4 ms·

I can't think of anyway on the spot of how this could be abused. They still don't know who you voted for. Are there any common abuses of this data?

MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
Not being in the business of voter suppression, I couldn't tell you anything authoritatively. But if I was, I'd use the data to find who has a spotty or non-perfect record with the hypothesis that they're more susceptible to suppression methods than someone with a near perfect record. Then the next step would be targeting locations that lean towards one party or using a combination of retargeting ads +obvious party selectors to run a BS phone or ad campaigns that disenfranchise or provide misleading information. Like this. Which was a real thing that happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Canadian_federal_election_voter_suppression_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Canadian_federal_election...
- itsdrewmiller 4y ago
  That same data is also used by other people to encourage those people to vote - I'm sure on a much larger scale than disenfranchisement efforts.
nmeagent 4y ago
"I know you'll probably vote for $foo. If I check after the election and find that you did|didn't vote, bad thing $bar might just happen to your friends and family." Edit: It's probably not a particularly good threat, but it could maybe be used to suppress certain targeted demographic groups that tend to vote one way or the other.
- Analemma_ 4y ago
  This seems like a pretty ludicrous threat to make. You could just submit a blank ballot or vote for the opposing party and your hostage-taker would have no way of knowing.
  - nmeagent 4y ago
    Right. It would probably be more effective for getting someone to just stay home.
- daemoens 4y ago
  You would have to do that on a pretty wide scale for it to be effective and would be caught pretty quickly after going after just a couple people.
heavyset_go 4y ago
Party registrations are public, and you can make a pretty accurate guess that someone who is registered to one party is likely to vote for that party, too. I can imagine a situation where someone's boss doesn't like a certain party or politician, and they decide to take it out on their subordinates that they suspect will vote/have voted for them. Seeing a D or R next to an employee's name and that they voted could be enough evidence for them to face discrimination or threats not to vote.
yellowapple 4y ago
"I know that you support $CANDIDATE_I_DONT_LIKE therefore if I see that you voted I'll break your kneecaps."
the_only_law 4y ago
The data does have party affiliation if that’s a thing in the particular state, as well as residential information, at least from what I’ve seen.

MonkeyMalarky 4y ago

Not being in the business of voter suppression, I couldn't tell you anything authoritatively. But if I was, I'd use the data to find who has a spotty or non-perfect record with the hypothesis that they're more susceptible to suppression methods than someone with a near perfect record. Then the next step would be targeting locations that lean towards one party or using a combination of retargeting ads +obvious party selectors to run a BS phone or ad campaigns that disenfranchise or provide misleading information. Like this. Which was a real thing that happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Canadian_federal_election_voter_suppression_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Canadian_federal_election...

itsdrewmiller 4y ago
That same data is also used by other people to encourage those people to vote - I'm sure on a much larger scale than disenfranchisement efforts.

nmeagent 4y ago

"I know you'll probably vote for $foo. If I check after the election and find that you did|didn't vote, bad thing $bar might just happen to your friends and family." Edit: It's probably not a particularly good threat, but it could maybe be used to suppress certain targeted demographic groups that tend to vote one way or the other.

Analemma_ 4y ago
This seems like a pretty ludicrous threat to make. You could just submit a blank ballot or vote for the opposing party and your hostage-taker would have no way of knowing.
- nmeagent 4y ago
  Right. It would probably be more effective for getting someone to just stay home.
daemoens 4y ago
You would have to do that on a pretty wide scale for it to be effective and would be caught pretty quickly after going after just a couple people.

heavyset_go 4y ago

Party registrations are public, and you can make a pretty accurate guess that someone who is registered to one party is likely to vote for that party, too. I can imagine a situation where someone's boss doesn't like a certain party or politician, and they decide to take it out on their subordinates that they suspect will vote/have voted for them. Seeing a D or R next to an employee's name and that they voted could be enough evidence for them to face discrimination or threats not to vote.

yellowapple 4y ago

"I know that you support $CANDIDATE_I_DONT_LIKE therefore if I see that you voted I'll break your kneecaps."

the_only_law 4y ago

The data does have party affiliation if that’s a thing in the particular state, as well as residential information, at least from what I’ve seen.