Slashdot Mirror
Software for the Grass Roots
An anonymous reader writes "In February at the O'Reilly Digital Democracy Teach-In, technologists from the Dean, Kucinich, Clark and Kerry campaigns laid down arms to share tech plans while their respective camps were still battling it out in the primaries. A (private) list and requirements for fall campaign organizing ensued. Just six weeks ago, a few of the developers converged in San Francisco for a show and tell of their emerging free software tools. Today, the AdvoKit project was the first to tag beta, hoping to kick-start the campaign software revolution in time for November 2nd."
What kind of software is really necessary here? Besides spam software, plain old HTML is usually sufficient.
I know for sure that I'd rather seek out and find information on the candidate that I'm interested in rather than have them force themselves into my email inbox.
But I guess as a libertarian I'm expecting too much privacy from the Democratic (Neo-socialist) party.
Hmmm... I had to convince a friend that free software is a plausible notion, as he simply argued that "If people aren't paying for it, what incentive is there?" But then again, if you're working on free software, then you have some sort of desire... While if you're working underpaid in a cubicle, you wind up having a lot less drive than someone doing it purely for pleasure. I respect those who work on free software immensely...
Nothing new within the last 7 days
This makes it a good /. topic, apparently :-)
I disagree with this. I think we don't need more between the voter and the politicians, we need less. What I want to see is the politicians go door to door, meet people, talk to them. The more politics becomes some equation with all the consultants and marketing experts, the less voting will mean. Politicians will secure their base, do research to find out how to make the middle swing their way, and then give speeches to satisfy those people. More technology will just reinforce this new paradigm. And once this happens, the real power will be with lobbyists, the ones who can fund a candidate to have the best consultants and marketing.
I would love to see a genuinely inspired person run a campagin going door to door, speaking passionatly about what they believe in (and not something scripted by consultants). I would like to see this guy/gal reject lobbyists and do it the old fashioned, grass roots way. Can it be done today, and still win? I think so. But to the uninspired who want the title/power/prestige of public office (and not the public service), they will take the easy way and do a media blitz.
I will finish with one last question. Should it really cost 10 million dollars to run a "sucessful" senate campaign? Should it cost 200 million dollars to run for president? And how does that limit who can run? Only the wealthy? Only the well connected? What about Joe Sixpack who has some good ideas about making life better for the avarage american? Can he possibly run and compete?
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
I'm guessing that you are a bitter Republican who most likely does not like this software because the liberals are using it?
Technology is good because it increases Democracy, if you are conservative you can still use this.
"I will finish with one last question. Should it really cost 10 million dollars to run a "sucessful" senate campaign? Should it cost 200 million dollars to run for president? And how does that limit who can run? Only the wealthy? Only the well connected? What about Joe Sixpack who has some good ideas about making life better for the avarage american? Can he possibly run and compete?"
Hilary Clinton or Barack Obama could run, but they have no chance of winning. It's about winning isnt it?
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
The AGPL is a GNU recognized free software license.
It's essentially a modified GPL - with a "running this software over a network constitutes distribution" clause.
Very cool - I had no idea this was around - might be worth some Free Software developers jumping onto until GPL v3 comes out (which will have a similar clause).
For those who have no idea what I'm going on about - read devchannel's explanation: Closing the GPL's distibution loophole
My pics.
I predict large #s of complaints when the RNC adopts similar strategies.
I realize this is a generalization, but I'll make it anyway. The kind of people who use the internet on a regular basis already know who they're going to vote for. Perhaps this all seems a bit too idealistic to me.
Did you stop and read the requierments on the box?
Upgrading my pc just so i could run the GPL?
BSD uses the GPU to render the license text, which really takes a load off the system. GPL is way behind the times.
And don't get me started on GPL SP2!
Also worth checking out is CivicSpace, the new incarnation of DeanSpace, currently being developed by Civic Space Labs. They recently released a free (speech and beer) zipcode database, and are building in tools mimicing the "get local" aspects of the Dean campaign along with some really cool GOTV stuff.
Everything is based on Drupal, and is very tech friendly....RSS feeds, iCal files for events, etc. It's syndication gone political and is damn impressive stuff.
I built a few sites during the Dean campaign using the first iteration of the tools, and have watched them progress from there. It's definitely worth checking them out if you're looking to build a camapaign site for a candidate or a movement.
Since i'm free software
You to put a verb in your sentence! Or are you the free software messiah we've all been waiting for?
I have no idea how you came to this conclusion. I was critisizing how it is so expensive to run for office. If you look at history, it is the republicans who have been breaking records with the amount of money they raise. And it is the democrats that go into neighborhoods meeting people. How many poorer neighborhoods did Bush go into? Yet I remember Clinton going into ghettos shaking anyones hand who wanted to, and kissing little black babies. I am pretty sure Bush spent more time at $500 a plate fund raising dinners. To be fair, the democrats did it too. But wouldn't it be better if they spent that time with us, rather than giving a canned speech to their supporters?
There is also the question of escalation and responding. If one side starts raising the amount of money they spend, the other side has to try and compete or they will lose. Same thing with tools. One side starts hiring experts to determine what makes the voters tick, and then customizes a campaign to tell the voters what they want to hear, not the real ideas the candidate has. What will the other side do? They will follow those methods or fear losing. And even if one side does something new, and it works, it will be repeated in following elections.
Technology is good because it increases Democracy
What makes you say this? Why is technology good for democoracy? Just because technology is usefull for some things, does it mean it is usefull for all? The problem with technology and politics is it is more easily maipulated than if the candidate was on your block, in front of you, talking with you. You can ask the candidate questions, view their body language. With technology they will sell you a politician the way McDonalds sells hamburgers. They will put up only what they want. The other side will try to smear them. And what are you left with? Do you really know the person?
Hilary Clinton or Barack Obama could run, but they have no chance of winning. It's about winning isnt it?
And while the ultimate goal is to win, sometimes it is about a messege. How popular a topic was the budget deficit before Ross Perot and his commercials. Remember the millions of dollars he spent so his same half hour commercial would be on all the major stations so he could show off his charts? Well, it had an effect. He did not win, but it forced politicians to do something. Because of him, Clinton balanced the budget. And while the republicans out there might say it was congress, the leader of our nation is always the president. He makes all the final decisions, which way to lead our country and what bills to sign into law.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
More like Astroturf if you ask me. If I understand it correctly, the software is meant to tie people together in a way suitable to a political cause, specifically to raise money by judging from the AdvoKit introduction. Reading that, I'd say this is about raising money to finance these ridiculously expensive campaigns (to us Dutch, American politics sometimes seems to revolve around money and little else...) and not about furthering democracy. Tying people together into a pre-arranged framework with the sole purpose of raising money and/or support for a particular cause is not grass-roots, it's Astroturf. Or fund raising, take your pick.
----- One learns to itch where one can scratch.
No, it's more like: this software distributes its source code to anyone who wants it, and you are not allowed to interfere with that.
<li><a name="nid2EL" id="nid2EL"></a><a href="http://goatse.cx/" class="extlink">Advokit</a>
Just goes to show you that you can't trust Dems w/ security.
Sanity is the trademark of a weak mind. -- Mark Harrold
Speaking of Kerry, I just served him dinner!
The constitution originally called for one repersentative for every 30,000 citizens. If this had not been changed, there would be about 10,000 representatives today.
I've watched the way elections work in states such as New Hampshire and Vermont where there are large legislatures and few voters. An aspiring politician can actually meet and talk with every voter. These states are well noted for low priced political ventures.
There are fewer taxes voted when everyone in your district actually knows you, and can go to your door to complain.
This also diffuses political power and makes it difficult for a small clique or boss to run the the legislature as a personal fief.
The solution to the problem of communicating with voters is to have more politicians and smaller districts. Then the only solftware needed would be a few pairs of sneakers.
Its still active and of the major campaign blogs it kicked major ass. It allowed all registered users to have their own blog, which became a very useful feature for individuals to post and retain community information.
It also didn't moderate (except for particularly egregious postings) by removal of posts. It used the moderation system from kuro5hin.org (and was based on scoop), which let the users moderate posts up and down. It worked pretty well, and the community kept a pretty fair hand in moderating.
When the Clark campaign was in full gear, it was the best of the major campaign blogs, by far. There was and is no comparison. And it formed a nice community that is still actively discussing things today.
I always get the shakes before a drop.
Isn't that a perhaps obstructively cynical?
You say: "the software is meant to tie people together in a way suitable to a political cause, specifically to raise money" -- what's wrong with forum designed to allow people who support a cause to organize themselves more efficiently?
I spent a lot of time on a candidate blog this season, and thought it was a good experience. Moral support for activism, with a lot of discussion about what was working and what wasn't. I thought it was a very healthy experience.
As for money, what are we supposed to do? In Holland, maybe you can just shout and everybody will hear you. Here there are 300 million people scattered across four time zones, plus AK and HI. You need mass media to get your message out. People don't contribute because they're snookered into it, they do it to help spread a message they believe in.
Kill, Tux, kill!
The advocacydev wiki linked to in this article has been vandalised, and several links have been redirected to goatse.cx.
So be careful if you are browsing from work.
I could not find an easy way to roll back the changes.
64-40-63-15.nocharge.com seems to be the vandal. Go to Revision 21 if you want the non-vandalised site.
"Software for the Grass Roots"
I nominate Windows XP. Ya'all seen the default wallpaper that comes with it, right?
"Derp de derp."
There's only one way to tell. Does he weigh less than a duck?
Do you publish a newsletter? I would like to subscribe to it.
you forget group interaction; namely, rallys and such. Events such as these can spark discussion and help develop consensue that does not require one on one intreaction with every voter.
The parent of your post was speaking to the human aspect of democracy being marginalized via technology. In that, I very strongly agree.
If our decisions are actually going to mean something, we need to spend a little time discussing them in a very real way.
Blogging because I can...
The software detects Repugnican leanings and refuses to operate.
Maybe I am being cynical. I do not doubt that there are more such as you, who are truly involved and care about the content of politics. More power to you. However, when I read on AdvoKit's web site that its success is measured in the amount of money generated by using it, I get cynical feelings. Why is it not measured in terms of the number of people gotten to rally behind a cause such as equal rights for a minority (gay marriage, anyone?). I do appreciate the difficulties in reaching an audience of 300 million people, but I do not see why that should be so expensive if all that really mattered was content. The way it looks from abroad, American politics is about throwing huge parties, gaining support for your cause by besmirching the other and getting into bed with companies that stand to gain from your gains. I really, really hope that more people such as you take control and see to it that politics again is about trying to make the world a better place for the people.
----- One learns to itch where one can scratch.
Where do you get that AdvoKit is a tool to make money? AdvoKit is tool to keep track of voter records and volunteers. AdvoKit can be used to find lists of voters in your area and to record results after those voters have been contacted. (ie, did they like my candididate, do they want a yard sign, do they want to volunteer, etc). It also keeps track of the volunteers so you can manage your campaign.
http://www.windmeadow.com/
With the publicized loss of Democratic congressional data from a few months ago, I hope some encryption technology is included in this.
PGP was pretty grass-roots when it came out; I wouldn't be surprised if it would be discussed at least once?
If you're really interested, head over to www.forclark.com, make an account and check out the Clark blog. Since the campaign has ended, you'll mostly be picking up a conversation amongst diehards who know each other, but don't be shy. There are regular posters from Sweden, Australia and other countries, so you won't feel too out of place. We all know you can never learn about anything by seeing it through the eyes of the media, so do check it out for yourself.
As for what politics is "about", well, no man gets to choose the terms of his own existence, eh? I think if you spend some time chatting with folks on the blog you'll find many people just trying to make the best of the world as they find it. Give it a shot.
Kill, Tux, kill!
If there's software for grass roots, does that make my lawn a Beowulf cluster ?
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
I would love to see a genuinely inspired person run a campagin going door to door, speaking passionatly about what they believe in (and not something scripted by consultants).
// end rant
I want a sell-out in politics. I don't want an inspired representative. Bush already is (in his own mind, anyway).
I want a rep who will represent me and my beliefs, regardless of his own, thus the term representative. So, give me the guy that won't stick to his beliefs, the guy that will follow the opinions of his electorate and actually do his job, REPRESENT.
I want the guy that is passionate about one thing only, representing me. I don't care about his position on the issues, and neither should he. I care about my position, and so should my rep.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
Wow! Let's just take the four leading names in the world's largest corporate sponsored political party, put them in a room to share tactics and strategies, and call it "grass roots". The longer this campaign goes on the more confusing it gets...
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Some of us are doing it.
I work for an organization that is committed to door to door work (for the DNC, but the RNC has similar orgnaizations, so do unions, church groups, and others).
My organization is at www.grassrootscampaigns.com. We were recently hired by MoveOn to do GOTV in 10,000 swing precincts. That means we need 500 organizors, 10,000 precinct leaders, and 30,000 additional volunteers. It would be great if you could get involved on my side (go Kerry!), but EVERY campaign wants people willing to do some door to door work. Even a few hours a week makes a huge difference. Call your Democratic or Republican town committee, call local candidates, call candidates for state and federal office.
One of the reasons less people do the door-to-door thing is statistics. Less people vote, so it's harder to find likely voters, makes walking a precinct harder. Precinct populations have expanded. A candidate for state rep might, maybe, with a lot of good planning, hit all voters registered his way. Any level above that (state senate, federal office), it is just undoable. You have to pick likely voters who you know should be going for you. Even then, you have to pick a swing county or two to focus your efforts.
Anywho, please consider getting involved, the netroots is wonderful, but the grassroots is where communities grow.
hoping to kick-start the campaign software revolution in time for November 2nd."
Hah, we in NJ already have a place our politicians can meet, it's called alt.com
Trade unions represent lots of unprivileged people. Hollywood people are tightly connected to the total cross-section of Americans who buy their entertainment. These people, successful in working in industry organizations, understand that organizations are effective in politics.
People in America who identify primarily as "the people", rather than "the corporation" favor the Democratic Party over the Republican Party. Grassroots organization is more popular among people than among corporations. Democrat organizers, especially from the Dean, Kucinich and other organizations farther outside their Party structure, understand their advantage among grassroots campaigns, and the success that they, and others with their policies, stand to gain by promoting grassroots organization.
--
make install -not war
Technology lets organizers spend less time on structural and organizational issues, and more time getting people to talk with each other about the issues. It's the classic optimization of digital control of analog systems, which provides the best combination of both direction and fidelity in the communications. Not more, but better technology, that increases communications productivity, measured by successful delivery of messages betwen people. Replacing lots of phone calls and TV studios with websites, emails and interactive messaging means a tech upgrade, not just a tech expansion.
--
make install -not war
I want a boring politician who believes only that their job is to represent their constituency to other politicians, according to the rules in law. Everyone else belongs in a political action group, a nuthouse, or both.
I'd like to see politicians get paid the median income of their constituency, up front for their elected term, then 66% of the ongoing median as pension for the rest of their lives. With no other income allowed, combined with audited financial filings every year until they die. That way, they'd have their compensation connected directly to their constituents' income, and nothing else. Combine that with campaign contributions allowable only to the race for the office itself, tappable equally by every candidate, with free, equal time guaranteed on PBS. And 66% of their time available only to constituents, with their schedules and votes published on their websites. That would clear out most of the bribery, and provide a predictable, stable bureaucratic workforce in the business of representation. Overachievers would be diverted to propaganda as their tactic for political influence.
--
make install -not war