I have been predicting for a while now that by '08, every serious presidential contender will employ a blogger. Today's National Journal includes a good column by K. Daniel Glover called: Paid Bloggers Proliferate On Campaign Payrolls (you may need a subscription to read it in its entirety). Here's an excerpt:
"With increasing frequency, candidates across the country are paying bloggers to write, develop Web sites, connect with energetic allies on the Internet, respond to online critics, and advise their employers about how to behave in the blogosphere. Others are paid to do more traditional campaign work like communications consulting and opposition research."
... Also, the liberal/homosexual group PFLAG actually has a pretty decent website with some pretty decent downloadable materials. Heck, we might as well use their hard work to advance the conservative movement. For example, if you're interested in GOTV, they offer the following educational resources:
Check it out. If you're a conservative, you might want to use some of these ideas to advance the conservative movement. (Remember, political technology is philosophically neutral) ...
... This WaPost article (click link and then scroll down) discusses how emotion is vital ingredient in campaign ads: "The goal in such ads 'is to go for the heart first, the head second ..."
Benchmark poll: Poll conducted early in a campaign to establish name identification, determine areas of demographic strength (and weakness) and identify key issues to be emphasized throughout the effort. This is usually the largest poll of the campaign and will also have the first "ballot test".
Brushfire poll: Poll conducted in the middle of a campaign to determine progress in establishing name identification and any movement in the ballot test. It is also an opportunity to spot check any new issues that may have arisen.
Tracking polls: Polls conducted near the end of the campaign - frequently using 100 surveys each night for a period of nights. They will measure the ballot test and determine if the money being spent on media is working and getting the desired effect.
1.) Log on 2.) Look up people you know in Connecticut 3.) Write a message to them 4.) It gets placed on a physical postcard mailed to that person (on the Lamont campaign dime)
More Kos ... "It costs nothing but a few minutes of your time, and is a great way to spread the word about Lamont to people you know in Connecticut. Tagaris writes: We've seen postcards that read, "Dear Grandma, I really believe in Ned Lamont. I hope you'll vote for him on November 7th. Love you and miss you. Eric"There is no television ad that beats that, period."
What is your opinion of a candidate obtaining an RV with his signs plastered all over it and going to soccer and pop-warner football fields and giving out free water and coffee on the next two weekends versus walking in precincts?
Dave
Answer
Dave,
I would recommend walking precincts. It's not exciting, but it is the most efficient and effective. The reason is that when you walk precincts you should be able to target LIKELY and PERSUADABLE voters. When you go to a football field, etc., you end up spending a lot of time talking to people who love you -- people who hate you -- and even people who aren't registered to vote. With 2 weeks to go, I would "hunt where the ducks are." Of course, the exception to the rule is if you are going to be getting press. If a reporter is going to be shadowing you one day, for example, the RV idea would likely be a big hit!
In 2004, the Republican Party used marketing-style data-mining ... calculating whether a certain voter in a particular district owned a snowmobile and was therefore a likely Republican voter, then targeting the prospect with a narrow political message.
...
Campaigns try to boost turnout by targeting voters who tend to vote early and providing them with information about voting hours, ballots and maps to polling places near their districts.
When the RNC started hitting Senate candidate Harold Ford (D-TN) for attending a Playboy Party, he cried fowl -- and his supporters called the ad "racist." Of course, the truth is that there is one way to know if an ad is working, and that is if your opponents attack you for using it. This is an important lesson to learn in politics: You're opponents attack you when your strategy is working. If your strategy is flawed, they will be content to let you keep doing it. But if it's hurting them, they will cry foul. The Ford adswere lethal to him because they destroy the "choir boy" image he was (up until that point), effectively portraying (in a state like TN, he needs it).
... Now, it has been my observation that very few "intellectual" pundits and journalists actually understand this concept. That's why I was so happy to read Rich Lowry's sagacious comments in the Corner. It is very clear that Lowry "gets it":
... it's my sense that that controversial RNC ad scored a direct hit in Tennessee. It forced Ford to say "I like football and I like women." There's nothing the least bit wrong with that. But it runs counter to the pious image he was cultivating with statements like, "I love Jesus, I can't help it" (from Newsweek). This is why the controversy over the Playboy party—absurd in isolation—has so hurt Ford. It makes him seem much less like the choir boy he's been running as ...
Millionaire Loopholen. the U.S. Supreme Court's 1976 Buckley v. Valeo ruling which said limiting the amount one could contribute to one's own campaign would violate the First Amendment.
1996 Wall Street Journal (Apr. 4) A12: Then Steve Forbes ran right through the millionaire loophole.
What can you do in the next two weeks to help the cause? If you're a conservative living in a state with a targeted Senate race, AdvanceUSA has provided some pretty neat Candidate Comparisons. Activists can just print them out and distribute them.
Under the "words matter" category comes this news: Bush dropsphrase "stay the course" The liberal DailyKos has some good stuff up, including: Confessions of a Bloggerand I'm Exhausted and Guilty. Should You Be Too (confessions of a door-to-door canvasser? (Warning: this has a liberal viewpoint -- which should be ignored) ...
Look to the left and you'll see my new article, "The Politics of Anger." Right now, it's still password protected (right now, only premium members can read it). I'm going to get that fixed so that everyone can read it ...
Tonight, I'm planning to deliver this speech to the Arlington/Falls Church YR's:
The great Athenian orator, Demosthenes, was asked what made for a great speech, and he said three things: "action, action, and action." With that in mind, my talk tonight has to do with some general advice and action items for young future Republican leaders -- which is exactly who you are. First, I have three general pieces of advice, then I'm going to end with three things we can do specifically after the November 7 elections:
1. Associate with people at the top of their game. The way to learn the most is to associate with successful people. I have intentionally sought out the best people. Sometimes it has meant developing a mentor/protegee relationship. I'm found that it is remarkably easy to meet any political leader you want for advice over, say, breakfast. Like anything else, the hard part is getting up the courage to ask. Other times it has meant working with them in a consultant capacity. And sometimes it has meant taking a step back in salary or stature, in order to sort of learn at the knee of the master. It is almost always worth the investment.
2. Establish good habits - A wise man once said that men don't pick their futures, they pick their habits and their habits determine their future. What are your habits? Reading good books is a good habit. Working out is a good habit. Volunteering is a good habit. Your habits determine how you spend your time. On a campaign, time is the most important element. But it's not just true in politics -- it's true in life. Every one of us in this room should guard our time. I urge you to begin paying attention to how you are spending your time because that will ultimately tell me what you really care about and how far you will go.
3. Stay on top of technology - It has gotten much easier to get your message out effectively and cheaply using technology. I published my book, Teaching Elephants to talk and now people can go to my website -- or Amazon.com -- and purchase it. I have an email list and a blog. All these things are very inexpensive -- and every activist and leader can do this. On a campaign, we are seeing things like MySpace and YouTube make a big difference. For example, I predict every presidential campaign will emply a full-time blogger. Every one of us should be familiar with this technology.
Now, with two weeks to go until Election Day, I simply must say something about the upcoming elections. I am not one of those timid souls who wants to throw up our hands and surrender.
But I also think that, no matter what happens on November 7, Republicans need to reevaluate ourselves -- so that this doesn't happen again. Ignoring the problem won't make it go away.
Now, normally, when I have done speeches such as this, my focus has been to talk about political strategy and tactics -- not ideas. My reason was simple, when I got involved in politics, Republicans had, for years, been great at churning out intellectual ideas. But they had been lousy at selling those ideas. From a career perspective, I picked a niche that needed to be filled (I also happened to be very passionate about it). My goal was to find people who were philosophically sound (in terms of our Republican values), but needed to become more technologically proficient.
But the challenges that conftont us today are very different than they were a few years ago. To every thing there is a season. Thanks to the hard work of a lot of groups and leaders, Republicans are now reasonably adept at getting our message out and running good polical campaigns. The trouble is we have been much more successful at marketing our candidates than we have been at marketing our ideas. In short, we've been better at winning elections than at winning the argument.
This should not come as a surprise to us today. As recent events have unfolded, it has become obvious that too many of our leaders lack a philosophical lodestar.
In some cases, I believe this is a result of having been seduced by power. But more often than not, too many of our Republican leaders were never really deeply-rooted in their beliefs, to begin with. With that in mind, I have come up with a few thoughts on what you and I can do between November 8 and the New Year to make sure that we face 2007 in better shape than we are today. I'm not naive enough to think that our actions will change things for everybody, but I do think that this is something those of us here tonight can pledge to do as one small step for Republicans. I have three things that I want to recommend for us between now and New Year's day:
1. News-fast. I'm reading a very good book right now called The Artist's Way. This book was written by Julia Cameron (the ex-wife of Martin Scorsese) and the purpose of the book is to help people recover and overcome writers block. It's a twelve-week course that involves reading and doing some exercises. One of the exercises involves going a week without reading. According to Cameron, this is the one challenge that evokes the most anger. But she believes that part of recovering a new creative perspective requires going through this reading-fast. For a week, please join me in not watching or reading the news.
2. Read About Ideas. My first thought is that we must recommit ourselves to ideas and philosophy of the past. Let us commit oursleves starting November 8 to read those think intellectual books that are sitting on our shelves. Russell Kirk, and Richard Weaver -- for those of us who are conservative -- are the wholesome Sunday dinner greatly needed for a world snacking on Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity books. Too many of us have been living off "fast-food philosophy." It's time to recommit ourselves to going back to school, so to speak, and refresh our minds and souls with ideas.
3. Put it in Writing. Write a personal statement of political philosophy and values and personal goals. I intentionally put this one third because I think that after reflecting on the ideas of the past, and after sort of freeing your minds through this news fast, you and I will see things more clearly. Think about what things government can do to make things better (in many cases it involves government getting out of certain areas) and commit it to paper. By putting your ideas on paper, you will be more likely to stick to them. Lastly, write our your five goals for the New Year. Studies show that people who have written goals are more likely to achieve them.
I believe that if you and I follow this advice, we will grow as leaders and our community will benefit, as well. Thank you.
In the "show me" state, a visibly ill Michael J. Fox appears in a powerful pro-stem cell / anti-Talent political commercial .
While there is no evidence to support his claim that Sen. Talent is standing in the way of science, this very emotional and personal ad will likely be effective at influencing emotional voters. It is hard to argue logic against a visibly ill victim.
As someone who grew up watching Michael J. Fox on TV, it is both troubling that he is this sick -- and that political people are capitalizing on his sickness. But it is to be expected.
If you are engaged in the stem cell debate, pay attention because more of this is coming ...
The Washington Post has a great opinion piece this week where they basically asked proven winners in sports to give the GOP election advice. I like this idea a lot because winners are winners. The same techniques that work in sports often work in politics. And it is instructive to see that these proven winners in sports are exhibiting more leadership qualities than most GOP consultants and political leaders have these last few weeks. Here is one example, but I recommend reading the entire column.
As I would say to my players, it's not over till it's over! Never, ever give up! Fight with all your might. Pull every trick play you have out of your playbook and show them you're still the champions. Think about what it will be like if you should lose. That should be enough to ignite a fire in the weakest of the bunch. Remind the world what happened in Vietnam while Lyndon Johnson, a Democrat, was in office. Champions never quit. They fight to the bitter end through blood, sweat and tears! Life is tough. Life is football without a helmet.
- John McKissick , head football coach, Summerville (S.C.) High School, the winningest football coach in history
The liberals are in a tizzy about the new Republican ad, titled: The Stakes (available at http://www.gop.org/), which many in the media are comparing it to the infamous Daisy ad. There are some good reasons for the comparison ...
Obviously, both ads use emotion. As I often say (and this isn't original to me), "Logic leads to conclusions, but emotion leads to action." The bottom line is that the best way to motivate voters is to use emotion. Note: The fact that the ad uses emotion to stress a point does not in any way diminish the fact that the ad is both truthful and logical.
But the ad is similar to the Daisy ad in other ways, too. The GOP is reportedly only spending $20K on running the ad, but it will get tons of free exposure on TV and the internet. Likewise, The Daisy Ad only appeared once (not counting all the times the media played it for free). By intentionally modeling this ad on Daisy ad, the GOP has ensured that the media will do much of work of spreading the message. It's too good of a story to ignore.
... How do I know the ad is intentionally modeled on the Daisy ad? The most obvious reason is that the first words spoken by Lyndon Johnson in the Daisy ad are, "These are the stakes" -- not coincidentally, these are the only words spoken in the new GOP ad.
Is the ad fair? Elections are important and the voters have the right to know just how important they are. We owe them that much. If they see this ad, and still decide to vote for the Democrats, then at least we have done our job. The stakes really are this high ...
Drop-Off Voters n. Voters who cast ballots in Presidential years but not in off year elections.
2006New York Times (Oct. 8) Sec. 1, Pg 20: Labor is focusing on the "drop-off voter," making sure that union members who vote in presidential elections but not in midterm elections go to the polls.
In the 1972, the liberal rag New Times published an article listing the ten dumbest members of Congress. According to National Journal, "Back then, Sen. William Scott, R-Va., was named the dumbest member of Congress. As if to prove the point, he then held a press conference to deny the assertion, thereby giving the story far wider readership than it otherwise would have had."
I've heard Morton Blackwell tell this story dozens of times when he talks about "Handling Negative Information." The lesson learned is that you shouldn't repeat someone else's accusations. Also, you should respond to an attack in the medium in which you were attacked.
Next Monday night, I am speaking to the YR's of Arlington County/Fairfax County, VA. I'm working on a speech currently titled: "Advice to Young Republicans After November 8." Part of my advice is going to be to re-commit ourselves to ideas and philosophy. I'm planning to post the speech (if it is good). But right now, I'm still working out the kinks. Please email me your thoughts. What advice would you give them?
My favorite show is the office, so I guess it's no surprise that yesterday I got a prank phone call from Dwight. ... So it strikes me that this might be a useful technology for political campaigns???
October Surprisen. the release of important news in the month before election, in hopes of affecting the outcome, esp. by an incumbent.
1980New York Times (Sept. 1) A7: Republicans worry about an "October Surprise" in foreign policy.
2003 Seattle Times (Nov. 29): The phrase "October Surprise" has become a part of the political-campaign lexicon, the notion that an incumbent president can make some major announcement or take some substantial action in the monthlong run-up to Election Day.
A lot is being written (and said) about President Bush's upbeat attitude regarding the upcoming midterm elections. Of course, the liberals want you to believe he is out of touch. But the real reason he is showing an optimistic outlook is that he being a leader. Leaders don't have the luxury of letting show it when they are scared, because they know that it will affect everyone else. Think of it this way: How could a volunteer phone caller -- or a volunteer door-to-door worker -- stay positive and keep working hard if even President Bush was conceding the election? People look to leaders during tough times. They must show resolve. He is.
They say "the pioneers get the arrows." In other words, while being cutting edge has some advantages, it also has some disadvantages. For example, you get soaked with the cost of working out the kinks, fixing the glitches, figuring out the beta version, and then someone comes in later and learns from your mistakes. Such is the case in politics. As Hotline's "On-Call" blog reports:
"... donating via mobile phones is still not feasible for politics because of potential legal problems with phone companies. Just ask Michigan Gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos' campaign, who attempted to raise money on cell phones by text messaging in $4.99 increments last week only to have T-Mobile call three days later and ask them to take it down because of potential legal issues."
It's a fine line between being cutting-edge and taking too many risks. They may have crossed it.
Just wanted to check in and ask for a favor. As you may know, I have a campaign tips email list that I send out about once a week. I have a whole bunch of ideas just waiting to write about, including "how to pick a campaign manager."
... But with just three weeks to go until Election Day, I want to stay relevant. In the past, I've written about GOTV, so the most obvious topic may be redundant. My question to you is: With three weeks left to go, what's the best advice I could give to candidates?
Jim Gerahty shares some encouraging feedback (from his readers) about the GOP's get-out-the-vote effort ...
Every day for a week before the election I got an emain (sic) from the RNC on the importance of my vote. Attached was a Mapquest map showing the route I needed to take from my house to my polling place. It impressed the heck out of me.
Today's Washington Post features a cleverly disguised hit-piece on George W. Bush. Ostensibly, the piece seeks to dissect his changing rhetorical style. But the real objective is to portray him as a desperate out-of-touch lame duck who thinks he's a messiah:
Renshon, who wrote a mostly-favorable book in 2004 about Bush's psychology, said the president's declarations are in keeping with his apparent self-image as a Jeremiah, "railing against the tides" and saying what "people ought to be doing something about.
While The Post believes they are criticizing Bush for trying to be "Jeremiah," the truth is that Bush is filling the exact role that American's want and need in a president. Recently, I read The Culture Codeby Dr. Clotaire Rapaillea French Anthropologist turned marketing guru for Fortune 100 companies. Rapaille markets the book by asking:
Why are people around the world so very different? What makes us live, buy, even love as we do? The answers are in the codes.
As you might expect, the code for leader is different from country to country. What does the Frenchman say the American code for president is?
... Moses
As such, Rapille says that Bush is perfectly "on code" for what Americans want and need as a president.
So I guess the Post does know what they're talking about, after all ...
What does the average House and Senate campaign cost? According to National Journal's Congress Daily, too darn much:
In 1976, winning candidates for the House spent an average of $87,000 on their campaigns. In 2004, they spent an average of $1 million. For Senate candidates, the average cost of winning jumped from $609,000 in 1976 to $7 million in 2004. The Center for Public Integrity's study was sponsored by the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.
If you're a challenger, you've got to pull out all the stops to get press attention. But if you're the incumbent with a slight lead in the polls, how do you avoid making gaffes? Give 'em the silent treatment.
"With less than a month before Election Day, Allen (R-Va.) has become virtually impossible to interview directly, giving his campaign handlers much more control over the message they send to voters. What voters see this month will be -- they hope -- only what they want voters to see."
Today's LA Times features a story on political "trackers." No longer reserved for the avant garde, tracking your opponent is becoming de rigueur in political campaigns. If you're running for office, the odds are, you are being watched (and watching your opponent):
The 24-year-old, baby-faced O'Brien is a "tracker" -- a videographer who follows an opposing candidate, hoping for a gaffe, an awkward moment, a bit of hypocrisy or inconsistency that could be campaign fodder.
Trackers -- using inexpensive hand-held cameras and having the ability to post clips almost instantly on YouTube and other video-sharing websites -- have become a major element in several campaigns.
Digg This | 
Facebook | 
Technorati
