
Invitation for DNC reception with Obama at YC - negrit
http://www.scribd.com/doc/219461164/Obama-YC-invite
======
dang
There was a significant thread about this a couple of days ago [1]. Although
this isn't technically a repost, substantively it is—the story hasn't changed.
Normally, we kill such reposts as dupes. In addition, this thread is the sort
of heated discussion we usually penalize.

However, we are careful to intervene less in controversial stories about YC or
YC startups. That's the first thing PG told me about moderation and the thing
he has emphasized most. So I'm going to suspend the usual rules and leave this
one untouched for now. If it falls in rank, it will be purely because of user
flags, and if that changes for any reason, I'll edit this comment.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7612060](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7612060)

Edit: s/heated political discussion/heated discussion/

Edit 2: Enough users have been flagging this post to auto-kill it. I've
unkilled it four times so far and will try to keep doing so, though I can't
promise how quickly. (Flagging rarely kills a post—usually it at most lowers
its rank—but in cases where flags overwhelm upvotes, it can.)

~~~
coherentpony
>In addition, this thread is the sort of heated political discussion we
usually penalize.

I'd love to think you're serious, but there were _three_ fucking posts---
almost all identical---about Syrian chemical weapons on the front page this
morning. All of a sudden, now that it's about YC, you're saying, "oh, we
usually penalise this."

I at least have respect for the fact you didn't remove this thread, but still,
I'd prefer it if you got off your political high horse when it makes YC look
bad.

~~~
dang
I shouldn't have said "heated _political_ discussion"; it was enough to say
"heated discussion".

You can't conclude anything solid about HN moderation from the state of the
front page at a given moment, because we're not always looking at it. When you
see duplicates and other things on the front page that appear to contradict
normal moderation practice, the likeliest explanation is that we just haven't
seen it yet. Indeed, a lot of stuff gets flagged by users before we ever get
to it. By the time I looked at HN this morning, there certainly weren't three
Syria stories on the front page. I think I may have flagged one of them. I'd
need specific links to be able to say more.

Edit: I intended to write more here, but I have to go out now. Please send
questions or concerns to hn@ycombinator.com.

------
rdl
I would not apply to YC if I knew in advance YC was a DNC fundraising
organization. (I'd be even _more_ angry if it were an RNC fundraising
organization.) I'd even be pissed if it were a Libertarian Party fundraising
organization, even if I might donate to them myself.

Shark jumping doesn't even begin to address this. This is a new class of
fuckup -- "when YC became a political party fundraiser" is the new shark-jump.

~~~
tptacek
They're not a "DNC fundraising organization". They're a business that happens
to be run by someone who currently supports the DNC, and is making an in-kind
contribution of the use of their office space for an event.

YC is a private business. Their management is entitled to participate in the
political process in any way they choose. If YC's voting interest is OK with
an in-kind contribution, that's their right too.

The idea that you'd find this kind of thing shocking is a little surprising,
since it's very much the norm across all political parties.

If you'd like to pivot to a discussion of libertarian politics, I'd observe
that there are companies that not only play host to libertarian political
activist organizations, but also directly and aggressively lobby in favor of
their favored policy objectives.

~~~
rdl
Companies lobby for their own policy interests all the time -- even if they
dislike the politicians or political parties. I could totally see someone in
the oil industry lobbying R for Keystone XL even if they hate everything else
about the party.

I'm against YC being explicitly R, D, or L (or C, or G, or whatever), as it's
1) different than a normal company 2) a company I have a somewhat closer tie
to than as a customer, but less close than a place I work for or own.

~~~
argumentum
Say as the outcome of Sam/YC getting involved in this fundraiser, nothing
happens other than some progress on a founder visa, ip reform and (hopefully)
a stinging question or two about surveillance/privacy issues.

Wouldn't that be good?

I think that's quite likely the _worst_ scenario. I can't imagine the reverse
happening, that being in a room with Obama turn Sam and YC into toeing the
Democratic party-line.

The strange concoction of libertarianism, progressivism and contrarianism that
you see in YC, HN and even generally in silicon valley will remain. Because
_that 's who we all are_.

~~~
rdl
Party politics are actually what's holding up Founder Visas right now -- Craig
Montuori is probably the smartest person working on this (IMO), and the basic
calculus seems to be ~everyone is pro-FV, but everyone also believes only a
single bill can pass, and thus everyone must get his own particular issue
added to it. The stumbling block is not the farmworker visa, or the
afghan/iraqi translator visas, but the huge "citizenship for people already
present in the country without documentation" issue, which is inherently
political because one party assumes all of those new citizens will vote for
the other party. "We must have comprehensive immigration reform" means "all or
nothing"; without that, we'd get founder visas, iraq/afghanistan visas, and
farmworker visas right away, and then continued lack of action on the ~12mm
people already in the country who are in limbo. So, donating to a political
party on this issue actually pushes things _backwards_. (This is independent
of whether you feel all of these things together are better or worse than some
subset, or none; it's just strategy.)

(and, on the R side, it's the stupid Hastert Rule; a majority of the House
supports even comprehensive immigration reform, but not a majority of the
majority party. A discharge petition and immunity from retribution seems like
the only solution to that.)

IP reform doesn't seem particularly partisan to me, but I don't know about the
politics on that issue. It does scare me if it becomes one party's issue that
the other party will oppose it just to oppose it.

Surveillance/privacy clearly crosses party lines; it's most correlated with
tenure (DiFi, etc. are pro-NSA; younger D and R candidates are generally anti-
NSA, with some awesome exceptions like Wyden.)

The real outcome of this will be $150-200k or so for DNC, which will
presumably mostly be used on upcoming house/senate campaigns. It's a drop in
the bucket with superpacs, but fewer strings attached to it.

~~~
argumentum
Regarding the money, the fundraiser was going to happen anyway at Mayer's
house. [http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2014/04/18/new-obama-
to...](http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2014/04/18/new-obama-to-hit-y-
combinator-headquarters-in-mt-view-on-may-8/)

So the question, in my view (as someone who probably agrees with you on most
political things), is what is especially different now that Sam is co-hosting
this at YC.

In terms of strategy, given that you have goals X, Y and Z, what's the best
way to accomplish them? I've been a (l)ibertarian as long as I can remember,
and while I have succeeded in changing the minds of some "mainstream" friends
on particular issues, the unfortunate fact is the ideology isn't natural to
most people.

We're going to have to make compromises and move _all parties_ to support more
of the things we want.

If this was an ordinary DNC fundraiser I would be more concerned, but _the
president_ is the guest of honor. I.e. there is more than money at play.
Connections that can be made. Things can be done. When judges and bureaucrats
are appointed, they can be people we'd like a bit more.

And if there was one person that you'd want on stage with the smallest chance
to alter Obama's thinking, _wouldn 't it be sama_?

------
DanielBMarkham
Some things you just have to repeat a few times for them to fully sink in.
(But why?)

We live in a highly-charged partisan debate about all sorts of tech issues --
issues which both parties are, sadly, at odds with what's best for the nation.

I don't understand why YC would 1) choose to help one party or the other, 2)
choose to piss off members of the other major party, and 3) politicize their
mission. I thought they were there to help folks make stuff that people
wanted. What part of that has to do with one party or the other?

Here's hoping we're missing some important detail. This just doesn't make
sense to somebody watching from afar.

You know, traditionally if you want the president to come by and pat you on
the back so you can take your victory lap, you also bring in some schmucks
from the other party. That way you get the press and don't look like partisan
robots. Maybe this is in the plan? (but why?)

------
edw519
I'm sorry to say I couldn't accept your proposal for a political contribution.
Please don't take it personally. The requests I receive get better every
election cycle, and since there's a limit on the number of candidates I can
consider in person, I had to turn away a lot of genuinely promising
candidates.

Another reason you shouldn't take this personally is that I know I make lots
of mistakes. It's alarming how often the last candidate to make it over the
threshold for consideration ends up being one that I vote for. That means
there are surely other good candidates that fall just below the threshold and
that I miss even considering.

I'm trying to get better at this, but the hard limit on the number of
candidates means it's practically certain that candidates I rejected will go
on to become successful office holders. If you do, I'd appreciate it if you'd
send me an email telling me about it; I want to learn from my mistakes.

edw519

------
sama
to be super clear: YC is not hosting the event, just lending the office space.
my apartment is far too small.

there's plenty i think obama has done badly, but i think he's done a lot of
good things too. and for the political issues i care most about (all related
to startups, pretty much) i think he is likely to help the most. of course,
everyone is welcome to disagree with me on this, and many yc community members
do.

~~~
davidw
> YC is not hosting the event, just lending the office space.

This is one of those distinctions that are likely to be lost on a lot of
people.

That said, like others have written, this kind of thing is probably what it
takes to have some influence, unless Obama has taken to reading snark-filled
threads about the NSA on reddit.

~~~
mseebach
> This is one of those distinctions that are likely to be lost on a lot of
> people.

Not least, the press.

~~~
sachinag
Only the tech press. The political press understands that leadership of
organizations often host events like this from both parties. (Technically,
really, all the various parties, including Libertarian, Green, Independence,
Reform (Perot), and others.)

------
callmeed
If it was an RNC fundraiser, there would already be a protest website up and a
hashtag to boycott YC.

~~~
coherentpony
While I hate to say you may be right, there will be a huge fuss kicked up
regardless. I do not care which political party this had been, it screams
partisanship down the necks of startup CEOs. It is _not_ okay to get involved
in politics. Unless, of course, laws prevent a free market, in which case
there would already be people kicking up a fuss.

Sam Altman, you need not pay close attention because you'd need to be blind to
miss the impending shitstorm on social media. I hope you remembered to bring
lube.

~~~
fleitz
I love the free market ideal, but the reality is that the gov't will fuck up
your business.

Since the DNC holds political sway, and is the most likely to pass a law or
start proceedings against your business it's best to make friends with them.

It's like police in Mexico, the smart people pay off the first cop they see
before they end up having to pay off the entire precinct.

The reality is that the way companies like Uber and AirBNB will thrive is by
paying off the DNC so that suddenly city council is restricting opportunities
to minorities (by not letting them sublet / drive cabs) rather than a AirBNB /
Uber restricting opportunities for minorities by under cutting cabs / hotels.

You want to pay these assholes upfront.

~~~
sparkzilla
Nice set of principles you've got for sale there.

------
martythemaniak
Geeks have a hard time understanding the deeply political nature of the world.
Not playing politics doesn't make you wiser or smarter, it just makes you a
schmuck, because someone that plays politics will come around and eat your
lunch.

Why the democrats? On social (think Mozilla and Eich) and science/tech issues
(the evangelicals), they're far more in tune with Bay Area techies than
republicans.

If you doubt this, I will give you a tour of Crazytown (aka Toronto) where Rob
Ford has made track gauges a political issue. 1435 mm? You're a liberal!
1495mm? You're a conservative!

~~~
coherentpony
>Not playing politics doesn't make you wiser or smarter, it just makes you a
schmuck, because someone that plays politics will come around and eat your
lunch.

That's not an argument to play politics. That's an argument as to why the
system is fundamentally flawed.

~~~
sillysaurus3
It's the only system we have. The system can theoretically change itself, but
that's not going to happen by abstaining from it.

~~~
supergeek133
The approach can just change. If YC wants to come out and say "I support
policy XY and/or Z" and I go find the candidate that matches that, awesome!

I'm sick of businesses endorsing people or party via fundraiser. Support an
idea, not a person. Let the voter decide the person.

------
cheetahtech
Wow. I have been a long time follower of both hacker news and YC, but this
draws the line.

To be a separate donor on political views alright, but to subscribe your
company behind it, jeez.

~~~
antocv
Where do we go? Lobste.rs?

~~~
coherentpony
Nope, we go here:

    
    
        echo "127.0.0.1 news.ycombinator.com" >> /etc/hosts

------
argumentum
Calm down people. This event was happening _anyway_ at Marissa Mayer's house.
If you think rationally, even if you absolutely despise Obama and more
generally the political establishment, you'd be a fool to pretend that they
don't exist.

No _more_ money is going to be raised for the DNC than would have happened
anyway. On the plus side, the President will hear from the startup community
_as well as_ the tech establishment.

I can't see any huge _real_ negative here (and I'm a fairly extreme
libertarian). Hosting or even donating to a political campaign doesn't mean
you support everything they do. In fact, you often see powerful people
donating to multiple, opposing parties and candidates .. it's just the only
way to have influence over the issues that affect your interests.

~~~
mkempe
Actually it is about raising more money. The _argument_ offered for the switch
from Mayer's house to YC's space is to get _more_ paying people in the event.

~~~
argumentum
Do you honestly think they couldn't have found an alternate venue to
accommodate demand? If you've been to YC, calling it an impressive venue would
be a bit of a joke. It's basically a warehouse (admittedly with an elegantly
architected, though extremely spartan, interior). And what does accommodating
a few more people have to do with Sam becoming a co-host?

This has little to do with money, and a lot to do with influence (on both
sides). Startups are a big thing now, YC is a big thing in startups and
Obama/the DNC likely saw value in connecting with this new group of
influential people.

Similarly, for Sam/YC, it's an opportunity to move things along on issues that
matter.

~~~
mkempe
You stated: "No more money is going to be raised for the DNC than would have
happened anyway."

I'm pointing out that the proffered reason they changed venue was to
accommodate more people, and thus raise more money. As a matter of fact, no
other reason was offered, in particular none of the ones you advance. Unless
you have insider knowledge or seen a different announcement?

~~~
argumentum
I meant it in the sense that PG writes about Washington DC here:
[http://www.paulgraham.com/cities.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/cities.html)

 _In DC the message seems to be that the most important thing is who you know.
You want to be an insider. In practice this seems to work much as in LA. There
's an A List and you want to be on it or close to those who are. The only
difference is how the A List is selected. And even that is not that
different._

That's simply how Washington works .. influence _is their currency_.

------
simonsarris
Woah there, comment-space. Let's hold our rage-horses.

This looks like YC is _playing host_ to the president of the United States,
who happens to be a Democrat.

Edit: As Sam said, it's even less dramatic: They're not even hosting, they're
just lending the space.

 _Plenty_ of apolitical institutions with space do the same thing. (Museums,
botanical gardens, etc).

In another year they may do it again with a president who happens to be a
Republican, or Lizardman, etc, etc.

While the tickets do amount to donations, I think it's an error to see this as
an endorsement of anybody on YC's part. In a few years they could just as well
do the same thing with the RNC and a different president.

~~~
rdl
It's to the DNC, and President Obama is their guest.

This is a political fundraising visit. If it were a visit by the President of
the United States in an official capacity to talk about issues, I would be
ecstatic that it was happening at YC, regardless of the President's party. The
difference is the trip is being paid by the DNC, from political funds; an
official visit is paid by the taxpayer.

Maybe I've been influenced by working in government facilities where _any_
political lobbying or support is completely banned, but this seems exceedingly
inappropriate.

~~~
tptacek
It is exceedingly inappropriate in _exactly what way_ , Ryan? It's YC's space.
They own it. What duty do they owe you or anyone else to host or help only
politicians you agree with?

~~~
rdl
YC is an investor in my company, and I donate about 50-100h of my time to YC
every year. I agree that gives me zero ownership, but by the common definition
of "stakeholder", it's reasonable to be upset.

I felt equally bad when another investor went off the deep end on anti-gun
politics.

~~~
tptacek
I don't even know what to say to the idea that you might believe your
investors are obliged to either share your opinions about gun control or keep
quiet about them.

~~~
rdl
The "trying to pressure portfolio companies into supporting political agenda
on non-tech issue" was the part I objected to.

The issue isn't the specific policy viewpoints. It's using a commercial or
other relationship to try to pressure for politics.

"sf.citi" was supposed to be focused on pro-business SF local politics, which
is sort of reasonable. Gun control is literally orthogonal to technology.

~~~
tptacek
And YC is pressuring you into supporting the DNC how?

~~~
kumarski
[https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman)

------
sparkzilla
This is a PR disaster for YC. It sends a strong signal that YC is actually a
political organization and not one based on merit. By making this decision, YC
alienates founders who are Republicans, and disturbs anyone else who thinks
that YC should be politically neutral. Because we can never know if a YC
evaluator will look at an applicant's twitter feed and discount the applicant
because of their political leanings (shades of Brendan Eich), applicants who
are Republicans will either have to hide their affiliations, or simply not
apply to YC.

~~~
mkempe
Indeed. One would expect that Sam and other YC leaders did carefully consider
the implications, and the consequences.

The following will probably mark me as persona non grata with some people at
YC.

I find American politics abhorrent, including both parties. The president's
policies have been and are abhorrent, too. Further, the notion that one would
pay tens of thousands of dollars for such an event is profoundly disgusting.
Part of what is wrong with politics in this country is that kind of money.

As for those who claim that it's politics as usual, that one must play along
-- when did conformity become justification?

~~~
mkempe
The down-voting is a nice embodiment of someone's wish to make others personae
non gratae.

------
supergeek133
This just all goes back to the seemingly unholy relationship between business
and government these days. It shouldn't matter what party and what capacity.

They just shouldn't be related, much less running fundraisers. Even if it's
just the space.

------
programnature
You want tech to have influence in DC? This is what you have to do. I doubt it
matters to Sam if the president is R or D.

~~~
supergeek133
But it's not the President. It's the DNC. They just happen to be bringing
along the President, right?

------
jprince
So disappointed that YC stoops to this level. Building companies should not be
about political issues and this is a new low for YC.

~~~
zorpner
Disrupting existing markets (not a component of all company-building, but
certainly a critical piece of many YC companies) is fundamentally about
political issues.

~~~
jprince
You know what I mean, zorpner. Don't split hairs here. YC was supposed to be a
business incubator for all people - people like me who are conservatives and
people like most of the tech sector who lean left. It wasn't supposed to
matter WHAT we believed, as long as we could build products people wanted. Now
even tech is becoming partisan.

I don't want to have to hunt down incubators that donate to the RNC or
Libertarian party just to keep my hard work from helping people I strongly
disagree with on nearly every issue(DNC.)

~~~
zorpner
I _think_ I know what you mean, and I disagree. It's an illusion to think that
any practice (including tech) is non-partisan -- tech influences policy and
policy influences technology. Every company functionally has a political
allegiance, even if it's not specifically acknowledged, and the unwillingness
of SiV companies to acknowledge this publicly hurts everyone.

This doesn't eliminate opportunities, but creates them -- funding a
conservative incubator now becomes a potentially viable business plan.

------
PUTNEY
Politicians from all parties want to associate their brand with "tech." It is
associated broadly with pro-growth, innovation and entrepreneurship.

YC is not just any old office space. Holding the event here allows the DNC,
and the president, to claim support from this community.

It is a smart political move for the fundraisers. It is also a valuable
contribution from YC leadership to the DNC.

Unless there is equal time given to equally important elected officials from
other parties, YC can now be branded as a partisan group. You are no longer
above the fray.

------
jds375
While the idea of YC being involved in politics at all is off-putting, I don't
think it's necessarily a bad thing. This provides YC with valuable publicity
and connections. It helps put the tech/entrepreneurship community in the
public eye and will certainly bolster it's importance and value (even just a
little bit). I think good can come out of this, but we'll have to see.

------
jgalt212
This just seems very short-sighted of Sam to do this so soon after being
handed the keys to the YC kingdom. There is definitely, some brand damage
being done here. And what's the upside? Sam gets to hang with his social
betters?

------
kenjackson
I think it is fine to support your beliefs or political party. Just be
prepared for the fallout. In this case the fallout will likely be small.

------
loumf
The principals of every noteworthy company in the US probably gave some money
to a politician. This is probably not even the first time a YC principal did a
fund-raising activity.

My read is that YC is being used as a space, and is not giving YC funds. If
this were direct to a candidate, I don't even think it would be allowed unless
that candidate paid market rate for the space (or the host did and declared it
as a donation). I'm not sure what the rules are for committees rather than
candidates.

------
nostromo
This is a bit icky, but smart. Other industries play ball, and we should too.

------
mkempe
For context, what other businesses in SV have "lent" their space to run a
fundraiser for one of the two major parties in the last ten years? Is it a
common practice?

------
seeingfurther
We need movement on visas in Washington and like it or not this is exactly how
that happens.

~~~
PUTNEY
You're implying quid pro quo. If that is how it works, you should be inviting
the folks that oppose immigration reform. Not the ones that support it.

------
amuntner
Was this already in mind when the proposal to monkeyhammer new user posts was
presented?

------
ironhide
Do me a favor, tell Obama to shutdown the NSA's spying on America?

~~~
antocv
What do you think HN is? Some kind of place where you can talk freely with no
consequences?

Imagine if the feds had a nice small social network of the elite in tech and
those who aspire or like to become techies, and if they had access to all
their clicks, comments affiliations etc.

Better investment than that huge data centre in Mormon-land.

------
Uhhrrr
Is this a joke or a prank? Because otherwise, ick.

EDIT: If the event winds up being a 2 hour barrage of questions about the NSA,
it might be redeemed.

~~~
bmj
_If the event winds up being a 2 hour barrage of questions about the NSA, it
might be redeemed._

Do you actually think the DNC or the President's staff would allow that to
happen? This isn't a dig at the Democrats, either--I can't imagine the RNC
allowing a fundraiser dinner to become a town hall meeting to grill the
President on a controversial issue.

~~~
Uhhrrr
There was an article in the NYT Sunday Magazine yesterday which had VP Biden
being put on the hot seat by gay marriage supporters[1]; I would hope that the
NSA's mass data collection practices, which are much less controversial (they
are widely unpopular, unproductive, and give terrible power to any bad actors
who have access), would be as worthy of questioning.

[1][http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/magazine/how-the-
president...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/magazine/how-the-president-
got-to-i-do-on-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0)

------
kzrdude
This is just the kind of thing Altman needs to do to climb the social ladder
and to get into the right circles right?

