This will likely pass the House unless "the Resistance" does an unprecedented show of strength. How? Likely not phone calls. Let me explain.https://twitter.com/AP/status/859910173992902657 …
-
So, anything that becomes easier to do (organize marches, organize or automate online coordinate phone calls) gets evaluated accordingly.
Large marches do much (annoy you-know-who; energize folks; find one another—yeay). But they're no longer as scary to pols as they're easier.
-
-
I believe phone calls are headed that way. They no longer convey the same level of underlying capacity phone calls did 10-20 years ago.
-
How can "Resistance" display strength? Do harder things. Fundraiser targets weak R's who vote yes, gets 100 million in one day. Might do it.
-
This is not an argument against marching or calling. You probably have to do those things just as baseline (their absence signals weakness).
-
Movements falter when the get stuck on tactics & stop thinking about the underlying dynamic: how do we convey threat by building capacity?
-
Globally, the powerful getting better at countering social movements. Partly why I wrote a book to explain why/how.https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/853968637199253505 …
-
Unfortunately, this discussion brings out a lot of defensiveness—as if one is belittling movements. Defensiveness is not a path to strength.
-
My 2¢: You want to spook the R's voting yes today? Put up a single fundraising page targeting them, raise many millions before the vote.
-
It will annoy him, sure. I don't know why a single R legislator would be spooked only by large march in Manhattan.https://twitter.com/nw3/status/860123037387157505 …
-
To conclude thread: FB post on how a movement might still be able to stop Obamacare repeal; even at the last minute. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1826519680695429&set=a.108673669146714.15995.100000122456753&type=3&permPage=1 …pic.twitter.com/WRMps3dxnA
-
Also this. If/when this passes House, *something* will quite likely pass the Senate.https://twitter.com/thegarance/status/859969902051983361 …
-
I won't sugarcoat. This is a paltry sum. The left/DEM donors/rich ppl are MIA. Grassroots energy not matched/helped.https://twitter.com/ckmarie/status/860484598958108673 …
-
Tea Party is a very successful movement. It had a real grassroots—and it was smart, strategic. But it also got funded. "Resistance"? Not so.
-
I there were a true appreciation of the stakes, there'd be a billion $ put into local organizing by now. Indivisible=~$1.5 mil so far TOTAL.
-
A tax cut for the very very very rich just put tens of millions at risk of early death. These are tiny responses. https://twitter.com/karlskahn/status/860492161892089856 …
This Tweet is unavailable. -
Grassroots is here; they show up; they work; they donate. They are organizing. Dem/left/progressive/tech leadership and donor class isn't.
-
If you look at the the Tea Party, their strategic smarts and organizing was important. But so was the huge quick cash infusion.
-
I'm talking since the election.
@IndivisibleTeam raised only $1.5 mil TOTAL SO FAR and most of it grassroots money. https://twitter.com/karlskahn/status/860493296313004032 …This Tweet is unavailable. -
I get desire to highlight good work that *is* done. But sugarcoating problems gave us 2016. Realism is a more powerful basis for optimism.
-
Koch bros alone spent almost A BILLION on the 2016 election. I'm telling you, Indivisibles runs on fumes even now. https://twitter.com/nateemmons/status/860496433014820864 …
This Tweet is unavailable. -
Just one of the efforts. Grassroots is on fire; liberal donor class is sitting on its hands waiting for? Dunno what.https://twitter.com/swingleft/status/860543959512354816 …
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.