Eric Schmidt's 2014 plan for Hillary's campaign via Wikileaks

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/37262

by joeclark77 • 10 years ago

57 27 10 years ago

wu-ikkyu• 10 years ago

Some interesting excerpts:

"Key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates all that is known about them."

"The impact of press coverage should be measurable in reach and impact, and TV effectiveness measured by attention and other surveys."

"Build tools that measure the rate and spread of stories and rumors, and model how it works and who has the biggest impact. Tools can tell us about the origin of stories and the impact of any venue, person or theme."

"For each voter, a score is computed ranking probability of the right vote."

"It should be possible to link the voter records in Van with upcoming databases from companies like Comcast and others for media measurement purposes."

dakerfp• 10 years ago

"Find a way to do polling online and not on phones."

snowwrestler• 10 years ago

Because polling on phones these days must include mobile phones to be accurate, which is every expensive because computerized dialers are illegal for mobile numbers. To poll mobile phones, you must have humans manually dial each number.

Polling is a major expense for campaigns. Anything that gets that cost down is a strategic advantage. That said, online polling has a LONG way to go before it is as accurate and trusted as phone polls.

MrZongle23• 10 years ago

The Stasi would have loved this guy.

Gravityloss• 10 years ago

I think they would have liked Facebook, Google, Apple, Lenovo, Microsoft, Sony...

contingencies• 10 years ago

North Korea apparently loved him.

joeclark772• 10 years ago

I get the impression that he feels very strongly about the cloud, cloud, cloud.

achievingApathy• 10 years ago

I was wondering if anyone else noticed that he couldn't have possibly mentioned the cloud anymore if it were an actual Google product ready to launch.

pgodzin• 10 years ago

What stage was Google Cloud at in 2014 that AWS was being recommended by Eric Schmidt?

mywittyname• 10 years ago

Probably to avoid any potential conflicts of interest.

cylinder• 10 years ago

"The campaign headquarters will have about a thousand people, mostly young and hardworking and enthusiastic. Its important to have a very large hiring pool (such as Chicago or NYC) from which to choose enthusiastic, smart and low paid permanent employees.
The key is a large population of talented people who are dying to work for you. Any outer borough of NYC, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Boston are all good examples of a large, blue state city to base in.
Employees will relocate to participate in the campaign, and will find low cost temporary housing or live with campaign supporters on a donated basis. This worked well in Chicago and can work elsewhere."

MrZongle23• 10 years ago

"... enthusiastic, smart and low paid permanent employees... dying to work for you...will relocate to participate in the campaign"

Jesus, those don't sound like campaign workers. They sound like cult members.

spdustin• 10 years ago

You've never been involved in any form of activism, I take it? It's no cult; people who want to work for a political campaign are activists like any other. They are devoted to a cause they believe in, and will happily make personal sacrifices to strengthen that cause.

The activist spirit is alive and well in campaign employees.

Maybe you've volunteered for a charity? Volunteerism is the other half of the equation. Campaign employees are part activist, part "paid volunteer". Anyone who's volunteered for their kids' school, for a neighborhood charity, or for some other cause knows the positive, almost euphoric feeling that comes from volunteering for something that is meaningful to you.

In a time where most of us go to sleep feeling existential dread because we can't do anything to stop the various runaway trains we see in our society/planet/etc, volunteering can provide a feeling that you're actually doing something to make a difference.

That spirit, too, is alive and well in campaign employees.

ComteDeLaFere• 10 years ago

Actually, they sound like the people that GOOG/FB currently hire.

gagmaker• 10 years ago

what a monumental shit this guy is... google keep hitting low and low. pity.

stefanwlb• 10 years ago

Nobody found it interesting that they had a budget of 1.5 billion USD? And how much did trump have?

clydethefrog• 10 years ago

They were hiring people here on HN last year.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10363111

Interested if anyone can share their experiences?

BlickSilly• 10 years ago

I kinda respect this part:

"The Rules

Its important that all the player in the campaign work at cost and there be no special interests in the financing structure. This means that all vendors work at cost and there is a separate auditing function to ensure no one is profiting unfairly from the campaign. All investments and conflicts of interest would have to be publicly disclosed. The rules of the audit should include caps on individual salaries and no investor profits from the campaign function. (For example, this rule would apply to me.)"

davesque3• 10 years ago

I am increasingly having an extremely hard time ignoring the reality that Wikileaks appears to be playing favorites here. Where is the dirt on the internal workings of the Republican party and Trump's campaign? It would bring some useful perspective to all of these supposedly damning leaks.

I was previously under the impression that Wikileaks's primary mission was to liberate information. However, Wikileaks appears to be only selectively interested in freedom of information and more interested in some arbitrary agenda.

It's important to remember that even facts can appear to mean very different things depending on the context in which they are presented. Whoever is presenting the facts can do a great deal to manipulate people's understanding of them by choosing to emphasize certain aspects and conveniently omitting others.

Update: Here are some outsite views which reflect and/or support my arguments:

1. https://www.wired.com/2016/07/wikileaks-officially-lost-mora...

2. https://www.rt.com/tags/the-julian-assange-show/

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Propaganda_and...

ConfuciusSay022• 10 years ago

They can only release information they have.

If they had the information, I'm sure they would release it - like they have in the past released information damaging to the Bush administration years ago.

Do you have evidence that they have information that they are suppressing?

tdb78932• 10 years ago

I agree, I don't like Assange but I think it's whoever is giving him the leaks and not him who is biased. I just wonder who it is that is doing the leaking

davesque3• 10 years ago

I don't have evidence that they're sitting on information. But there are plenty of things they've done in recent months that make them sound almost alt-right -- at times seeming extremely obstinate or even belligerent. Here's a fairly well-written article that discusses some of them: https://www.wired.com/2016/07/wikileaks-officially-lost-mora...

Eric Schmidt's 2014 plan for Hillary's campaign via Wikileaks

Related Stories