Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scott Walker Rents Out Email and Donor Lists To Pay Campaign Debt (wisconsingazette.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the do-what-you-gotta-do dept.

An anonymous reader writes: In an effort to pay off his hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt racked up from his failed presidential run, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is renting out his email and donor lists to other candidates. Wisconsin Gazette reports: "The campaign owed $1.2 million at the end of 2015 and has paid off about $308,000 since then, according to campaign finance records. The bulk of those payments have been made possible by income from Granite Lists, a New Hampshire-based company that rents out Republican donor lists. Granite Lists has paid more than $172,000 to Walker's campaign since it ended in September. In April alone, Granite Lists brought the campaign nearly $50,000, comprising most of the total $70,930 the campaign brought in that month. In addition to flat-rate charges, candidates can set up revenue-sharing agreements, where some of the proceeds they obtain from donors are diverted back to the list owner. Candidates can also pay a flat rate of $10,500 to email Walker's entire 675,000-person email list and $7,000 to email the 225,000 donors and presidential sign-ups, according to Granite Lists website. [Granite Lists] calls Walker's donor file 'one of the hottest donor lists to hit the market in years.'"

113 comments

  1. I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    And sent Ron Paul $10.

    In return, to this day, I'm still getting batshit ramblings in my inbox from all over the Republican spectrum.

    Never again.

    1. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

      I sent $27 to Bernie. No regrets.

    2. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      charity helping people... obviously you're not from the USA

    3. Re: I was young and stupid once. by davester666 · · Score: 1

      more like throwing money in a trash fire and declaring it money well spent.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does help people, if anyone but bernie is voted in by Americans, the rest of the world will suffer.

      You are either American and a hater of bernie, or just a dumbfuck.

    5. Re:I was young and stupid once. by luminousone11 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I generally don't believe in charity, I believe in changing the system that created the need for charity in the first place.

      Granted I will fully admit that its a bit of a Marxist view, But you can't give with the right hand, what you toke with the left hand, its a fundamentally uneven exchange.

      Sure I could take that $27 dollars and feed a couple homeless people for a day, or I could spend that on changing the system that created the inequality that created those homeless people in the first place.

      Government provided access to health care/mental health care, low education jobs, Education, and housing programs will do much more then a single food/money donation ever could.

    6. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Imrik · · Score: 1

      If Bernie is voted in, Americans will suffer under our crushing national debt.

    7. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Deficits don't matter".

      Dick Cheney

    8. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I sent $27 to Bernie. No regrets.

      dot dot dot for now.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    9. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Deficits are unpatriotic."
      - Barak Obama

    10. Re:I was young and stupid once. by khallow · · Score: 1

      But you can't give with the right hand, what you toke with the left hand, its a fundamentally uneven exchange.

      Who takes in a democracy? Only the government has that power legally. Everyone else has to trade and offer something in exchange.

    11. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      My only regret would be if hillotrumpery became president. They're like that beast from the movie The Thing.

    12. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

      But you can't give with the right hand, what you toke with the left hand, its a fundamentally uneven exchange.
       

      What if you toke with both hands? Sounds good to me.

    13. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow... what a naive point of view. if only government could just spend a few bucks and solve all of the ills of mankind....

    14. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like a true Anonymous Coward

    15. Re:I was young and stupid once. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      I sent $27 to Bernie. No regrets.

      I sent him $10 bucks. Also no regrets.

      It was the first time I ever donated to a political campaign, and possibly the last.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    16. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, yes, it's all the government's doing from start to finish; corporations and their lobbyists are just victims begging the mindless evil monster that they totally hate to help them steal the rest of us blind. Christ, were you born that stupid or did you take lessons?

    17. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      I did the same thing, and got a million e-mails starting with 'Dear Patriot!'

      Never again.

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
    18. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

      As a person who saw what St. Jude did for my family, I can assure you money given to them is well-spent.

      --
      "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
    19. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Dread_ed · · Score: 2

      Are you really operating under the easily discredited illusion that the president gets to write and pass legislation?

      Bernie would be the most stymied president ever. Besides, his political positions and socialist agenda are not why you elect him.

      You elect him to increase the political IQ of every voter in the US through the way he frames the issues, specifically not in terms of bolstering entrenched corporate and wealthy interests. You elect him for the things he would obstruct, namely the further enrichment of business interests and the wealthy .5% at the expense of everyone else.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    20. Re:I was young and stupid once. by khallow · · Score: 1
      Here, the grandparent proposes taking wealth from whoever has seizable wealth, funnel it through a machine designed for taking wealth, and give what's left to the people that he just took the wealth from. As he wrote himself:

      But you can't give with the right hand, what you toke with the left hand, its a fundamentally uneven exchange.

      You add on the remarkably dense observation that there are corporations and lobbyists who can use the power of this government to their own ends. As I said and you confirm, the government remains the only party legally taking from anyone. But sure, let's give them more power to rob us blind. That hasn't failed hard in the past. Or least not enough for you to notice.

      That immense cognitive dissonance coming off of you two has got to hurt. Maybe you better take an aspirin for it.

    21. Re:I was young and stupid once. by i.kazmi · · Score: 1

      O wise one, since you clearly know what charities one should be donating to, please be kind enough to provide a list of the charities you approve of and that you think actually help people. The rest of humanity would be indebted to you for generations to come...

    22. Re:I was young and stupid once. by luminousone11 · · Score: 2

      It can either spend a few bucks to solve all sorts or ills, or it can spend a few bucks to cause them...

      $22,000 Average cost of policing each homeless person per year
      $45,000 Average cost per person placed in prison per year
      $75,000 Average cost per person found dead with no family, savings, or estate to auction, when funeral/cremation is left to be paid for by local government
      $130,000,000,000 Yearly cost of uncompensated health care at emergency rooms shifted onto your health care insurance premiums, and doctor copays by the poor

      Don't delude yourself, not paying isn't an option. Their is no magic scenario where you don't pay.

      We can either spend on compassionate programs to help people, or we can spend more money through various private gatekeepers and local governments and pretend we are not spending because its not on our federal tax statement, and generally have cruel outcomes that damage society as a while.

    23. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      https://support.catholiccharit...
      https://www.habitat.org/cd/giv...

      I am sure there are more, but those are off the top of my head.

      Not the AC, but I don't understand this pessimism, there are good charities that work to help poor people out there.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    24. Re:I was young and stupid once. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Vote Johnson?

      https://garyjohnson2016.com/

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    25. Re:I was young and stupid once. by i.kazmi · · Score: 1

      I never said there were no good charities or that giving to charities was a bad or unacceptable thing...I have a direct debit set up with a couple of charities that I support (two cancer research/treatment non-profits, one disaster relief charity).

      What I was pointing out was the utter stupidity of what the AC was saying, who decides what charities help people more? There are charities which provide medical aid or housing or legal aid or food or an education or a myriad of other services/products to the underprivileged, who decides which of these are more deserving of someone's money? The AC? I don't think so.

      Also, how is giving to charitable entities the same thing as making a political donation? If I decide to donate to a politician, it'd be to help a candidate who at least claims to hold the same ideals I have, it might not pan out or it might, but doing nothing and hoping for things to change is just plain dumb. I guess the only people who think that giving to a politician in the hopes of effecting change are either the people who think that the world as it is today is perfectly fine and does not need to change or the people who are so extremely dejected that they feel that no matter what someone does, nothing would ever change. If the AC falls into the first category then they are a fucking imbecile whereas if they fall into the second category, they need a psych eval and probably should be placed in a padded white room before all that anger and frustration boils over and makes them do something extreme!

    26. Re: I was young and stupid once. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Bernie is voted in, Americans will suffer under our crushing national debt.

      So a complete Revolution you say?

  2. Basically how he's running wisconsin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only he could recognize the value of forethought in spending more than attacking unions.

    1. Re: Basically how he's running wisconsin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Fighting unions is a waste of time and money. Unions are doing a great job of making automation more affordable.

  3. Campaign reform may be in order by rmdingler · · Score: 1
    The simplest way to reform the American political process would be to fund campaigns with tax money.

    It would, at least, afford large donors the opportunity to bribe their politicians the old fashioned way.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I'm getting kind of sick of going into the office every day... instead under your system I think I will 'campaign' for public office... from the beach, from my back yard, from the local amusement park with my kid... and let you and the other tax payers pick up some good portion of the tab.

      Sound good?

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    2. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Fwipp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure, as long as you get the X signatures required to be recognized as an official candidate.

    3. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm getting kind of sick of going into the office every day... instead under your system I think I will 'campaign' for public office... from the beach, from my back yard, from the local amusement park with my kid... and let you and the other tax payers pick up some good portion of the tab.

      Sound good?

      Like you can't do that right now anyway.

      All you need to do is get enough existing people to believe in YOUR cause.

    4. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by bluelip · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yeah, non-existing people are known to vote liberal anyhow.

      --

      Yep, I never spell check.
      More incorrect spellings can be found he
    5. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The simplest way to reform the American political process would be to fund campaigns with tax money.

      There are two ways to do this, and neither is acceptable:
      1. Give most of the funding to incumbents and major parties, which helps lock-in the status quo.
      2. Give equal money to challengers, which means David Duke gets funded with tax dollars, along with every other kook who registers to run.

      Currently we have a hybrid system where candidates get matching funds for what they raise privately. There is little political will to go any further.

    6. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      But any campaign funds can only be used for the campaign. So save those peanuts from coach class if you go hungry. You will still need to borrow against your mortgage if you quit your day job to go campaigning.

      Oh, add a proviso to the bill that politicians only get paid when they're at work, with only 10 vacation days a year for campaigning purposes or travel, anything beyond that comes out of their pockets. Any political party meetings will have to happen after hours.

    7. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's exactly the way it works. With enough signatures, anybody can get on the ballot. The money angle is bullshit. Money has more influence on the voter than the politician. It's being spent to convince everyone to vote 'correctly' to make sure the *right lizard* gets in. And with 98% compliance, it is an outstanding success. It is the voters who give power to money. You could vote for, say, the Greens, and turn all the other guy's money into confetti. The choice is yours, not theirs.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    8. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      Um, exactly who is going to write these provisos? I mean, if we are going run the country by referendum, let's fire all the politicians and save a buckets of money. And also, if reformist politicians can win elections, "campaign reform" would be a moot issue.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    9. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by rmdingler · · Score: 1
      Alright...for this to pass Congressional muster, you'd have to be more than persuasive; you'd have to be convincing in your apparent push to continue the status quo, or your reform legislation stands no chance of getting out of committee.

      Yes, if Duke met the prerequisite requirements for funding, he would get it: that's your representative republic.

      Your democracy can be (sort of) all inclusive and flawed or, if you prefer, muddled with nonelected candidate selectors.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    10. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Prien715 · · Score: 1

      Or how about
      3. Use polling data to determine the candidates popularity. Release funds weekly where a candidates given share of the pot is equal to their polling percentage.

      No parties, no money for David Duke, but plenty of money for popular independents.

      --
      -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
    11. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      I'll sign for you if you sign for me. Bring some friends and we can all reach the requirement in no time at all.

    12. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey look, the NYT, who has been caught lying countless times now, just polled Clinton at 98% and Sanders at 2%. That means Clinton will get $10 million while Sanders gets $2561.

      That sounds much better, just let them decide how much they and their opponents get and all it requires is printing a fake story, which seems to happen nearly every day.

      Actually the US became great by having freedom of speech. Any attempt to abridge it, no matter how well intentioned, will end up being far worse than just letting anyone say anything. For example Jeb spent nearly $100 million to get below 5%, the most spent for nearly the bottom results. More money doesn't mean much.

    13. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I'm getting kind of sick of going into the office every day... instead under your system I think I will 'campaign' for public office... from the beach, from my back yard, from the local amusement park with my kid... and let you and the other tax payers pick up some good portion of the tab.

      Sound good?

      You don't know how public financing of elections works, do you? You just typed what you thought would be a "real talk" comment without having a single clue as to the mechanism by which public financing of campaigns takes place.

      I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a Trump supporter.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I'll sign for you if you sign for me. Bring some friends and we can all reach the requirement in no time at all.

      Do you know how many signatures it takes to get on a statewide ballot? I don't think "some friends" is going to cut it. For you.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    15. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, non-existing people are known to vote liberal anyhow.

      And what about illegals*? They're not REALLY illegal immigrants. They're unregistered Democrats! No really, this tendency is overwhelming and (unlike the immigrants) it's well documented.

      * Did you know? Most illegal immigrants are, in fact, not Mexican. The majority of them are from all over South America.

    16. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      3. Use polling data to determine the candidates popularity. Release funds weekly where a candidates given share of the pot is equal to their polling percentage.

      Which polls are included? Who gets to run the polls? Who decides who gets to run the polls? Who pays the deciders? Can the deciders accept contributions?

    17. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1

      You mistakenly assume acquiring signatures is hard.

      Even in a state like Washington where they keep on file your 'official' signature to validate your signature on a ballot or petition there are trivial ways around it.

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    18. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1

      Like you can't do that right now anyway.

      All you need to do is get enough existing people to believe in YOUR cause.

      You misunderstand my desire to campaign... I don't want to have to spend time asking for money, I just want to 'campaign' in nice to be places... sometimes with other people around.

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    19. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1

      You don't know how public financing of elections works, do you? You just typed what you thought would be a "real talk" comment without having a single clue as to the mechanism by which public financing of campaigns takes place.

      Care to enlighten me then?

      I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a Trump supporter.

      Nope, not a fan. In fact I voted for Sanders on Tuesday (not that it matters in Washington)... come November Johnson or McAfee will get my vote (given how hard blue Washington is).

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    20. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Care to enlighten me then?

      I live to serve.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    21. Re: Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the party level you get an amount based on the voting results last time

    22. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No - let's get rid of political parties altogether. Round up all of the politicians, put them all in a field .... I don't understand why we can't just treat it like jury duty - evey 4 or 5 years just pick a bunch of people at random out of the phone book, & that's your government for the next 4/5 years. Think of the money it'd save on elections. Can't be much worse than the current system I think.

    23. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not very well if you're posting a dubious second hand source instead of the authoritative one.

    24. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

      Sound good?

      No but it does sound like you are already well on the way to becoming a politician.

    25. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Come to www.campaignlife.com and sign for me and a thousand others, we all sign for each other, won't take long to reach critical mass that way.

      You were saying it was hard how, exactly?

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    26. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1

      So your 'enlightenment' is... a lengthy Wikipedia article?

      Again, I'm claiming to be lazy, I want to campaign from my backyard for higher office and have the government pay for it... where exactly (at least link to an anchor section) which say I can't do that under the proposed systems?

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    27. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Come to www.campaignlife.com and sign for me and a thousand others, we all sign for each other, won't take long to reach critical mass that way.

      Online signatures are not valid for the purpose of getting on a ballot. Online petitions are not valid for the purpose of getting on a ballot.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    28. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Again, I'm claiming to be lazy

      You've made your point on that count.

      I want to campaign from my backyard for higher office and have the government pay for it

      You have to get on the ballot to get public funds. How are you going to collect enough signatures to get on the ballot from your back yard?

      Let's start there. Once you crack that code, get back to me and we'll move on to the next point.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    29. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please donate to my campaign to get enough signatures to campaign

    30. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1

      You have to get on the ballot to get public funds. How are you going to collect enough signatures to get on the ballot from your back yard?

      See my reply to another comment: https://slashdot.org/comments....

      Here in Washington, we have perennial candidate (ands self described extraterrestrial) who manages to get onto the ballot just about every time, so clearly there is a way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      There are many ways it can be done, per my reading of state law, I can't at this time share the method I've figured out (as part of a larger electoral flaw here).

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    31. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Here in Washington, we have perennial candidate (ands self described extraterrestrial) who manages to get onto the ballot just about every time

      The threshold for local elections is much lower. Also, don't assume the candidate is as lazy as you just because he's an extraterrestrial.

      per my reading of state law,

      That's funny.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    32. Re:Campaign reform may be in order by DaHat · · Score: 1

      per my reading of state law,

      That's funny.

      If you end up discovering a major vulnerability in an entire states electoral system which could be maliciously used to sway local or state wide elections, and be done from ones basement without any official support (though a campaign level org having even more money to dedicate to such trickery would be able to exploit it in an even wider way)... what do you do?

      Report it? Given the political leanings in this state it would be dismissed, despite each individual component having been independently tested.

      Use it for your own gain? I prefer to limit my exposure to jail time and felony convictions thank you very much.

      Nothing short of an end to end demonstration is required, something that would break numerous state & federal laws... after all, the powers that be claim to be against you voting on behalf of other people... and simple reading of state law says that revealing the flaw would constitute election fraud.

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
  4. Expect no help coming from Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Christie was smart about this...

  5. If you're wondering about Democrats by chispito · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Yes, Democrats do this, too. From a 2014 article:

    The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee rented the Obama for America list twice in April, services valued at $135,000, according to an FEC report.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    1. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Nutria · · Score: 2

      Exactly.

      Anyone shocked that Scott Walker is doing this is either (a) too naive to be allowed to breed, or (b) grossly partisan for the other side. (Anyone want to bet how naive that reporters from the Wisconsin Gazette are?)

      Besides, he's paying off his debt by doing something completely legal.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    2. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by chispito · · Score: 1

      (Anyone want to bet how naive that reporters from the Wisconsin Gazette are?)

      The publication's tagline is "Progressive. Alternative." I don't think it's naivete.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    3. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Hillary will be renting out a whole email server!

    4. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Nutria · · Score: 1

      [grin]

      And the people who read it and are genuinely shocked?

      OR... does their bias blind them, causing the naive shock and rage?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    5. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody was wondering. A little bit over-sensitive, are we?

    6. Re: If you're wondering about Democrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Note however that fact doesn't make Scott Walker a scumbag - because he is - he's just not a scumbag for this.

    7. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Or (c) from a different country and shocked at how unprincipled that bunch is now. I think even Nixon would blush.

    8. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Or (c) from a different country and shocked at how unprincipled that bunch is now. I think even Nixon would blush.

      That's code for "I'm grossly partisan against Walker."

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    9. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations, you've managed to make your point that we should just expect everyone to be a shitty asshole.

      Just remember: whoever wins next time, it doesn't even matter, because only people "too naive to breed" expect any of them to be better than the others.

    10. Re:If you're wondering about Democrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One good reason why if I want to donate to someone, I set up accounts to do so - and close them down after the elections.

  6. I don't see the problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, these people are corrupt salesmen. What in the world do you expect? The people supporting them know what they're getting into. If they wish to discourage the practice, they will associate with and vote for a higher class of person.

    And dear Slashdot,
    Why can spammers post more frequently than me? What do I have to shill to get the same privileges? You name it, I'll do it, no problem. Just say the word, and I'm there, dude.

  7. Candidates Only Care About What U Can Do for Them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet more proof that most politicians think you are there to help them, not the other way around. It so ingrained that they don't even see anything wrong with selling your loyalty to any other politician like a trading card. Pledge your fealty, serfs!

    On the plus side, if you want to create a fake identity then donating a couple of bucks in that identity's name to a campaign should be a great way to populate those Big Data databases that fake info.

  8. More than once by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

    I've thought it would be an unbelievably valuable idea to start a fake conservative blog to farm email lists of gullible dopes. I see that Scott Walker was ahead of me on this count. Well played, Herr Walker... well played.

    --
    Who did what now?
  9. Going in to debt by Spookticus · · Score: 1

    I just do not understand, why is it necessary to go in to debt to run for president of this country...Perhaps to sell your soul now so that you can sell it later....

    1. Re:Going in to debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not necessary. Bernie won't be in any debt

    2. Re:Going in to debt by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      I just do not understand, why is it necessary to go in to debt to run for president of this country

      It's not. The idea is to hold fundraisers and such to get others to pay for your campaign. You're not supposed to use your own money, silly.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  10. Bigger question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did he intend to repay his debts if he were President?

    1. Re:Bigger question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty easy to raise money if you're a sitting president.

  11. Where is your sponsors Scott? by siamesevodka · · Score: 2

    Apparently Charles and David Koch have abandoned their favorite son. They could pay his debts out of petty cash. But they won't. Kind of reminds you of those two old goats in the movie trading places doesn't it?

  12. Sure as shit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And 100% guarantee that the decaying mummy who goes by bernie sanders and that liar who calls herself hillary are doing the same fucking exact thing.

    1. Re:Sure as shit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doubtful. They're raising a ton of money every month and there's no reason to spam their lists while they're raking it in

  13. Short attention span by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Clue that it is not the case is at the start of the first sentence.

    1. Re:Short attention span by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Clue that it is not the case is at the start of the first sentence.

      Not if you're a big fan of the Wisconsin Gazette but don't realize your naivete.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    2. Re:Short attention span by dbIII · · Score: 1

      If you read that first sentence you will realise exactly how wrong you are and why I have not even heard of that publication. Maybe check my spelling for another clue.

      As for naive - US politics certainly looks like that at the moment. A fucking insane autocrat is attempting to lead a party with "republic" in that name as if George Washington didn't revolt to form a republic after getting out from under the rule of an insane autocrat - and people don't seem to notice! How fucking naive is that? A casino boss is telling them he cares and he is believed. How fucking naive is that?

  14. Republican Financial Acumen by LMariachi · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The campaign owed $1.2 million at the end of 2015 and has paid off about $308,000 since then, according to campaign finance records."

    Did anyone expect anything else from an erstwhile rising star of the "party of fiscal responsibility?"

    Or are they not even bothering to try to push that bullshit anymore?

    1. Re:Republican Financial Acumen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pushing shit is really the only thing you can do with it.

    2. Re:Republican Financial Acumen by pz · · Score: 1

      Why is this comment marked funny? Paying of 1/4 of a million-plus dollar debt in about nine months is (a) nothing to sneeze at, and (b) fiscally responsible. The campaign is repaying its loans. How is that not good? How is that not the right thing to do?

      I'm not arguing whether it is right or just or ethical to go into debt to campaign for public office (from my naive understanding, nearly all major campaigns operate under a deficit spending model), but there's no way you can argue that making efforts to pay off your debts, and making decent progress at it, is dishonorable.

      Furthermore, we have not idea what the terms of the loans are. He could have 20 years to pay it off, or 2, for all we know.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    3. Re:Republican Financial Acumen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's marked funny because Slashdot has been bought out by a batch of militant Democrats who come through each story with a combination of infinite mod points and the ability to sever comments from all search methods (I watched one get removed from a discussion yesterday, probably because it mentioned the general trend of US scholastic resource wasting). However, the owner-trolls do seem to still abide by the "one vote per login" rule on each comment, so enough real users can countermod as long as the owners don't overhaul the karma system.

    4. Re:Republican Financial Acumen by whipslash · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot

    5. Re:Republican Financial Acumen by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.
        -- Dick Cheney (to Paul O'Neil)

      Most budgets as given by Republican candidates would have blown up the deficit. As much as Trump has a budget (he's very fuzzy on specifics) would also blow up the budget.

      Clinton cut the deficit. Obama has shrunk government (many who see Democrats only as spenders can not see that) and has shrunk the deficit a lot since his first year and the Great Recession. Economic numbers generally do better under Democrats.

    6. Re:Republican Financial Acumen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These guys all live in a world where leverage is used to succeed and get ahead. As such they are proposing now to elect King Leverage himself. He will surely choose to get us more so in to debt and then have us go bankrupt and ask all creditors for a hair cut. Oh wait! He said that.

  15. This is nothing new, and everyone does it... by WinterBeard · · Score: 1

    My wife worked as a staffer for a couple of years in early 2k and this is nothing new, every politician, and political organization does this on both sides of the party.

    1. Re:This is nothing new, and everyone does it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up. Mod TFA down (I keep asking if moderators can mod TFA down and out of existence).

      I donated to obama (against Hillary) in 2008. My name was handed to every other democrat from the county level on up through state and national. Presuming I was a democrat. So yea, nothing new here. Save that /. is picking on a republican ... which again, nothing new there either.

  16. Two methods of list-pimping by Taser · · Score: 2

    There are two different versions of list-pimping that are going on regarding e-mail lists:

    It can be sold/rented for a fixed amount ($X).
    OR
    It can be sold/rented for a fixed percentage of the incoming donations (Y%).

    An older article on Politico (Dec 2015) details the issue, where the candidate on the e-mail may not receive any of the money being donated.

    http://www.politico.com/story/...

  17. Rents out? by crtreece · · Score: 2

    How do you rent out an email list? Normally renting implies that you give the thing back at the end of the rental term, which I have a hard time believing would happen here.

    --
    file: .signature not found
    1. Re:Rents out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One way to do it -- I have no idea if this is actually what they are doing -- would be to not actually give them the email list but instead to give them access to send messages to it via an intermediary. They'd never actually see who exactly they are contacting, and access can be revoked by blocking access to that intermediary.

  18. Mailing list rental by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Posting anon because I'm at work and work for a commercial mailer.

    A lot of charities do this, and based on other comments, other politicians/parties to this. As for how it's done, the lists are usually rented for a limited number of mailings, usually one or two, and contain seeds to detect re-use. If a company uses a list again without paying for it, it will get noticed and they will basically get blackballed and be unable to rent a list again. There are several companies that handle this, and often a rental can actually be just an exchange of an equal number of donors, rather than paying x$/1000 names.

  19. What about the ones faxed in? by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Create online petition.
    Provide a print_out-sign-fax_in form.
    ???
    Profit.

    Also, shouldn't stuff like GPEA make sure that electronic signatures are treated equally as ones made on paper?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    SEC. 1707. ENFORCEABILITY AND LEGAL EFFECT OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS.

            Electronic records submitted or maintained in accordance with
    procedures developed under this title, or electronic signatures or other
    forms of electronic authentication used in accordance with such
    procedures, shall not be denied legal effect, validity, or
    enforceability because such records are in electronic form.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:What about the ones faxed in? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      It's been tried. The only kind of signatures currently allowed for ballot access are the old-fashioned kind that you write with a pen on paper.

      Except in Utah, where along with signatures, local officials will accept an "X", as well as road kill (as long as it's fresh). In Utah, they are trying electronic signatures, but to be fair Utah really doesn't matter.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:What about the ones faxed in? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      the problem with any election reforms is that the people who would have to approve it have a vested interest in the status quo.

    3. Re:What about the ones faxed in? by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Status quo has a half-life of a generation.
      Voter demographics changes completely every 18 years, with yearly changes taking place as people age into it and die out of it.

      The whole voter registration shenanigans that Republicans are pulling to keep brown people from voting and the enthusiasm of Bernie Sanders fans - and even Trump and his supporters are a living sign of those two forces clashing.
      So were the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements.
      Even Hillary ended up promising to get the big money out of politics.

      There is no such thing as status quo.
      It only seems so cause we count our time in seconds and minutes - while societies and governments count it in decades and centuries.

      BTW... Your nick... Battle Angel Alita or Blue Oyster Cult?

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    4. Re:What about the ones faxed in? by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Well... that's clearly discriminatory against roadkill jerky.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    5. Re:What about the ones faxed in? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      Blue Oyster Cult.

    6. Re:What about the ones faxed in? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      The whole voter registration shenanigans that Republicans are pulling to keep brown people from voting

      Looks like you bought that whole controversy...
      No, no one is trying to prevent anyone from voting, Texas even offered people free IDs, though living in today's society is nearly impossible without ID, so they should have already had one.

      AND, many Democrat controlled states already have voter ID laws that are roughly the same as the Texas Voter ID law from last election season.

      https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      But let's play the party line, it was all about racism and preventing black voters!

      http://www.votetexas.gov/regis...

      Heck, if you can't afford to get an ID, just vote by mail, that shouldn't be too hard should it?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  20. idiots again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is this comment marked funny?

    whooosh!

    fiscally responsible.

    So making an attempt to pay off a debt somehow "erases" the irresponsibility of running up the debt in the first place?

    I'm not arguing whether it is right or just or ethical to go into debt

    BUT YOU JUST DID

    1. Re:idiots again by pz · · Score: 1

      So making an attempt to pay off a debt somehow "erases" the irresponsibility of running up the debt in the first place?

      You're saying that, not me.

      I'm not arguing whether it is right or just or ethical to go into debt

      BUT YOU JUST DID

      Nope, I didn't. I argued about whether it is right or just or ethical TO PAY OFF ONE'S DEBTS.

      And, should anyone else get all huffity, plenty of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, including our current sitting president, have racked up massive campaign debts. I make no judgement on whether going into debt to finance a campaign is good or not -- I accept it as the current standard behavior. Paying off one's debts (which seems to be a long-term problem for Democrats, Republicants, and Independents, also including our current sitting president), is a morally good thing.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  21. Translation by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    "Scott Walker Rents Out Email and Donor Lists To Pay Campaign Debt"

    Translation:

    "Scott Walker Is A Scumbag Who Doesn't Give A Shit About Your Privacy"

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...