Adding a statutory candidate check box

[LindsayYoung]

The statutory candidate data is much cleaner, so it makes a good default.

We can just add 'candidate_status=C' to all the links to that page. Is there a better way to handle that default?

I am simplifying this a bit, the full list of codes codes is:

C = Statutory candidate
F = Statutory candidate for future election
N = Not yet a statutory candidate
P = Statutory candidate in prior cycle

[LindsayYoung]

Fixes #785

[LindsayYoung]

Just C, might be too limiting, we might want to include all non-nulls, what do you think @PaulClark2

[PaulClark2]

If the default is "statutory candidate" we probably want to use "C," "F" and "P" as all of these codes indicate the candidate has spent or raised $5000. The default value for candidate status (cand_status) is "N." We may need to try including and excluding codes to determine what works best.

[jmcarp]

What's the status of this patch @LindsayYoung? Do we want to stick with "C" only or add more options? Regardless of which statuses we choose by default, it seems like we'd want to allow users to filter by any status.

[LindsayYoung]

Sorry, did not see this comment before, I will take a look!

[LindsayYoung]

We were talking about defaulting to the statutory candidates for the browse views, so I am going to change the link slightly, I think we should change the language on the following to reflect the new, curated view, Instead of "All 2016 presidential candidates", just " 2016 presidential candidates" and so on.

Would that be OK @emileighoutlaw and @noahmanger ?

[emileighoutlaw]

I think that sounds great to me!

[emileighoutlaw]

Great thought

[LindsayYoung]

Going to change links in the fec-style dropdown next

[noahmanger]

Great!

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Lindsay Young [email protected]
wrote:

Going to change links in the fec-style dropdown next

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#795 (comment).

Noah Manger
18F http://18f.gsa.gov | Work: 415-696-6146

[LindsayYoung]

The API part of this is working locally and on production, but is having issues on dev, I will look into that now.

(After this, merge 18F/fec-cms#89)

[noahmanger]

Where's this at?

[LindsayYoung]

I think the only thing left is debugging the tests.

[LindsayYoung]

It looks like the tests are comparing results against the API, so we need to filter those results the same, I am not finding where it is making the comparison call in the test to add the same filtering.