Tom Alt - Great logic. A lot of OTHER people collected that data too. Unless the entire Tucson Democratic volunteer base in exclusively for Grijalva. They've been collecting that data for a WHILE now, and by people for a LOT of different politicians. Or initiatives, ballot measures, petition drives etc.
I know for a fact, having been on the Glassman campaign, that some of that data was collected by people for Glassman.
Some was collected by people for Giffords. Way to discount their efforts.
Some was even collected by people for Obama.
I'm sure you don't suffer from the sort of self-importance your comment implied. But seriously - your argument is unsound at best.
Thanks for clarifying. I was playing it a bit fast and loose with the language there. Should have just left it with Executive Director.
Bill Roe, huh? Well THERE'S a great person to piss off. Oh well. Glad I'm not working in AZ politics anymore. Heard plenty about him while I was working on the Glassman campaign.
And I could/ought to have used slightly less bitchy language. What can I say, I bristle when people inadvertently (and usually unintentionally) say things they don't realize are offensive to professional (or at least serious) journalists. If we EVER write something that's not true, that cannot be cited, that has no references, we open ourselves to not just libel lawsuits, but being totally discredited as legitimate news sources.
In my follow-up, I'll take on board your comments and try to be as specific and unambiguous as possible in my explanations.
Michael Skinner - keep in mind, there is no information at this point that suggests Grijalva was in any way involved in this process or decision. For all we know the ADP did this independently, based on their own interests, resources and priorities. If so, that's unfortunate for them, because I doubt Grijalva's office is wild about this sort of publicity.
Just an FYI. It's a little early to be lambasting the Congressman for something in which we don't actually know if he's involved.
A lot of your questions are answered in my HuffPost piece (hark! The sound of my own horn tooting!). You can link to it above. Or huff.to/ABZonADP
Clearly you haven't read it, or you'd have a better idea of what's happening. And you wouldn't have made so many erroneous comments.
For one thing - glossing over the mild condescension in your comments - the Arreguin campaign submitted all the necessary documentation, affidavit, check etc, which the ADP requires in order to grant access to the Voter File - another way to refer to VAN. Which is to say, the ADP has a process for granting access to VAN - BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY DO FOR CANDIDATES - and the Arreguin campaign followed that process to the letter.
Their contact, the Elections Director for the ADP, told them all was well and he was just waiting to get verification.
They also denied access to Aguirre. Do you think HER campaign screwed up somehow? No. The Executive Committee told her the same thing they had someone else tell Arreguin. No Running - not around pools, not against incumbents.
Not proprietary, huh? Well, take that up with Camacho, because those were his exact words to me. No one ever said the voter information itself was proprietary. The Voter File CONTAINS proprietary information - that could be the code used to process the data, information on past contacts, etc. etc.
Yes, the data is freely available, but it is expensive and time-consuming for any campaign, especially a small one, to input and process all such data into a usable format.
"IF such a decision was made"? Really? Really? I don't know how they do it out in Texas, but where I come from, we show a little more respect - especially when we don't know what's going on. And you pretty much explicitly state that you don't.
Unless Frank Camacho lied to me, then the executive committee specifically voted to give Heredia the authority to deny access to the Voter File, for both Arreguin and Aguirre. I can't confirm that from Heredia because he won't return my call as I was told he would. One would hope the head of a state party would have a bit more integrity than that.
Recent Comments
I know for a fact, having been on the Glassman campaign, that some of that data was collected by people for Glassman.
Some was collected by people for Giffords. Way to discount their efforts.
Some was even collected by people for Obama.
I'm sure you don't suffer from the sort of self-importance your comment implied. But seriously - your argument is unsound at best.
Olmos and walrus and anger, Oh my!
Thanks for clarifying. I was playing it a bit fast and loose with the language there. Should have just left it with Executive Director.
Bill Roe, huh? Well THERE'S a great person to piss off. Oh well. Glad I'm not working in AZ politics anymore. Heard plenty about him while I was working on the Glassman campaign.
And I could/ought to have used slightly less bitchy language. What can I say, I bristle when people inadvertently (and usually unintentionally) say things they don't realize are offensive to professional (or at least serious) journalists. If we EVER write something that's not true, that cannot be cited, that has no references, we open ourselves to not just libel lawsuits, but being totally discredited as legitimate news sources.
In my follow-up, I'll take on board your comments and try to be as specific and unambiguous as possible in my explanations.
Just an FYI. It's a little early to be lambasting the Congressman for something in which we don't actually know if he's involved.
A lot of your questions are answered in my HuffPost piece (hark! The sound of my own horn tooting!). You can link to it above. Or huff.to/ABZonADP
Clearly you haven't read it, or you'd have a better idea of what's happening. And you wouldn't have made so many erroneous comments.
For one thing - glossing over the mild condescension in your comments - the Arreguin campaign submitted all the necessary documentation, affidavit, check etc, which the ADP requires in order to grant access to the Voter File - another way to refer to VAN. Which is to say, the ADP has a process for granting access to VAN - BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY DO FOR CANDIDATES - and the Arreguin campaign followed that process to the letter.
Their contact, the Elections Director for the ADP, told them all was well and he was just waiting to get verification.
They also denied access to Aguirre. Do you think HER campaign screwed up somehow? No. The Executive Committee told her the same thing they had someone else tell Arreguin. No Running - not around pools, not against incumbents.
Not proprietary, huh? Well, take that up with Camacho, because those were his exact words to me. No one ever said the voter information itself was proprietary. The Voter File CONTAINS proprietary information - that could be the code used to process the data, information on past contacts, etc. etc.
Yes, the data is freely available, but it is expensive and time-consuming for any campaign, especially a small one, to input and process all such data into a usable format.
"IF such a decision was made"? Really? Really? I don't know how they do it out in Texas, but where I come from, we show a little more respect - especially when we don't know what's going on. And you pretty much explicitly state that you don't.
Unless Frank Camacho lied to me, then the executive committee specifically voted to give Heredia the authority to deny access to the Voter File, for both Arreguin and Aguirre. I can't confirm that from Heredia because he won't return my call as I was told he would. One would hope the head of a state party would have a bit more integrity than that.