Is Your Neighbor a Democrat? There's an App For That 550
theodp writes "ProPublica's Lois Beckett reports that the Obama for America campaign's new mobile app is raising privacy concerns with its Google map that recognizes one's current location, marks nearby Democratic households with small blue flags, and displays the first name, age and gender of the voter or voters who live there (e.g.,'Lori C., 58 F, Democrat'). Asked about the privacy aspects of the new app, a spokesperson for the Obama campaign wrote that 'anyone familiar with the political process in America knows this information about registered voters is available and easily accessible to the public.' Harvard law prof Jonathan Zittrain said the Obama app does represent a significant shift. While voter data has been 'technically public,' it is usually accessed only by political campaigns and companies that sell consumer data. 'Much of our feelings around privacy are driven by what you might call status-quo-ism,' Zittrain added, 'so many people may feel that the app is creepy simply because it represents something new.'"
A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
It is creepy, and a good reason not to register as a member of either party...no matter how much you may want to vote in the primaries.
Re: (Score:3)
What, they can't tell by my lawn signs?
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Funny)
Mine just say, "Get off!"
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Funny)
So, republican, Texan or both ...
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
"While voter data has been 'technically public,' it is usually accessed only by political campaigns and companies that sell consumer data. "
Why is it automatically considered not a privacy issue if your information is sold?
Re: (Score:3)
Political party membership as well as political donations [fundrace.org] are public record in the U.S. Mostly because we are supposed to be free to speak as we see fit, without fear. The "drudge lists" are not so much sold as the clerks tend to limit their distribution to legitimate political concerns. For example, anyone running a petition drive can get them, usually in digital format, so they can self-validate signatures -- there is a nominal fee, but it is pocket change, not a revenue generator for the clerks office
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are ashamed of your party... change?
If you are scared of others, what part of that is freedom?
Stand up for yourself...
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know. I guess when you have democrat mayors so easily making statements of their intentions to use the government and public resources around them to economically harm a corporation because of free of speech by the CEO of a company made in a personal manner, you tend to think there are some people who will use information they do not agree with against you in ways that are not only unethical but illegal as well.
You are right, what part of freedom is that? But we were reminded recently of it so it is a concern.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
So you equate using government punishing free speech as the same as government encouraging actions it agrees with?
Let me tell you the difference, both is free speech, but the constitution prohibits the government from denying it.
Re: (Score:3)
Is it only comments when a police officer says he will plant evidence on someone to charge them with a crime if they ever come in their jurisdiction but it never happens because the object never goes to his jurisdiction because of that?
Just saying you are going to use the power of government illegally because someone does something constitutionally protected iis enough to punish someone for it. What if some mayors came out and said anyone who openly supports gay rights will be arrested and the police might
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm in agreement here.
I think Chick-Fil-A's president is an ignorant blowhard. However, he is entitled to the right to be an ignorant blowhard. The mayor can call him an ignorant blowhard and could even attend a "Chick-Fil-A's President Is An Ignorant Blowhard Parade" if he so chose.
But the second he threatens to use government resources to reprimand him? That's over the line.
However, I'd also like to point out that he is one man. I do not appreciate a lot of the comments I've noticed that imply everyone who disagrees with this man somehow must also endorse the mayor's intended sanctions. This ignorant display of identity politics needs to stop. It pops up in nearly every debate. Usually in the form of "A random idiot who belongs in Group X believes Something Stupid Y. Therefore, everyone who is a member of Group X believes Something Stupid Y."
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
Careful - that's a dangerously slippery slope. What if the company donated to planned parenthood? What if the mayor banned atheists from owning businesses?
In short, what about the first amendment?
Glenn Greenwald discussed this at length: http://www.salon.com/2012/07/30/free_speech_and_donations/ [salon.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I'd sooner not have government be able to say what organizations a company can give money to...
Personally if I disagree with how a company does business, I don't go there. Simple and effective from my side. I don't stage an attempt to do everything I can to make them go out of business, ignoring the fact that hurts far more innocent people than the intended target, and triggers people to go out of their way to buy stuff there to offset the protest? (Wisconsin saw a lot of that during the collective bargaini
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that other members are NOT responsible for what he said. Only he is. If tomorrow someone in a group I belong to says that he thinks all children everywhere should be beaten non-stop to build character, I don't need to publicly disagree with him. In fact, the only way you should hold his opinion against me is if I publicly pledge support for it. This is especially true when you consider that so many stupid things are said every day by all sides that if you had to apologize for every one said on your side, you'd never get to do anything else.
The real issue here is that, first of all, besides political parties not meaning much, "groups" like liberals, progressives, conservatives, radical religious nutjobs have very vague and subjective definitions, at least as far as our common usage of it. Many people hold views that could be regarded as a part of all of those. So who gets to decide what groups I belong to? I'm an atheist, but I'm sure some would define me as a religious nut because of that, or assume that means I agree with other atheists who say religion should be banned.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Chick-Fil-A is the stupidest name...
In Waxahachie Texas there is a Mexican food place called "TaMolly's".
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
Chick-Fil-A wasn't attacked because of the CEO's political opinions, it was attacked because of their donations to hate groups, particularly the one that is pushing quite successfully for Uganda to make homosexuality a capital crime.
Really? Then why did they start protesting only after Cathy made his comment? And if the uproar was over donations made by Chick-Fil-A, then maybe you should notify CNN and every other news outlet that thinks this is about what Cathy said. Here is a quote from a CNN [cnn.com] story:
The controversy came about after an interview with the fast food restaurant chain's president and COO, Dan Cathy, appeared in The Baptist Press on July 16 and he weighed in with his views on family.
"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit," Cathy said. "We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that."
Strange. No mention of Uganda at all.
Oh, and the whole Uganda story is bullshit [cbsnews.com] anyway.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
the only hate I have seen, has been coming from those who disagree with mr cathy
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
Or you might be scared of right wing domestic terrorists murdering you... as just happened to some Sikh's today
You mean like the right winger that shot Gabrielle Giffords, the one that flew the plane into the IRS building in Austin or the one that just shot up a Batman movie.
Oh, right! None of those guys were right wingers, but they were all reported to be, just like you are trying to report this guy to be.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
If they ban only the ones who practice constitutionally protected rights, I am equally outraged.
You see, the difference between banning strip clubs in general and only "Crazy Jack's lady emporium" is that in one, it is an across the board ban based on community standard or whatever they are using to justify the ban not related to the expression of first amendment rights, the other is singling a specific business out because of first amendment expression and religious freedom.
Without this distinction, then any government entity could ban or use the public infrastructure to interfere with the business of anyone who supports another candidate for office or a position that the political officer doesn't like. Would you find it equally tolerable if the mayor of New York banned Amazon or Starbucks (amazon's founder donates 2.5 million to defend Washington's gay marriage law, Starbucks says on their web page they support gay marriage and some are trying to create a gay starbucks appreciation day) from doing business there because they support rewriting marriage laws to allow gays to marry? That's a more appropriate comparison to what these mayors are doing and it is a matter of the first amendment and a government punishing specific companies based on their or their owner's expression of it. It is simply wrong whether you agree on the message or not.
Alcohol sales is a bit different because the repeal of prohibition specifically gives the states explicit control over alcohol which would allow them to limit the amount of bars and or times alcohol sales could happen in certain areas.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
is your google finger broke or something? the mayor of boston said he was going to stop a fast food chain from expanding in boston, the mayor of Chicago said the same chain didn't fit in have the same values as Chicago while one if his alderman lackies said he was intentionally blocking the opening of a new restaurant in his district. The mayor of san fransycso made comment implying he was going to pull the same crap.
If you don't know what is happening, perhaps you shouldn't be commenting?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As a non-USAian, I've never understood why you have to "register" with a particular party. This seems like it just opens the door for all kinds of election fraud and manipulation.
Why is it that you can't just go down the polls and put a check mark beside whatever candidate you want?
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
You don't have to register for any party, because you can select independent. You have to register with a party if you want to vote in their private elections. The primaries aren't official government election. They're elections held by the parties to see who will represent them in the official elections. Some of them don't require you to register, but most do.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Insightful)
So why are public funds spent on primary elections, when they are held by private clubs?
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
If you're asking a question like this, the subject is the federal government, and the answer eludes you, you can safely default to "corruption" and be right 99% of the time.
Re: (Score:3)
That is one argument, but it allows independents not affiliated with any party to vote as well. I live in a semi-open state, where I can vote either for Democrats or Republicans but not both, so I switch parties to vote for the candidate that isn't in office to get the most moderate candidate, which has ALWAYS failed. Usually by a landslide. This year they voted for my anathema, and it is my belief he would have won in a closed election here, too, but thankfully he lost in further primaries. This year the c
You can (Score:4, Informative)
The two parties own our political process. They make it difficult for anyone but them to get on the ballot. They even have "straight ticket" checkboxes on ballots so you don't have to go through the trouble of voting for individuals based on their qualifications, but simply vote for every Democrat or Republican on the ballot.
But in the end, you can vote for whoever you want to vote for in the general election.
The biggest reason for the party registration is that most states don't allow you to vote in a party's primary unless you're registered to a party, and a person registered for one party can't vote in another party's primary (vote for the weakest candidate). Yes, that's another way the two parties have owned our system: The government actually runs and pays for their primary elections when it should be their own business who they put up for election, and entirely with their own money.
Re:You can (Score:5, Informative)
That was the argument of the Texas Democratic party in Smith v. Allwright. That it was a private event and therefore they had every right not to allow blacks to participate. The supreme court found that primaries are a compelling part of the American electoral system and therefore not entirely private matters.
Re: (Score:3)
It's because we Americans are simply too stupid to select an election system that allows more than two parties, such as the proportional representation systems that you Europeans have. All we get is simple plurality voting, which of course leads inevitably to two parties, and a vote for any other party is "a wasted vote".
Choice! (Score:3)
It's because we Americans are simply too stupid to select an election system that allows more than two parties
Please don't expect this to help. There are enough clueless idiots out there to fill any number of political party nominations. I'm not sure that choosing the least worse of 3 or more is much better than least worse of two. But you should definitely keep party membership lists private - it opens all sorts of possibilities for abuse otherwise.
Re: (Score:3)
As a non-USAian, I've never understood why you have to "register" with a particular party. This seems like it just opens the door for all kinds of election fraud and manipulation.
It creates an obstacle for undermining a vote. Outsiders can go in and deliberately vote for weak or joke candidates. But any such attempt is going to lose participants, if they have to register as members of the party in question.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
Primary System (Score:3)
My father, who is American (not me though, technically yes, but I don't live there, and it seems like a crazy place I wouldn't want to stay for all that long), thinks the Primary system makes the USA more democratic. I'm not so sure. Seems to me like a weird way for the 2 "parties" to be completely inescapable.
In Canada, when we have a terrible political party because it gets too corrupt from being in power, eventually that party gets dumped and those with that ideology have to form a new party that must em
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, why would you all care if someone knew what party you registered with.
You know, I didn't used to care. Then recall season hit here in Wisconsin, and happy groups like this [dailykos.com] started popping up on Facebook, not to mention tons of veiled threats online (I received plenty just commenting on Madison.com during the height of the circulation)...and even a few open ones. Then, of course, the employers started getting harassed over their employees having signed the recall petitions and shit like this [dailykos.com] started happening.
While I'm not afraid of those people when it comes to violence against me (they're largely trailer park living, welfare collecting, hypocritical cowards), when those signatures were released I was definitely worried about repercussions in the workplace. [freakoutnation.com] How do you prove you were terminated in response to political ideology? Even if you could prove it, political affiliation is not considered a protected class [wikipedia.org].
Maybe if you'd lived up here in Wisconsin over the last year you would understand better why shit like this being made public could intimidate some people.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:4, Insightful)
If you live deep in red territory, you neighbor for years who is normally a good and decent guys, however you just kinda nod your head when he goes on his political ramble. Now see you are part of the party he really hates, you may be outcast from the community.
You may not be scared of the person, however you life just got a little more difficult for something you considered a minor ideology difference.
We all have our beliefs and values, some of them we just kinda want to keep private from others, not that you are embarrassed of it, but because it can create tension where it really isn't that big of a deal, because other may have a stronger view on the topic then you really do.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
Or Republicans for that matter. A few years ago Democrats requested a list of people who signed a petition to get something on the ballot. Their admitted intent was to hassle and intimidate these people.
The Supreme Court upheld the request, as that is technically public information, but expressed geat concern over gros. That's a hint to Congress that they maybe might wanna do something about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But we ALLLLLL Bundle!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Interesting)
Creepy or not, it's not new. In the presidential election of 2004, I remember seeing a web site mentioned in an article where you could go and look up who gave how much to which campaigns for any address. I remember wondering how many people know that the information was so readily available. If anything, this will be a good thing in educating people how easy the information is to access.
Re: (Score:3)
"Independent" is an identification too, and one that will actually get you more attention than being with a party. Whoever gets the indy vote wins.
Re: (Score:3)
A better question would be, why the hell is the state and its government involved in private internal elections within parties?
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Interesting)
Because they aren't fully private. Smith v. Allwright held that primaries because they have substantial impact on the governance of the United States are subject to public regulation. In this particular case the concern was that the Democratic party of Texas could not exclude blacks.
Re:A good reason to go independent (Score:5, Informative)
It's not public. It's only public because the dems disclosed it. You can't tell who is and is not registered republican in that way.
Yes you can. You can go down to your local office and get the voter registration rolls for your town, including Republicans anytime you want. This information is legally public. It is not private and then disclosed.
My neighbor's a state representative (Score:2)
Welcome to the New World Order, Where Privacy is (Score:2)
ignored by the Government.
Seriously, this is what they think is a good idea?
Time for change is right. I'm thinking we need a new system, the current one no longer represents the people.
Re: (Score:3)
The Obama campaign is just using a technique that's tried and true in the corporate world.
As long as they don't start installing this app as part of AT&T's Android bloatware package, I don't have a problem with it.
But it's interesting that knowing about what corporate money is coming into a political campaign is completely off limits. For some reason, that's considered just beyond the pale. Well, we know the reason, but that doesn't make it easier to s
Re:Welcome to the New World Order, Where Privacy (Score:3)
Sadly, I have to tell you that Privacy has been ignored not only by the government, but also by a lot of people around us
Look at what they have disclosed about themselves on fb and other social-network sites
Re: (Score:2)
right back atcha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duopoly [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
a political party isn't a government...
go back to school.
dude, the "political parties" are fronts for the corporations.
Pay fucking attention.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
ah, yes... "the" corporations, much like "the" [insert racial stereotype here]
You might think corporations are people, but the sane people do NOT believe that.
So sorry, corporations can not find safe harbor under hate laws. Nice try though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
He wasn't talking about hate laws, you said that. His comment was about irrational fear, stereotyping, stupid generalizations and other small minded ways ol looking at things.
Re: (Score:2)
a political party isn't a government...
go back to school.
Is the govt any better? [lmgtfy.com]
There's "available" and then there's "available" (Score:5, Insightful)
> Harvard law prof Jonathan Zittrain said the Obama
> app does represent a significant shift. While voter
> data has been 'technically public,' it is usually
> accessed only by political campaigns and companies
> that sell consumer data.
"But the plans were on display..."
"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."
"That's the display department."
"With a flashlight."
"Ah, well, the lights had probably gone."
"So had the stairs."
"But look, you found the notice, didn't you?"
"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Re: (Score:3)
When Adams wrote that, a lot of public records were still maintained on paper. That alone provided a huge natural barrier to intrusive searches, despite the fact that the information was technically public. Placing all this information online in a publicly searchable database creates the biggest invasion of privacy in history, yet the legal basis has not changed.
Everybody here always mocks "security through obscurity" so it's interesting to look back to a time when it actually was quite plausible.
Public shaming? Commies love it they use it a lot! (Score:4, Insightful)
Right. Yes voter records are accessible to the public but so are criminal records and those
of sex offenders. Even the wages and salaries of federal employees are available online
for anyone curious enough btw.
I wonder what a given neighborhood would look like if we overlaid sex offenders and
criminal records with Obama voters. This is entirely feasible and entirely legal as well.
But yes for everybody else who didn't have the misfortune of living 30 years in a communist
country, commies love to use peer pressure. Right now they're planning to show who is
using how much electricity in a given neighborhood and giving discounts if _everybody_
reduces their energy use in a street. Yes, if only one neighbor exceeds the set quota
everybody 'loses' and everybody will know who is 'responsible'. Expect your neighbors
to come to your door and bitch at you.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
But wait, there's no need for the Right to feel left out -- they could use technology like this to round up the jews, queers, gypsies et al., with just a fraction of the effort invested by their Nazi role models back in the '30s!
Re:Public shaming? Commies love it they use it a l (Score:4, Insightful)
What I find is interesting is that this is Obama's official campaign app and not some third-party "lets see what we can do with data" app.
Re:Public shaming? Commies love it they use it a l (Score:4, Insightful)
Collectivism? Why is everything that the right doesn't like is assumed to come from the mind of Karl Marx? If your neighborhood watch goes around noting the license plates of guys who cruise for hookers, is that collectivism?
Social morality has always had an element of peer pressure and groupthink. That's as true for right wing value systems and left wing ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This replaces lower-tech methods (Score:5, Funny)
The previous method, back in the days before all this social networking stuff: Republicans tend to keep their shades drawn, even though they really don't have anything that would be worth hiding. Democrats ought to draw their shades, but don't.
Adds to the creep factor (Score:2)
2. even more sign the democratic party is less based on ideals, but more on the sense of community that has been taken from us by the paranoia and fear taken from us by the government and RIAA/MPAA affliated communities. Make otherwise unsure people feel like part of something, and hopefully they won't pay attention to issues.
Spin right round baby... (Score:3)
even more sign the democratic party is less based on ideals, but more on the sense of community
Wow, so it's "community" now to out your neighbors and friends as to political leanings?
Come to think of it, Democrats are fond of outing gay Republicans. I guess this is just another example of how the Democrats know best what aspects of your life should be public.
As others have stated - a better incentive to register independent I have not seen.
Thank you Democrats for birthing yet another wave of libertarians,
Re: (Score:3)
You can't really be a left wing libertarian, [...] US-style libertarians [...].
So, because there are so few of them, you assert it impossible that you are speaking to one?
Actually a Good Thing (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Actually a Good Thing (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't simultaneously thing wikileaks and government transparency are good things and this is a bad thing
The hell I can't. Government should be transparent, not people.
Also, there's a similar analogy to the difference between a six-shot revolver and an automatic weapon. The balance between openness and privacy was struck when the data was hard to get. Now that it's so easy to get en masse, that balance needs to be re-struck.
Easy makes it ok (Score:2)
anyone familiar with the political process in America knows this information about registered voters is available and easily accessible to the public.
Just answer me this Tweek, what do you see as postive about toddler murder?
Ahh ahh... It is easy
Yes it easy.
So.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's just like when the bastard politicians exempted themselves from the Do Not Call registry.
Re:So.. (Score:5, Insightful)
This data is not 'creepy' when company's are using this data privately for profit, however when it's expressed publicly in a not-for-profit way it's a privacy concern. God bless America.
How many of your nearest thousand neighbors have you shared your political affiliation with?
That's what this does and that's why people find it creepy.
My new app... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:My new app... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:My new app... (Score:4, Funny)
That would be great, but my ipad only has 16gig of RAM, not nearly enough to handle that sort of data flow.
Oh heck, I already know I'm in blue territory (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Similar thing where I live. It's amongst the bluest of areas in the country, but the gun range is always busy when I visit.
Re: (Score:2)
A problem of Vision (Score:5, Insightful)
If all you see is red and blue, I'd say it's time to get new glasses, metaphorically speaking...
If you start hating someone just because of one thing they believe, then the only person that has a real problem is you.
Re: (Score:3)
Only diversity of skin color and sexuality, not diversity of beliefs!
And once again (Score:4, Informative)
Choicepoint, Florida Voting File (Score:4, Informative)
This database been used by Choicepoint for years for Gerrymandering. When you read that a GOP mob will be challenging black voters in district X, it's because Choicepoint has worked out that district X is the best chance of swinging the vote by barring black voters. Ethnicity they mine from one database, the voting preference from this database.
Remember the voter cleansing list? Crossed referenced with Choicepoint (DBT as it was then). The list of mostly Democrats purged from the Florida electoral roll for having similar names to convicted felons in other states. Where do you think they got the list of Democrats from to filter by??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File
This data should be private, perhaps showing people the public data about them will finally help it be kept private.
Who you vote for is your business, and nobody elses.
Reminds me of non-IP-based BSSID geo-location (Score:2)
One more nail (Score:5, Informative)
Yet another way Democrats and Republicans have devised to drive voters to register (and vote) as independents. Let's hope this trend keeps up!
Dead people and cartoon characters (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Chicago has more blue flags than residents.
precedent (Score:4, Interesting)
Before we get too excited about this, we would do well to remember that it wasn't until the 1800's that we started having anonymous voting.
When you voted for any of the first several presidents, you went into a big room and held up your hand. There was zero voter fraud then (as now).
Secret ballots and anonymity in the electoral process was not part of the original system in the US. The founders didn't see the need, apparently. But counting the votes was always taken very seriously, with representatives from both parties involved. (This was before the innovation of black box computer voting outsourced to Republicans. Before Ken Blackwell. Before 2000).
Re: (Score:3)
That's in the 2012 Republican platform.
Come on, people! (Score:4, Interesting)
If your opinions are that private, WTF are you doing on Slashdot?
Another example of Supposed Privacy (Score:4, Interesting)
There's lots of juicy data out there... (Score:4, Insightful)
Voter reg data includes not just brief biological data [first, middle, last, address, DOB, sometimes telephone, date registered, political affiliation, the elections in which the person voted, which were absentee], but then state census data contains lots of other good stuff [first, middle, last, maiden, address, sometimes telephone, occupation as person reports it, head of household status, etc] and then if the person is a homeowner, you use the assessment database [date home purchased, assessed value each year, number of bedrooms, bathrooms, condition of each, any co-owners]. Then you can throw in the facebook, the google, the linkedin.
My concern: even private citizens like myself who know of and access this data don't flaunt it. I don't make it obvious to a neighbor that I know she votes in all Democratic primaries or only votes in November 0 mod 4 elections. I don't talk about her property tax bill either. Some people with this app will play it poorly because they will not understand that even the data is out there in the public, it is still impolite to treat it as common knowledge.
Elections in Quebec (Score:3)
If you think that's creepy, checkout:
http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/elections-quebec-2012/carte-du-financement-politique-au-quebec/ [lapresse.ca]
Since 2011, any amount over 200$ was made public by the organisation overseeing elections. Since 2012 all amounts are public. This is (in part) to counter corporate fraud. Companies are not allowed to donate directly to political parties, so they ask their employees to do so.
Re: (Score:3)
It's interesting, I was just thinking- so now I know how to find out who all is voting for the other guy without drawing attention to myself.
Not that I would ever do anything to harm them or anything. But if I decide I don't want Bill's lawn service taking care of my lawn because he is a democrat, I don't need to sign for a big list at some government office and suffer people wondering why I want it. Come to think about it, there are a lot of performance reviews coming up, perhaps I can show some people how
Re:Should be interesting (Score:4, Informative)
It appears your hunch isn't that far off from reality:
SCOTUS Rules Petiton Signatures Are Public Record [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
However that was a ruling based on the laws of the state of Washington.
In California the laws are radically different. In fact California and Washington have two of the most divergent sets of laws in the country as far as voting.
Some differences of the top of my head
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would you say tea party nut? You do realize the last several shooting incidents were most likely people who would vote democrat right? They also were somewhat crazy and probably never connected their political ideology with their desire to kill people.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, and? What is better, not pointing out a bug, or pointing out a bug, even though you don't know how to fix it? Especially since it's something that needs to be fixed in consensus?
Thanks for deflecting it with such a cheap fucking "argument". I offered nothing, because it wasn't what you arbitrarily claim it should have been?
I contributed pointing out what bullshit your post was. What you think of t