Artemis

I'm a bisexual anti-capitalist, artist, & aspiring propagandist. We're not free until we're *all* free.

Guillermo del Toro fan account. Anarchist pep-talks are provided free of charge. Solidarity forever!

Profile pic & banner are images of GI Robot from Creature Commandos

#nobot

Location: In your dreams
Pronouns: she/her, they/them

Public Key

npub1hpk989vztnk8wg536j7zyld778nf8jd96j6u95hw95xq98ah8dmsum88gd

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqstsmznjkp9emrhy2gaf0pz0kl0re5nexjafdwz6thz6rqzn7mnkacpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsgn3wfd

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1hpk989vztnk8wg536j7zyld778nf8jd96j6u95hw95xq98ah8dmsum88gd

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-09-11 16:28:10 GMT

- reply

9/11 "truthers" have sure been useful to these people too.
If you're conspiring to do something nasty, it's very helpful to have people out there coming up with ridiculous, convoluted theories, so that it's fucking hard for everyone else to look critically at the facts we really do know.
Wouldn't want to be one of those "crazies" after all.

2026-08-26 21:36:39 GMT

- reply

Bathroom bills are in many ways just a legal representation of the oppression trans people already face.
Does that make bathroom bills a fucking problem? Absolutely it does, but the oppression has to go, not just the parts that are directly enshrined in law.
If trans people are more likely to be in poverty, then any way that poverty is employed to hurt people is an attack on trans people (& Black people, & disabled people, etc.). The system is built to quietly kill the "undesirables".

2026-08-26 21:36:39 GMT

- reply

The servants of the oligarchs are not going to protect our trans siblings.
The oligarchs are doing EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER to maintain the system that kills trans people (& Black people, & disabled people, & [name a marginalization]).
And not just maintain it either! They want to expand it! Strengthen it! And they WILL do that no matter what letter is next to their puppet's name.

2026-08-26 21:29:13 GMT

- reply

A lot of cis folks who talk about "protecting trans people" do so from a very detached & theoretical point of view.
Trans people are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Like all forms of marginalization, trans people are more likely to be in poverty, less likely to have social support, etc.
If we actually accept that the problems they face go waaaaay beyond fucking bathroom bills, then we have to go waaaaay beyond voting for people to veto legislation like that.

2026-08-26 21:23:14 GMT

- reply

I will try to use any means I can to protect trans folks, but I'm not going to become a defender of the very system built to harm them in the process.
The trans genocide is happening RIGHT NOW. In some states, people have protection, but in many they don't, & persecuting trans people & denying them appropriate medical care & the right to exist in their own bodies however they want KILLS. So what the FUCK are the Dems in Congress fucking doing? Kids are DYING (not just kids either).

2026-08-26 21:23:13 GMT

- reply

If I want to protect my trans siblings, electing Democrats who *cannot be trusted* to protect them just is not going to do it. It's not.
I make my gambles on election day. I cross my fingers & pray that somehow this will help.
But that is not the work. Until this fucking cis-hetero, patriarchal, white-supremacist system is GONE, trans folks are going to be persecuted & marginalized.

2026-08-26 21:23:13 GMT

- reply

Tell ya what: I will probably shrug & fill in the little bubble next to David Crowley's name on my ballot in November. Why? Because I could at least hope that he would veto things like the anti-trans bills that the legislature has tried in the past to pass.
But understand: there is already a trans GENOCIDE under way in this country, & Dems are currently signaling that they want to back off from protecting trans people.

2026-08-26 21:08:13 GMT

- reply

We've got to stop serving these people. That's what we're doing when we *work harder than THEY do* to get them elected.
Someone like David Crowley is simply not doing the work. I don't understand how it would make sense to try to do the work for him. Are we going to try to get them elected in spite of themselves?
I don't know, man, maybe he wins, but I don't think so. And it will be because he decided not to try. This election should be a layup for Wisconsin Dems. If they fail, it's on them.

2026-08-26 21:04:19 GMT

- reply

If we can't talk openly & clearly about the behavior & actions of the politicians who supposedly are (or are trying to become) our representatives, then what the hell are we doing?
Why would we silence ourselves? If they have a problem with the truths we speak, they will address them. If they don't address them, I'm sorry to tell you, it's entirely possible they weren't particularly trying to win in the first place.

2026-08-26 21:01:36 GMT

- reply

Vote for who you like. If you think the most moral thing to do with your ballot is vote for "the lesser of two evils," I'm not going to tell you otherwise. I don't think we're going to deal with these problems at the ballot box.
But for the love of all that is good & beautiful, can we PLEASE stop protecting the people who are helping oligarchs MURDER us, starting with the most vulnerable? PLEASE stop putting their election chances ahead of truth & justice. PLEASE.

2026-08-26 20:59:17 GMT

- reply

Whether there are Republicans or Democrats in charge, the world still burns. Oligarchs still get to live lawlessly, destroying the lives of BILLIONS of people. Genocide remains something we just have to live with.
Enough already with placing all your focus on trying to stop Republicans. THIS is where that got us. Clearly something else is wrong, something much, much bigger.
Can we please be honest about it?

2026-08-26 20:54:25 GMT

- reply

But y'all, we *cannot* afford to shut up about the politicians that are selling us out.
I said we can't use the political system to solve the crises that face us—the ones that MUST be addressed—but you know what the system CAN be used for? Grave & grievous harm. And if we only talk about part of the political spectrum, then we're NEVER going to get people to understand what exactly these fucking oligarch's puppets are doing to us.

2026-08-26 20:54:25 GMT

- reply

Personally, I don't believe we can work within this system to repair the damage this system has done, BUT it would be useful in the short-term if we could have some actually honest folks who will actually work to help people in political office. It won't solve the crisis, but it could alleviate some pain.
So I get that. It's why I got excited for Francesca Hong. I thought "this woman might actually do some good & might actually try to represent me." I thought that would be kind of neat.

2026-08-26 20:54:24 GMT

- reply

If we keep limiting our interaction with the world of politics to short sighted attempts to get the "lesser of two evils" win, we're clearly not on the path to making those *necessary* outcomes happen.
It's time to expand our imagination both within & outside of electoral politics.
If you're going to be involved in elections, then put your effort into electing people who will ACTUALLY stand up & do what's right, because anything short of that won't do.

2026-08-26 20:54:24 GMT

- reply

Y'all, we gotta get serious about the state of electoral politics & understand that letting everything that matters to us slide just because we're scared of a Republican victory has been TRIED & THIS is where it got us.
Doing that didn't get us the outcomes we desperately need: climate justice & environmental repair, an end to genocide, secure rights for marginalized people, & healthcare, food, & water as universal basic rights.

2026-08-26 20:26:25 GMT

- reply

Unless we're going by "butterfly flaps its wings" rules... In which case, I have NO WAY of knowing how my actions will affect anything, because I have NO WAY of knowing what chain of events they will set off.

2026-08-26 20:24:39 GMT

- reply

If David Crowley doesn't start running his campaign like he wants to win, he is going to lose. He just is.
I won't be the one making it happen. He needs to actually hire some campaign staff for starters.
To anyone concerned about me "hurting his chances," if I had that kind of sway, I would be doing a lot more useful stuff than this.
Documenting this political malpractice is a public service. People deserve to know & understand how "political representation" works.

2026-08-26 20:20:17 GMT

- reply

We're clearly not going to see eye-to-eye on this. If it gets picked up by the news, GOOD. Maybe he'll change his campaign.
Right now it's pretty clear to me he's not trying very hard to win. He's going to lose unless he starts trying.

2026-08-26 20:16:40 GMT

- reply

I mean, what if it's a wake-up call that makes him actually get his shit together? Or do you not believe that he would change what he is doing?

2026-08-26 20:14:03 GMT

- reply

BUT on the wild off-chance that I help the Crowley campaign realize what they are doing to their campaign by completely shutting out the general public, I might actually have HELPED him win.

2026-08-26 20:14:02 GMT

- reply

If David Crowley won't respond to voters at all, I won't be the reason he loses. I just won't. That's not possible for ME to be at fault for that. No matter what I do, I'm not going to cause the outcome that David Crowley lost because he wouldn't listen to me. Because if he wouldn't listen to me, he wouldn't listen to anyone.

2026-08-26 19:41:30 GMT

- reply

I'm not lying when I leave a message on the Wis Dems voicemail saying I'm concerned that this behavior & type of campaign could cost David the election. I really think it could.
Honestly, I kind of AM doing free work for Democrats because I'm trying to get them to notice that they're screwing up. That's nice of me, isn't it?

2026-08-26 19:39:42 GMT

- reply

It's one thing to mark your ballot & cross your fingers that this person will be better than the alternative.
It's another thing to take on the responsibility of being the ambassador for someone who literally could not care less about you.

2026-08-26 19:39:42 GMT

- reply

But frankly, I think this problem with the Crowley campaign IS a losing strategy, & if he doesn't shape up & start making people feel heard, then he's going to lose badly, & it won't be MY fault. In fact...I tried to tell him.

2026-08-26 19:37:24 GMT

- reply

Like "vote blue no matter who" has got us acting like their servants. Why would WE make excuses for THEM? Who is in the service of who here?
Vote for who you like, but if you're worried about hurting someone's chance to get elected by being honest about what they are doing, then...what are we doing here? What is that? Why is it our job to elect them? This can't be fucking right.

2026-08-26 19:34:31 GMT

- reply

Y'all, it is not OUR job to protect politicians' reputations. It's THEIR job to convince people they are trustworthy. And you know how they could do that? By demonstrating trustworthiness.
How are we all in a mindset that WE work for politicians & not the other way around?
It is THEIR job to satisfy US. It is not YOUR job to advance their career.

2026-08-26 19:32:04 GMT

- reply

I am not a slave to the Democratic party. I do not do work for campaigns for free. I do not shut up about my discontent. If my discontent is hurting their election chances, then they should do something about it.

2026-08-26 19:31:02 GMT

- reply

Why would it be my job to protect David Crowley's reputation? I'm not going to do free work for a politician who has contempt for me.
It is simply not my responsibility to guard his reputation, & in fact I think we need honesty & openness about ALL candidates. I may yet vote for him in November, but if he wants to protect his reputation, then HE needs to do that. He could do that here by addressing the situation & actually running a campaign where it feels like he's listening.

2026-08-26 19:31:02 GMT

- reply

And frankly, how much harm do you think his campaign is already doing to his chances, by leaving every single person who tries to reach out to him hanging? It's kind of "invisible" but you don't think anyone has lost faith in him due to this malpractice?

2026-08-26 19:25:53 GMT

- reply

I mean seriously, they get to just decide that they don't need to hear ANYTHING AT ALL from the general public, & we're supposed to accept & respect that choice?
I don't. I simply don't. I don't think that a campaign like this has any right to shut us out & not even try to talk to us. They don't. And I am making it clear in my communications that this is no longer about having a question or two: this is about whether David Crowley will listen to people.

2026-08-26 19:22:01 GMT

- reply

So what am I doing here?
1) confirming my suspicions about the Crowley campaign's mismanagement
2) testing if there is any way to break through to a candidate who has chosen to deliberately avoid voters
3) pressing through on behalf of the many people who must have given up after 1 or 2 or 3 attempts. It's so un-fucking-fair that these folks get to have everything their way just because most people don't have the time or energy to get themselves heard.

2026-08-26 19:19:05 GMT

- reply

Unfortunately there are no other options here. Yes, I think they probably do find this ridiculous at very least, but the alternative is just to accept the wall they have set up between the campaign & the public, & I don't accept that.
But also, I have done this kind of thing before on a smaller scale & when you are dealing with systems like this, an absurd level of commitment seems to be the ONLY thing that gets them to recognize you.

2026-08-26 19:15:38 GMT

- reply

It actually makes perfect sense that they'd be busy & not have much time to spare for communicating with voters, but that is why they should have someone whose job it IS.
If it's not their job, whose is it? That's a question they won't answer (because it's nobody's job).
They are not off the hook, because they KNOW they don't have someone attending to this. If this campaign were run well, they could just hand off my messages to whoever's job it is & be done with it. But it's a shit campaign.

2026-08-26 19:12:02 GMT

- reply

It's kind of funny too because these 2 guys & maybe a couple assistants are likely pretty busy with campaign stuff & don't have that much time to attend to a "small" thing like me, but... I'm not busy.
Crowley needs more campaign staff, because it actually SHOULDN'T be either of these guys' jobs to respond to me: they should have a dedicated person for this type of thing.

2026-08-26 19:09:18 GMT

- reply

Here I was feeling proud of myself for (almost) subtly pointing out that I've started doing basic research on them, but I think sending them records of my other communications—demonstrating my effort & persistence—is probably a much bigger attention-getter.
I can only guess, of course, because these fuckers won't respond to me.

2026-08-26 19:00:14 GMT

- reply

Looking at the number of emails I sent to the Crowley campaign that were possibly seen by someone (we can safely assume those sent to the "info" email only were not read), & the fact that they can only have received only one or two of my letters so far, I can see how they would have been assuming I was just a loudmouth who would eventually go away.
Foolish fucking assumption, but I see how it could happen.
PRETTY SURE I just cleared up that misunderstanding.

2026-08-26 18:56:25 GMT

- reply

It's actually NOT as high a volume of emails as you would think, because I started off slow. I left a LOT of voicemails, but no one is listening to those—I am sure of it.
But when you add in all the OTHER emails to OTHER people AND letters too (which I just forwarded to the Crowley campaign), I think the picture becomes a lot clearer.
They were only seeing my communications to THEM, so I don't think they realized the full scale of my dedication.

2026-08-26 18:53:19 GMT

- reply

Maybe tomorrow I'll collect up all the emails I have already sent to the Crowley campaign & send them as attachments & tell them it's "for your records: to make sure you aren't missing anything".

2026-08-26 18:32:37 GMT

- reply

I am pretty damn confident they've noticed me by now, so I am kind of amazed that they are continuing with the "just ignore people" strategy even now that I've made it clear that I will persist.

2026-08-26 18:30:28 GMT

- reply

I just showed them evidence that I am persistently trying to contact many people's offices about this, not just pestering them.
I still don't think this will earn me a response, but I do think it will earn an internal conversation.
David Crowley might even learn my name today! (Or not: maybe none of these incompetents will mention any of this to him)

2026-08-26 18:22:32 GMT

- reply

Sent an email with photos of letters sent to Tony Evers, Sarah Godlewski, & Wis Dems too.
I said I'm not trying to harass them with so many emails this morning, but I realized they may want to see these/keep them for their records.
I think today is DEFINITELY the day I make an impression if I haven't already.

2026-08-26 17:55:18 GMT

- reply

You know, in case they didn't believe me when I told them I am pestering everyone I can think of to explain what's going on.

2026-08-26 17:53:50 GMT

- reply

Just for shits & giggles I went through the emails I sent to Wis Dems & the people who endorsed him & forwarded several of them (but not even all) to the Crowley campaign, Garren, & Jonathan and said "for your records."

2026-08-26 14:44:45 GMT

- reply

- David Crowley has no fucking idea &/or doesn't care that his campaign is not actually fully staffed & functioning (incompetent &/or malicious)
- so far my attempts at contact aren't going anywhere because when they see my communications, they just think "not my job" & don't even think about the fact that it's not anyone else's job either.

2026-08-26 14:44:45 GMT

- reply

Until proven otherwise, I'm operating on these assumptions:
- only a handful of people actually work for the Crowley campaign, maybe only 2, & 1 of those is a consultant whose work is specific & limited in scope
- no one in the Crowley campaign is responsible for communicating with voters/the general public
- those who do work for the Crowley campaign believe that they have no responsibility to communicate with voters, because it's not in their job description

2026-08-26 14:44:45 GMT

- reply

I think I'm just dealing with a couple of dudes who think I'm beneath their notice.
I think the Crowley campaign has not tasked ANYONE with voter outreach/communication, & the people who DO work for him think they are too busy & important to talk to people.

2026-08-26 14:44:45 GMT

- reply

Until I have more information, that's the best explanation I have put together: Crowley's "campaign manager" actually only does certain jobs. Crowley has a campaign manager like people have lawyers. The lawyer only works for them when given some specific thing to do & bills them hourly.
That's my *theory*. The only other person I know works for the campaign (so far) is his spokesperson, who probably thinks it's beneath him to talk to individual people who don't have endorsements to give.

2026-08-26 14:24:30 GMT

- reply

Aha. The 414 Campaigns domain IS owned as it redirects to the (nearly blank) Facebook page for 414 Campaigns (consulting firm belonging to Crowley's campaign manage). And when I email [campaign manager's 1st name]@[website address], I do not receive an "undeliverable" message, so the email address is valid.

2026-08-26 14:24:30 GMT

- reply

Shot off an email to him at that one too in case he hasn't seen the others & in this email I ASKED whether I was pestering him.
I said (paraphrasing): I currently have the impression you aren't really managing the entire campaign just ads, campaign filings, etc. so if that's the case, just let me know that David's "campaign manager" actually has no responsibility for voter outreach, because I don't want to be bothering you if you aren't even very involved in the campaign. Just let me know.

2026-08-26 13:33:29 GMT

- reply

Back to letting the Crowley campaign know I've been researching them: I think my letter addressed to the Crowley campaign c/o Garren Randolph's consulting company may arrive today (or maybe not, but it was posted on Monday & is going to an address in the same city, so there's a good chance it will), & I think getting that one may surprise him.

2026-08-26 13:33:29 GMT

- reply

It was actually very easy to find the address of his political consulting company, so I can't take credit for being a genius, but the indication I've now given is "I didn't stop at the information on the campaign website."

2026-08-26 13:27:36 GMT

- reply

It's not like I've found a smoking gun, but I am building a bigger picture. The bigger the picture & the more detailed, the more likely you are to find something actually interesting.
And if you're doing what I'm doing right now, you'll almost certainly find a few new points of contact at least.

2026-08-26 13:27:36 GMT

- reply

That's the real trick to research in my opinion: when you see names of people & organizations & events in the course of your research, look them ALL up. Some will not connect to anything relevant, but you won't know that if you don't look nor do you know what might turn out to be a connection later once you've collected a few more pieces.
Honestly, maybe don't ignore emails from people who learned to do research in grad school & have been applying it to the rest of their life for some time.

2026-08-26 13:22:47 GMT

- reply

When researching anything thoroughly, PDFs (of meeting minutes, financial filings, & more) found through Google are your friend. That's where you'll find leads & connections.
Often the documents themselves are kind of irrelevant, but if you're researching a person, for instance, you may stumble across something that gives you the name of a business they own or work for, which opens up a whole new line of inquiry.

2026-08-26 13:19:51 GMT

- reply

This would be SO much easier if Google search were still good, by the way.
It is very beneficial to people who have shit to hide that Google has reduced many advanced search features & made it generally hard to refine searches.
I used to be a fucking expert at finding info that is technically public but not really meant to be findable (like reports that are required to be posted *somewhere* but which aren't publicized outside of an organization). It's tougher now.
Not impossible though.

2026-08-26 12:55:58 GMT

- reply

I also know I have a correct email address associated with Jonathan Fera's work on the campaign (see "out of office" message), so I'm fairly certain I have guessed his campaign manager's campaign-associated email as well. [email protected] is also a valid email address. Whether it is maintained by anyone is another question, but I threw it in there for good measure.
I could be wrong, but I THINK I may have just sent an email that will cause them to have a conversation about me.

2026-08-26 12:55:58 GMT

- reply

I can't know for sure that this email was seen, but I'm confident they check the "press" inbox (Jonathan Fera's "out of office" message said to direct press inquiries to that address, so it would appear it's not just a "dummy" account like the "info" one.

2026-08-26 12:48:49 GMT

- reply

I can't speak to intention, but it's doing nothing to debunk the idea that he isn't even trying to win in the general election.
But I can't help but feel that incompetence/cluelessness is also playing a role. There may also be stinginess with money, not wanting to pay any staff they don't absolutely NEED.
Well, I'm out here, personally trying to let them know that they do in fact absolutely need someone who is responsible for talking with voters & answering questions from the public.

2026-08-26 12:48:49 GMT

- reply

As best as I can tell, David Crowley literally believes he can skip the part of campaigning that is making it appear—on a daily basis, not just for a couple hours at an event—like he has an interest in ordinary people.
Whether this is a deliberate decision on his part or whether he didn't fully realize that it's not part of his "campaign manager's" job description & they aren't paying anyone else to do it is up for debate.

2026-08-26 12:21:55 GMT

- reply

I also sent Garren Randolph (campaign manager) an email asking if he works full-time for the Crowley campaign as I noticed he has also been consulting for another campaign. I said I sure hope someone who is running for governor has a dedicated campaign manager!
Anyway...this is the part where I have let them know that I'm not JUST emailing them, but also researching the campaign.

2026-08-26 12:19:26 GMT

Sent an email to the Crowley campaign & the email addresses associated with his campaign manager & spokesperson this morning with my current theory.
Felt like I should update them on my understanding of the situation & give them a chance to correct me if I'm wrong.
https://cdn.masto.host/dicecamp/media_attachments/files/117/161/772/021/876/132/original/ebb0f8ddb30a6ace.png

2026-08-26 04:23:44 GMT

- reply

What it looks like to me is that Crowley is paying a "campaign manager" to run ads & set up photo ops for him & that sort of thing. He's not paying anyone to handle *all aspects* of the campaign, & he probably isn't even aware of what's missing.
So is he trying to win? Not very hard, that's for sure.

2026-08-26 04:21:26 GMT

- reply

Which brings me back to the very beginning: no one is working on David Crowley's campaign. Not really. There are whole aspects of campaigning, whole areas, like VOTER OUTREACH, which no one involved with the campaign is actually responsible for.
And no one involved cares enough to find someone to do it for them. I think that's what we're looking at.

2026-08-26 04:17:50 GMT

- reply

If Garren is perhaps more of a CONSULTANT than a proper campaign manager, that would especially be the case: he's not being paid to deal with it, so he won't.
The fact that treating people like this could be damaging to the campaign isn't going to change what he does. If he isn't directly paid for it, he doesn't care. No vision, no foresight, just "money please."

2026-08-26 04:17:50 GMT

- reply

I'm trying to understand the psychology of these people, & I suspect that neither Garren nor Jonathan (David's primary campaign staffers) think that it's their job to talk to people like me & neither of them have the ability to realize that on this campaign, it is NO ONE'S designated responsibility to talk to people like me. Someone's going to have to pick up the slack, but I don't think they will do anything unless they are directly instructed to do so by the person writing their checks.

2026-08-26 04:10:39 GMT

- reply

Absolutely none. But I sent them a letter too! My guess would be that with them I'll at least have to attempt a certain number of contacts before they deign to give me any response (other than replying to my initial email to them with the same contact info for the Crowley campaign I already had).

2026-08-26 03:59:56 GMT

- reply

SOME of this shit has gone unseen & unheard, but at this point I'm pretty sure I have made it through to someone's eyeballs with a couple of these contact attempts.
So I hope that they are saying "who the hell is this woman & why won't she leave us alone?" from between gritted teeth.
Even if it's not true, it's a nice thought. Aspirational for sure.

2026-08-26 03:56:58 GMT

- reply

I won't get the satisfaction of hearing someone groan when they hear from me yet again, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
You have to just do your best & trust that you are making a proper nuisance of yourself.

2026-08-26 03:56:58 GMT

- reply

Oh! As with research, so with being a nuisance: it feels like you're wasting your time, but sometimes you may be forcing people to have conversations about you, even if they are following a policy of not responding.
And I'm going to count it as an achievement every time I send my 3rd letter to someone: "Achievement unlocked! Dedicated file folder."
They might just throw them away, but I think it's considered advisable to hang onto correspondence in case of future legal questions.

2026-08-26 03:31:39 GMT

- reply

I'm not convinced that David Crowley is actually paying for someone to manage his campaign full-time.

2026-08-26 03:30:25 GMT

- reply

Also, I'm starting to wonder if I've sort of got it backwards with Garren Randolph: I was thinking "wow. This guy is working on multiple campaigns & can't possibly be giving his full attention to Crowley's governor campaign" (which is still true), but I wonder if the perspective should be wow. David Crowley may not really have his own dedicated campaign manager. It looks like this guy juggles multiple candidates because he's more of a consultant than a campaign *manager*.

2026-08-26 03:07:40 GMT

- reply

I'm not saying I'm an expert investigator, but I at least know a thing or two about digging up connections between things.
You really do have to be willing to "waste your time", because you often don't know what's really important until you find it.

2026-08-26 03:05:32 GMT

- reply

When you comb through a document looking for a specific name or whatever, you also get whatever other contextual information is there: names of other people, information about specific events, etc. Then, if any of those show up somewhere else in your research, you'll remember you've seen it before & perhaps know where to look.

2026-08-26 03:01:03 GMT

- reply

I'm looking up a bunch of random political operatives that don't seem to have much to do with David Crowley...except for the couple people I've flagged to look into more deeply, who might have closer connections (I won't know until I look).
Finding new information requires you to follow hunches. Sometimes they will take you nowhere & feel like a "waste of time", but even then, you're often gathering more contextual information than you realize.

2026-08-26 02:58:15 GMT

- reply

Tip for doing research: follow leads even when you're not sure they are going anywhere.
If you see the name of a person or organization mentioned in context of someone/something you're looking into, take a second to find out about them & look for other connections they may have with the person you're researching.
They don't spell out for you who is in business with who. You've got to notice when names show up together & look deeper if you want to find new leads.

2026-08-26 02:05:35 GMT

- reply

That's the vibe I'm getting from the folks at the Crowley campaign. They don't seem to think this requires any work on their part.

2026-08-26 02:01:16 GMT

- reply

"Michael, it's one campaign. How much time can it take? 10 hours?"

2026-08-26 01:55:39 GMT

- reply

This is what I mean about it being "amateur hour". I'm not convinced they are even doing this full time.

2026-08-26 01:54:30 GMT

- reply

So even though I can't find Yee's campaign manager mentioned anywhere in the first couple pages of Google results I think it's likely that his campaign manager is (or at least was until very recently) Garren Randolph.
So Crowley's campaign manager seems to have been splitting his time between campaigns. (Yee is running for state treasurer)

2026-08-26 01:54:29 GMT

- reply

It may have changed since the primary (or not) but it does look like Garren Randolph (David Crowley's campaign manager) has been splitting his time with another campaign (Yee for WI) as campaign filings from as recent as the beginning of this month have Garren Randolph's name as the one submitting them, & Yee's campaign has been paying Garren's business.

2026-08-26 00:03:02 GMT

- reply

It's just so funny, because if you had told me 3 weeks ago that I'd be spending my spare time entertaining myself by poking through David Crowley's political history, well, I probably would have believed you, but I would have had to ask "why though?"
Just return emails from voters, you assholes. This has become a temporary hobby for me all because they can't be fucked to do us the courtesy of *pretending* to care.

2026-08-25 23:59:12 GMT

- reply

I've never read ANYONE'S campaign finance reports! I've seen other people talk about them, but I've never done it personally. I've certainly never gone in & Google searched the companies campaigns pay money to. Why would I? Other people keep track of that shit.
Well, except for maybe when a guy is just Milwaukee County Executive & he maybe hasn't yet collected anyone who wants to keep an eye on him.
These fucks are making me work so hard for a goddamn return email...

2026-08-25 23:56:00 GMT

- reply

Like, why are they encouraging me on this path of snooping through Crowley's history? I'm really just looking for contacts at the moment, but who fucking knows what I might see?
Probably nothing, but there's no telling.
Why are they making me do this? 😂

2026-08-25 23:56:00 GMT

- reply

So...these assholes have made me so mad that I am reading David Crowley's campaign finance reports (that's how I was able to confirm the mailing address of the company of his campaign manager).
How mad are they going to make me? I'm not saying I'm going to find a scandal & break the news, but... isn't that how scandals often break? SOMEONE got curious enough to snoop through a bunch of shit to see what they could find?

2026-08-25 23:56:00 GMT

- reply

I said I was going to find my rage this year. Maybe I am. Maybe I'm letting myself fully experience the fucking frustration & indignity of suffering under these gormless politicians.

2026-08-25 21:44:39 GMT

- reply

None of us have enough energy to expend on ALL the things we have a right to be angry about.
Your time & energy is precious because it is limited. You do not need to rage about everything that is wrong all the time.
But my point is...if you *want* to be mad about politicians being slimy, self-interested, & allergic to accountability, go for it. You have every fucking reason to. And you have every reason to insist that people deserve better. Because they do.

2026-08-25 21:44:39 GMT

- reply

I'm not talking about "reform", because this white supremacist, patriarchal system can't be reformed. It's built on a foundation of inequality & depends on inequality to continue to function.
It's got to go.
But that doesn't mean you have no right to be angry at the people who sell us all out within this system.

2026-08-25 21:39:53 GMT

- reply

For most people there IS a baseline of indifference that they simply expect & accept even from the politicians they think are "the good guys". We don't insist that people back up their claims to "represent" us—in fact, I think most people simply quietly accept that they DON'T.
That's why "politician" is a bad word. Because we know what it means: it means being self-interested & self-promoting while avoiding accountability at all costs.
Fine, that's how it is. It SHOULDN'T be though.

2026-08-25 21:34:27 GMT

- reply

Whether we realize it or not, even those of us who are politically disaffected STILL tend to give politicians more grace than they deserve, because we STILL accept that "this is how it is" & are (on some level) willing to pretend it's normal, even if we don't like it.
It's not ok.
It's important that we don't stay in anger in ways that hurt us or people around us, but the anger *is* justified nonetheless, whether or not it's something that we are going to give our energy to.

2026-08-25 20:55:53 GMT

- reply

They want to pretend to be "public servants" while also eschewing ALL responsibility for everything.
I can't prevent them from being in office, but I sure can make a point of NOT consenting to it.

2026-08-25 20:54:40 GMT

- reply

Like, I get it: "This is just how politics work".
Sure, but that doesn't mean I have to act like I consent to it.
I sure don't.

2026-08-25 20:53:17 GMT

- reply

THEY endorsed the guy. Now I'm coming to them & saying his campaign can't even reply to questions from his would-be constituents, & they're going "I have no responsibility for this"??
Of COURSE they do. They are throwing their political weight behind someone & saying "this is the right person for the job." So they are the ones living in a bizarro-land where words have no meaning, telling me that they aren't responsible even for the words that come out of their mouths.

2026-08-25 20:53:16 GMT

- reply

Although, you know, I say it's a reasonable thing to ask—and it is—but these public officials & their campaigns don't think so. They don't feel any responsibility for their endorsements & they don't feel any responsibility to me or to voters in general.
So when I do get responses (very rare) it's "why are you asking us? Here's the same Crowley campaign contact info you already have that provides no responses."

2026-08-24 18:09:59 GMT

- reply

LOL. To back up my Klobuchar claim I sent a reply to an email I sent last week, & I got an auto-response this time. Weird how that didn't happen the first time... it's from the same email address on the same thread.

2026-08-24 18:03:11 GMT

- reply

In any case, my plan is to verify this feeling with real data, so feel free to suggest candidates you're curious about.
There are probably some campaigns that are responsive, but how many?
I'll tell you what: Amy Klobuchar's campaign is also unresponsive, but I assume they are treating a win in the Democratic primary as if it makes the general election a mere formality, so maybe it would be different in a more competitive race.

2026-08-24 17:58:34 GMT

- reply

Sure, "some candidates," but it isn't limited to Crowley, not by a long shot.
Could you name some of these good candidates (who are not already running explicitly populist campaigns)? I would be happy to test & report back the results honestly.

2026-08-24 17:40:23 GMT

- reply

I think what I am finding out from this experiment is that the pretense of representing people is over. Candidates aren't playing that game anymore.
They expect you to vote for the letter next to their name while they do the important work of figuring how much they can get paid by oligarchs & corporations.

2026-08-24 17:40:23 GMT

- reply

"Listening" to people only confronts them with problems they don't intend to solve, & if they don't respond, then sure, maybe individual people get pissed off, but it's invisible to the general public.
It doesn't matter how many people reach out to the Crowley campaign individually about our frustrations & our questions. The lack of response is hidden to anyone who doesn't try it for themselves. It only becomes an optics issue if we are given a forum where we can all see & hear each other.

2026-08-24 17:31:56 GMT

- reply

Most political candidates are NOT running to represent you.
They aren't even running to pretend to represent you while actually representing the interests of others.
They are running to represent the interests of donors & lobbyists while trying to avoid even having to HEAR from the people they are supposed to be representatives of.
They will not listen even to give you a blow-off response. They don't acknowledge any responsibility to you at all.

2026-08-24 17:31:55 GMT

- reply

Next person who tells me "vote blue no matter who" better explain to me why these "blue" candidates won't respond to even the simplest questions from their would-be constituents, because I cannot possibly believe they have any intention of fighting for us in *any way at all* if they can't even pretend to care what people want or trouble themselves to respond to basic questions.