Changes

For example, a year ago the public was not paying attention to [[Terri Schiavo|Terri Schiavo-Schindler]].  Yet people worked very hard to [[election|elect]] [[Republican]] [[Jeb Bush]] [[governor]] of [[Florida]], and also to [[election|elect]] a [[Republican]] [[legislature]].  Those who voted for [[Jeb Bush|Bush]] expected him to do the right thing on existing [[issue]]s, and unforeseeable [[issue]]s.  And he did: he recently signed a new [[law]] that saved [[Terri Schiavo|Terri's]] [[life]].   

For example, a year ago the public was not paying attention to [[Terri Schiavo|Terri Schiavo-Schindler]].  Yet people worked very hard to [[election|elect]] [[Republican]] [[Jeb Bush]] [[governor]] of [[Florida]], and also to [[election|elect]] a [[Republican]] [[legislature]].  Those who voted for [[Jeb Bush|Bush]] expected him to do the right thing on existing [[issue]]s, and unforeseeable [[issue]]s.  And he did: he recently signed a new [[law]] that saved [[Terri Schiavo|Terri's]] [[life]].   

[[Party]] [[loyalist]]s try to put [[people]] who think like them into office and then let them make the [[decision]]s.  Let the [[experts]] – the right [[expert]]s – handle the [[issue]]s as they develop.  Work on placing the right people on the field, as in [[sport]]s, and then let them play the [[game]] as best they can.

[[Party]] [[loyalist]]s try to put [[people]] who think like them into office and then let them make the [[decision]]s.  Let the [[expert]]s – the right [[expert]]s – handle the [[issue]]s as they develop.  Work on placing the right people on the field, as in [[sport]]s, and then let them play the [[game]] as best they can.

This approach takes a dim view of spending [[time]] trying to persuade someone in an opposing [[political parties|political party]].  It is often a waste of [[time]].  You can spend [[hour]]s, [[day]]s or even [[week]]s trying to persuade a member of a [[political party]] to do something, only to find him [[vote|voting]] as his leadership told him to.  It is unrealistic to think you can persuade a [[Democrat]] to support the [[Republican]] [[George W. Bush|President Bush]] in a public way.  Spend your limited [[time]] building your favorite [[party]] rather than trying to persuade likely opponents.

This approach takes a dim view of spending [[time]] trying to persuade someone in an opposing [[political parties|political party]].  It is often a waste of [[time]].  You can spend [[hour]]s, [[day]]s or even [[week]]s trying to persuade a member of a [[political party]] to do something, only to find him [[vote|voting]] as his leadership told him to.  It is unrealistic to think you can persuade a [[Democrat]] to support the [[Republican]] [[George W. Bush|President Bush]] in a public way.  Spend your limited [[time]] building your favorite [[party]] rather than trying to persuade likely opponents.

[[Interest group]]s take a different approach.  They say that [[Republican]]s will be [[Republican]]s, and [[Democrat]]s will be [[Democrat]]s.  It’s been true for 140 [[year]]s, and could be true for another 140 [[year]]s.  They do not see one [[party]] winning over the other.  Instead, try to work with both [[political parties|parties]] on a particular [[issue]].

[[Interest group]]s take a different approach.  They say that [[Republican]]s will be [[Republican]]s, and [[Democrat]]s will be [[Democrat]]s.  It’s been true for 140 [[year]]s, and could be true for another 140 [[year]]s.  They do not see one [[party]] winning over the other.  Instead, try to work with both [[political parties|parties]] on a particular [[issue]].

Also, [[interest group]]s [[focus]] on one or a few [[issue]]s to maximize their impact.  Many [[pro-life]]rs feel that [[abortion]] is by far the most important [[issue]] in [[U.S.A.|America]].  No other [[politics|political issue]] is even close.  They do not care if someone is [[Democrat]]ic or [[Republican]], [[Libertarian]] or [[Green]] (pro-[[environment]]).  What is his or her position on [[abortion]]?  That is the only [[question]] needed to be asked, some feel.

Also, [[interest group]]s [[focus]] on one or a few [[issue]]s to maximize their impact.  Many [[pro-life]]rs feel that [[abortion]] is by far the most important [[issue]] in [[United States of America|America]].  No other [[politics|political issue]] is even close.  They do not care if someone is [[Democrat]]ic or [[Republican]], [[Libertarian]] or [[Green]] (pro-[[environment]]).  What is his or her position on [[abortion]]?  That is the only [[question]] needed to be asked, some feel.

A [[political|parties|party]] worker, even a [[pro-life]] one, will tell you that all [[issue]]s are connected and often it is difficult to win on one [[issue]] without winning others.  For example, winning on the [[pro-life]] [[issue]] requires reestablishing respect for [[human being|human]] [[life]].  It may take changing what is taught in [[public schools]], where over 90% of [[U.S.A.|America]]ns form their [[belief]]s.  If [[people]] think [[human being|human]]s are just [[animal]] [[tissue]] because they were taught that in [[public schools|school]], then they may not become [[pro-life]].

A [[political|parties|party]] worker, even a [[pro-life]] one, will tell you that all [[issue]]s are connected and often it is difficult to win on one [[issue]] without winning others.  For example, winning on the [[pro-life]] [[issue]] requires reestablishing respect for [[human being|human]] [[life]].  It may take changing what is taught in [[public schools]], where over 90% of [[United States of America|America]]ns form their [[belief]]s.  If [[people]] think [[human being|human]]s are just [[animal]] [[tissue]] because they were taught that in [[public schools|school]], then they may not become [[pro-life]].

The [[interest group]]s will respond by saying that if a [[candidate]] is wrong on the [[pro-life]] [[issue]], then that [[politician]] is usually wrong on everything else too.  [[Vote]]rs don’t have the [[time]] or interest to find out where [[candidate]]s stand on numerous [[issue]]s.  Besides, [[candidates]] often [[deceit|lie]].  Find out where a [[candidate]] stands on the [[pro-life|life issue]], and the rest is obvious.

The [[interest group]]s will respond by saying that if a [[candidate]] is wrong on the [[pro-life]] [[issue]], then that [[politician]] is usually wrong on everything else too.  [[Vote]]rs don’t have the [[time]] or interest to find out where [[candidate]]s stand on numerous [[issue]]s.  Besides, [[candidates]] often [[deceit|lie]].  Find out where a [[candidate]] stands on the [[pro-life|life issue]], and the rest is obvious.