An Anonymous Coward writes:
As you probably already know, Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign was involved in some recent hijinks involving improper access to campaign data from the Hillary Clinton campaign, after a buggy software patch applied by the contractor maintaining the Democratic Party's voter database, NGPVAN, inadvertently opened a data firewall. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) suspended the Sanders' campaign access to Democratic voter lists (a subscription that the campaign had paid for); Sanders responded by suing the DNC; after a brief negotiation, the DNC restored the Sanders campaign access; and Sanders apologized to Clinton for the hack in Saturday night's debate. Clinton accepted the apology, and noted that most Americans don't care anyway.
Present company (possibly) excepted. Veteran Democratic campaign consultant David Atkins, who evidently has hands on experience using the software in question, pieced together what he thinks happened; including useful background on NGPVAN's software and its use by the Democratic party.
Atkins' bottom line:
As it turns out the ethical breach by Sanders operatives was massive, but the actual data discovery was limited. So it made sense and was fairly obvious that the DNC would quickly end up giving the campaign back its NGPVAN access—particularly since failing to do so would be a death sentence for the campaign and a gigantic black eye to the party.
Atkins also had some choice words for DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, agreeing with David Axelrod (Obama's former chief campaign strategist) that the DNC overreacted.
DNC CEO Amy Dacey blogged that the suspension of access to Sanders wasn't punitive:
This action was not taken to punish the Sanders campaign — it was necessary to ensure that the Sanders campaign took appropriate steps to resolve the issue and wasn't unfairly using another campaign's data.
In a winner take all world of party politics, allowing the party to manage your campaign contact list just seems sort of dumb.
Trusting the other camp by hiring their ex-staffer seems even dumber.
And that's about as specific as I can get before the _cough_ progressive troll army descends on me.
Mob, Frojack. It's a mob, not an army.
Still I'm likely to get "mobbed" to hell here on SN by laying any baskets with babies too close to certain doorsteps.
Let me tell you about mobbing.
The Jews really, really want Clinton to win. The supreme ruler of the Democratic party and loyal Israeli Debbie Wasserman-schultz [squarespace.com] will stop at nothing to ensure that all candidates other than Clinton are disqualified or discredited from running.
In short, there is no "democracy" in the Democratic party.
I'm clearly missing something — given both Clinton & Sanders are steadfastly pro-Israel, why would Jewish or loyal Israeli people favor a candidate that's Methodist over one that's proudly Jewish?
Good question. Maybe with the Jews, winning a Democrat candidate is a win-win situation. They control everything.
Isn't this a result of "the party" doing the fund raising, and therefore havinf the money to collect the information?
The campaign already needs to access the contact data because most of the data is owned by the DNC and available to both sides.
Given the lack of tech-savvy people in politics and the need to spend money carefully, it might be a dumb move to spend money re-inventing the wheel.
Lack of tech savvy people in politics? Seriously?
We are talking about the DNC - Democratic National Committee here, not the DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo.