info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
DNC to Clinton: The data was fine -- you effed up
50 views
Skip to first unread message
Pelle Svanslös
Jun 2, 2017, 7:29:36 AM6/2/17
to
Washington (CNN) -- Democratic data gurus are lashing out at Hillary
Clinton after she complained publicly that her campaign was hamstrung by
a party that had out-of-date information on individual voters.
Clinton said Wednesday in an interview with Recode's Kara Swisher that
once she became the Democratic nominee, she inherited "nothing." The
Democratic National Committee's data, she said, "was mediocre to poor,
nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it."
Her comments drew swift rebuttals from some Democratic operatives who
built, or worked with, that data.
Tom Bonier, the chief executive officer of TargetSmart, a Democratic
voter-targeting firm, said in using the DNC's data, the Clinton campaign
was "absolutely standing on the shoulders of the Obama data juggernaut.
There's just no question."
"I can tell you, having worked with the DNC from the outside over that
time period, the DNC not only maintained what was built as part of the
Obama 2008 and 2012 campaigns, but they built upon it," he said. "And
that meant more staff and that meant better data. They built an in-house
analytics team, which they had not had in the past. And they were
constantly adding data to the file."
Bonier added: "You can argue about whether or not they were behind
Republicans. ... But it's absurd to suggest that any Democratic
candidate who was using the DNC data in 2016 was inheriting nothing, as
Secretary Clinton said. What they were inheriting was the best data
operation the Democratic Party has ever seen."
So what went wrong?
Several Democrats pointed to the Clinton campaign's use of the data in
making decisions about which voters to target, where to send the
candidate and where to devote its advertising dollars.
That element of the campaign -- analytics -- is built on top of the
party-provided data.
Still, there were elements of Clinton's argument that are difficult to
dispute.
Much of her criticism of the DNC was an implicit shot at former
President Barack Obama, who many Democrats have complained kept his own
campaign's data and analytics housed separately and allowed the party's
infrastructure to lapse under former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman
Schultz's leadership.
The Republican National Committee made improving its data and analytics
a priority between 2012 and 2016, erasing the advantage Obama had in
previous elections.
Clinton also cited the Trump campaign's use of the controversial GOP
firm Cambridge Analytica, which boasts of "psychographic" profiles of
voters based heavily on Facebook information.
Clinton's campaign did not hire a similar outside data firm, but she
said Cambridge Analytica helped Trump.
"You can believe the hype on how great they were or the hype on how they
weren't, but the fact is, they added something," she said.
Tom Perez, the new Democratic National Committee chairman, also
complained about the party's data operation in his campaign for the job
over the winter. However, ... "There are a lot of reasons for not
winning that election."
"We're totally focused on the future of the DNC," he told Burnett.
"We're totally focused on building an infrastructure for success."
DNC spokesman Michael Tyler said the party is in the process of
overhauling its data and technological operations.
"Tom has said before that the DNC was not firing on all cylinders and
that's why he did a top to bottom review that included technology. The
DNC is now undergoing an organizational restructuring that will include
a new chief technology officer, who will do an in-depth analysis and
maintain the party's analytics infrastructure needs," Tyler said in a
statement.
"Tom is already deeply engaged with the outpouring of support from
Democrats across the country, from Silicon Valley to suburban Georgia,
who want to help improve the data and tech, get it in the hands of more
organizers everywhere, and build the grass-roots funding stream required
to support those efforts."
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/02/politics/hillary-clinton-dnc-data-pushback/
Clinton after she complained publicly that her campaign was hamstrung by
a party that had out-of-date information on individual voters.
Clinton said Wednesday in an interview with Recode's Kara Swisher that
once she became the Democratic nominee, she inherited "nothing." The
Democratic National Committee's data, she said, "was mediocre to poor,
nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it."
Her comments drew swift rebuttals from some Democratic operatives who
built, or worked with, that data.
Tom Bonier, the chief executive officer of TargetSmart, a Democratic
voter-targeting firm, said in using the DNC's data, the Clinton campaign
was "absolutely standing on the shoulders of the Obama data juggernaut.
There's just no question."
"I can tell you, having worked with the DNC from the outside over that
time period, the DNC not only maintained what was built as part of the
Obama 2008 and 2012 campaigns, but they built upon it," he said. "And
that meant more staff and that meant better data. They built an in-house
analytics team, which they had not had in the past. And they were
constantly adding data to the file."
Bonier added: "You can argue about whether or not they were behind
Republicans. ... But it's absurd to suggest that any Democratic
candidate who was using the DNC data in 2016 was inheriting nothing, as
Secretary Clinton said. What they were inheriting was the best data
operation the Democratic Party has ever seen."
So what went wrong?
Several Democrats pointed to the Clinton campaign's use of the data in
making decisions about which voters to target, where to send the
candidate and where to devote its advertising dollars.
That element of the campaign -- analytics -- is built on top of the
party-provided data.
Still, there were elements of Clinton's argument that are difficult to
dispute.
Much of her criticism of the DNC was an implicit shot at former
President Barack Obama, who many Democrats have complained kept his own
campaign's data and analytics housed separately and allowed the party's
infrastructure to lapse under former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman
Schultz's leadership.
The Republican National Committee made improving its data and analytics
a priority between 2012 and 2016, erasing the advantage Obama had in
previous elections.
Clinton also cited the Trump campaign's use of the controversial GOP
firm Cambridge Analytica, which boasts of "psychographic" profiles of
voters based heavily on Facebook information.
Clinton's campaign did not hire a similar outside data firm, but she
said Cambridge Analytica helped Trump.
"You can believe the hype on how great they were or the hype on how they
weren't, but the fact is, they added something," she said.
Tom Perez, the new Democratic National Committee chairman, also
complained about the party's data operation in his campaign for the job
over the winter. However, ... "There are a lot of reasons for not
winning that election."
"We're totally focused on the future of the DNC," he told Burnett.
"We're totally focused on building an infrastructure for success."
DNC spokesman Michael Tyler said the party is in the process of
overhauling its data and technological operations.
"Tom has said before that the DNC was not firing on all cylinders and
that's why he did a top to bottom review that included technology. The
DNC is now undergoing an organizational restructuring that will include
a new chief technology officer, who will do an in-depth analysis and
maintain the party's analytics infrastructure needs," Tyler said in a
statement.
"Tom is already deeply engaged with the outpouring of support from
Democrats across the country, from Silicon Valley to suburban Georgia,
who want to help improve the data and tech, get it in the hands of more
organizers everywhere, and build the grass-roots funding stream required
to support those efforts."
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/02/politics/hillary-clinton-dnc-data-pushback/
stephenJ
Jun 2, 2017, 8:15:40 AM6/2/17
to
Democrats sniping at each other. Good post, LOL.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
The Iceberg
Jun 2, 2017, 8:36:05 AM6/2/17
to
Court1 said it best during the election, pretty much they should all resign and leave politics forever if they didn't manage to win.
Shakes
Jun 2, 2017, 4:20:02 PM6/2/17
to
On Friday, June 2, 2017 at 5:36:05 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:
> Court1 said it best during the election, pretty much they should all resign and leave politics forever if they didn't manage to win.
Actually I think Court_1 deserves credit for getting over the election outcome and it's aftermath, given that she was as critical of Trump as anybody.
> Court1 said it best during the election, pretty much they should all resign and leave politics forever if they didn't manage to win.
*skriptis
Jun 2, 2017, 6:01:02 PM6/2/17
to
Shakes <kvcs...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
you let it go in such cases. But otoh how praise can you give her
if it's an ego issue just as it's for those who can't let it go?
In her case of, she primarily let it go as she doesn't want to be
associated with "losers". Whether it's the poor, or Hillary
supporters, she hates the losers and has no loyalty.
Guys like pelle, tt are fixated in another way or guys like Brian
who get paid for their anti trump posts.
I'd expect some anti trump posts now and then, from a person that
has been so vocal against him during th campaign.
Instead avoiding the subject altogether reminds of hoping that
everyone forget your pick in David w contest, that's gone badly.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
> On Friday, June 2, 2017 at 5:36:05 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:
>> Court1 said it best during the election, pretty much they should all resign and leave politics forever if they didn't manage to win.
>
> Actually I think Court_1 deserves credit for getting over the election outcome and it's aftermath, given that she was as critical of Trump as anybody.
Hm? Not so sure about that. I mean on one hand it's positive that
>> Court1 said it best during the election, pretty much they should all resign and leave politics forever if they didn't manage to win.
>
> Actually I think Court_1 deserves credit for getting over the election outcome and it's aftermath, given that she was as critical of Trump as anybody.
you let it go in such cases. But otoh how praise can you give her
if it's an ego issue just as it's for those who can't let it go?
In her case of, she primarily let it go as she doesn't want to be
associated with "losers". Whether it's the poor, or Hillary
supporters, she hates the losers and has no loyalty.
Guys like pelle, tt are fixated in another way or guys like Brian
who get paid for their anti trump posts.
I'd expect some anti trump posts now and then, from a person that
has been so vocal against him during th campaign.
Instead avoiding the subject altogether reminds of hoping that
everyone forget your pick in David w contest, that's gone badly.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
stephenJ
Jun 3, 2017, 8:01:12 AM6/3/17
to
yammering of TT/Pelle etc., surely court's approach is a lot better for
this forum?
*skriptis
Jun 3, 2017, 10:01:02 AM6/3/17
to
stephenJ <sja...@cox.net> Wrote in message:
Yes. In general.
But since we have off topic one way or another, I prefer any pro
or anti trump post over movie posts. ;)
But since we have off topic one way or another, I prefer any pro
or anti trump post over movie posts. ;)
stephenJ
Jun 3, 2017, 10:25:41 AM6/3/17
to
bob
Jun 3, 2017, 4:55:02 PM6/3/17
to
On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
wrote:
what "data" is she complaining about? she should be leading with her
convictions, not wishing to know what "data" the voters favored to
cater her phony platform to it.
thank God that woman is not president!!
bob
wrote:
what "data" is she complaining about? she should be leading with her
convictions, not wishing to know what "data" the voters favored to
cater her phony platform to it.
thank God that woman is not president!!
bob
Pelle Svanslös
Jun 4, 2017, 4:21:42 AM6/4/17
to
On 3.6.2017 23:55, bob wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
> wrote:
>
> what "data" is she complaining about?
I'm not sure she's complaining, but she does acknowledge a piece was
> On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
> wrote:
>
> what "data" is she complaining about?
missing. Read the article.
“Donald Trump is the weak man’s vision of a strong man.”
-- Charles Cooke
Whisper
Jun 4, 2017, 5:42:15 AM6/4/17
to
On 4/06/2017 6:21 PM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> On 3.6.2017 23:55, bob wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
>> wrote:
>>
>> what "data" is she complaining about?
>
> I'm not sure she's complaining,
Shes a woman no?
> On 3.6.2017 23:55, bob wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
>> wrote:
>>
>> what "data" is she complaining about?
>
> I'm not sure she's complaining,
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Pelle Svanslös
Jun 4, 2017, 6:16:11 AM6/4/17
to
On 4.6.2017 12:42, Whisper wrote:
> On 4/06/2017 6:21 PM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>> On 3.6.2017 23:55, bob wrote:
>>> On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> what "data" is she complaining about?
>>
>> I'm not sure she's complaining,
>
>
> Shes a woman no?
You're a doofus, no?
> On 4/06/2017 6:21 PM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>> On 3.6.2017 23:55, bob wrote:
>>> On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:29:29 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> what "data" is she complaining about?
>>
>> I'm not sure she's complaining,
>
>
> Shes a woman no?
0 new messages