton, the President in office at when Nader ran!

I feel fine with my decision and would do the same thing again. In fact, I voted third party in 2k4 as well. The thing is, I don't really care that Bush II won. In fact I miss those days when most of my peers were anti-government since their team hadn't won. I am not particularly interested in what flavor of shit I will be forced to eat, and I won't legitimize the process by asking for the one that seems less foul.

I don't blame you. There was no reason for you to know any better. I blame Nader.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#143

Post by ironsides »

tptacek wrote: post #131
mindslight wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it was totally Nader and Nader voters that caused the invasion of Iraq, not the 50 million people who voted for Bush, nor the hordes of people who cheered on going to war, nor the butthurt NYPD that suppressed protests (only mentioned due to personal experience), nor the mass media that started fanning the flames and beating the drums before the dust had even settled. Let us remember, Bush II ran on a platform o…

This argument might make you feel better, and it sure sounds sympathetic, but it doesn't change the fact that Nader's hopeless campaign gave the election to Bush. It's not as if the concept of spoiler candidates is new to US politics; it's how we got Clinton, the President in office at when Nader ran!

The argument that a vote for nader is a vote for bush is flawed. The basic premise of voting is that you vote to support a candidate and or a set of ideas you align with. Its a step better than voting "none of the above" as it provides an idea of what you would prefer.

The concept of voting for the "lesser of two evils" just further perpetuates the mess that we find ourselves in today.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#144

Post by mindslight »

tptacek wrote: post #142
mindslight wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel fine with my decision and would do the same thing again. In fact, I voted third party in 2k4 as well. The thing is, I don't really care that Bush II won. In fact I miss those days when most of my peers were anti-government since their team hadn't won. I am not particularly interested in what flavor of shit I will be forced to eat, and I won't legitimize the process by asking for the one that seems less foul.

I don't blame you. There was no reason for you to know any better. I blame Nader.

I could say the exact same thing about my younger self with respect to having voted at all.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#145

Post by ironsides »

oceanstone wrote: post #111
Pyxl101 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an interesting point. How does one determine when one is past the point of being a spoiler and into being a serious candidate? It seems that there is a self-fulfilling prophesy here, wherein if one is concerned about being a spoiler, then one will begin drawing votes away from other viable candidates as soon as they enter politics, and thus spoil; but yet, in order to ever become a viable candidate in the first…

Lessig and Nader are so different though. Lessig is being perhaps overly cautious, and bailing after the Democratic Party changed the rules and excluded him from the debates (boo). Nader stayed in the 2000 race until the end, even campaigning in states where Gore and Bush were neck-and-neck.

While Nader realized he would lose the election, he made a big point of trying to capture 5% of the vote and also trying to raise additional awareness of his core agenda.

Winning 5% of the vote would have enabled the party to qualify for Federal Election Funds in the following election. http://www.fec.gov/press/bkgnd/fund.shtml

Dont forget that these days $$$ = share of voice.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#146

Post by calvins »

noelsusman wrote: post #100

The Democrats plan for victory is to appear less crazy to moderate voters than the Republicans. That's their biggest advantage right now. It's why they don't like Bernie Sanders and it's why they've constricted their debate schedule so much. They want to sit on the sidelines and let the Republican candidates make fools of themselves during primary season. Putting Lessig into the debate runs contrary to that plan. Bes…

Meeting the rules for inclusion that were known by all parties (and were in fact used for the first debate) should have been all that was needed for Lessig's inclusion.

This last-minute change of the rules to specifically exclude Lessig after it seemed he was going to meet the requirements is a disgrace.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#147

Post by dankohn1 »

tptacek wrote: post #140
decisiveness wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether or not you agree with this it has always been the core message of Lessig's campaign: Getting special interest money out of politics should be first priority, and until we get enough citizens to care about that, it'll be extremely difficult to pass legislation that goes against any special interest. Yes, his strategy for getting the message out was broken, but he understands his campaign was quixotic in its in…

People on "our" side of the ideological spectrum are going to have an unpleasant reckoning soon with the fact that the governing that really matters happens at the state and local level. State office campaigns build a back-bench for federal politics, and the states actually do serve as laboratories for democracy, and most of the rulemaking people come into contact with are state and city rules, not federal ones. If y…

Evidence that you are correct that the focus should be on state legislatures: Matt Yglesias's Vox story, "Democrats are in denial. Their party is actually in deep trouble." http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9565119/democrats-in-deep-trou...

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#148

Post by blakeyrat »

gkoberger wrote: post #8
scrollaway wrote: post #2

Can someone give me a rundown of how anyone expected anything different to come out of this? Polling at 0% isn't exactly fixed by a televised debate. Sanders is competing with Hillary on a fairly close scale and yet a lot of people still say he has no chance (though I definitely think he does at this point, but I'm not a US citizen so...), so what could possibly happen with Lessig?

Lessig never wanted to be president; he wanted a podium. But you can't say that. If he indicated he wasn't serious about being president in any way, they never would have let him on stage. That being said, I think it's shameful he hasn't endorsed Sanders. Lessig acts like he's the only one working on it. Whether or not you like Sanders, he is the only viable candidate whose core issue is overturning Citizens United.…

Lessig didn't (just) want to overturn Citizens United, he wanted to make campaigns publicly financed. Meaning: the Government will spend your tax money to buy advertisements for politicians.

I think that's a terrible idea, and as long as Lessig is flogging it, he won't get my support.

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#149

Post by vidarh »

Bud wrote: post #133
vidarh wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you it's probably not necessary. But Obama in an exceedingly bad example in that respect: Obama is firmly in the centre of the current US political landscape. You can be a moderate Republican and be to the left of Obama on many issues. That's presumably a large part of why he won, and why so many "progressives" have been disappointed at the lack of change. The shift from Bush to Obama was a tiny shift co…

>The shift from Bush to Obama was a tiny shift compared to what going from Obama to Sanders would be. Nope. The shift from Bush to Obama was immense. It resulted in two Supreme Court nominations by a Democrat instead of a Republican. What would the Obama to Sanders change be? Zero. Nothing. The shift from Bush to Obama resulted in every Cabinet position becoming Democratic too, of course. Obama to Sanders? Basically…

I find it absolutely crazy that you write off the change of someone who could have comfortably served in the Reagan administration (Obama) to a socialist as "zero". Yes, if that's all that happens, he'd be severely constrained.

But you appear to totally miss my point, unless I've misunderstood you:

An electorate that votes for Sanders over issues is an electorate where a majority would be fundamentally out of step with every Republican and pretty much every serving Democrat in Congress with perhaps a handful of exceptions.

The only situation where there wouldn't be massive changes in Congress over such a presidency would be if these people elect Sanders almost entirely over personality or party membership rather issues. Which is possible, but, as I said, it would be truly bizarre.

(I say this as a European well to the left of Sanders; I really hope he gets elected as it would be fantastic to see the US shift more in line with Europe, but I give him a snowballs chance in hell)

Re: Lessig Ends Presidential Campaign

#150

Post by aetherson »

s73v3r wrote: post #32
ermacaz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its hard to poll above 0% when your only issue is being against freedom of speech

Citizens United is not freedom of speech.

The freedom to shout at strangers on sidewalks is a meaningless one in terms of ability to add your ideas to the national political dialog. All meaningful political speech in the modern day has some kind of money spend behind it -- including your posting here on this comment thread. And if we raise the bar from "I guess theoretically this might potentially affect something" to "obviously meaningful speech," then the money spends become quite large.

If the government can restrict any and all money spends on political speech, it can suppress all meaningful political speech. This is the absolute core of the First Amendment.

Post reply on HN