Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Obama Campaign Deploys New Cellular Weapon

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the free-candy-when-you-sign-up-for-autopay dept.

Democrats 76

Hugh Pickens writes "Michael Scherer writes that the Obama fundraising machine has deployed a new cellular campaign weapon designed 'to trigger the campaign finance equivalent of an impulse buy' during key political moments in the campaign. The tool links two familiar technologies, SMS and one-click purchasing, by sending out an SMS message to cell phones and smart phones of tens of thousands of previous campaign donors giving them a one-click option to give more money. 'Campaign officials hope to be able to return to donors in key moments of emotional excitement,' writes Scherer. One person familiar with the ask says that the response rate has been more than 20 times greater than any text message solicitation Obama has sent out before and and the reason is simple: Even with an iPhone, it remains an arduous hassle to enter all the information that is typically required to buy anything online with a credit card. The trick is that anyone who gives even a few dollars to the Obama campaign is asked if they want to keep their credit cards on file to participate in what the campaign calls 'Quick Donate.' Now donors just need to write '25,' or '10,' and that amount of dollars is immediately drawn from their credit cards. One of the Obama campaign's best fundraising days in 2008, for instance, came right after Sarah Palin's convention speech. Now partisans can 'vent their outrage or enthusiasm by simply typing one number into their phone.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Doesn't Amazon have a patent on this? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540017)

One button donate sounds great, but what about One Button Bribe or Quick Graft? I tell you, corruption is the future!

Fuck you Slashdot (-1, Troll)

ThurstonMoore (605470) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540065)

Fuck you and April 1st.

Re:Fuck you Slashdot (1)

guises (2423402) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540167)

This appears to be a genuine story, no fooling involved. Grandparent was at least on topic, despite being AC. If you're going to cuss out Slashdot for posting fake stories then at least wait for them to actually post a fake story.

Re:Fuck you Slashdot (-1, Troll)

ThurstonMoore (605470) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540445)

Fuck you too.

Not April 1st (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540267)

http://swampland.time.com2012/03/30/the-obama-campaign-tries-out-a-new-cellular-weapon/

TFA is actually dated March 30, 2012.

On a side note... Why even bother with credit cards?

Even with an iPhone, it remains an arduous hassle to enter all the information that is typically required to buy anything online with a credit card.

Pre-paid or on a contract, one still pays to some company for the privilege of using one's phone.
So, why not simply send an SMS or call a number which would charge your number with either a prearranged sum or which would let you to type the sum in?

Sure, such practice may delay the money flow in case of all those phones which are on a contract - until the bill gets payed.
That is, unless the phone company is willing to take the risk of "non-collection" on itself.
But it seems a far safer practice than "entering all the information that is typically required to buy anything online with a credit card" or "keeping [their] credit cards on file".

Re:Fuck you Slashdot (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#39542065)

Waaaah waaah, boo hoo, your precious Slashdot is only running 364 days out of the year. Whiiiiiiiiiinneeee

Re:Doesn't Amazon have a patent on this? (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540133)

Hope it's secure I could really see the future headline "hackers breach Obama campaign systems, 1000s of credit cards stolen"

Re:Doesn't Amazon have a patent on this? (2)

nuttzy (877548) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540291)

Most places store a token and not your actual CC now. It makes PCI DSS compliance far easier and more secure. There's zero risk to consumers if a token gets compromised. Would just be a matter of the upstream CC processor being secure.

Re:Doesn't Amazon have a patent on this? (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540629)

Okay ... Let me fix my original comment then ...

Hackers breach prominent payment service provider, 10,000s of credit cards stolen - including Obama campeign.

Re:Doesn't Amazon have a patent on this? (1)

PNutts (199112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39541039)

If by "future" you mean "headlines we've already seen a number of times", then yes. The CC infrastructure has been breached a number of times.

Re:Doesn't Amazon have a patent on this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540985)

Future? Obama and his cronies make Bush look like a saint

Better ways to spend money (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540025)

Obama is not better or worse than anyone else who's served as president. Might as well spend your money on other things, since whoever the successor is will be no better or worse no matter what you do.

Re:Better ways to spend money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540343)

Obama is not better or worse than anyone else who's served as president. Might as well spend your money on other things, since whoever the successor is will be no better or worse no matter what you do.

Like on the lottery. At least in the lottery you have a chance of getting something in return for your money.

Re:Better ways to spend money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540967)

You can get a great return on your money with Obama, you just have to give him a significant amount first and he will pay you back x1000.

Re:Better ways to spend money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541075)

You think Bush's war in Iraq is nothing? But to continue the lottery theme, DC and his friends did have the winning numbers and made a lot of $$$.

It would be, if it was a sensible election. (0)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#39541613)

It wouldn't matter if Obama was the choice against human candidates but it seems to be that it is going to be Obama against a republican. None of them are sane or human. Obama needs just one slogan, (nixons voice) "I am not a republican".

There seems to be a large movement in the US that wants to tear the country apart with some kind of weird idea that you can turn back the clock to somekind of fantasy land from the past that never existed.

Let a republican win and the US will let the bankers run rampant again, let healthcare spending grow out of control while getting less healthcare in return, let the infrastructure collapse because who needs roads anyway and burden the average family with more kids then the family can support or the nation needs.

So far, Romney is the most sensible republican NOT because he is actually sensible but because he is the least crazy. The only risk of a republican winning the election is if Obama gets lazy and people think they can savely vote republican as a balance mechanism since surely everyone else will vote Obama.

Mind you, this is assuming that voters don't actually hate themselves and their country. In America, this is not a given.

Re:It would be, if it was a sensible election. (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39541995)

Mind you, this is assuming that voters don't actually hate themselves and their country

It's not self loathing, it shocking ignorance. Around 2004, there was a BBC documentary that followed the reelection campaign for George W Bush. Even the people they interviewed who were actively involved in the campaign often had no idea what his policies were, how he was perceived internationally, or what he had done while in office. The people they were talking to had even less idea. Yet all of them then went to vote for GWB. I suspect the same is true of Obama and I'm fairly certain it's true in most congressional elections. If the average voter can't tell you anything about the voting record of he person he's voting for, how can you expect a rational outcome to the election?

Re:It would be, if it was a sensible election. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39542263)

Lets see here, don't vote GOP because...

bankers will run rampant again. Under Obama $7.2 Trillion has been printed/borrowed and given to bankers. Not sure how this is a GOP problem?

let healthcare spending go out of control. Since Obama has gotten into office health insurance priemiums go up almost 20% each year. Obamacare had no cost controlling rules in it to keep costs down. Again not sure how this is a GOP problem.

let infrastructure collapse. Obama got a $900 Billion "stimilus" package to fix infrastructrue with "shovel read jobs". It went to keeping government union employees and their pensions funded and none of it went to new jobs or infrastructure because their union dues become campaign contributions for him. Again not sure how this is a GOP problem.

I'm not sure what you point was, unless you were trying to proclaim your ignorace to eveyone.

-50 (1)

jamesh (87723) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540029)

I wonder what would happen if you tried to donate $-50...

And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...

Re:-50 (1)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540043)

And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...

Not possible. There is no timezone where April 1 ended 12 hours ago (you posted at 12:38 UTC), or am I missing something?

Re:-50 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540053)

And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...

Not possible. There is no timezone where April 1 ended 12 hours ago (you posted at 12:38 UTC), or am I missing something?

You seemingly missed the "AM", which stands for ante meridian i.e. the morning. In some places (the UK at least) April fools jokes traditionally are supposed to stop at noon. I don't thikn this tradition exists, or is common, in the US though.

Re:-50 (1)

jamesh (87723) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540139)

And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...

Not possible. There is no timezone where April 1 ended 12 hours ago (you posted at 12:38 UTC), or am I missing something?

As AC pointed out we typically observe a midday curfew on April fools day in Australia, although I guess that's just a local thing. We also just finished DST and I misread the clock, it was actually closer to 11 hours ago... my bad.

In any case, when something like TFA pops up that seems stupid enough to be an April Fools thing but not that much stupider than other ideas I've read about i'm never quite sure, especially when the local time of the poster isn't given ... I could RTFA but that's not the way it's done around these parts :)

Re:-50 (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39542007)

As AC pointed out we typically observe a midday curfew on April fools day in Australia, although I guess that's just a local thing

It's the same in the UK. If you make an april fools joke after noon then you are the fool, not the person who believes it. This probably made more sense when accurate clocks were rare.

Re:-50 (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 2 years ago | (#39546821)

If nobody believes it, it's a bad joke to begin with.

Re:-50 (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540161)

you have a point, April 1st should be considered valid until the last timezone on earth has passed over to April 2

I hate April 1st. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540035)

I hate April 1st.

Re:I hate April 1st. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540063)

I hate you.

Re:I hate April 1st. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540279)

How do you feel about niggers?

Re:I hate April 1st. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540517)

They make me hate you.

Re:I hate April 1st. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541191)

Some of the voices tell me to hate you.

A matter of trust (1)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540037)

I don't think many people are willing to trust politicians with their card information.

Re:A matter of trust (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540067)

I don't think many people are willing to trust politicians with their card information.

Maybe many wouldn't, but bearing in mind these politicians get elected in the first place I've no doubt many people didn't tick the "No, don't keep a record of my details" box. I'd also guess that the box was as tiny as legally possible and buried somewhere people don't read.

Re:A matter of trust (1)

PNutts (199112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39541117)

If not then they are naive. Politicians are the clowns that have their thumb on every aspect of your life. Your puny credit card is nothing compared to their relationships with big banks and wall street and lobbyists and donors.

I like the LibreOffice approach to this better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540041)

Why collecting donations, when you can create your own money? [documentfoundation.org] The LibreOffice approach is compelling.

Amazon... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540045)

will sue!

Poines? (2)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540047)

Poines? Omg..

Imagine this in the hands of the Republicans (-1)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540105)

Imagine a Republican president, where the call for wars is more overt (none of this Nobel Peace Prize stuff):

"Before [washingtonpost.com] September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained."

(SMS to donate to Fisher House [slashdot.org] , since a direct donation to Halliburton would be just too crass.)

Re:Imagine this in the hands of the Republicans (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540475)

I think it's safe to say, many tens of thousands of Americans have died under a Democrat than any Republican. Refer to WWI, WWII, Korean and Vietnam wars. When your lesson is over, come back for a test.

Re:Imagine this in the hands of the Republicans (1)

coastwalker (307620) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540921)

So you are saying that the US is a different country under different political parties. I'm surprised that you dont get rid of the enemy within with a bit of genocide just like the Syrian government. How can you live surrounded by such traitorous scum? I suppose you havent found a big enough hole to bury two hundred million people in yet. I wonder how many tons of meat that is?

Re:Imagine this in the hands of the Republicans (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540901)

Imagine you weren't such a retard.

politics has become too damn corrupt (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540155)

the money factor needs to be removed from campaigns and restrict all politicans running for office only one hour of television time and a single youtube channel for all the politicians to share and upload videos via an impartial third party so the politicians dont start trolling eachother on it,

what obama is doing should be illegal, what they all are doing is immoral and should be illegal

Re:politics has become too damn corrupt (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540573)

So, how do you propose to prevent a politician from being mentioned on the evening news or morning talk shows without stepping on the First Amendment?

Or do you really believe the evening news only provides impartial news articles about political candidates?

Re:politics has become too damn corrupt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541819)

Stop voting Democrat than.

I know the initial reaction is that statement is trollish, but look at history. In 1992 Microsoft gave no money to either party, Clinton got into office and an anti-trust lawsuit hit them and SUDDENLY Microsoft started giving large amounts of cash to both parties. After 10 years of them "behaving" by continuting contributions their punishments just went away.

Currently any oil or gas company, who doesn't donate to Obama, gets every possible regulation thrown at them, even ones deemed illegal by federal judges. Businesses who did donate (Solendra) not only get regulation removed, but they get $500 million and new tariffs for foreign competitors importing similar products. Lets not even look at Goldman Sachs ROI on their donatoin, its probably somewhere in the $10 million for each single dollar donated.

The Democrats have made the political contribution the biggest ROI a business can make. So if you don't want more money in politics stop voting Democrat.

Re:politics has become too damn corrupt (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#39541931)

RE: "Currently any (insert big namebrand-here) company, who doesn't donate to Obama, gets every possible regulation thrown at them"

yup, thats called fascism, the government and many companies are in bed together and has turned the USA in to a fascist-kleptocracy

spim, in other words (1)

TheGoodNamesWereGone (1844118) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540253)

Spimming/spamming me; robocalling me, even calling me unsolicited, are not ways to get me to vote for you, no matter the party.

Re:spim, in other words (2)

Fnord666 (889225) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540909)

Spimming/spamming me; robocalling me, even calling me unsolicited, are not ways to get me to vote for you, no matter the party.

I agree. It's bad enough that they thoughtfully excluded themselves from the do-not-call legislation. Anyone with any sense of decency would still check the list and abide by the wishes of those who have chosen to add their numbers. On the other hand, if they had any sense of decency, they probably wouldn't be in politics in this day and age anyway.

Re:spim, in other words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541685)

Spimming/spamming me; robocalling me, even calling me unsolicited, are not ways to get me to vote for you, no matter the party.

I agree. It's bad enough that they thoughtfully excluded themselves from the do-not-call legislation. Anyone with any sense of decency would still check the list and abide by the wishes of those who have chosen to add their numbers. On the other hand, if they had any sense of decency, they probably wouldn't be in politics in this day and age anyway.

You have to specifically opt-in to this, as well as already having your CC info or token saved on their system. Opt-in does not count against the DNC list

OMG!! (0)

pvjr (184849) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540289)

PONIES!!!

Response to reality (5, Interesting)

fermion (181285) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540383)

As reported a couple weeks ago, Obama is lagging in big donors [washingtonpost.com] . While Romney is building his campaign thousand dollar donations, Obama is increasingly having to build his campaign on hundred dollar donations, or as the article suggests, $2 at a time.

So, if we assume, as pundits say, that big donors are not going to Obama because he wants to transfer all wealth to the lazy people, and the only people who support him are the young people who don't know any better, kids that are hoping for a socialist government so they do not have to work, how does Obama capitalize on that demographic? By using the one tool all these kids know. The phone. These kids, while they are in their drug induced stupor on payday, can click to donate a few bucks. They would never actually be able to write a check and address an envelope. But over a few months, they can donate $50 bucks.

Really, all kidding aside, this is the way a modern politician needs to collect funds. The maximum donation to a politician should be $50 a month. Anyone can do that. This idea of stealth funding of campaigns by a few large donors need to go. In the republican race, this has resulted in our choices being a polygamist in spirit, a polygamist in reality, a jihadist, and a one that wants to promote the idea that we should pay our troops to sit around the base playing video games and get high. Not a great list for a party that claims to be pro america.

Reality ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541479)

FACT: Obama got millions from donors during the past election. In fact, 80% of his political money was backtracked to just 6 individuals.

Problem: Obama is no longer liked by intelligent people. He turned out to be a completely incompetent idiot and we are in WORST shape today than we were 4 years ago.

Re:Reality ..... (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39545295)

Reality check. Those "intelligent people" were in fact, not intelligent at all.

There are two primary types of people who vote Democrat.
1. Young clueless students who have no historical perspective and are full of dreamy idealism.
2. The 1% elite ruling class that are heavy into politics in order to secure their legacy / dynasty.

The others are blacks (not racist if it's the truth, don't deny) and dead people. Funny thing about zombies is they tend to vote more than once. Fancy that.

Re:Response to reality (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | more than 2 years ago | (#39541827)

$50 a month

Anyone can do that.

I'm sorry to inform you that you're unable to understand 30% of Obama's voter base.

Re:Response to reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39542893)

Please explain. Hopeful and uninformed? Bandwagoners? He's 10x worse than Bush.

Re:Response to reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39544307)

Unable to afford $50/month. AKA broke as fuck and/or living beyond their means.

Re:Response to reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39542095)

"one that wants to promote the idea that we should pay our troops to sit around the base playing video games and get high."

Huh?

First, how is this a consequence of "large donors" "stealth funding" his campaign? Ron Paul's "Money Bombs" are essentially the $50/month donations you advocate manifested in reality.

Second, I'm curious what you would prefer the US military be doing other than safely waiting at ready for a threat to national security?

Finally, how does a desire to end the war on drugs translate to a desire to see government employees get high on the clock?

Frankly, I think you pulled this slam against Ron Paul out of your ass because the cognitive dissidence of your sense of futility required that you dismiss RP as a viable candidate. Sort of a sour grapes "this counter-example destroys my argument so I have to talk shit about it".

Re:Response to reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39548373)

Texas politicians, either dem or repub, tend to be funded by a small group of very rich people. For instance, Perry is owned by a few people who work in real estate or energy. Texas is going to be nuclear dump site for the country because of this.

I don't think any rational person pays taxes so that public servants can sit around and play video games all day. Ask anyone if they are willing to pay more taxes so the post office can continue to have people jerking around while customers wait in long line. Just because we replace military with post office should not change that logic. If we are not fighting wars, we do not need a large military. That is why the cons want to fight wars and scare everyone. It allows them to control unemployment by increasing government jobs. This is another Texas thing, one of the few states where public employment has risen while in most other states, and on the federal level, public employment has fallen.

The problem with Paul is he is not libertarian. His district depends on huge government grants, from NASA to oil tax breaks to direct payments to his fishing buddies. He build a luxury bus stop to employ his constituents, at the federal taxpayer expense. He is not for rationalizing the military, as he keeps building video game parlors for the soldiers that are supposed by in PT. No wonder we have soldiers are zombies that shoot up civilians. His constituents get government money when they overbid contracts, and their children get to play video games at the taxpayer expense. How is that libertarian?

In specific terms of the military, he should be fighting for all 18 year old persons be subject to 3 months of military training, with stipend, as soon as they finish high school, or drop out. These people can then go to college, or get a job, or spend one more year in the military where they will be on probation to see if they are quality. Everyone will then be in the national reserve, ready to train and deploy if we need them. No more wasted money on bases. This is the way the constitution made up the military. Short increments when needed. Read it if you do not know this.

Re:Response to reality (1)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 2 years ago | (#39542847)

The maximum donation to a politician should be $50 a month. Anyone can do that.

While I applaud your creativity, I would argue that setting any limit using a fiat currency is just asking for that limit to be inappropriate at some point in the future. The dollar has lost 98% of its value in the last 100 years, 70% of that since the 70s when we went off the gold standard. It will continue to decline because we choose to keep printing more of it, to bail out industries that have marketed themselves as being "too existing to not exist!"

Re:Response to reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39545649)

"currency" is a unit of trade, not a store of value. That is why it is spelled "curren[t]"cy

Close to what a business might do... (1)

Mariomario (2558403) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540521)

This is certainly not an idea of Obama himself, this is very close to a business idea. And as we all know, he has no business experience and actively trying to destroy businesses. I frankly don't understand why people would want to donate every time some hyped up situation comes up. I guess this why democrats make stories up like republican "war on women". It never existed, but I'm sure they tricked a lot of donors that is was real to get some money from them.

Re:Close to what a business might do... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541587)

This is certainly not an idea of Obama himself, this is very close to a business idea. And as we all know, he has no business experience and actively trying to destroy businesses. I frankly don't understand why people would want to donate every time some hyped up situation comes up. I guess this why democrats make stories up like republican "war on women". It never existed, but I'm sure they tricked a lot of donors that is was real to get some money from them.

It is not really tricking donors to talk about the "war on women" any more that would be tricking voters by saying Obama is "actively trying to destroy businesses". Both of those things have about the same level of truthfulness, and also about the same level of truthiness. Obama wants to end the tax breaks we give to the rich. Destroying a few big businesses in the process is just a happy side-effect. Republicans oppose policies that give women access to birth control and child care, and sometimes even state that they think it is better for women to be home with the children than work. For them, forcing women to be stay-at-home moms is just a happy side-effect.

Re:Close to what a business might do... (1)

OhHellWithIt (756826) | more than 2 years ago | (#39555563)

I frankly don't understand why people would want to donate every time some hyped up situation comes up.

I believe it's related to one of the things I learned in Sociology 101: Social groups tend to solidify their support against an external adversary, whether real or imagined. (The external adversary can be a next-door neighbor; he just has to be different enough to be perceived as "other".) Consider the fact that Americans were willing to put up with rationing and to buy war bonds after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, or to put up with the invasion of Iraq and the passage of the Patriot Act in the wake of 9/11. I am sure that every time the Democrats or the Republicans are perceived by their followers as being under attack, donations to the attacked party go up.

I guess this why democrats make stories up like republican "war on women". It never existed, but I'm sure they tricked a lot of donors that is was real to get some money from them.

Whether or not it was a war on women, there was a perfect storm of events that led U.S. liberals to feel there was a concerted effort to subjugate women, including the vaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia, Rush Limbaugh's calling a grad student a slut, and I forget what else. Speaking from the liberal side of things, I'll have to say that the best thing that happened to the Democratic Party in Virginia was the GOP takeover of both houses of the state legislature. A number of bills that even moderates regard as extreme won passage (like the repeal of the 1-gun-a-month law), and I am sure that this has resulted in more contributions to Democratic coffers and will result in more Democratic votes in the fall. (Whether it will be enough to win Virginia's electoral votes for Obama is open to question, but had the Democrats retained control of Virginia's senate, I wouldn't have given a nickel for his chances this year.)

There used to be a Democratic representative from New York or someplace like that who would introduce a bill to repeal the 2nd Amendment at the beginning of each session of Congress. This bill always ended up in National Rifle Association fundraising materials, and, if the guy is gone, I'll bet that the NRA really misses him.

To go off on a tangent, I'll submit that Hamas has got this principle down to a science. It seems like every time there is any chance of a reduction of hostilities between Israel and the Palestinians, they lob a few rockets (used to be they sent suicide bombers) into Israel from Gaza. The Israelis invariably respond by bombing the hell out of them and tightening up on the restrictions. Hamas is then able to use the restrictions and retaliation to gin up support from the affected Palestinians, thus perpetuating their control in the Gaza Strip. If the Palestinians were to choose to follow the examples of Martin Luther King or Gandhi, Israel would have to let up, and it would ultimately be better for all concerned.

Money Laundering? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540595)

Surprise! A new high-tech way to launder money into Obama's campaign! Those unaccountable credit-card donations are just so 2008.

Macroparasitic electronic democracy (1)

Sqreater (895148) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540773)

Isn't it wonderful how safe, efficient, and effective the systems are that are constructed by the macroparasites and their familiars in government for scooping dollars out of your pocket? But electronic voting on issues nationwide -- nah, not possible.

Re:Macroparasitic electronic democracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39546323)

Just like Diebold can make machines hardened enough for -bankers- to trust, but can't seem to make an e-voting machine unhackable.

P.T. Barnum was right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39540843)

He said : "There's a sucker born every minute."

How is that pertinent to this article, you might ask ?

Because only a sucker donates money to ANY politician.

A de-elect button would be better (1)

hardihoot (1044510) | more than 2 years ago | (#39540883)

I'll be pressing the de-elect button hard this November.

From Orwell to Pavlov in one easy step (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541501)

Give 'em a pellet.

Watch 'em press a button.

Genius.

Bumms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39541955)

The system ideally leads to opponents being funded almost equally, meaning the process incurrs the biggesst cost on the public with the least effect...

impulse buy (1)

Tyrannosaur (2485772) | more than 2 years ago | (#39542551)

designed 'to trigger the campaign finance equivalent of an impulse buy'

He also wants to get the voting equivalent of an impulse buy. Sadly, too many people vote like this as well.

If you donate to these assholes' campaigns, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39542647)

You're either delusional, or expecting a kickback... or both. Either way, you're a fool, or a corrupt bastard. These politicians should be jail, not in any high office. Just vote for the craziest bastard you can find, so we can put the country out of its misery as quickly as possible. Nobody should desire this lingering, painful death.

Negative numbers (1)

relliker (197112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39542713)

What happens if I send -2000000? Will I receive 2 million in my account?

So Obama the spammer or Romney the tax cheat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39543879)

This are the choices we get when every low grade moron is allowed to vote.

We should have a test and the top 1/3 can run for office, the top 2/3 can vote and the bottom 1/3 can go study and try again next year.

Raping Sedated Patients in the Asylum (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39544767)

... or in the Coma Ward. Emotional mugging, facilitated. Since it's done by several people and groups acting in accord, I do suppose it qualifies as - at least - gang or mob activity. Since politics is involved, it probably qualifies as a full-bodied Conspiracy. Oh, something like " ... to emotionally incapacitate and plunder ...", or something like that. One of the definitions of Politics, according to some.

Essentially, it's a proposal for preying upon the momentarily (yes, I'm being nice) weak and helpless. Just the USA-Way, I suppose. I'm surprised televangelists (or their present incarnations) haven't done that already. Is Goldman Sachs, or JPMorgan involved, perhaps?

I'll bet they didn't test for this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39545941)

-1500000

Who Better To Trust (1)

Toad-san (64810) | more than 2 years ago | (#39548599)

than your beloved political party!

"The trick is that anyone who gives even a few dollars to the Obama campaign is asked if they want to keep their credit cards on file to participate in what the campaign calls 'Quick Donate.' Now donors just need to write '25,' or '10,' and that amount of dollars is immediately drawn from their credit cards. "

Neat idea! What could possibly go wrong with that?

Obama campaign money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39568797)

After he's re-elected he'll just take all the money he wants right out of their paychecks.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?