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

The Republican Party has an API

gop.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#31

Post by endtime »

astine wrote: post #29
yummyfajitas wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the tip. I was completely unaware of that when I wrote my original post. That's why I posted a long political diatribe, rather than a short snarky emulation of people who use a post like this as an excuse to launch into long irrelevant political diatribes.

I think we all detected your sarcasm, but who in particular are you responding too? I haven't seen any diatribes yet, and I think that it would be best that any reactions or responses to them should be actual replies. Just my two cents.

I think we all detected your sarcasm, but who in particular are you responding too?

Scroll down? There are several people who made politically motivated comments. That said, perhaps the fact that they were all downvoted into oblivion is response enough.

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#32

Post by yummyfajitas »

jhancock wrote: post #30
jacoblyles wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can keep tabs on what half the government is doing. And there are honest-to-god Republican activists out there (check the comments with negative ratings on the bottom of social news sites) who want to know what their party is up to and keep it on task. Much like how others might want to know what the Obama administration or the Democratic caucus is up to. All in all, I think it's pretty awesome. I hope the Democr…

If the GOP wants its own API, it belongs at http://api.rnc.org/ I understand that many/most are partisan and may only want to keep tabs on "their guys". But the idea of the U.S. gov paying for _any_ partisan site such as this is terrible. I find it hard to understand how its even legal.

The government pays for political campaigns, and I don't think the legality of that is in dispute. This doesn't seem much different from that.

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml

Note: I think it's terrible policy, I'm just pointing out the precedent.

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#33

Post by lallysingh »

cabalamat wrote: post #23
jacoblyles wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can keep tabs on what half the government is doing. And there are honest-to-god Republican activists out there (check the comments with negative ratings on the bottom of social news sites) who want to know what their party is up to and keep it on task. Much like how others might want to know what the Obama administration or the Democratic caucus is up to. All in all, I think it's pretty awesome. I hope the Democr…

> I hope the Democrats will follow suit, or that Congress will put up a general API. The worst thing would be if the Dems followed suit, but using a different API. Yuck.

It'd be hilarious for the two to use the same API, then patent it so that the Libertarians couldn't use it.

Just to piss them off :-)

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#36

Post by thwarted »

wheels wrote: post #20
thwarted wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can keep tabs on what half the government claims they are doing. Without another, independent source, preferably also with an API, verification will be hard to do.

You obviously didn't look at the API. It's just factual information (comittees, voting history, etc.) about Republican congress members. Failing technical errors, that will be accurate. I'm anything but a Republican, but I hate when there's a seriously cool effort made by the Republicans that everyone here immediately jumps into a negative tone and tries to find things wrong with it. That's even pettier than the stuf…

I did look at the API. And government generated "factual information" still should be verified -- thankfully this information is verifiable (in the scientific sense). My observation was not about any party in particular, it was an observation about politics in general. Really, a party of a single branch of government providing its own status and historical information would seem to be less (however slightly) trustworthy than if the Library of Congress provided an API to the data they already collect, or if the Executive branch provided a check on the other branches through providing a service to the people like this.

I mean, election recounts seem to have more cross party and cross branch involvement and checks than the day to day operations of the government.

It is part of the civic duty of every citizen to question the motives and actions of their government, no matter which party is involved.

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#37

Post by mileszs »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #15
tjr wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not.

Thanks for the tip. I was completely unaware of that when I wrote my original post. That's why I posted a long political diatribe, rather than a short snarky emulation of people who use a post like this as an excuse to launch into long irrelevant political diatribes.

I think the point of the negative votes was to try to get the point across that sarcasm, snarkiness, whatever, adds nothing to the conversation. A better tactic would be to add a negative vote, or simply post something thoughtful that adds to the conversation that began with the posted link, or both, or nothing at all. In my opinion, those are all more worthwhile options than adding to the meaningless comments.

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#38

Post by patio11 »

cabalamat wrote: post #23
jacoblyles wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can keep tabs on what half the government is doing. And there are honest-to-god Republican activists out there (check the comments with negative ratings on the bottom of social news sites) who want to know what their party is up to and keep it on task. Much like how others might want to know what the Obama administration or the Democratic caucus is up to. All in all, I think it's pretty awesome. I hope the Democr…

> I hope the Democrats will follow suit, or that Congress will put up a general API. The worst thing would be if the Dems followed suit, but using a different API. Yuck.

The great thing about APIs is if you don't like them you can wait two weeks and somebody will put them in a wrapper for you.

gem install acts_as_government anybody?

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#39

Post by jhancock »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #32
jhancock wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the GOP wants its own API, it belongs at http://api.rnc.org/ I understand that many/most are partisan and may only want to keep tabs on "their guys". But the idea of the U.S. gov paying for _any_ partisan site such as this is terrible. I find it hard to understand how its even legal.

The government pays for political campaigns, and I don't think the legality of that is in dispute. This doesn't seem much different from that. http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml Note: I think it's terrible policy, I'm just pointing out the precedent.

Our gov is based on electing people, not parties. I can see how subsidizing individual campaigns can be allowed. Subsidizing parties is contrived from little to no constitutional basis.

Re: The Republican Party has an API

#40

Post by yummyfajitas »

jhancock wrote: post #39
yummyfajitas wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government pays for political campaigns, and I don't think the legality of that is in dispute. This doesn't seem much different from that. http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml Note: I think it's terrible policy, I'm just pointing out the precedent.

Our gov is based on electing people, not parties. I can see how subsidizing individual campaigns can be allowed. Subsidizing parties is contrived from little to no constitutional basis.

The gov subsidizes parties. Campaign subsidies are given only to nominees of major and minor political parties, and party conventions are subsidized directly. From my previous link:

"The Presidential nominee of each major party may become eligible for a public grant..."

"The amount of public funding to which a minor party candidate is entitled is based on the ratio of the party's popular vote in the preceding Presidential election..."

"Each major political party is entitled to $4 million (plus cost-of-living adjustments)8 to finance its national Presidential nominating convention. A qualified minor party may become eligible for partial convention funding..."

As for the constitutional basis, I agree that there is none. Then again, there is little to no constitutional basis for social security, medicare, the war on drug users, the department of education, etc.

I'm just saying that gop.gov isn't anything special or unprecedented.

Post reply on HN