Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier Findings: Game Biz Favors Obama

October 13, 2008 -

Video game industry types are leaning Barack Obama's way.

That's the conclusion which GamePolitics cautiously drew a couple of weeks back based on our survey of campaign donations by game industry A-listers.

Kotaku spent some time rummaging through Federal Election Commission records, but took a more global approach, compiling data on a company-by-company basis. In a story posted today, they came to pretty much the same bottom line:

About seventy-five percent of game industry presidential campaign donations went to democrats, based on a sampling of developers and publisher donations over the past two years obtained from the Federal Election Commission.Kotaku looked at presidential campaign donations for nine companies from January of 2007 through the end of July, 2008. The companies included were Activision, Blizzard, Electronic Arts, Nintendo, Sony Computer Entertainment of America, Take-Two, THQ, Ubisoft and Valve...

 

 

The database showed that the nine companies donated a total of about $97,800 to ten candidates, about $61,000 of which went to democratic candidates, while about $36,700 went to republican candidates.

 

Kotaku also serves up a number of pie charts to support their conclusion. Mmmmm, pie...


Comments

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

What I think is funny is that Rockstar favors the Democrats, Rockstar, Hot Coffee, Hillary Clinton.  Argh, just the thought of it hurts.

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

Like I said earlier: People in creative fields have a tendency to lean Democratic.  It'd make an interesting study for why those fields attract people with that political ideology.  Somehow, I think it's already been done.

"That's not ironic. That's justice."

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

That's an easy one. Creative types including actors, artists, and musicians are (generalizing here) often more touchy feely in their approach to life. "How does that make you feel?" Is a stereotypical catch phrase. Emotional responses to situations take precedent over rational responses (except where actual "rationalization" is involved to justify actions). This is the viewpoint most often identified with classic modern "Liberalism." Conservatives, by contrast, are more typically identified with phrases like "What do you think of that?" A rational, as opposed to emotional response. Most Liberals lean Democratic. Most Conservatives lean Republican.

I'm certain it's more complicated than that, including things like making choices that appear to make you fit better with a particular social group, or not wanting to be labeled as a "hater" or a "bigot" even though you make choices based on reasoned thought rather than emotions.

--Verbinator

Artist and game designer who is NOT fooled by claims of "Change."

--Verbinator

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

WELL I LIKE PIE AND THATS FINAL!

Shobidoo, the hardcore gamer

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

How about this for McCain

 

Game companys are in the 5% Obama wants to redestribute the money of, giveing them a. less money to make games resulting in lower quality games or b.higher priced games or c.causeing them to move to a forigen country.

 

 

Trickle down economics, do you speak it?!

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

It sounds like he is going to take out some of the CEOs from gouging their companies for money.  So I believe the money the company saves from that alone will be enough to take care of additional taxes, haha.  I wish...

EA is making crap games either way.  Since around 2004, they cared more about money than games, and if the jack up the price any more, we can see pirating increase a boat load again.  If you look at the profits of Madden and Maxis games alone, that takes care of the financial need of ALL EA employees other than executive members with bloated salaries anyways.  What was it?  100 million copies of Sims 2?  At an average of $30 a pop that is $3 billion...  Given their great accountants, they only pay a few million in taxes for that.  Given retailer, and cost takes out $1billion.  If average salary is $75,000 a year, they can pay 27,000 employees off of Sims 2 alone.  They have about 8,000 employees, so there is 3 years of pay off of 1 game for their entire company.

Madden sells an average of 5 million companies now in days, after cost, price drop and retailers cut that is prolly around $200 million a year they pull in, which is pay for about $2,700 employees at $75,000 a pop.  Hell, they sold 1 million copies of FIFA 09 in their first week.

Lets give a crude rounding to EA's yearly income to $4 billion a year.  If they pay 8,000 employees equally, that would be $500,000 a year each.  Don't say there are additional cost, because EA also has great accountants that make them not have to pay taxes, AT ALL. (a problem with big companies right there VS government funding)  Even taxed that is $400,000 a person with a bad accountant.  I could see top game designers making that, but artist and programmers are not, and the executive members are cashing in the rest for the most part.

I think I see about $2 billion in income that I bet is going to executive members.  I think they can pay for any tax hikes, and their company can take a dive if they want to force that onto the consumers. (Especially with stupid projects like "The Sims: The Movie" and "Spore Animated Series")

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

To my knowledge, the only companies that will have ceo pay regulated, are companies that have taken federal assistance during the bailout.

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

This essentially means that the "For Obama, Video Games Still an Underachievement Metaphor" story further down the site's queue doesn't hold water, at least not as far as the radical knee-jerk interpretation of it goes.  If Obama is an enemy of video games, then why are so many video game lovers supporting him?

This suggests that the industry is far more mature than certain nameless panic merchants would have people believe.

-----------------------------

"They were retarded hairless pink bunnies, all of them. Except Shigeru Myamoto and... well, the good ones were just too /rare/ to be worth bothering about." - Mason Hornblower on the extinction of the human race

-------------------------

Treat me nice, or you may end up in my next novel.

Re: Survey of Campaign Giving by Company Confirms GP's Earlier

Delicious Democratic Pie Mothafucka do you eat it?!

When Life gives you lemons, you find a new god.

When Life gives you lemons, you find a new god.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenNow, having said that, what sites are you reading that are claiming that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem" or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"? Or was that hyperbole too?09/21/2014 - 1:03am
Andrew EisenFirst of all, ONE person in the Shout box suggested an obligation to call harassers out on their harassing but only after YOU brought it up. Plus, Techno said "when you see it happening." If you don't see it, you're not under any obligation.09/21/2014 - 1:02am
Sleaker@Craig R. - at this point I don't even know what the hashtags are suppsed to be in support of. what does GamerGate actually signify.09/21/2014 - 12:21am
Sleaker@AE - Hyperbole for the first 2, but it seems like some of the comments in the shout are attempting to place blame on fellow gamers because they aren't actively telling people to stop harassing even though they don't necessarily know anyone that has.09/21/2014 - 12:16am
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician