Online Politics - Will it Work?

It's another election year and it's bound to be one that we will remember, if only due to the changing face of the Internet that has already started with laws like the DMCA and the WIPO. Many of you are rightly worried about which candidate will be the best to vote for in terms of the jobs, the technology, and the freedom we all value so much. So here are a couple of questions from readers who are curious about the arrival of politics on the net, and the political tools both currently available and in development to help online voters make informed choices.

molo asks: "This is the year I will be entering the work force, and I've realized that I need to vote to protect my rights as an American, an individual and a programmer. For that reason, I ponder this question:

Which candidate is better for geeks (and the associated geek jobs and issues)?

There is plenty of political FUD being spread from all sides, and to help you weed through it, here are some links for each of the candidates: Bush on Technology and the New Economy, Gore's High-Tech Economic Agenda, Gore on Technology & Science, Nader on Corporatism, Buchanan's Issues and Browne's Issues (anything relevant on these last two?). While I realize that there are a lot of differences between the candidates, can we try to limit this discussion to geek issues? Its hard to make heads or tails of these guys, and I'm curious what the rest of the community thinks."

RomulusNR asks: "The other day I visited Vote Smart, mainly to do a comparison of Nader vs. Gore (sorry libertarians, I'm a lib'ral) on their opinions on major issues. To my discouragement, I discovered two things while visiting the site. One, is that no major presidential candidate has filled out Vote-Smart's presidential issues test, even after repeated urgings from Vote Smart, high-profile political colleagues, and major SIGs. No, not even Mr. Internet Inventor himself. The other thing I noticed made me think Vote Smart had become thoroughly useless... in that practically every schmo with designs on political attention and the bother to get their names on their state's presidential ballots, is listed on Vote Smart. If VS's list is to be believed, there are about 60 candidates for the presidency as we speak -- about 55 more than I could think of."

I don't agree with the two-party system, but not even the most politically divergent democracies in the world have that many independent parties (at least not with their own candidates). It would be impossible to carry out an election with 60 competing candidates.

Which makes me wonder two things. One, if the Internet allows every schmoe to declare themselves a presidential candidate, will it help the political process? Will it even have an effect, with all those also-rans diluting the third-party pool? Two, if all major (or even remotely viable, like Nader) political candidates are going to simply ignore grassroots Internet 'informed politics' attempts like Vote Smart, what good will they be able to do?"

Comments

Re:gore, did "invent" the internet!

[anonymous cowerd]

I don't suppose Gore actually attempts to take credit for inventing TCP/IP or the FTP protocol or anything like that. At least I hope not; that would be as pathologically delusional as Reagan "remembering" being there in person, in uniform, when U.S. soldiers liberated the Buchenwald concentration camp in 1945.

I have a old book published in 1990, Dvorak's guide to PC Telecommunications (John Dvorak & Nick Anis). It's full of quaint tips on how you can hook up your 2400 baud modem to connect to a variety of BBSs. It came with two 5-1/4 discs with PKZip, Qedit, and Telix SE, a terminal program for DOS. Recently I was dusting my bookcases and I took a glance at it for nostalgia's sake, where I found this comment. In the first chapter, Introduction to Telecomputing (page 9), Dvorak & Anis write the following - I quote the entire paragraph for context and flavor:

The current horizon in communication speeds is linked
to the development of the Integrated Services Digital
Network (ISDN) currently just coming to market via the
local Bell operating companies. These essentially
digital telephone links, capable of 64000bps
communication, elimante the need to modulate
data into tones (see the ISDN discussion in Chapter 19).
At 64Kbps (kilobits-per-second) PC communication
should become nearly effortless. Senator Albert Gore of
Tennessee is advocating the development of a national
data communications highway connecting universities,
laboratories, and educational facilities, transmitting
at a rate of 3 gigabits (10 to the ninth power) per
second. That's fast enough to send the Encyclopedia
Britannica over the telephone from one computer to
another in less than a minute!

That's the way two professional tech writers saw it back in 1990 or so. Evidently they considered Gore's political sponsorship of that yet-unnamed "data communications highway" was significant enough that they mentioned his name, and no one else's, when they alluded to it.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

political tools

[nomadic]

Regarding political tools, http://www.issues2000.org might be helpful; it lists each major candidate's stand on just about every conceivable issue. I haven't really examined it in-depth, but it appears pretty objective and even-handed.

As for who is the "geek" candidate, I'd say Gore probably fits the geek image better than anyone else (George W.'s frat boy "might not know much but I can hire advisors" mentality seems diametrically opposed to what most geeks hold dear). And yes, Gore didn't invent the Internet, but he was instrumental in getting government funding for DARPAnet, and as far as politicians go, he's one of the most informed on technological issues. Personally, I'd like to finally see someone in the White House who's on the right side of environmental issues (while I believe George W. would pretty much try to gut the EPA, which is what Reagan tried to do in the 80's).
--