4 ms·
I would say that companies who have ties to competing campaigns shouldn't be allowed to also provide services to the IDP or DNC. I'd even go further and say th
by dqv 7y ago
I would say that companies who have ties to competing campaigns shouldn't be allowed to also provide services to the IDP or DNC.
I'd even go further and say that no campaign staffer should be tied to any companies providing services to the campaign.
Edit: clarified - obviously campaigns consult companies for their success, but they shouldn't provide services to both the DNC and the campaign.
Edit2: the IDP runs the caucus
- sixQuarks 7y agoExactly!
- rtkwe 7y agoThat's a huge restriction to put in place with no indication that anything has ever happened like that. The incentives are aligned for both the company to refuse and the campaign to never ask because both would black ball them forever from politics...
- dqv 7y agoI don't think the fact that it hasn't happened yet is a good enough argument. >The incentives are aligned for both the company to refuse and the campaign to never ask because both would black ball them forever from politics... Oh no... it shouldn't be voluntary, it should be required. If a company is providing services to a campaign, that same company should not have any role on the election side.
- rtkwe 7y agoThe app was a reporting convenience more than anything. There was an entire paper trail and a manual process to go along with it. It wasn't core to the accurate count at all.
- dqv 7y agoThe app is the reason we're on our second day without a full set of results... It's highly suspicious.
- rtkwe 7y agoNot entirely they're also trying to report far more information out this year than last. Previously there was only the State Delegate Equivalent count recorded and reported and there was no paper trail of the counts at each stage. This year they're tracking the first and second alignments along with the final SDE count. All of those papers have to be hand recounted because they're not setup to be machine counted.