DNC Acquires Voter Cell Phone Numbers
Source: Political Wire
An internal memo says the DNC has reached out to 30 million voters so far and acquired 94 million cell phone numbers of registered voters ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.
Axios: There are only 100 days until the election. Reaching voters where they are on cell phones, not landlines and connecting with new voters will be crucial to Democrats efforts in November and looking ahead to the 2020 presidential election.
DNC Memo
Read more: https://politicalwire.com/2018/07/29/dnc-acquires-voter-cell-phone-numbers/
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Way to go DNC,our Call Lists sucked in 2016 because of out dated Phone Numbers.
cutroot
(873 posts)Democrat here. I am just questioning the logic of this.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Less than 50% of the US population still has a landline. I think the logic is QUITE sound.
cutroot
(873 posts)And, if it goes to voice mail you still get charged
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)cutroot
(873 posts)I would estimate that everyone here on DU, with the exception of the trolls and the lurker provocateurs, already know whom they are voting for. In general, I understand the need to get the message out. But, calling people and making them pay for it just does not seem like a good idea.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)It's the fence sitters and LLI's that are the targets...
I'm poor, and have an unlimited cell plan that costs me $30/mo. I've seen unlimited for as low as $20/mo.
cutroot
(873 posts)I travel frequently so I have to have good coverage. Even if they called me twice a day and charged me a dime, I would still vote Democratic. The fence sitters aren't likely to respond to a phone call. There are better ways to get people off of their butts. If we keep trumps antics front and center in the public eye, he will do the job himself.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)MetroPCS and SimpleMobile are national plans on the T-Mobile network, and their prices are the same everywhere.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....don't even have limited minute plans except for prepaid phones.
cutroot
(873 posts)I know many people that have land lines and just use the cell phone as a supplement. Where do you get your estimate of "Very few people"?
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)The majority are cell phone ONLY.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)And predicate your conclusions entirely on mere anecdotes.
cutroot
(873 posts)buzz off
Meadowoak
(5,528 posts)LeftInTX
(25,038 posts)Towlie
(5,314 posts)This is definitely not a good thing. I don't pay for cell phone service in order to provide a free advertising medium for people to promote their product, service, or agenda, no matter what it is.
And cell phone calls are particularly insidious because they assault you no matter what else might be demanding your attention at the time.
truthisfreedom
(23,138 posts)I get robocalls regularly in my cell. Its disgusting.
Towlie
(5,314 posts)I remember when Chimpie signed it into law on TV, and I thought "No! No! It should be a DO call list."
SeattleVet
(5,477 posts)I have not received a call from a *legitimate* telemarketer in many years; the only calls I get are from scammers and crooks, who are going to break the law, anyway.
Do you report these calls? The FCC and FTC *do* take enforcement action when they can. Unfortunately, most of the criminals are (illegally) spoofing their number, too, and are out of the country, and hard to track down. There have recently been some good enforcement actions against fake IRS scammers in India (they had US accomplices), and some huge fines that put a few vacation and credit card scammers out of business.
Political robocalls are absolutely illegal, without prior permission from the phone owner.
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-16-264A1.pdf
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Scam callers usually don't care about the rules.
crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)And if you get a live call, be nice to the person. They're a volunteer.
SeattleVet
(5,477 posts)or you had to have given express permission to be autodialed or robocalled.
It's totally illegal if they robocall or autodial the numbers without express permission from the phone owner. The FCC levies the fines, and they can make it VERY expensive for the DNC if they can't prove that they either manually dialed the numbers or have permission to call that number. What could *possibly* go wrong if they call someone that files a valid complaint? Guess who controls the FCC now.
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-16-264A1.pdf
SunSeeker
(51,497 posts)EarthFirst
(2,894 posts)If I wanted unsolicited calls; Id have directly provided you with my number.
Im willing to bet that this is the larger sentiment as well...
Gymbo
(133 posts)You harass me with robocalls you won't lose my vote, you will lose my support. I won't contribute to any plan that includes invading my privacy.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)But I get it... sometimes, the mere desire for personal convenience strongly outweighs the actual measure of our political convictions.
keithbvadu2
(36,622 posts)You pay me 10 cents per call on my cellphone bill... I will answer it.
That goes for voicemail also. Checking voicemail also uses my minutes.
Otherwise, I am not interested in you bothering me no matter which party you are.
SeattleVet
(5,477 posts)While political robocalls and autodialed calls to landlines are legal, you still need prior express permission to place either of these types of call to a cell phone.
Unless they have specific permission from the owner of the phone, they CANNOT robocall or autodial cells.
Penalty is up to $1500, per call, and it is levied by the FCC. Under the current administration, they can make it VERY expensive to the DNC if they decide to press on with the plan.
Here is the information, directly from the FCC:
https://www.fcc.gov/political-campaign-robocalls
And here is the .pdf with the information about what the DNC has to do to keep from getting in huge trouble when people complain:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-16-264A1.pdf
Essentially, they need to have express permission to make the calls, ad must be able to prove that they have permission. Someone in charge at the DNC needs to read and take into account this information before falling into the trap and being fined for massive amounts.
(It's still legal, if very annoying, if they use a phone bank and manually dial the numbers.)
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)MattP
(3,304 posts)soryang
(3,299 posts)they are usually from call banks in India or the Philippines. How many of these calls do you get before you stop answering?
I like the ones that ask "how satisfied are you with your health plan?"
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)Most leave a message if it is important
bigworld
(1,807 posts)If they're not already convinced to vote Democratic, a simple phone call is not going to sway them -- and might even scare them away.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Now we're just keeping up with technology.
LeftInTX
(25,038 posts)People often need to be reminded to vote
I was calling people on election day because they hadn't voted early. They had actually forgotten about the election. Also certain demographics are likely to be very busy and need reminding. (Young parents come to mind)
I'm volunteering on a special election right now. Most people don't answer their phones. (Land or cell)
When we left messages 68% of the voters went to the polls the next day. When I managed to talked to voters, they had said they tried to vote, but the location had changed and didn't know where to vote. With instruction, they managed to find their polling spot.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)So many here poo-pooing on this idea. I don't get it.
SeattleVet
(5,477 posts)If they use an autodialer or robocall these phones without express permission they are liable for up to $1500 per call fine, levied by the GOP-controlled FCC.
Totally illegal if they robocall or autodial the numbers without express permission from the phone owner. The FCC levies the fines, and they can make it VERY expensive for the DNC if they can't prove that they either manually dialed the numbers or have permission to call that number.
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-16-264A1.pdf
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)and are phone banking in a legal manner.
Your concern, however, is noted.
deurbano
(2,894 posts)and she manually dialed the numbers, used her real first name and interacted with those called.
ret5hd
(20,477 posts)they will say "WOW! Thanks for the heads up! We had NO idea!"
Then you can go to sleep tonight without all those pesky worries floating through your head.
You're welcome.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)And frankly , after 2016 I do not trust the DNC and unsubscribed from their mailing list.
deurbano
(2,894 posts)So, I guess that's not exactly a robocall? There were real people dong it (she used her real first name)... but they did have some canned text responses to certain things the recipients would say. However, she would also personally interact with anyone who wanted to discuss the candidate, had questions, etc.. During Clinton's campaign, my daughter did hours of data entry every day (at headquarters, not from home), but she has a speech disability so couldn't make (landline) calls. She is also quadriplegic, but can type with one finger, and the Newsom campaign had a program where she could text from her computer from home, and she became one of their super text-ers. She also did some work on her computer from home for Mark Leno (when he was running for mayor in SF), but I think that was just texting Leno supporters to remind them of events... or to try to get them to volunteer, etc.... and maybe some GOTV on election day.
People don't realize their numbers are public (maybe when they register to vote?), and many (like almost everyone upthread!) were pissed off to get the texts. My daughter thinks a law will be passed to end this once enough people complain. In terms of costs to the recipient, do people have to pay for texts, too? We have pretty comprehensive cell phone plans (don't use a land line), so I'm not sure about the more limited plans, but I thought texts might be free on most of them?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... without needing any help or running-start from anyone else. The previous snub was simply a way for someone to say "fuck you, Democrats" but it didn't have any meaningful or lasting impact on whether the DNC can effectively do its job.
All I'm saying is that I had the greatest confidence in our party's leadership, its plans, its ability to adjust and compensate, and its ability to move forward and make progress on its own without relying on (or begging for) data handouts. We've got some smart party leadership.
Go, Democrats!
True_Blue
(3,063 posts)I think if they have live volunteers calling they will get positive responses. I volunteered for Hillary's campaign and we only called registered Democrats mainly to give them the address of their polling place and find out if they needed a ride. We all got very positive responses from almost everyone we spoke to.
FailureToCommunicate
(14,005 posts)kimbutgar
(21,027 posts)They should be prepared for this happening, considering what happened in 2016.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Despite being, well... mere phone calls.
And if this prevents someone from voting for a candidate, I'm left to presume only that we're looking for even the tiniest displeasure to allow us the excuse of not voting.
If a simple phone call convinces someone to not vote, I'd be wary of that person's ability to think both calmly or rationally.
RandySF
(58,363 posts)Would likely complain if the opponite occurred. Its another opportunity to bash the DNC.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)I didn't care for their bias and tactics in the last primary and I do not need or want their bias and guidance on voting in the fall.
Raine
(30,540 posts)on anything ... I don't want anyone put friends or family calling me! If I have to give a number I give my old land line number because the ringer is in the silent position so I never hear it, the machine gets it.