Slashdot Mirror
Bernie Sanders Campaign Blocked From DNC Voter Info After Improper Access (washingtonpost.com)
PolygamousRanchKid writes with news that staffers for the Bernie Sanders campaign improperly viewed the voter data gathered by Hillary Clinton's campaign by exploiting a software error. "The discovery sparked alarm at the DNC, which promptly shut off the Sanders campaign's access to the strategically crucial list of likely Democratic voters. The DNC maintains the master list and rents it to national and state campaigns, which then add their own, proprietary information gathered by field workers and volunteers. Firewalls are supposed to prevent campaigns from viewing data gathered by their rivals." On Wednesday, while the software was being patched, it briefly opened access to all of the restricted voter data. The Sanders campaign fired the staffer responsible for viewing the data, Josh Uretsky. The campaign says their access was simply part of an investigation to determine their own exposure, and blames the vendor (and those who hired it) for improperly securing the data.
The DNC doesn't want Sanders to be their candidate any more than the leadership of the GOP desperately doesn't want Trump to be their candidate - cause they both are afraid it would cost them the election at the Presidential and Senate level (and House seats too). Expect the DNC to do anything it can PR wise to help the expected winner to win. JMHO...
Also, while yammering away about a guy and his exploit through a firewall he himself didn't shut down
The DNC are using this as an excuse to lock the Sanders campaign out of its OWN DATA until whenever.
That data is how we print up lists of voters, addresses, phone numbers, and how we record people's reactions and what they care about. It goes into an NGP-VAN server and will eventually be used by ALL the Dem candidates.
And for 'whatever reason', the Democratic National Committee has decided to tell NGP-VAN to lock the Bernie campaign out of its own data, when we are counting the days until the first primaries.
While arguing about the guy and how guilty he is of data intrusion, try to consider whether it's worth shutting down the whole campaign and locking them out of their computer systems until (unspecified impossible conditions here). Because this is looking like an intra-Democrat coup to coronate Hillary Clinton, and that really helps nobody.
If it's not, why haven't they unlocked the Bernie data yet?
Pretty easy to look like a conspiracy to stop the Bern, when you 'suspend' the campaign and lock the guy out of his own data files. Do you think Hillary Clinton would have been locked out of access to her campaign's data files?
The real question is, for how long. It's an important time, just weeks before the first primaries, and every day counts. This is one day that Bernie's people can't work on getting out the vote, because their systems are down.
Well, not down: they're just not allowed to have them. Because it's totally democratic to handicap one entire campaign for a day or days or who knows HOW long, while allowing the other campaign to carry on canvassing.
Killary's friends run that company who host the database. It's a sham! Killary is a criminal! Nothing more than a chance for her to eliminate the competition!
You Democrats are nothing more than criminals! Chrony capitalism at its finest!
I'm surprised that Sanders' team would access such a database at all. It flies in the face of being a socialist, where personal data is not considered a commodity to sell and buy.
In many more progressive countries, having a database of individuals for this purpose would be illegal. Individual rights trumps any corporate or party interests to data mine personal information, and concessions to run such a database would almost certainly not be granted.
[I have no interest in voting for a socialist as President. Just not my politics. Also there is also NO WAY I'd vote for Hillary Clinton. NO WAY. But...]
After all the political snafus and screw-ups that the Democrats have been involved with in the past 30 years, one thing is clear: NO ONE ever gets fired. Ever.
So, if Bernie Sanders helmed a campaign that FIRED someone--I humbly submit that if you're trying to decide between the two, and don't want more of the same from this f'd up political system--Bernie should DEFINITELY get your vote.
Scott
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
You work hard and are rewarded for the benefit you provide society. The rich have been getting richer for four decades. The middle class is eroded and the working poor are more so than ever. What are the rich being reward for doing? Remember, the only thing the Republicans have shut down the government for was to provide tax breaks for the rich. The Republican party does not represent real conservative values anymore.
No, honey, at most, it is an incorrect statement. Whether it is even incorrect, let's see.
Nope, none of the links were to point-by-point comparisons as you attempted. The links were to Sanders' own program, which look remarkably similar to that of Chaves. Let's see:
Chavez is a communist in the literal sense: nationalization of industry, organizing people into communes and price controls. Sanders wants none of those things. Socialism is simply Communism-lite — the differences are in a degree, not the substance. Chavez did not nationalize industry — except for oil-industry. Does Sanders want to nationalize anything? He certainly did in 2006 even if is mum on the topic now... And he is calling himself "Socialist", which would be a misnomer, if he opposed nationalization. Thus, you've outlined a similarity, not a difference. Fail. Although Sanders also wants to expand social programs Thank, for another similarity. Another Fail. Chavez neglected infrastructure; Sanders wants to increase spending Venezuela's infrastructure-erosion was not part of Chavez plan, it was a consequence of his misgoverning. That Sanders' rule is likely to result the same is one of the points I am making. Chavez instituted currency controls; Sanders has (as far as I know) never advocated such a thing Again, price-controls were a reaction to economy going down the toilet — it was not Chavez plan to do it. That Sanders' rule is likely to result the destruction of economy is one of the points I am making. Chavez was all sorts of corrupt. Sanders is the least-corrupt Ah, so sweet to see a Leftist throw a former idol under the bus in order to promote a new one... But, either way, personal corruption has nothing to do with economics or foreign policies. Chavez was soft on violent crime; Sanders is not Chavez was not "soft on crime" — he was hard on competent policemen, whom he feared and replaced with loyal (if incompetent) ones. But that was not part of his proposals either — it was simply a result of his ideas put to life. Sanders' ideas — which are remarkably similar — will have the same results, whatever his intentions are. Chavez was a militant who supported terrorism, Sanders is the opposite. Chavez didn't support "terrorism", he supported like-minded Communists, who used terrorism (among other methods) "for the greater good". I'm yet to be reassured, Sanders will be different in practice. but it's a fair bet Sanders wouldn't use "oil diplomacy." Huh? You mean, he will not use the "carrot" of money to advance causes he likes? Seriously? Why not?Hey, make up your mind — are RethugliKKKans more like Hitler or like Chavez?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.