
$1M VotePlz Sweepstakes - runesoerensen
http://blog.samaltman.com/1-dollars-million-voteplz-sweepstakes
======
jhulla
This is awesome. Encouraging potential voters to engage, understand, and
participate in democracy is a good thing. Once registered, hopefully they will
stay registered and participate for the rest of their lives.

Besides the big name top of the ballot Presidential election there are many
down ballot elections to consider. There are house elections, senate elections
(in some states), local elections, as well as propositions, etc.

With the wall-to-wall coverage of the Presidential election, it is easy to
forget that the wheels of our democratic American system turn at multiple
levels.

E.g.: Your local school board matters. Your judges (if elected where you live)
matter.

Here are two summaries of California's propositions:

[https://ballotpedia.org/California_2016_ballot_propositions](https://ballotpedia.org/California_2016_ballot_propositions)

[http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-november-ballot-
pr...](http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-november-ballot-propositions-
guide-20160630-snap-htmlstory.html)

Vote.

~~~
web007
I like [http://www.peterates.com/](http://www.peterates.com/) as well,
informative and accessible reviews (with vote recommendations) for California
propositions.

------
alva
Not a criticism! Replace benefitting party as you wish.

It is interesting when these initiatives present themselves as non-partisan.
If you target a demographic that polling suggests will go for your preferred
party, plough tons of money to encourage them to vote, can it truly be
described as non-partisan?

edit: And if so, should they be obligated to disclose their preference and
intention?

~~~
gizmo
There are two parts to it.

First it encourages young people to vote. This is important because young
people will be the most affected by policies enacted by the next president.
This part is non-partisan, because it forces both political parties to take
young people more seriously as a voting block.

Second it's clearly against Trump, because Trump's base consists of older
white people with racial anxiety/anger. Young people lean democrat, but they
don't get out to vote.

~~~
gthtjtkt
> Second it's clearly against Trump, because Trump's base consists of older
> white people with racial anxiety/anger. Young people lean democrat, but they
> don't get out to vote.

If you honestly believe this, you are very out of touch with reality.

Young voters hate both major party candidates almost equally.

~~~
mikeyouse
Clinton is a 36-point favorite over Trump with 18-34 year olds:

[http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pr/2016/08/15/poll-
finds-...](http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pr/2016/08/15/poll-finds-
millennials-favor-clinton-over-trump-wide-margin/88757778/)

~~~
makomk
Yeah, 18-34 year olds are a lot more willing to support Clinton than Trump,
and also the age group with the most Clinton supporters and the least Trump
supporters. It's easy to get a different impression from the mainstream press
sometimes because they're pissed off that young people aren't even _more_
overwhelmingly supportive of Clinton and some of them are supporting third
parties instead. They came to believe that young people's anti-Republican lean
would mean automatic Democrat victory in future and now they're angry that it
hasn't come to pass.

------
gizmo
This is a terrific initiative. Especially the part where you can take a
picture of your driver's license and get everything taken care of. Everybody
with a little bit of startup experience knows that removing signup friction
makes a huge difference and yet voting in the US is way more complicated than
it needs to be. This isn't an accident: legislators know low turnout doesn't
affect all demographics equally. So I support projects like these that get
people to vote.

------
gthtjtkt
> No one able to vote in the US should be sitting this one out

I disagree. People who haven't taken the time to thoroughly research the
candidates should __not __be encouraged to blindly push a button, especially
this year. Most of them will probably be persuaded by fear mongering or
partisan mud-slinging.

That's not democracy, it's just mob rule.

~~~
gizmo
It doesn't take a lot of research to choose when one candidate is comically
unqualified.

The people voting is the entire point of democracy. Smart people and dumb
people. Policy wonks and random button pushers. It doesn't matter, everybody
gets one vote. That way whatever the outcome is, it reflects the will of the
people. To oppose this is to oppose democracy itself.

~~~
gthtjtkt
There are (at least) two comically unqualified candidates in this year's
election.

Thank you for proving my point.

~~~
bajsejohannes
I see this claim a lot, but I really don't get it. What is it that makes
Hillary "comically unqualified"? She might not be your favorite, but
unqualified seems like an exaggeration. Her opponent _does_ seem unqualified
(and dangerous). I'm not an American, so I might not follow it as close as
you.

~~~
sidlls
"Comically" is certainly an exaggeration. But her corruption, a resume lighter
than GWB's, and dishonesty that makes other politicians blush (some with envy,
others with shame), etc. make her qualifications at best questionable.

Neither candidate would be a candidate if we had a functioning democracy.

------
jahabrewer
With the incentive being student loan payoff, shouldn't we be concerned that
this is targeting voters that skew Democrat?

~~~
nilved
Yes, this is undeniably a partisan endeavour.

~~~
palakchokshi
I'm sorry are you saying that there are no student republicans? that's a very
misinformed opinion if you believe that.

~~~
d0lph
You know what they say, if you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, and
if you're not a conservative by 50, you have no brains.

~~~
chillwaves
Never wished I could downvote before today. Not even the (ridiculous) content
of the post, so much as.. this is your contribution to the discussion? Spare
us.

~~~
d0lph
I'm sorry it wasn't to your liking.

My point was moreso that in the US at least there is a pronounced difference
in political affiliation based on age. Notably, that is an old quote, it just
seems interesting it holds up.

~~~
jonathansizz
In what way does it hold up?

It's saying that a 20-year old conservative is necessarily heartless, and a
50-year old liberal is necessarily stupid. I don't see how either of these
follows; I know plenty of young conservatives who care deeply about other
people, and old liberals who are very smart.

It's just a lazy meme.

------
markcerqueira
I'm definitely registered to vote (at the correct address), but this website
claims I am not. I voted (by mail) in the Democratic Primary.

~~~
StephenSmith
Same here. This clearly won't work if a decent percentage of people are
already registered and it doesn't know that.

~~~
shawn-butler
Just register in several places. Not like fraud is a real problem.

------
ronilan
Obligatory.

\- _Incentivizing to vote with cash prizes. Isn 't that illegal?"_

\- _" Illegal? Sam(ir) this is America"._

~~~
throwanem
Not a lawyer, but as far as I know, the relevant statute would be 18 USC 597,
which says: "Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person,
either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate
[...]"

Which I strongly suspect is why the language around the offer universally
refers to "check[ing] voter registration status". And I'm sure somebody or
other's legal team has reviewed this language and signed off on it.

~~~
Kiro
> And I'm sure somebody or other's legal team has reviewed this language and
> signed off on it.

Not really related to this but I think you would be surprised how often this
is not the case. I've been involved in many big contracts where I've realized
no actual lawyers have been involved at all.

~~~
peterbonney
In this case there's a lengthy terms and conditions document, clearly drafted
by lawyers.

~~~
Kiro
Yeah, you are probably right but I wanted to get that off my chest anyway.
Sorry for OT.

------
web007
Odd that it shows I'm not registered - I wonder if it has trouble with
permanent absentee ballots? That would be especially unfortunate since they
encourage that option after registration.

------
davidbrent
This list of known browsers(cookies) would be worth well over $1mil to US
advertisers right? I can only assume they're selling it, according to the
privacy policy.

------
revelation
I think it's unethical to link prices to debt, college or student debt in
particular.

How about a "50k for a business plan" option? This is a startup accelerator,
right?

------
rubidium
"The 2016 US Presidential election feels like the most important one so far in
my lifetime." -sama

I'm the same age as Sam. But I must confess I don't see why he sees this one
as the most important. Both candidates are terrible (for different reasons).
It's quite damning of the entire political establishment.

I just want to get through the next 4 years and hope that either party can
finally find one good candidate.

~~~
specialist
_" I don't see why he sees this one as the most important."_

This cycle realigns the USA. Like Reagan did in 1980, in reverse.

Baring an Act of God, Hillary has already won. Ignore the polls. Everyone has
their own reasons to pretend its close. Media wants a horse race and more
advertising dollars. If Hillary's base thinks the election is in the bag, they
might stay home. Donald is Donald.

Hillary's campaign is pushing hard, to flip as many states as possible. The
races to watch are down ballot, especially state houses and judges. This
election is the set up for the 2021 redistricting, to win back the US House
for a generation. REDMAP in reverse.

The GOP "establishment" (business friendly moderates) might even be okay with
that. REDMAP worked too well. They probably want to wrest control of their
party back (from the Tea Party).

~~~
chris11
538 has Trump .6% ahead of Clinton, the other polls have CLinton ahead, but
her highest is at 54% right now. That's basically a coin flip, not an act of
god. [http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-
forecast/?...](http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-
forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#now)

~~~
specialist
Aha. Thank you. You helped me figure out Trump's angle.

After he loses (badly), Trump will claim the election was rigged, stolen,
whatever. Because the returns won't match the polling. An argument well worn
by the left when Gore beat Bush in 2000.

Please recall that Romney was surprised he lost. He too thought too much of
the polls. But whereas Romney had a decent campaign, posing a credible threat,
he faced the most sophisticated campaign in history, with an amazing ground
game (GOTV).

Comparatively, Trump has nothing resembling a campaign. A twitter account.
Some campaign stops. No volunteer organization. And certainly no ground game.
Rather, Trump's effort is solely about enriching Trump, a play book he's
copying from Giuliani, Grigrich, and a host of other faux GOP candidates.

~~~
chris11
There's also a rumor going around that he plans to start a media company if he
looses because he has some very strong supporters and he think his campaign
should have been covered differently.

------
mtgx
Getting more people to vote is nice, but ultimately you're still stuck with
the duopoly [1] of parties. Why isn't there a big push to change the voting
system to something that would allow better representation in Congress?

A whopping 49% of Americans are registered as Independents, which leaves only
half of Americans that truly feel like they're represented by the only two
choices they're given every 2/4 years: the Democratic and Republican parties.

That almost seems criminal to me. How can the only two viable parties (with
the current voting system) represent only _half_ the country at any given
point in time? And the number of people that are registered as Democrats and
Republicans drops every election. This is a democracy _crisis_ , and people
need to start treating it like one.

If Sam Altman and the others in YCombinator really care about democracy, they
should also support organizations such as FairVote.org and help them change
the voting system city by city, and state by state, until it eventually
happens everywhere.

Oh, and just one of the many benefits of switching to a proportional
representation voting system[2], or at least a single-winner ranked-choice[3]
one? It _gets more people to vote_ because they now feel better represented by
the available viable candidates.

Isn't that nice?

[1]
[http://www.fairvote.org/monopoly_politics](http://www.fairvote.org/monopoly_politics)

[2]
[http://www.fairvote.org/proportional_representation](http://www.fairvote.org/proportional_representation)

[3]
[http://www.fairvote.org/rcv#rcvbenefits](http://www.fairvote.org/rcv#rcvbenefits)

~~~
sidlls
Yes, almost 100% in agreement with you. My only quibble is that we take care
to really know about who is running the various vote reform efforts and
initiatives. The Democrats and Republicans will do whatever they can to get
reform in name only under the guise of more choice. See California's "top two"
primary system as an example of how one party more or less locks up exclusive
access to the ballot in more cases than one should be comfortable with. If we
aren't careful, vote "reform" efforts will look more like that than PR.

------
0003
Not sure why you need my email address to check if I am registered...

~~~
kevhito
They need to notify the winner(s) somehow?

------
taylorbuley
If there are assets available, I'd love to create a house ad campaign on our
local CA newspapers pointing to this lander.

------
beamatronic
By filling out this form ( for California ) does all of my information become
public record?

~~~
throwanem
Not the VotePlz sweepstakes form directly, as far as their privacy policy
seems to state, but if you actually register to vote, then your information
will become part of the public record along with everyone else on a voter
registration list.

------
d0m
FYI, at first glance the name looked very spammy. If I didn't see the
samaltman.com domain I wouldnt have clicked. I'm glad I did though, good luck
with that initiative.

------
nilved
Yikes, cringe. Please tone down the emoji and literallies and why evens.

~~~
obmelvin
Presumably you aren't the target demographic of the site. It's not meant to
appeal to you.

~~~
nilved
I am the target demographic, and this doesn't appeal to us.

> The 2012 election was decided by millennial turnout. And this election
> should be too. It’s up to you to vote and decide!

Millenials see politicians and old people using emoji as contrived and
duplicitous. They also hate the word millenial.

~~~
logfromblammo
At least they eventually replaced the "Gen Y" placeholder with an actual
_name_...

You know that word that Gen X hates, because the media constantly uses it to
refer to us? Yeah, neither do I.

Just be glad that your generational cohort is large enough that people will
actually pay attention to you as an advertising demographic or voting bloc.
Even when the Boomer-controlled media is ridiculing you as special snowflakes
in your safe spaces, at least they're talking about you.

------
glibgil
Enter for a chance to win... jury duty. No thanks!

~~~
throwanem
Do you not care about any of your civic responsibilities, or only those which
require more than an hour or two of your time every few years?

~~~
glibgil
Yes

------
oh_sigh
So, Sam, who do you support? Why is this election bigger than any other
presidential election?

Also, is there a strong correlation being registered to vote and actually
voting? If you aren't motivated to even register to vote already, will
entering a contest making you register really affect your desire to go out and
vote?

~~~
rory096
>So, Sam, who do you support?

He's made no secret of this.

[http://blog.samaltman.com/trump](http://blog.samaltman.com/trump)

~~~
toomuchtodo
$1M VotePlz is too little too late of that's the impetus; keep the cash and do
something useful with it Sam, like fixing the DNC so they run a competent
candidate next time.

~~~
hellogoodbyeeee
You have been the victim of the conservative spin machine if you think one of
the most experienced candidates that either party has fielded in decades isn't
"competent".

~~~
lintiness
let me guess, romney was "too robotic" and "didn't stand for anything" ... ?

~~~
hellogoodbyeeee
I don't see how my opinion of Romney's personality has any bearing on
Clinton's resume.

~~~
lintiness
of course you don't. romney's probably the single most experienced, best
qualified candidate for president the nation's ever seen. that you believe a
woman who's ridden the coattails of her husband to office is somehow more
"experienced" is telling.

~~~
hellogoodbyeeee
Is this a joke? You are completely dismissing the accomplishments of a senator
and a secretary of state because she is a woman?

Lots of governors run for president. Very few senator/sec of state/first
ladies do.

Edit: Mitt Romney wasn't even a two term Governor. Gary Johnson is objectively
a better qualified candidate

~~~
oh_sigh
If being president/CEO of a large organization is your qualifying factor, then
you surely must be supporting Trump right now.

