Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Communications Google Democrats Software News Politics Technology

Google's Schmidt Drew Up Draft Plan For Clinton In 2014 ( 418

New submitter troublemaker_23 writes: Eric Schmidt, the chairman of Google's parent company Alphabet, submitted a detailed draft to a key Clinton aide on April 15, 2014, outlining his ideas for a possible run for the presidency and stressing that "The key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates all that is known about them." The ideas, in an email released by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks, were sent to Cheryl Mills, former deputy White House counsel to Bill Clinton. Mills forwarded it to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, campaign manager Robby Mook and Barack Obama's 2012 campaign manager David Plouffe. The email is one of a trove from Podesta's gmail account that was obtained by WikiLeaks. About two weeks prior to this, Podesta wrote to Mook that he had met Schmidt and that he (Schmidt) was keen to be the "top outside adviser." In the April 15, 2014 email, Schmidt emphasized that what he was putting forward was a draft, writing, "Here are some comments and observations based on what we saw in the 2012 campaign. If we get started soon, we will be in a very strong position to execute well for 2016." It was titled "Notes for a 2016 Democratic campaign." He divided his comments into categories such as size, structure and timing; location; the pieces of a campaign; the rules; and what he called the key things. With regard to size, structure and timing, Schmidt wrote: "Let's assume a total budget of about US$1.5 billion, with more than 5000 paid employees and million(s) of volunteers. The entire start-up ceases operation four days after 8 November 2016." As to location, he did not like the idea of using Washington DC as a base and was keen on low-paid workers. "The campaign headquarters will have about a thousand people, mostly young and hard-working and enthusiastic. It's important to have a very large hiring pool (such as Chicago or NYC) from which to choose enthusiastic, smart and low-paid permanent employees," he wrote. "DC is a poor choice as it's full of distractions and interruptions. Moving the location from DC elsewhere guarantees visitors have taken the time to travel and to help."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's Schmidt Drew Up Draft Plan For Clinton In 2014

Comments Filter:
  • by CajunArson ( 465943 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @09:03AM (#53191099) Journal

    This plan of spying on voters and recording their life history is an excellent thing as long as it benefits a candidate with a (D) next to her name. It just shows that the Democrats are pro-science higher beings of pure energy that descended from a higher plane of existence for us to worship.

    If Trump had done that he'd be worse than Hitler (again).

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Call me pessimistic, but the war against privacy (and the "prove your innocence" movement in general) is exactly why I've given up caring about the future of humanity. What we are seeing today is only the tip of the iceberg. It's going to be far worse than we think. The future of humanity will be defined by a top-down hierarchy of power and complete lack of respect for individuality -- not unlike the military. The fact that even the subject class is now effectively chanting "privacy is dead" says it all. Th

      • by Jawnn ( 445279 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @10:07AM (#53191515)

        There's going to be no place for a person like me who believes in individual sovereignty.

        Why do you think that is? Could it be because so many so-called "conservatives" have abdicated that sovereignty so willingly every time the governing class told a scary story? "OMG! Same sex marriage?! Let's have the government decide who can be married and who can't. OMG! Women can choose what to do with their own bodies? That's not right. We need the government to step in and take that right away. OMG! Teh terrorists! Please make us safe. We don't care if you piss all over The Bill of Rights, just make us feel like you're doing something that matters."
        And no, you libertarians don't get off the hook, because you tools have aligned yourselves with the Conservatives far more often than not. The result is that your rights, as a citizen, have been supplanted by corporate power.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Orgasmatron ( 8103 )

          Just FYI, the anti-abortion position is not about controlling the bodies of women. It is about stopping murder. And the pro-abortion position is not about freedom for the bodies of women, it is about murder too.

          See, for example, the pro-abortion camp's reaction to a proposal in Italy not long ago to replace third trimester abortions with surgical delivery, incubation, and when successful, adoption. I'll give you a hint, the pro-abortion camp was absolutely fucking outraged that anyone would suggest that

      • I think this is ultimately the natural outcome of high populations.

        High populations create the need for ever more organized structures and ever more rigid discipline to enforce adherence to these structures. Resistance to these structures is also an inevitable outcome which feeds back into the increasing need for more more rigidity, surveillance and control features to prevent disruption to the organizational structure.

        Of course we've passed the point in many cases where the level of organization and organ

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by lbmouse ( 473316 )
      Well considering the turn around of 1994 when the GOP started down the path of becoming the anti-intellectual party, there probably isn't anyone in the Koch companies or delivering pizzas for Papa Johns smart enough to come up with this type of plan. Let's face it, thanks to Newt Gingrich's Contract with America during the Republican Revolution, the GOP is just one election away from nominating Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho. Barry Goldwater must be getting tired of spinning in his grave.
    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      Yes, Democrats are pro-science. Republicans are only pro-science when it's conveeenient. They're downright Lysenkoist when scientific findings inconvenience either their fat-cat backers or their useful idiots in the pulpits.

    • by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @11:11AM (#53191983) Journal

      Yesterday, I heard on NPR (I believe it was a climate forum) one of the talking "experts" opined "well, basically, white people are the problem" followed by chuckles and murmurs of assent.

      I'm curious in what context such a statement (changing any other ethnicity, or special interest group) could be uttered without the speaker immediately (& rightly) being castigated and socially outcast?

      "well, basically, black people are the problem".
      "well, basically, gays are the problem".
      "well, basically, jews are the problem".

      EDIT: aha found it. []
      "Climate One program at the Commonwealth Club of California, recorded Oct. 21, 2016. Greg Dalton, moderator." 7:58+
      "Truthfully...white people are the problem"

      And damn you all for making me listen to that crap AGAIN to find it.

    • Horse shit (Score:5, Insightful)

      by s.petry ( 762400 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @12:11PM (#53192415)

      Stop trying to justify propaganda and propagandists. Schmidt has used the platform to attempt to sway the election. The same thing Twitter and Facebook have done, as well as main stream media. People are sick of it, and we can see the game being played all over.

      Google performing "Science" would require UNBIASED positioning, not purely biased in favor of Democrats. You can not by definition perform science with a one sided bias.

      Google search for months has provided biased results in search results and pre-fetching strings. Typing in "How do I vote" showed "For Hillary" as the top search entry for months, and Donald Trump did not show in the search results even if you typed in "for Donald" or "for Trump".

      I get it, you Progressive Leftists hate losing. You don't care that Donna Brazil is empty of morality and has no problem cheating as long as the candidate the party oligarchs wants is elected. The only reason she was fired from CNN was that she got caught, not that she was devoid of ethics. No problem with scum like Bob Creamer sending provocateurs to Sanders and Trump rallies because it makes their candidate look better and opponents look bad. That scumbag had 340+ visits to the White House and 50 visits with the President, and you refuse to question how much the President actually knows about the corruption. You have no problem with the Attorney General meeting a potential witness and husband of the subject of 18 separate USCs days before her Directory of the FBI decided not to allow prosecution of any charges, and have not demanded that the AG step down for malfeasance.

      You don't have a problem with it, but a huge number of the Public does. We do not support corrupt oligarchs and have no illusions that we somehow benefit from them. Trump burning down a huge portion of a corrupt Government is a solid option at this point. The alternative is to have a civil war, which we should all agree would be very bad for all of us.

  • that's pretty evil (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TimothyHollins ( 4720957 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @09:16AM (#53191149)

    What the fuck happened to "Don't be evil" ?

    This is a return to McCarthyism plain and simple.

    • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

      What the fuck happened to "Don't be evil" ?

      This is a return to McCarthyism plain and simple.

      The same thing that happens to most people when they believe they have unbelievable amounts of power. They use it for their own personal gain, and fuck everyone else over to gain more of it. Google has long since said fuck you to everyone else, especially the "plebs" who don't follow their ideology. Now get down on bended knee and kiss the ring, follow their ideology, support their 63 genders and whatever else. Or they'll use that information to destroy you.

    • by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @09:46AM (#53191367) Homepage Journal
      What happened was money.
    • It was deprecated about the time that they introduced the opt-out village: []

    • Nothing, it has nothing to do with this.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @09:19AM (#53191175)

    So, a private citizen supported a candidate and offered free advice? Shocking. How many big corporations out there donate money because "they are people too"? There is nothing of interest here other than to have a bunch of Trump supporters try to claim that the election is rigged and this is proof that Google is rigging it for "Crooked Hillary". It amazes me that people are so gullible they can be spoon fed any piece of information that fits the party's agenda. I'm voting for Clinton because she is the better of my two choices (and the other one is a moron). End of story. This crap does nothing but fire up the base.

    • What made the advice free ass-hole. Why do you think Wall Street donates money to political campaigns and pay "speakers" to give "talks."
    • by Trailer Trash ( 60756 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @10:29AM (#53191703) Homepage

      A couple of observations:

      1. Wait. I thought Republicans were the party of big business. Schmidt must have gotten confused, right?

      2. Wait. He's wanting "low paid workers". I though the Democrats were all about paying more? And making sure women had pay equity with men, right? $15 minimum wage? I mean, he wants to pay above minimum wage, right?

      You're the one who's been spoon-fed the party's agenda, as usual.

      • A couple of observations:

        1. Wait. I thought Republicans were the party of big business. Schmidt must have gotten confused, right?

        Much of the tech industry leadership leans Democratic, mostly because they grew up in northern California.

        2. Wait. He's wanting "low paid workers". I though the Democrats were all about paying more? And making sure women had pay equity with men, right? $15 minimum wage? I mean, he wants to pay above minimum wage, right?

        No, like any good Democrat he wants *other people* to pay above minimum wage :-)

        • I don't think much of the tech industry grew up in Northern California, tbh. Eric Schmidt grew up in Virginia.
        • Much of the tech industry leadership leans Democratic, mostly because they grew up in northern California.

          It's not relevant - most industry leadership leans Democrat. They offer the most bang for the buck.

          With Clinton as the Democrat candidate for POTUS I think we can drop the pretense that the Democrats aren't the party of big business.

      • 1) You seem confused. Democrats are not anti-big business. What do you think, that breaking up big businesses into medium and small business is part of democrat's agenda? There are big corporations that support democrats, and heads of big corporations too (Buffett is one of the prominents, Schmidt too), and it is not because they hate themselves. They are just fine with nullifying Citizens United and measures that seem anti-corporation to republicans, because it is the sane thing to do and it wouldnt hurt t

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Before you vote for Clinton, google Whitehouse Travel office. The Clintons destroyed the life of a long time government employee to try to benefit their cronies. If you are good with this type of action, by all means vote Clinton.

    • So, a private citizen supported a candidate and offered free advice? Shocking.

      Nobody is saying that he doesn't have a right to back whoever he wants to.

      At the same time, voters should be aware of what's happening, and the fact that the company that serves much of their news, advertising, and information may be politically biased and motivated.

  • The key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates all that is known about them

    I love to think what Google knows about me if they've tried this on me. From my emails and chats with my wife it's clear I'm an anarchist, a pacifist, I don't believe in Democracy, I don't vote, I want states to be allowed to secede (but I don't necessarily want to secede - I just want it to be allowed), and I want the same for counties, cities, and households. Processing my political record at Google probably trips all kinds of alarms.

    • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

      You reply to this...

      The key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates all that is known about them

      ...with this...

      it's clear I'm an anarchist, a pacifist, I don't believe in Democracy, I don't vote

      It doesn't apply to you, then.

      Google's advice is actually quite an improvement, since it also excludes tracking of children, criminals, non-Americans and every other person inelligable to vote in the US election Quite a lot better than the current situation.

      • by Calydor ( 739835 )

        From, emphasis mine:
        a person who votes.
        a person who has a right to vote; elector.

        It is, in fact, very useful information that the OP is a voter who does not vote. Depending on his reasons not to vote he can either be swung to one side or should be ignored entirely so you don't waste resources needlessly.

  • "low paid workers" Schmidt should have just imported a bunch of H1B visa types to do this. Cheap skate.
  • So how about some of those rnc emails. Fucking facist assange
  • The only way to defend against this is to poison the data set. This is exactly why I will vote for Trump to build a wall with China to keep illegal NAFTA carpetbaggers trying to legalize Clinton marriage.
  • This is news? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @10:03AM (#53191491) Journal

    Obama was doing this in 2008, and the Republicans have their own big data operations, too.

  • When Brendan Eich's backing of a popular, but ultimately-losing political movement came to light, Mozilla — undoubtedly pressured by Google, who provides 90% of its money [] — forced [] the inventor of Javascript to voluntarily [] step down.

    The ongoing collapsing of Her Beautiful Wickedness is no dissimilar — although reasonably popular and, some would say, even with a reasonable chance of getting the same 52% of the vote that Brendan-backed Proposition 8 has gathered, Hillary may lose on legal gr

  • And they said their motto is "Do No Evil". The are the epitome of evil.
  • His recommendations are for resolving issues that come up with the existing data collection that Democrats (and replubicans) have already been engaging in for decades. He isn't talking about using his company to divulge personal information about users, but to use existing and accepted practices for mining the data. That being said, his advice weighs a lot more than the average advisor's. It's like Mike Tyson coaching your son's elementary school boxing program.
  • I first misread that as "... Drew Up Daft Plan..."

    Then I realized, that's probably the case anyway.

  • by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @11:09AM (#53191969) Journal

    Prior to the signing of the final draft of the American Constitution on the last day of the Constitutional Convention in September 1787, Franklin had a speech of his delivered, by James Wilson, because he was too ill at the time to deliver it himself. In the speech he protested the fallibility of the Constitution and of the document he said:

    In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.

    Keep in mind that Franklin probably didn't mean the people were criminal, only that some powerful segments of the population manipulating things to corrupt them, like reducing education, interfering with the press, sabotaging government functions so they are ineffective and many other things. Being a third party to these elections and effectively disinterested in the result I tend to wonder what damage is being done to the office of the President by the way the campaigns seem to tear each candidate into pieces and I wonder if that is the canary in the cage.

    Franklin seems to have been able to predict this moment, and please don't take that as a criticism of your country, however isn't that a sign to look to the type of things Franklin was trying to warn everyone about back when the US constitution was framed?

  • young and hard-working and enthusiastic...from which to choose enthusiastic, smart and low-paid permanent employees

    If there is any doubt about the reasons behind their H-1B desires, this should set it to rest.

1 Sagan = Billions & Billions