This definitely sounds like it’s worth trying, and it turns out that there’s at least one prominent politician who’s a fan of this idea. I do have the intuition that almost none of them would actually do it, because having more money directly benefits their staff.
Good point. I suppose I could end up being more optimistic because
some politicians might think supporting it will, all in all, still make it more likely for them to win office
they might not believe that too many people would take part in this, so they could win relatively cheap virtue points
they might just be convinced that this is a great idea and are open to testing it out with voters
no idea if true, but I imagine many politicians also don’t have too close relationships with a significant proportion of their (seasonal?) campaign staff and have enough slack cutting other things if necessary? Or to rely more on volunteers?
Probably it would help if you could find ways for the politicians to reap as much positive public recognition from this as possible, e.g. trying to place things like „Voters of both Richard Roe and Jane Doe donated 30.000$ as part of the One America Charity Campaign“ in the local news. Maybe also by letting them recommend a charity they’d like to be associated with.
Another thought, I guess you might face less opposition in areas where campaigning is less professionalized and connected to the respective party‘s campaign apparatuses, who I guess will not like this idea (assuming they exist).
This definitely sounds like it’s worth trying, and it turns out that there’s at least one prominent politician who’s a fan of this idea. I do have the intuition that almost none of them would actually do it, because having more money directly benefits their staff.
Good point. I suppose I could end up being more optimistic because
some politicians might think supporting it will, all in all, still make it more likely for them to win office
they might not believe that too many people would take part in this, so they could win relatively cheap virtue points
they might just be convinced that this is a great idea and are open to testing it out with voters
no idea if true, but I imagine many politicians also don’t have too close relationships with a significant proportion of their (seasonal?) campaign staff and have enough slack cutting other things if necessary? Or to rely more on volunteers?
Probably it would help if you could find ways for the politicians to reap as much positive public recognition from this as possible, e.g. trying to place things like „Voters of both Richard Roe and Jane Doe donated 30.000$ as part of the One America Charity Campaign“ in the local news. Maybe also by letting them recommend a charity they’d like to be associated with.
Another thought, I guess you might face less opposition in areas where campaigning is less professionalized and connected to the respective party‘s campaign apparatuses, who I guess will not like this idea (assuming they exist).