I’d expect the most common failure mode for rationalists here is not understanding how patronage networks work.
Even if you do everything else right, it is very hard to get elected to a position of power if the other guy is distributing the office’s resources for votes.
You should be able to map out the voting blocs and what their criteria are, i.e. “Union X and its 500 members will mostly vote for Incumbent Y because they get $X in contracts per year etc”
The mapping of voting blocs seems like a really good idea, very actionable, and a great way to visualize who could be electing you. Putting their requirements, or encouragements out in a visual way, to weigh where the least action can cause the greatest gain.
I think that the situation I’m considering has an intensely powerful patronage network that it can relatively easily attach itself to. Other patronage networks will also be necessary.
I’d expect the most common failure mode for rationalists here is not understanding how patronage networks work.
Even if you do everything else right, it is very hard to get elected to a position of power if the other guy is distributing the office’s resources for votes.
You should be able to map out the voting blocs and what their criteria are, i.e. “Union X and its 500 members will mostly vote for Incumbent Y because they get $X in contracts per year etc”
The mapping of voting blocs seems like a really good idea, very actionable, and a great way to visualize who could be electing you. Putting their requirements, or encouragements out in a visual way, to weigh where the least action can cause the greatest gain.
I think that the situation I’m considering has an intensely powerful patronage network that it can relatively easily attach itself to. Other patronage networks will also be necessary.