It is interesting that you managed to scour the website for anything that wasn't perfect for you but managed to not see that the idea is explained and people can sign up to participate.

Actually, I was doing just the opposite: looking for things that I thought you had done well so I could make sure you didn’t think I was just out to discourage you. The problem is that you don’t care enough to do any actual work for me to complement. I did like the “1Demand” branding and believe that by using it and not referring to the organization as One Demand makes the name work!

As for how people can participate, you have yet to explain anywhere HOW participating will send any message! How will anyone associate people writing in on a ballot specifically to your group?

You just jump from people signing up and writing in their names on their ballots to candidates realizing that they missed out on hundreds of thousands of potential votes by accepting larger contributions without explaining HOW anyone will recognize the message those write-in ballots were trying to say!

Do you plan on making the names of those who sign up public?

How can anyone differentiate between write in votes that are 1Demand backers vs. voters that are actually attempting to write in the name of a candidate that they support?

The very fact that most people here agree with the notion that we would love to see Big Money out of the campaign’s, yet no one is jumping on your band wagon should serve as an indication that your idea is not nearly as sound as you believe it is!

If you don’t care enough about how 1Demand is viewed by the public, why would anyone think it is worth investing their time and energy in it?

This is a simple trick of sophistry - offer two alternatives as though that is the complete argument on either side.

What people do to generate outsize influence, which you would know if you actually used social media instead of just being the expert with no experience, is that they generate "feel good" viral content that delivers a simple message in a compelling format and is shred by like minded people and spreads into a wider audience as though it were a grass roots meme.

And it is very effective.

"Today, 23 companies and associations are pledging to expand apprenticeships," he said, and then he stopped himself.

Then he continued with his prepared remarks.

When Coats was informed of the upcoming meeting live on stage, he looked shocked: "Say that again?" Then he burst into stunned laughter. "Okay... that's going to be special."

Can you imagine having to put up with such an idiotic boss the way Coats has to? It must be a nightmare!

I think you should consider using 1Demand as your group’s name, not One Demand. The graphics looked much better on your website , and it will prevent people from thinking it is On Demand.

Chris is being very nice by NOT agreeing to write an article on your dis-organization! That’s what he is trying to tell you with the, “you attract more flies with honey than with vinegar” comment. You want him to write an article that explains what you are offering, but you are not offering anything!

Your website looks pretty at first glance, until you look how outdated it is. The link you offer for learning more about 1Demand still has the tab header “About Voucher Vendetta” and constantly refers to trying to influence the 2016 election!

Your volunteer page tells people interested in volunteering to send an email to “volunteer@vouchervendetta.org”.

You are asking for donations but aren’t accepting them.

You still have information about your 2015 Billy Joel contest that you never held because you failed to clear it with the artist!

The info page about you still says you are totally committed to Voucher Vendetta, which seems odd coming from the person asking people to donate their money and to support 1Demand!

Don, this is a freaking nightmare! How can anyone take you seriously when you don’t care to even attempt to look like you are competent?

You claim that people joining 1Demand and writing in their own names on the ballot will send a clear message that people want $100-or-less donation candidates, but you still cannot explain to anyone HOW that message is actually delivered. When we have pointed this out to you, you dismiss our comments as being from people who want to maintain the status quo in political donations. Our concerns are taken as proof that we want the Big Money system to continue and for your idea to fail!

Don, if we wanted you to fail miserably, then we would complement you for a well-thought-out plan that no one could ever find fault with!

CW would be negligent if he recommended anyone sign up or give to your group, as you are NOT a true non-profit! You have no strategy. You have no support.

CW isn’t going to write an article trashing one man’s delusions because it serves no purpose! Yet, that is exactly what you keep demanding that he do!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-LTRwZb35A

Very likely the best 3 minutes and 12 seconds you will spend today. :)

that's the nature of all ambitious projects, you resolve one problem and find two more that need to be addressed. as far as "considering" advice goes, how much consideration is necessary to change one broken link in your profile? i did it in five minutes.

JL

"The British have discovered an embarrassing amount of pro-brexit support comin from Moscow . . ."

Are the British dumb enough to allow Moscovites (Russians) to vote in the Brexit election?? I doubt it! So you must be referring to subliminal social media messages.

Dems/Libs are totally unrealistic about what it is that informs peoples voting patterns. The vast majority of voting EVERYWHERE, is motivated by either wallet or ideological considerations. Hillary did not lose because of Russian messages on peoples Facebook pages, and Brexit did not pass for the same reason.

Most of you guys would profit by joining CW and me, and get the hell OFF Facebook! It makes you crazy.

No, I would not be that naive. Since the Cold War however, there has been serious rearrangement of the deck chairs in the international order. The Russian Republic claims to have put their old Soviet ways behind them, and joined the modern non-communist community of nations, and backed that up by signing multiple treaty obligations and trade agreements. This is why it was relatively easy for the west to impose sanctions on them following their illegal annexation of Crimea and further harassment of Ukraine.

But if Russia truly wants to be a full member of this very prosperous club, it has to stop trying to undermine the other members, who don't take well to assaults on their sovereignty.

If Putin wants to return to the Cold War paradigm, he'd have to do so with half or less of the economic power that the Soviets had, fewer allies, and far economically stronger opponents who have the ability to cripple his trailer-park economy overnight. He is resorting to espionage and subterfuge out of weakness, not strength.

Otherwise, it is the consensus among the world's actual leaders (other than Trump, apparently) that Putin should be taught in no uncertain terms that membership in their economic club is a privilege, not a right, and he either gets the point, or finds his country sidelined. It's that simple.

You really think this stopped at the end of the cold war? Interesting...

"Bullshit questions" is the exact quote. They were not bullshit questions...

You avoid discussion because if you discussed it honestly you would have acknowledge that my points are valid.

Read what you wrote. You want validation and you don't want to have to come up with a convincing argument to get there. Again, that's not how life works.

It's curious how I am supposed to follow the advice given to me, yet no one else has to follow or even discuss the advice I am offering on how to improve the Democratic Party and our political system.

Many here have tried, but what we have responded with does not validate you so it is dismissed. Well, except for the operational stuff. In the time it took to write the above quoted sentence, you could have fixed your name link. In the time it took to write all you have written on this page you could have updated your site and started the return to a page rank that anyone interested could find your site. This is rudimentary web mastering and you are pathetically bad at it and not even trying to improve. Why should anyone take you seriously?

But Hillary's tits and Putin's tats don't line up so well when you take into account that Russia has also gotten into interfering lately with elections in Germany, France, Poland, Ukraine, etc., and of course, Brexit, wherein the British have discovered an embarrassing amount of pro-Brexit support coming from Moscow rather than Wales.

Draw all of the Cold-War US policy analogies you want, this is the new world order, wherein Russia is openly attempting to destabilize Western Democracies. Screw the lefty false equivalence, there is none in the modern world.

Hey Liz, remember our brief exchange about Biden yesterday? Trump must have spotted it, and devoted a tweet to it this morning, taking the opportunity to trash-talk our favorite blue collar hero. That was diversionary tactic #1.

In the meantime, Fox is trying (and not for the last time, 'natch) to suggest that criticism of Trump could hurt the chances of Red State Democrats in the midterms. I expect the headline CRITICISM OF TRUMP CREATES SPLIT IN DEMOCRATIC PARTY to be something of a masthead over there for the next few months, as Fox tries desperately to focus its voters away from dissent among Republicants over Trump's treasonous escapades, and toward the small handful of (possibly) vulnerable Democrats.

Maybe they can get some Russian help with that.

You're joking, right? Don't take my word for it, look in to the issue yourself. And not just currently, but go back to the end of the WWII all the way to now and in to the future. Stick to only media sources you trust. I think you will find that the Russians are amateurs in comparison. The false equivalency may be there but the reverse of what you think...

I hope you're not playing the false equivalency game.

Because what the Russians did in the 2016 election is qualitatively different from what is the normal course of business in the spy world.

Let's have a security versus privacy discussion! If I thought that this was a place where that could happen in an intelligent and civil manner, I'd say yes but, it's not, so I'm not interested.

“I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on here!”

-Capt. Louis Renault

my best 'trump's razor' explanation is that the last person donald talked to before the press conference told him something that sounded good, so he repeated it without considering whether or not it conflicted with his prepared remarks.

@don,

refusing to fix your link is not by itself a reason to ignore your comments, but it's symbolic of your overall pattern, which is to demand a conversation on your own terms, while refusing to even attempt to implement simple, helpful suggestions. that pattern makes people feel like you're arguing in bad faith, and stops them from wanting to try to participate in meaningful discussion with you. ultimately, that's what the "vinegar" comment was an analogy for.

JL

For some reason, the sanctions were not lifted...

Lifting the sanctions was always the quid pro quo. The IC had Trump nailed before he was sworn in. Rexxon was Putin's pick.

Butina and her handler Torshin were all set to meet with Benedict Donald in early February before a prayer breakfast, which meeting was cancelled the night before for what should now be obvious reasons to anyone paying attention.

I'll have to try again to think of a real Trump's Razor explanation for why the President is acting like Putin's batboy.

Simple answer: Consciousness of guilt. He knows what he did, and he was well aware that Comey and a large chunk of the IC knew before he was sworn in and that Mueller has therefore always known.

I'm not sure I got the timing of the end of Act II right, either. I'm not even sure any more that it's a three-act play.

You're right about this, though. It isn't remotely a play in three Acts. It is more like a giant book... oh, let's say... The Holy Bible. There's multiple books and two giant sections. In the Old Testament, you will find names like Cohn, Rybolovlev, Deripaska, Sater, el alia, and in the New Testament, you will find names like Cohen, Flynn, Agalarov, Assange, Putin, et alia. Manafort and Stone are the glue that binds all the books.

Sater and Flynn have beautiful singing voices. Stay tuned.

Very well said, sir. I loved every one of them! :)

The Russian spy's charging documents today jogged my memory of that. In them, there is the story that right after the election the spy passed up the intellegence that Romney was Trump's choice for Secretary. of State. Russian trolls and bots went to work, and as quick as you can say "sanction-blocked Exxon-Rosneft joint venture on half a trillion dollars worth of energy," Eagle Scout and recipient from Putin of the Russian Order of Friendship medal, Rex Tillerson, was sworn in instead.

It was also noted that Christopher Steele spoke to the OSC shortly after the election wherein he related Moscow around-the-water-cooler talk in Lavrov's department that the Kremlin had successfully blocked Trump's choice of Mitt Romney.

Hmm. Upon reflection, I see that wasn't really an example of Trump's Razor at all. Rather, it was Occam's Razor. Of course, in any case, that can't be an explanation any more. For some reason, the sanctions were not lifted, and, as described in the link below, on Feb 28th this year, XOM pulled out of the joint venture. On March 31st, Tillerson resigned his job at State. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/business/energy-environment/exxon-russia.html

I'll have to try again to think of a real Trump's Razor explanation for why the President is acting like Putin's batboy. Maybe get it right this time. Have to hurry, though, because things are really starting to snowball. I'm not sure I got the timing of the end of Act II right, either. I'm not even sure any more that it's a three-act play.

Don, no one is going to take you seriously until you take yourself seriously. How many months has it been since your name link broke? Click, enter data, click. That's it, but still too hard for you. Without knowing the suffix to your site you basically do not exist on the internet. This has turned into a truly twisted ego trip, hitchcockian in nature...

Sorry, but Comrade Trump has been a BIG fan of the Colombian Marching Powder for decades! Remember his sniffling debate performances? As the late Carrie Fisher noted when asked if Trump’s sniffles were the signs of a coke-head:

I am an expert & ABSOLUTELY

Maybe it would be more honest to call your group “Demand of One”! If you spent half of time you spend on here nagging CW actually working on creating a reputable non-profit, you might see bigger results!

Maybe it would be more honest to call your group “Demand of One”! If you spent half of time you spend on here nagging CW actually working on creating a reputable non-profit, you might see bigger results!

Maybe it would be more honest to call your group “Demand of One”! If you spent half of time you spend on here nagging CW actually working on creating a reputable non-profit, you might see bigger results!

Maybe it would be more honest to call your group “Demand of One”! If you spent half of time you spend on here nagging CW actually working on creating a reputable non-profit, you might see bigger results!

Maybe it would be more honest to call your group “Demand of One”! If you spent half of time you spend on here nagging CW actually working on creating a reputable non-profit, you might see bigger results!

Trump walked-back his walk-back. Was this a rare triple negative? Or maybe a re-walk of his original statement?

Not to worry, events moved on and Press Secretary
Sarah Sanders boldly walked-back the walk-back of the original walk-back for an unprecedented quadruple negative! The degree of difficulty of that move is roughly the presser equivalent of a skater nailing a quad lutz. The audience was stunned, and even Sanders looked like she didn't quite believe she had pulled it off.