Monday, February 27, 2017

Why Attend Someone Else's Townhalls?

So continuing on from MP With or Without Erik and G2A Erik P: Wise or Chicken. Kelly, one of the organizers, noted that the meeting was advertised and that everyone was welcome.  So I posed some of our questions over at MP, unfortunately I have no answers yet
"Everyone was invited and welcome. There were Republicans, Democrats, and independents there. There was no screening. The invitation was on an open Facebook page, in the Sun Sailor--twice--and I believe was in church announcements." Kelly

"Question: So did you ever have any indication that Erik would come?

Or is this really just a way to rally the Liberals and gain additional supporters?

I mean it does seem like a brilliant method. Get everyone there and if Erik no shows, people may tend to think he is ignoring them. And if Erik shows and people share their sad stories and he has no immediate answers, he is shown to be unwilling to help.

My question is why would any rational person show up to these events? There seems to be no upside for them..." G2A
After thinking about it some, I guess it makes some sense for Erik not to show up.  I mean he ran as a Conservative, he got elected as a Conservative and therefore he is representing us as a Conservative.  What exactly is the value of attending a meeting where most of the people are the ones who did not vote for him???


And did the organizers think he should start acting like a Liberal after the election?  The whole thing is puzzling...

15 comments:

Laurie said...

I think my representative should schedule or show up to townhalls to answer constituent questions. It seems that Trump believes he only represents and cares about the 25% of the citizens who voted for him (in MN it is probably more like 35-40% who voted for him)

John said...

But what if you won't like their answers... Then what?

In Erik's case he ran as a Conservative and won. Do you think he should vote like a Liberal because a minority of the voters want him to?

Anonymous said...

Erik is a pretty weak guy, more comfortable doing sums in the Capitol basement than actually meeting constituents so it makes sense for him to avoid any but the most controlled public settings. If I were him, I would avoid town halls too.

--Hiram

Anonymous said...

Something I have talked about within my own party is that not showing up creates a political vacuum, that others to our disadvantage. Now that doesn't mean not showing up isn't the right choice. Often it is, and the reality is that no one can be everywhere, and Congress people are busy. But there is a price to be paid for being unavailable and it is up to Rep. Paulsen's adversaries job to make sure he pays it in full.

--Hiram

John said...

That is kind of what I think the organizers were trying to do.

No answers from Kelly over at MP yet...

Sean said...

"But what if you won't like their answers... Then what?"

I'm not expecting him to like my answers. But as my representative, he should hear my opinion, not just the opinion of those who agree with him.

John said...

However as Jerry noted, what ever happened to writing to one's representative?

Where is this desire to hold public outrage sessions coming from?

Anonymous said...

In fairness, legislators are very responsive to voter opinion. If you write your congressman a letter, there is actually a very good chance he will read it, and that's true for members of both parties. For one thing, legislators get hardly any letters these days, so when one appears in the office, it's quite an event.

==Hiram

Sean said...

The notion that an elected representative should be able to cloister themselves away from actual face-to-face interaction with their constituents is absurd.

John said...

I guess I have never gone to a Rep's office?

There is a big difference between face to face, and inviting them to be yelled at by the minority of voters.

Anonymous said...

The notion that an elected representative should be able to cloister themselves away from actual face-to-face interaction with their constituents is absurd.

They work you for you. If you don't like the way your elected official does his job, fire him and hire someone else.

"I guess I have never gone to a Rep's office?"

Been a while since I have been in DC but back in the day, congress people were very available to constituents when they s were around, but they are busy people obviously.

State legislators are very available, both in their offices and in their districts.

--Hiram

jerrye92002 said...

One recent Congressman set up a "town hall meeting" to speak directly to constituents. People signed up to be one of 5 people at a time invited, in 15-minute increments, to meet directly in the Congressman's office. It took over 3 hours for all the meetings, but there were no ugly "mob scenes" because there were no mobs, only truly concerned citizens, who got real attention from the Congressman. That tells you what you need to know about the mobs that show up at these quasi-riots, which is that they aren't "concerned citizens" by any stretch, and that they SHOULD be ignored.

John said...

Like the Paulson meeting invites... I think the devil is in the details...

Who did they invite, how were they invited, etc?

jerrye92002 said...

As far as I know it was an open invitation, they just "divided up" the participants. People behave MUCH better when they are in small groups than when they are part of a big mob. It's just that simple. If you want to talk to the Congressman, here's your chance. If you just want to cause a scene you don't need him involved and he should not be wasting his time with you.

You might criticize those "telephone town halls" on that basis. THOSE only invite people known to be interested in speaking to the Congressman, so Republicans invite only known Republicans, etc., AFAIK.

jerrye92002 said...

And some are making rules like "no signs." Does that seem unreasonable to you?