Google Launches Open Source Voter Information Tool

An anonymous reader writes "Google announces a new Voter Information Tool which, as its name implies, can be used by voters to find relevant information such as where you can vote and for whom. The search giant is releasing the new feature just over a week in advance of the US Presidential Election on November 6. This raises the question: can Google influence the elections even more than it already does via lobbying?" I've found Ballotpedia useful as well.

Comments

How Does It Raise that Question?

[eldavojohn]

This raises the question: can Google influence the elections even more than it already does via lobbying?

Could you explain to me how this tool raises that question? If you felt that Google was telling you to vote for Obama or Romney with this tool, which one was it because I didn't get a strong feeling for either ... it seems like they were just redisplaying CNN graphs and sending you to news articles. Take it up with the sites you land at and the popularity of their inflammatory headlines, not Google.

When I beg my coworkers, friends and family to vote, I'm not telling them who to vote for nor do I want to know afterwards. I only ask them to inform themselves and hit the booths on November 6th. How is Google's tool any different than that?

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[devjoe]

When I beg my coworkers, friends and family to vote, I'm not telling them who to vote for nor do I want to know afterwards. I only ask them to inform themselves and hit the booths on November 6th. How is Google's tool any different than that?

It's the same, but on a larger scale. Though your coworkers, friends, and family may not vote the same way as you, because you share some part of your life with them, they are more likely to vote as you do than not to. So by encouraging them to vote when they might not have done so otherwise, you effectively increase your political power just a little.

The same applies on a larger scale for Google. By providing this information to potential voters, they hope to encourage more voting, and voting by more informed voters. Whether this actually helps Google is not clear to me, but can it influence the election? Certainly.

This is also why there is all the controversy over voter ID laws. Voters without government ID cards are seen as more likely to vote Democratic, so Democrats are trying to prevent these laws from going into effect while Republicans support them.

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[zill]

If only there was some sort of database out there with all the registered voter's information...

If only the "Feds" had access to such a database...

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[dkleinsc]

The fact that somebody is registered to vote and/or casts a vote is a matter of public record. What's secret is who's name you checked off on that ballot.

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[dkleinsc]

Apparently, providing a way for ordinary people to discover information about reality is displaying a liberal bias.

For example, if you do a Google search on Ron Paul, the first thing you find is Ron Paul's campaign website telling you that "Ron Paul is America's leading voice for limited, constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, honest money, and a pro-America foreign policy." Those evil biased bastards!

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[rvw]

When I beg my coworkers, friends and family to vote, I'm not telling them who to vote for nor do I want to know afterwards. I only ask them to inform themselves and hit the booths on November 6th. How is Google's tool any different than that?

It's the same, but on a larger scale. Though your coworkers, friends, and family may not vote the same way as you, because you share some part of your life with them, they are more likely to vote as you do than not to. So by encouraging them to vote when they might not have done so otherwise, you effectively increase your political power just a little.

The same applies on a larger scale for Google. By providing this information to potential voters, they hope to encourage more voting, and voting by more informed voters. Whether this actually helps Google is not clear to me, but can it influence the election? Certainly.

It could influence the election. I bet that they know for 99% sure whether someone is a Republican or Democrate voter. Plus they might know who is likely not to vote. With their ads they could serve non-voting Democrats and ignore Republicans with this information. I don't believe they're going to do something like this, and if they would and it comes out, they're in big trouble, much more trouble than with the wrong president in power.

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[guruevi]

Why would they be in trouble? As far as I know there is nothing wrong with gearing your message to a specific voter population. See Fox News for example, they have their message tailored specifically to ... let's say mentally challenged people ... and it seems to work for them.

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[cayenne8]

The reason it could influence the election: One of the standard voter suppression tactics is to send out false and misleading information to voters about the time and place they can go vote.

Absolutely!!!

And this year, let's broadcast it, to make it clear so no one misses there day to vote!!

Make sure and remind everyone, that this year, in order to accommodate a large voter turn out, and to make sure no one is disenfranchised, that we've split the dates for voting this year!!

Republicans (the challengers) vote first on Tues. Nov. 6th.

Democrats (the incumbents) will vote the next day on Wed. Nov. 7th.

Please make sure everyone knows this and gets it straight.....

Be Informed!!

Re:How Does It Raise that Question?

[sumdumass]

Yep, Fox New dominates the New channel ratings.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/31/cable-news-ratings-for-tuesday-october-30-2012/155488/

I find it interesting though. In ratings, they lump the under 25 crowd in with the over 2 years of age viewers. It's not until you hit age 25 before they don't think of you as a kid somewhere between infant and adult.

Let me as you something though... Does it yank your chain that more people like Fox News then any other station? ERR I mean that the vast majority of people in the country think differently then you?

Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[eldavojohn]

Let's face it, Romney/Obama isn't really gonna make much difference to me locally compared to the bond referendum that sits on the November 6th ballot. So why is it that neither of these sites contain any information or reference to the my county's proposal to renovate three libraries, build a fourth, expand and improve county and regional parks, rebuild three fire stations, renovate twenty two courtrooms and build a levee and pumping station to protect a community from floods?

I was hoping that Google would have figured out a way to mine this and give me more news and opinions on it. Maybe news items on historical perspectives of what good and bad came from the 2009 referendum?

In Ballotpedia's defense they have the 2009 referendum but no mention of the 2012 ... why do I not find any tools for local government? Is that too difficult and expansive to tackle?

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Hatta]

Indeed. This election has been devoid of any discussion of any issues of importance. Neither major candidate has referenced the fact that the US imprisons more people than any other country in the world. Neither major candidate has noted that despite our love of incarceration, the criminals that caused the 2008 financial crisis still walk free. Drug policy has not made an appearance. Drone strikes have not made an appearance. The TSA has not made an appearance.

The only question in the presidential election is whether you want continued rule by someone who is owned by the corporate elite, or someone who is the corporate elite.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Kenja]

If you really dont think tax law, healthcare, the supreme court, women's rights, military spending and deployment, etc dont matter to you locally, then please just dont vote.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Sarten-X]

This election has been devoid of any discussion of any issues of importance to me.

FTFY

The issues that are being discussed in this election are the issues people (outside Slashdot) are talking about... taxes, abortions, debt, and the like. While we nerds are concerned about the flaws of deadly machines, statistical disparities in the justice system, and the disconnect between security theory and security theater, we are in the minority. Other people are concerned about silly things like killing babies, whether they'll be able to retire, and what country hates us the most.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[eldavojohn]

If you really dont think tax law, healthcare, the supreme court, women's rights, military spending and deployment, etc dont matter to you locally,

Wow, that's not at all what I meant by that statement ... what I meant was that these two presidents will most likely do the same thing on these issues. Do you really think Romney's going to repeal women's rights? Do you really think Obama is going to cut military spending? And even if they don't, they have to fight congress and the house on some of them.

The onus is on you to prove to me that the delta between Romney and Obama on the issues you mentioned will affect me locally more than all of the resources this bond referendum could supply. Yes, there are important national issues but I am saying that local issues are also important and nobody seems to care about them nor does anyone seem to report on them! Can't the mighty Google acknowledge their existence?

then please just dont vote.

Thanks, I respect you and your right to vote too.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Sarten-X]

why do I not find any tools for local government? Is that too difficult and expansive to tackle?

Having worked on an election-information site, I can tell you definitively: yes.

Every state chooses its own process for elections, and often each municipality can change that process as they see fit. There is no requirement that information about the ballots be made available in digital form. There is no requirement that any particular format be used. In some places, the only description of what's on the ballot is a small notice in the local weekly newspaper, and the ballot itself. Even a list of candidates is hard to get for some technology-opposing areas.

When I worked on my particular election site, we had eight people on staff, and five of them were working full-time collecting information from newspapers, government agencies, and sometimes phone calls to the candidates themselves.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

I know what you mean. I just finished my absentee voting and the amendments are written to specifically into tricking you into voting "yes".

For example, amendment 4 in Alabama states on the ballot that voting yes removes all references to segregated education. In reality, that one sentence has been invalid for over 3 decades. I got suspicious and research the bill that was mentioned on the sample ballot and found out that the bill actually removes all language in the State's constitution guaranteeing a person's right to a publicly funded education. If the amendment passes then the state legislature will be allowed to right laws that funnel money from education into their personal pork projects.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Hatta]

Other people are concerned about silly things like killing babies

If that actually happened, nerds would be as concerned about that as anyone else. But infanticide is already illegal.

whether they'll be able to retire

Which is directly related to income inequality and holding the rich accountable when they plunder funds the economy needs to keep running.

and what country hates us the most.

Which is directly related to how many drones we send to drop bombs on civilians in that country.

Of the 3 issues you claim normal people are worried about, one is obviously irrelevant to anyone with a high school biology education and the ability to think critically. The other two are directly related to issues I raised which no candidate has raised.

Nerds aren't a niche interest because we care about stupid things that no one else does. We care about the same things everyone else does, we're different because we're informed.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Kenja]

I think Romney would appoint a a heavily conservative supreme court justice who would over turn row v wade. I think Obama wont massively increase military spending like Romney says he will do. I think that Obama wont fight to repeal "Obamacare" killing my friend. I also dont think Obama will cut taxes in the same manor or extent that Romney will. There are major differences between the two candidates that will effect things far past their terms in office. Regardless of which you vote for, do so for a valid reason or stay home.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Stickybombs]

They don't care when life begins, or they would be lobbying for changes to the tax code too, allowing you to claim a dependent the moment a child is conceived. What they really want is control of you and your body when it suits their needs.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't care when life begins, or they would be lobbying for changes to the tax code too, allowing you to claim a dependent the moment a child is conceived. What they really want is control of you and your body when it suits their needs.

Someone please mod this up. It's never occurred to me that the anti-abortion movement should also be arguing that fetuses are dependents from the moment of conception. That's a fascinating insight.

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[guruevi]

If you followed the debates you may notice that both candidates have the same policies on those topics. Both Romney and Obama have said (on drone strikes, TSA, drug policy and guns): "I agree with the President" or "I agree with Governor Romney"

Re:Where's the Part of the Ballot that Matters?

[WillAdams]

Slippery slope.

It's okay to kill humans under certain circumstances (self-defense &c.).

  - a fetus doesn't have a beating heart until almost halfway through the first trimester (5th week --- http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/prenatal-care/PR00112 )

  - an amputation doesn't result in the death of a person, and no portion of a person likely to be amputated is likely to develop into a person.

  - Cancerous tumors have no reasonable possibility to create a living person.

  - ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny --- a fetus doesn't have a recognizable, human face until well after the 8th week ( http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/844962-overview )

  - ``A fetus responds to the human voice'' --- not until ~16 weeks

The problems w/ outlawing abortion are that enforcement of it requires an invasion of a woman's privacy which is problematic:

  - can't allow pregnant women to travel to anywhere abortion is legal (unless on effects a world-wide ban)
  - every mis-carriage / still-birth must be investigated as a potential murder
  - rape becomes an effective method for a man to procreate

For my part, I'd rather that all the effort which goes into anti-abortion to instead be put into caring for un-wanted children and single mothers. Once we've ensured that every woman who wishes to be pregnant is effectively cared for, then one might be able to justify doing something _to_ women who don't wish to be pregnant.

William

Voter Tools

[kodiaktau]

Voter tools like Publius are far more valuable than the collection of graphs from Google. Voters need a single place to research and look for information about their ballot. Especially for voters on border lines with other states, issues are muddied as TV and radio aren't focused enough to hit just their target market. Looking at a single place where your ballot is laid out is much more effective.

The organization and source of the Google data is questionable in my mind. Not sure why they have chosen to group things the way the did in the Insights tab and makes it look suspicious.

Re:Voter Tools

[asylumx]

Not sure why they have chosen to group things the way the did in the Insights tab and makes it look suspicious.

I'm not sure if maybe we're not looking at the same thing, but the layout looks to me like a list of topics on the left grouped by which debate or which overall topic they regard, and the corresponding poll data on the right. What is "suspicious" about that?