In most other countries (where primaries are internal party matters), you have to actually be a member of the party in good standing in order to participate in that party's primary. But they weren't anywhere near as common until the second half of the 20th century, and even then most were non-binding (and their results were often ignored when the "wrong" candidate won them).Īnd the primaries themselves changed over time, generally so as to broaden eligibility. It's not that they didn't exist before - the first ones date back to before the Civil War. To be clear: the politicians would still run on extreme positions, if they saw it as advantageous - but that didn't mean they'd govern accordingly if they won. Since establishment tends to be conservative by its very nature, this provided a screen against more extreme positions. The voters decided which one would be running the show at any given moment, but internal party politics were not readily accessible to the outsiders, and thus candidates and platforms were also vetted by the party establishment. See, historically, when we spoke about parties, we really spoke about their respective establishments. Ironically, I believe it's the increase in democratic processes in American politics that's responsible for this. Whereas a (reasonably-managed, honest) comment section provides loads of information that's actually valuable to the consumer. Maybe your conversion goes up a tick the first time you put them on the site, but when a repeat viewer sees the same ones again they're going to roll their eyes and register you as untrustworthy. _Everyone_ knows the testimonials are garbage. Consider the difference on an ecommerce site between a comment section vs a few company-picked "testimonials" above the fold. If you make it valuable they will use it. Users are able to identify when something is valuable to them. I don't understand why companies constantly do stuff that serves only _themselves_, and then expect users to engage with it because it exists. I'm never going to install it, and I have all but stopped reading it because these prompts are so obnoxious. It is pretty offensive that they say "reddit works better on the app" when the only reason for that is that they broke everything on mobile (on purpose?) in a series of badly-implemented redesigns.
0 kommentar(er)
