Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bernie’s Army of Coders

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 99 posts

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#21

Post by monocasa »

bmelton wrote: post #9
weatherlight wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how you would enforce that, It boils down to free speech really.

And this is why ultimately I agree with the decision in Citizens United. If my bill rate is $200 an hour, then it's possible to put a financial amount on any activity I do in support of a candidate. If they did that, then we would just get the usual brinksmanship (assuming a cap), and I might be "too wealthy" to contribute time to the candidate I support. Contrarily, if I'm just as passionate about a candidate, and h…

The big issue I see with your argument is that volunteer work isn't nearly as scalable as large amounts of money in terms of contributions from an individual. There's a difference between writing an app in your spare time, and running $100M of advertisements.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#22

Post by tn13 »

SilasX wrote: post #2

Interesting! This part got me thinking though: >And last summer a map compiling all the Sanders campaign happenings across the country, built by volunteer Rapi Castillo, a Philippine immigrant living in Queens who isn’t an American citizen and can’t vote this November, became the official “eventslink on Sanders’ website. So a foreigner is effectively giving an in-kind campaign contribution to a candidate? How come pe…

Very interesting point. The only reason I have not donated to volunteered for Rand Paul is because I was foreigner.

Also, I think candidates must show responsibility and least make everyone sign that they are US nationals.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#23

Post by weatherlight »

maxerickson wrote: post #17
weatherlight wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideas are powerful. What Sanders' rise (and to some extent, Trump's) symbolize political system whose representatives that are woefully out of touch with its constituents. I think congress and the Senate is next, we are going to see a huge shake up in each party from the top down. Don't be surprised if we start seeing more Sanders-like-citizens running for Congress. We live in interesting times.

I think you mean candidates. The electorate is the subset of constituents that can vote.

yes...will edit, and thanks!

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#24

Post by SilasX »

Zikes wrote: post #15
SilasX wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but then (per sibling subthread) we're right back to Citizen's United: "So I can spend all the time I want promoting a candidate, but if I use that time to generate money to pay others to promote the candidate, that's prohibited?" Prohibiting "contributions" to candidates, has to infringe on a kind of free speech.

I disagree with the Citizen's United comparison, since donating time towards a campaign can't be pocketed the same way money is. You can't commoditize already-spent labor in that way. Regardless, I think the real solution would be campaign laws similar to the UK's. It's my understanding that each candidate is given the same hard cap on campaign spending, which encompasses everything from advertising to the cost of sl…

>I disagree with the Citizen's United comparison, since donating time towards a campaign can't be pocketed the same way money is. You can't commoditize already-spent labor in that way.

But if it displaces another expense, it causes them to pocket the monetary savings from that expense.

>Every candidate's expenditures are diligently recorded and easily audited if necessary, and it creates a level playing field.

Even the independent expenditures? Like, if someone goes around buying ads because they just like Candidate X so much, does that count against X's budget? Probably not, hence why that approach doesn't quite resolve the Citizen's United issues -- the problem was the advocacy of people unrelated to a campaign.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#25

Post by jefurii »

ck2 wrote: post #4

Before we start admiring things, let's see what happens on Super Tuesday (12 days away). Nothing of what Sanders is doing is going to survive past a left primary. Absolutely nothing he is promising can be done without Congress. ------------ reply to below since I can only answer two replies on HN anymore before being blocked: Wrong comparison. That's like wanting to be manager when you have only worked at a company f…

> If Sanders ideas can work so well, why don't all these eager people first implement them at a local level where they have more immediate power? Nope, they want to go directly to the executive because it is a figurehead.

Lots of people don't pay attention to or vote in local elections so those aren't even on their radar.

You raise a good point though. There's discussion in the Sanders subreddits about doing exactly this, both as a way to channel the energy of his supporters if he doesn't get elected, and as a way to support him if he does.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#26

Post by bmelton »

monocasa wrote: post #21
bmelton wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is why ultimately I agree with the decision in Citizens United. If my bill rate is $200 an hour, then it's possible to put a financial amount on any activity I do in support of a candidate. If they did that, then we would just get the usual brinksmanship (assuming a cap), and I might be "too wealthy" to contribute time to the candidate I support. Contrarily, if I'm just as passionate about a candidate, and h…

The big issue I see with your argument is that volunteer work isn't nearly as scalable as large amounts of money in terms of contributions from an individual. There's a difference between writing an app in your spare time, and running $100M of advertisements.

It gets harder to measure, but on the argument of scalability, that varies dramatically.

If I wrote an app that was as popular as GMail, it's very possibly much more impactful than a $100M worth of advertisements.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#27

Post by Zikes »

SilasX wrote: post #24
Zikes wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the Citizen's United comparison, since donating time towards a campaign can't be pocketed the same way money is. You can't commoditize already-spent labor in that way. Regardless, I think the real solution would be campaign laws similar to the UK's. It's my understanding that each candidate is given the same hard cap on campaign spending, which encompasses everything from advertising to the cost of sl…

>I disagree with the Citizen's United comparison, since donating time towards a campaign can't be pocketed the same way money is. You can't commoditize already-spent labor in that way. But if it displaces another expense, it causes them to pocket the monetary savings from that expense. >Every candidate's expenditures are diligently recorded and easily audited if necessary, and it creates a level playing field. Even t…

Since the labor is an independent expenditure built on public data and the only thing Sanders did was link to it, the expense displacement is effectively nil.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#28

Post by pasquinelli »

bmelton wrote: post #19
weatherlight wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations shouldn't be people though. This is a dangerous precedent.

I disagree 1) that they are, and 2) that they oughtn't be allowed to be for what you're intending. On 1) They aren't persons, but do have a limited degree of personhood. Among other things, that personhood is what allows us to sue them and such. On 2) I don't have a problem with it. If companies have to abide the law, then I can't imagine how it would be that they shouldn't have input into its making. I agree that co…

a corporation isn't a democratic institution, so the wealth that's generated by all the people in that corporation is only available for use by the owners of that corporation. the money everyone generates only amplifies the voice of those people that own the corporation. if a corporation is a democratic institution, with equal influence and participation of all members of it, then i agree there's no problem. that isn't the case for most corporations.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#29

Post by zbyte64 »

bmelton wrote: post #19
weatherlight wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations shouldn't be people though. This is a dangerous precedent.

I disagree 1) that they are, and 2) that they oughtn't be allowed to be for what you're intending. On 1) They aren't persons, but do have a limited degree of personhood. Among other things, that personhood is what allows us to sue them and such. On 2) I don't have a problem with it. If companies have to abide the law, then I can't imagine how it would be that they shouldn't have input into its making. I agree that co…

> better alternative to fixing the problem than limiting people (who form corporations) of their first amendment rights.

That's the crux of the problem though. People who form corporations are granted free speech abilities that are beyond the means of everyone else. Those that own a corporation have no legal limit on the amount of cash they can lend to a political cause while those who do not have their allowed contribution amount capped.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#30

Post by [deleted] »

SilasX wrote: post #2

Interesting! This part got me thinking though: >And last summer a map compiling all the Sanders campaign happenings across the country, built by volunteer Rapi Castillo, a Philippine immigrant living in Queens who isn’t an American citizen and can’t vote this November, became the official “eventslink on Sanders’ website. So a foreigner is effectively giving an in-kind campaign contribution to a candidate? How come pe…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN