Techies choose Obama - by a landslide

Techies choose Obama - by a landslide

Summary: If techies could choose the next President, Obama would win in a landslide. Checking donors from 10 large tech companies, including Apple, Dell, Google and Microsoft, over 90% of the donations support the senator from Illinois.

SHARE:
275

If techies could choose the next President, Obama would win in a landslide. Checking donors from 10 large tech companies, including Apple, Dell, Google and Microsoft, over 90% of the donations support the senator from Illinois. Why does high-tech love Obama?

First the numbers The OpenSecrets.org Donor Lookup page supplied the numbers. When you make a political contribution you are required to give your employer's name.

Just pick the Presidential candidate, put in an employer name, and hit OK. Voila! All the contributors who gave that company as their employer are listed in the records.

The numbers need some cleaning. For example, if 1 person gave 3 donations, that is listed as 3 records. Also, returned donations are another record that don't indicate another donor.

I cleaned up the Obama numbers by pulling out returned donation numbers, donations from companies with similar names and some of the single donor/multiple donation records, something I didn't do for McCain because his numbers are so weak.

mccain-obama.jpg

McCain's policies Why are in-the-know techies like Vint Cerf and YouTube founder Chad Hurley supporting Obama? Maybe it has something to do with the policies each promotes.

The most obvious tech difference between the candidates is the Obama supports net-neutrality and McCain is against it. The Electronic Frontier Foundation noted press reports that of the 66 current or former lobbyists working for McCain, 23 have lobbied for telcos.

As Commerce Committee chairman until last year, McCain could have pushed for aggressive broadband policies to keep the US in the forefront of Internet deployment and commerce. Instead the US is falling further behind in both speed and penetration among industrialized nations.

McCain also flip-flopped on retroactive immunity for illegal warrantless wiretapping. He was against it last year and this year offered "unqualified" support. Obama also voted for the bill, but at least he knows the Constitutional problems.

Obama's policies Besides consistent support for net-neutrality, Obama also supports a number of tech-friendly initiatives:

  • Deploy next generation broadband and ensure access as we did decades ago with electricity and telephones.
  • Major expansion of university-based research
  • Patent system reform through PTO funding increases and citizen review.
  • Scientific integrity "Obama and Biden will restore the basic principle that government decisions should be based on the best-available, scientifically-valid evidence and not on the ideological predispositions of agency officials or political appointees."
  • Green energy development through a $150 billion program for biofuels, plug-in hybrids and commercial renewable energy.

The Storage Bits take Conservative columnist George Will noted McCain's ". . . impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events . . . ." If Obama loses - and I think he will - (Update: I was wrong!) the computer industry will suffer McCain's anger for their lop-sided support of Obama.

The telco's will enjoy free rein in the White House. The world's most creative and sophisticated tech innovators will be hobbled by a 3rd rate network infrastructure. Who is that good for?

Looking at the numbers, the surprising thing was how few people bothered to donate to either candidate. The 10 companies employ over 500,000 people; just over 3,000 contributed to either campaign. Wake up, people!

Comments welcome, of course. I

Topics: Telcos, Broadband, Networking

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

275 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Gee...

    Robin posts a full-page Obama AD.

    And after Obama is done raping us with all of his tax increases, exactly how will any of these things be paid for?

    Aside from a few good policy positions (meaningless talk) Obama would be a disaster for our nation on so many levels.
    Tim Patterson
    • So McCain is a better choice ...

      b/c of his mavericky insightful pick of Sarah Palin as VP, right?

      Paying more tax is painful but having a VP that makes Bush look smart is downright ridiculous.
      LBiege
      • Translation

        Anyone who doesn't suck their baby out with a vacuum cleaner is
        stupid.
        frgough
        • No.....

          Anyone who when tested with questions she is now ready
          for can can't answer might be a bit dim.

          However she does do well when in control of a given
          environment like speeches or talking points however. So
          not a total loss.

          She looks good too...BONUS!

          Pagan jim
          James Quinn
        • That's sick

          And does not follow.
          seanferd
      • Way to persuade someone with that talk....

        Seems the only thing anyone can say is that she is stupid and makes Bush look smart? This is the kind of debate that comes from the left. I guess that is American education for you, just call someone names and convince people that they are stupid too if they vote for Mccain. Is this real debate in their minds? Seriously, I feel like I am living in a big huge glorified elementary school where everyone picks on each other. I rarely see anyone that really knows Obama's policies and his associations with radical nut cases. No one I know would be associating with those people, but its alright for Obama to do it. People are so helpless these days and can't keep from looking to the government for parental guidance.
        OhTheHumanity
        • Now the mud sling begins

          Obama is associated with radical nut case, huh? How about McCain associated with a financial fraud in early 80s? You wanna play that game. LOL, typical republican dirty tricks. When will you guys pull off the "Harold call me" stuff?
          LBiege
          • Hmmm...

            Let's compare:

            Hazy, hastily dredged-up (fabricated?) innuendo about MacCain's alleged connection to a financial scandal in the '80s, or...

            ...Obama's well-documented, decades-long association with anti-American radicals such as Ayers and Wright.

            Hmmm, which is more damning for a leader: a tenuous linkage to a decades-old financial scandal vs. repeated contact with virulently (and violently) treasonous individuals over those same decades?

            McCain has my vote. It amazes me that so many supposedly intelligent "technical" people would vote otherwise.
            Churlish
          • Innuendo?

            From ABC:
            " The Senate Ethics Committee ultimately cited McCain for
            ?poor judgment? in meeting with those regulators on
            Keating?s behalf, though his actions was also deemed "not
            improper nor attended with gross negligence." Keating
            ultimately went to prison for fraud and McCain became
            active in campaign finance reform, almost a form of public
            penance.

            "The appearance of it was wrong," McCain later told the
            Arizona Republic. "It's a wrong appearance when a group
            of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators
            because it conveys the impression of undue and improper
            influence. And it was the wrong thing to do...I was judged
            eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor
            judgment, and I agree with that assessment."

            McCain himself acknowledged the connection.
            msalzberg
          • Sad aren't they?

            I see why this country is in trouble. The right-wingers don't know fact from fiction.
            storm14k
          • Hastily drawn up????

            How do you hastily draw up innuendo about the Keating 5? Theres nothing to draw up. It was real...IT HAPPENED. If you don't believe that then you probably shouldn't be voting.
            storm14k
          • Yes, it happened, but...

            McCain would have been let off if he hadn't been the only Republican. That prompted him to do worse by stepping on our First Amendment rights through so-called campaign finance reform. It's really been reformed, huh?

            Again we have a sad choice of candidates. But Obama is a Marxist. He said it's "neighborly" for the government to force productive people who earn a good living to give even more to those who don't. Have you done the math? My wife and I pay 45% of our income in taxes at all levels (income, property, sales, etc.). After 10% to our 401k and 5% to charity, we have 40% to live on. And BHO wants us to pay more. Will that really help the economy and IT? There is no limit to his desire for government control of the economy.
            cfmiv
          • Hastily drawn up?

            Don't forget about John Glenn, who is an Obama operative, who had the SAME LEVEL of involvement with the Keating 5. Different standards for different parties. Keep on fantasizing.
            MsUnderestimated
          • You forgot one thing...

            The [b]investigators[/b] of the S&L loan scandal told the socialists running the investigatory committee that McCain was not involved in any way. But, because he was Republican, they continued the tar 'n feather process and the pejoratives continue to this day.

            Yup, "innocent" sure sounds like "fry the SOB" to some people.
            sqr(cos(180))
          • Ask Obama about it?

            I was not the one that made it up, its fact that he is associated with Resko, Ayers, Wright, and some other men in Chicago like Farakkan. Now I don't know how that is mud slinging because I would call out any person that was associated with these clowns. So do you agree with the what the fellows I have listed above think? Because the ideas that come out of that bunch are radical and not about freedom and the rights of others. Mccain was not found guilty of anything relating to the Keating scandal and it would be nice in a perfect world to know exactly what your donors are doing in their business dealings, but its not. I will say that Obama was fully aware of Ayers and his ideas of killing and bombing to make his case, which in turn makes him a nut case. Correct me if I am wrong? Good luck.
            OhTheHumanity
          • So you'd like to get ugly, huh.

            Well if you want see smear material on McCain, there's a lot. I mean A LOT. It's just a matter of if Dems want this election to be that ugly or not.

            Check this video:
            http://www.youtube.com/v/WqZopuS1AYk&hl=en&fs=1
            LBiege
          • You tube is blocked, how about stating something here?

            I have you tube blocked so can't see your video, how about naming something or two that is in the video so the rest of us can see what smear tactic you have up your sleeve. But as you know the fellows that I mentioned that Obama has relations to are people involved in his political machine and have been since he started his political career in the living room of William Ayers. And I will say I would never get my picture taken with a low life like Ayers or any of those other fellows. Would you?
            OhTheHumanity
          • So they're all crooks - big surprise

            If you're interested in facts, check this out.
            http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/10/03/do_facts_matter?page=1

            Yes, the Dems want it to get ugly. I can't ever get a Dem to discuss issues, they just want to shout and criticize. They tell me my ideas are insane or absurd but don't offer anything constructive.

            BTW, I think McCain is a terrible candidate. I just think Obama is worse.
            cfmiv
          • Is there any doubt?

            ... that the dems want to get ugly? That's how they 'roll.'
            MsUnderestimated
      • Please, what nonsense

        Gee that's funny Telcos aren't tech companies?

        Revenues have gone up after the tax decrease not down, the problem with Bush was that he didn't stop spending. 9/11 caused us to change some spending priorities, but instead in his urge to please everyone (i.e. Democrats) he never cut spending on other programs.

        Paying more tax will bring our economy to its knees and these liberal tech companies with more money than sense will pay the price.
        stano360