爱问免费资料下载

中国特色70周年道路

来源:今日聚超值

2019-11-20 02:47:22|爱问免费资料下载

  

  Youth turnout in the November 2018 election was by the far the highest it’s been in a midterm election in the last 25 years, and probably ever. That record high was … 31 percent.

  That means that nearly 70 percent of eligible voters under 30 stayed home. That’s at least better than the 80 percent who stayed home in previous midterms.

  Here’s another statistic: Young people support Democratic candidates by a 2-to-1 margin.

  They just don’t bother to vote their choices. If the Democrats can change that, they’ll win more elections.

  Earlier in Fixes, I wrote about what the United States could do to raise voter turnout: make voter registration automatic, hold elections on Sundays — things almost every mature democracy does.

  A healthy democracy needs more participation in general. Winning elections, however, requires candidates to identify, mobilize and turn out their own supporters. There are a lot of new technological tools to do this. But one important innovation doesn’t require technology. It’s based on a strategy that’s not new at all. It relies on the most powerful motivator of youth: friends.

  Here’s an example: In 2014, Sangeeth Peruri decided to run for the school board in his hometown Los Altos, Calif. He was active in his son’s school — his daughter was a toddler — and on school district committees. Mr. Peruri had been an investment manager and was a pretty good amateur athlete: he competed to get on Season 6 of the televised competition American Ninja Warrior (Here’s the video he made when applying to compete in the seventh season).

  In his race for the school board, two other candidates were from a local charter school that was in a land dispute with the neighborhood schools. A statewide political action committee, the California Charter School Association, poured money into the race. The two pro-charter candidates spent about 0,000 — in a school district with about 30,000 voters. Mr. Peruri said he spent about ,000, plus filing fees.

  The race was ugly. Mr. Peruri said that someone wrote letters, mostly anonymous, to the local papers and to his endorsers and major supporters, insinuating a falsehood: that he had been connected with insider trading in his former job. Some of his supporters, concerned, asked him to retire from the campaign. “It was a traumatic experience,” he said. “Just reliving it gives me the chills” Campaigning became impossible. “Phone calls and door to door didn’t work any more,” he said. “People didn’t know whether to trust you or the rumors.”

  The turning point came when a woman came up to him and told him he had her vote. “What convinced you?” he asked. “Coach K told me to vote for you,” she said.

  Coach K led a math competition team that a large number of young students had joined. “It struck me that if I’m going to win this race, I have to find the Coach Ks,” Mr. Peruri said. He mapped out the town’s schools, churches, sports programs and civic groups, identifying their leaders. He met them, talked to them and asked them to talk to their friends. He found residents who would invite him to neighborhood block parties and introduce him around. “I looked for any group that had strong ties in the community,” he said.

  Mr. Peruri won, and served as president of the school board.

  That, of course, is how local campaigns used to work: candidates won votes by having personal conversations with real people.

  But it isn’t any more. Now candidates spend their time on the phone with rich people, raising money so they can buy television and Facebook ads — often ads that seek to mobilize voters by getting them angry, ads that polarize and degrade civic life. Organizing is often done by volunteers contacting people they don’t know. “I’ve found it really peculiar that everything we do in campaigns is stranger-to-stranger outreach,” Mr. Peruri said.

  How can we replicate Coach K for the modern world?

  Mr. Peruri is trying to do that. He created a program called VoterCircle, one of several new apps and strategies to get people to encourage friends to vote. This very old idea has a new, fancy name — “relational organizing.” What’s new is the debut of software that allows campaigns to do this strategically and track the results. “The new tools enable campaigns to make these asks of organizers more targeted and more integrated into their organizing program,” said Tara McGowan, founder and chief executive of Acronym, an organization that builds digital tools for progressive candidates.

  We know that when people are unsure of something, they rely on advice from friends. The most dramatic proof that this applies to voting comes from a Facebook experiment on Election Day 2010 involving 61 million people. It found that a message at the top of their feeds with voting information and an “I Voted” button only brought results (including an actual increase in voting) if it contained pictures of people’s Facebook friends who had voted. Absent this peer proof, information about voting didn’t work. The study also looked at those Facebook users’ friends and found a contagion effect — but only among close friends.

  So far, the new relational organizing tools are used mostly by Democrats. But Republicans will catch up. “The Democratic Party has always been the party of organizing,” Ms. McGowan said. “Republicans rely more on messaging and communications, and they are more sophisticated about it in a lot of ways.” Friend-to-friend organizing works particularly well with the Democratic electorate, which is heavy on young people and minorities.

  One app is for citizens (of either party), not campaigns. VoteWithMe crosses your phone contacts with voter registries. It can tell which friends live in swing districts — and whether they voted (but not how they voted, of course) in the last few elections. This gives you a list of the highest-impact potential voters to nudge, however you wish.

  What might help make VoteWithMe effective is the shame factor. Many people are startled to know that their friends can see whether they voted — and that’s an incentive to vote.

  OutVote is a bit more formal. You use the app to join progressive campaigns and advocacy on issues that you choose. (The app is free to volunteers but charges the campaigns and organizations.) At the campaign’s request, you ask your friends to show up at events, donate, vote and do other tasks. In that way, the app turns volunteers into mini-organizers.

  Mr. Peruri’s VoterCircle is a tool for campaigns — it’s free for small campaigns, but charges bigger ones. Campaigns ask volunteers to download VoterCircle, which compares their email and phone contact lists with the voter registry, creating a list of people eligible to support the candidate. It gives volunteers a message that they can personalize and text or email to their friends. The program tracks who has been contacted and how they responded.

  No one advocates using only relational organizing; it’s one strategy among many. And like anything new, it has issues. (Acronym has done detailed analyses of these and other digital political tools.)

  “The biggest dig is it’s really effective for a small group, but it doesn’t scale,” said Jessica Alter, co-founder of Tech for Campaigns, which provides expert tech volunteers to progressive campaigns. Other issues: new software can be buggy, and if it’s hard to use, volunteers won’t download and use the programs. And they’re only as good as the data they rely on. That’s problematic. Voter rolls, for example, have only addresses, but people’s contact lists usually have only phone numbers and emails. “If they’re common names, we have the user specify which voter is their friend,” Mr. Peruri said. “We have algorithms to improve the matching. But it’s never perfect.”

  What about the Coach Ks? To find what VoterCircle calls “super influencers,” the program maps out contact networks and identifies people at the center of the densest nodes — people who could influence hundreds of voters. It tells the campaign which supporters know that person. So the candidate can meet Coach K through a friend — no cold-calling.

  Mr. Peruri said that about 2,000 progressive campaigns and organizations have used VoterCircle since 2016. A researcher looked at the effects in one election, a mail-only special election for a school tax in Menlo Park, Calif. Getting a VoterCircle email from a friend was associated with at least a 25 percent greater likelihood of voting — an enormous effect. But this was a small sample, not a randomized trial, and the kind of election where such a program is most effective: one where people have little information and few turn out.

  Vote Tripling is very new — used in only a handful of campaigns last year — and something different. It’s not software; it’s an idea. Campaigns normally ask supporters to pledge to vote. The Vote Tripling strategy asks them instead to pledge to remind three friends to vote.

  It works like this: Campaigns ask their supporters to choose three friends they will remind to vote, and to tell the campaigns their first names. On the day before Election Day, the campaign goes back to supporters — by text, phone call or in person — and reminds them that they pledged to nudge Joe, Jane and Harriet to vote.

  The number three is important. Too much choice is overwhelming, said Robert Reynolds, a behavioral scientist who devised Vote Tripling. “If you ask people to get 10 friends to vote, they’ll get zero,” he said. “If you ask them to get three, they’ll get three.” It’s also crucial to get people to choose in advance the friends who need nudges. “This decision of which friends they will mobilize is sufficiently hard that people will procrastinate,” he said.

  There are only bits of evidence so far that Vote Tripling works — nonpublished preliminary results of one randomized control trial found that friends contacted by vote triplers were twice as likely to vote. But Mr. Reynolds argues that there’s no reason not to try it. A non-activist might not download an organizing app, but she’ll gladly ask three friends to vote. (Non-activists are actually more effective at mobilizing others than activists are.) It’s free, and there’s no opportunity cost. It treats people as leaders — less patronizing than asking them to commit to vote. He said one campaign got 3,000 people to take a vote tripling pledge in two hours.

  Mr. Reynolds supports Democrats, but he’s happy to have Republicans use Vote Tripling, because he thinks it’s good for the political system. Friend-to-friend organizing isn’t just a way to raise turnout. It could be a way to democratize democracy — to push candidates a little bit out of rooms with rich people into rooms with neighborhood leaders and to help ordinary people understand and use their influence. With their friends, Mr. Reynolds said, “I’m just some random dude. But you, sir or ma’am, you are powerful.”

  Tina Rosenberg won a Pulitzer Prize for her book “The Haunted Land: Facing Europe’s Ghosts After Communism.” She is a former editorial writer for The Times and the author, most recently, of ”Join the Club: How Peer Pressure Can Transform the World>” and the World War II spy story e-book “D for Deception.”

  To receive email alerts for Fixes columns, sign up here.

  The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

  Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

B:

  

  爱问免费资料下载【黑】【骷】【髅】【顿】【了】【顿】,【又】【说】:“【坏】【人】【好】【人】【都】【是】【人】,【既】【然】【都】【是】【人】,【为】【什】【么】【你】【们】【杀】【我】【们】【的】【时】【候】【义】【愤】【填】【膺】,【我】【们】【杀】【你】【们】【的】【时】【候】【却】【是】【十】【恶】【不】【赦】?【莫】【非】【你】【们】【不】【是】【娘】【生】【的】,【是】【从】【天】【上】【下】【凡】【的】【神】【仙】【吗】!【但】【即】【便】【是】【神】【仙】,【也】【与】【我】【们】【有】【多】【大】【差】【别】,【难】【道】【我】【们】【就】【是】【比】【你】【们】【不】【堪】【吗】!” 【重】【生】【被】【说】【的】【哑】【口】【无】【言】,【一】【时】【间】【还】【真】【是】【无】【言】【以】【对】,【看】【看】【纪】【幽】,【看】

  【林】【菲】【樱】【不】【知】【道】【宋】【巧】【这】【样】【的】【应】【该】【怎】【么】【办】,【所】【以】【只】【能】【让】【她】【走】【了】。 【但】【是】【她】【却】【坐】【不】【住】【了】,【想】【了】【想】,【林】【菲】【樱】【就】【去】【了】【叶】【寒】【的】【房】【间】。 【叶】【寒】【还】【没】【有】【睡】【的】,【听】【见】【敲】【门】【声】【有】【些】【意】【外】,【这】【个】【时】【候】,【谁】【会】【来】【找】【他】【呢】? 【打】【开】【门】【一】【看】,【就】【看】【见】【林】【菲】【樱】【站】【在】【门】【外】,“【菲】【樱】,【你】【怎】【么】【来】【了】?” 【叶】【寒】【虽】【然】【疑】【惑】,【但】【还】【是】【让】【林】【菲】【樱】【进】【来】【了】。

  【崔】【文】【卿】【微】【笑】【拱】【手】,【侃】【侃】【而】【言】:“【三】【皇】【五】【帝】【不】【同】【法】,【夏】【商】【周】【朝】【不】【同】【制】,【春】【秋】【战】【国】【更】【是】【以】【变】【法】【为】【图】【强】【之】【本】,【秦】【朝】【商】【鞅】【变】【法】【强】【胜】【于】【西】【陲】,【故】【始】【皇】【帝】【才】【能】【奋】【六】【世】【之】【余】【烈】,【鲸】【吞】【四】【海】,【席】【卷】【八】【方】,【从】【根】【本】【到】【底】【只】【有】【两】【个】【字】,【那】【就】【是】【改】【变】!【改】【变】【旧】【制】【度】、【旧】【思】【想】、【旧】【行】【为】,【让】【它】【能】【够】【符】【合】【当】【代】【国】【情】【民】【情】【军】【情】!【这】【便】【是】【变】【法】【之】【根】【本】!”

  【网】【友】【们】【的】【态】【度】【各】【异】,【置】【身】【其】【中】【的】【人】【反】【应】【也】【各】【不】【相】【同】。 【休】【息】【室】【里】,【白】【灵】【脸】【色】【惨】【白】【地】【瘫】【倒】,【然】【后】【猛】【地】【惊】【醒】【似】【地】,【慌】【张】【地】【四】【处】【摸】【手】【机】。 【摸】【到】【之】【后】,【拨】【通】【柳】【肃】【的】【电】【话】【一】【瞬】,【她】【仿】【佛】【抓】【住】【了】【最】【后】【一】【根】【救】【命】【稻】【草】,【双】【眼】【放】【光】【地】【喊】: “【柳】【总】!【救】【我】!【救】【我】!” 【妆】【容】【精】【致】【却】【形】【容】【狼】【狈】【的】【女】【子】【开】【始】【崩】【溃】【地】【大】【哭】:“【我】【求】【你】,

  【到】【现】【在】【易】【陌】【声】【都】【在】【想】【鹤】【梦】【当】【时】【是】【不】【是】【早】【就】【知】【道】【了】【他】【的】【脾】【气】,【那】【个】【时】【候】【只】【是】【装】【作】【一】【副】【新】【来】【的】【样】【子】,【好】【让】【他】【带】【她】【走】。 “【我】【接】【受】【过】【杀】【手】【训】【练】!【我】【只】【是】【因】【为】【得】【罪】【了】【一】【个】【人】【才】【来】【到】【这】【里】【的】!【你】【带】【我】【走】【吧】!”【鹤】【梦】【抓】【住】【了】【易】【陌】【声】【保】【镖】【的】【西】【服】。 【易】【陌】【声】【本】【来】【是】【没】【有】【停】【留】【的】,【但】【是】【听】【到】【了】【鹤】【梦】【的】【话】【倒】【是】【来】【了】【兴】【趣】。 【那】【天】【鹤】【梦】【穿】爱问免费资料下载【燕】【一】【鸣】【用】【自】【己】【的】【衣】【衫】【裹】【着】【笙】【月】【的】【尸】【体】,【亲】【自】【抱】【着】【笙】【月】【下】【山】,【笙】【月】【身】【上】【的】【血】【迹】【都】【已】【经】【干】【了】,【尸】【体】【也】【早】【已】【经】【冰】【冷】【冰】【冷】,【剩】【下】【的】【半】【张】【脸】【被】【化】【好】【的】【新】【娘】【妆】【也】【已】【经】【花】【了】,【已】【经】【发】【黑】【的】【脸】【色】【有】【些】【惨】【不】【忍】【睹】,【他】【们】【五】【个】【人】【谁】【也】【没】【有】【开】【口】【说】【话】,【谁】【都】【面】【对】【不】【了】,【笙】【璃】【的】【眼】【睛】【因】【为】【哭】【的】【太】【厉】【害】【一】【度】【睁】【不】【开】【眼】,【一】【宿】【没】【有】【闭】【眼】【加】【上】【哭】【的】【一】【发】【不】【可】

  “【铛】~” 【一】【枚】【龟】【甲】【赶】【在】【那】【刀】【划】【下】【的】【时】【候】【挡】【在】【了】【魏】【飞】【飞】【的】【身】【前】。【她】【马】【上】【矮】【身】【朝】【后】【快】【速】【退】【后】【几】【步】,【拉】【开】【与】【面】【前】【人】【的】【距】【离】。 “【你】【疯】【了】?!” 【魏】【飞】【飞】【看】【着】【眼】【前】【人】【气】【到】。 【然】【而】,【面】【前】【的】【那】【个】“【于】【微】”【却】【不】【管】【不】【顾】【地】【挥】【起】【手】【中】【的】【剑】【继】【续】【朝】【着】【她】【砍】【来】。 【魏】【飞】【飞】【正】【要】【咬】【牙】【迎】【上】【去】。 【突】【然】,【前】【面】【黑】【影】【一】【闪】,【还】【没】【看】

  【苏】【白】【没】【听】【明】【白】:“【怎】【么】【你】【卖】【婚】【纱】,【还】【要】【给】【别】【人】【钱】?” 【小】【唯】【撒】【娇】【道】:“【你】【先】【给】【我】【嘛】,【晚】【上】【我】【再】【给】【你】【慢】【慢】【解】【释】。” 【豆】【豆】【听】【到】“【晚】【上】”【这】【个】***,【也】【跑】【过】【来】,【两】【手】【搭】【在】【小】【唯】【的】【腿】【上】,【哈】【着】【气】【说】:“【那】【我】【也】【要】【听】。” “【好】【好】【好】,【晚】【上】【再】【告】【诉】【你】【们】。”【小】【唯】【把】【手】【机】【递】【过】【去】,“【你】【只】【需】【要】【按】【一】【下】【就】【行】【了】。” 【苏】【白】【低】

  “【唤】【一】【声】【嘛】!”【景】【凤】【扯】【着】【月】【华】【的】【胳】【膊】【撒】【娇】。 【景】【凤】【的】【磨】【功】【着】【实】【厉】【害】,【月】【华】【最】【终】【无】【奈】【地】【又】【唤】【了】【一】【声】,【景】【凤】【方】【才】【满】【意】【地】【拉】【着】【月】【华】【往】【茅】【屋】【走】。 【等】【二】【人】【到】【了】【小】【茅】【屋】,【四】【叔】【他】【们】【还】【没】【有】【回】【来】,【于】【是】【景】【凤】【与】【月】【华】【在】【大】【门】【外】【找】【了】【小】【木】【桩】【等】【着】。 【等】【着】【等】【着】,【景】【凤】【开】【始】【无】【聊】【了】,【她】【起】【身】【后】【在】【四】【处】【瞎】【逛】,【而】【月】【华】【远】【远】【地】【瞧】【着】【景】【凤】【这】【儿】

  【等】【再】【反】【应】【过】【来】【时】,【罗】【刹】【已】【经】【不】【见】【了】【踪】【影】。 【同】【时】【消】【失】【的】,【还】【有】【嗷】【鸣】【刚】【刚】【吃】【进】【肚】【子】【里】【的】【那】【只】【魔】【物】! “【嗷】【鸣】!” 【敖】【铭】【愤】【怒】【了】,【吼】【叫】【着】【去】【追】【只】【剩】【下】【一】【个】【小】【黑】【点】【的】【小】【剑】【灵】,【感】【觉】【整】【只】【龙】【都】【不】【好】【了】——【嗷】【鸣】【的】,【竟】【然】【敢】【抢】【我】【的】【食】【物】!【啊】【啊】【啊】! 【苏】【沫】【看】【着】【欢】【乐】【多】【的】【两】【个】【小】【娃】【娃】,【不】【由】【抽】【了】【抽】【嘴】【角】:“【刚】【刚】……【我】【好】【像】【看】