Patterico's Pontifications

11/5/2008

Key To The Obama Victory — It Harnessed The Power Of The Internet And Connectivity For Both Money and Message

Filed under: General — WLS @ 5:04 pm



[Posted by WLS Shipwrecked]

Two caveats about this post:

1)  I’m not minimizing the significance of Obama’s victory nor saying it was all because of technology advantages.  He ran a better campaign with a better message, and those campaigns usually win.

2)  I’m making no judgment in this post on the ethics or legality of some of the methods employed.

Following the 2000 election, the liberal advocacy groups began the march towards an increasing use of IT and connectivity.  Groups like MoveOn and Daily Kos sprang up late in the Clinton Administration, but really took off during the first Bush term in the aftermath of the Florida recount fiasco.

Their use of connectivity really had its first impact on the campaign of Howard Dean, which was staffed with a huge number of young and internet saavy supporters.   But their version wasn’t sufficient “mature” to overtake the establishment run campaigns of Kerry or Bush. The 2004 campaigns were still run the way campaigns had been run in the 20th Century — paid advertising, direct mail, phone banks, etc.

The people who began assembling Obama’s campaign apparatus in 2007 knew they could build a better mousetrap. 

The internet wasn’t seen by them as a device simply for dispensing information to their supporters — it was a lifeline back and forth between the campaign and the supporters.  Email addresses linked to PDAs and cellphones put the campaign always in contact with its supporters.  I read that the Obama campaign gave away signs and bumper-stickers in exchange for getting someone’s email address, understanding that the lost revenue for the trinket could be more than made up for later on if that person was prompted to donate $10, $20 or more to the campaign through a link sent via email. 

So, while Karl Rove and the GOP had their direct mail lists, and neighbor-to-neighbor 72 hour turnout operation, Obama quietly built a viral networking and fundraising juggernaut.  It was 20th Century technology v. 21st Century technology.

It has forever shattered the concept of public financing for Presidential campaigns.  I didn’t understand until this election that the amount of money available to a candidate who accepted public financing was whatever amount of money taxpayers had checked-off on their tax forms.  I knew that was where the money came from, but I had assumed that some statute established how much the candidates got.  Not true — it simply depends on how much is in the “kitty” for that year. 

But Obama showed that if you have a million donors, and you can get them to give you an average of $100 over 60 days, you already have $100 million dollars and you didn’t do anything except hit a “Send” button on a computer and collect your money from the credit card companies. 

Given that a Presidential campaign lasts nearly 24 months now, accumulating a few million email addresses in this wired-world seems like a no-brainer.  It’ll be political malpractice in the future for any candidate to not seek to copy what the Obama campaign first saw the utility of.

— WLS Shipwrecked

22 Responses to “Key To The Obama Victory — It Harnessed The Power Of The Internet And Connectivity For Both Money and Message”

  1. ‘Who is Peggy the Moocher? She’s Peggy Joseph, a voter in Sarasota, Florida who exulted earlier this week at a Barack Obama rally that this was “the most memorable time of my life.” Why? As she told a Florida reporter on a YouTube video now viewed by hundreds of thousands: “Because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know. If I help [Obama], he’s gonna help me.”’

    That’s how the Democrats have won elections for generations, and that’s how they’re going to keep on winning.

    That’s the key, promising people like Peggy that they’re going to steal money from me, and give it to her.

    Dave Surls (83046d)

  2. Oh, the quote is from Michelle Malkin, btw. Credit where credit is due.

    Dave Surls (83046d)

  3. Here’s the thing about the election and Obama’s future — Good packaging, supportive media, an attractive candidate and getting enough people to see in that candidate what the want to see can get you elected.

    It can’t get you re-elected.

    What you’re seeing with Obama is simply the New York City mayoral race, circa 1989, writ on a larger scale. People wanted to elect the first African-American as mayor because they wanted to believe with all their heart that if they only did that, the city would change for the better. But even in heavily liberal New York, and with all the big media outlets downplaying the results of his four years in office, they couldn’t keep enough people from switching from David Dinkins to Rudy Giuliani in 1993, because life had gotten worse, not better, for most voters, and there wasn’t a Republican in power anywhere any more to blame.

    Same applies here — Maybe Obama will surprise us and things will go great between 2009 and 2012, but even if it’s a total disaster, you know the big media and the Democrats will spin the problems as either being leftover from George W. Bush, or intractable, and no change of president can solve them. And there’s a solid 35-40 percent of the voters who already are locked in to pull the lever for Obama in 2012. But if voters overall think things are bad or getting worse, and the Democrats still control both houses of Congress, no amount of spin is going to make a difference four years from now in the swing states.

    John (1836b0)

  4. The collective strengths of the Internet will always go to Howard Dean. He owns the electronic grassroots revolution.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  5. Technically, Howard Dean built on the example of Internet fundraising set by… John McCain in 2000.

    /irony

    Karl (eacece)

  6. I can’t help but wonder how those Obama doners are going to handle their crushing credit card debt.

    Pious Agnostic (b2c3ab)

  7. “Key to the Obama victory?” $4 gas, Paulson-incited financial panic, hatred of W, disgust with Republicans, disillusionment over Iraq war, … I’d put “harnessing the power of the internet” at about number 57 on that “key to victory” list. Get real.

    gp (4db77f)

  8. What happens to political donations if the credit card debt goes to bankruptcy?

    FWIW, I think that it was easier for Baracky to get elected in 2008 than it will be for him to be re-elected in 2012.

    JD (008a90)

  9. Obama won because Hillary and McCain did not deserve to win. They did not have the guts to say, “This is an empty suit, a Chicago Machine hack, who only does what Emil Jones and Richie Daley tell him to, who will be the death of America if he is elected”.

    nk (95bfab)

  10. gp — without $600 million and a stunning organizational effort in all the battleground states, the issues wouldn’t have mattered.

    Those same issues were there for Dodd, Biden, Edwards, etc., but they didn’t rise above their opponents.

    Obama beat all the Dems, and late McCain, because he built a better machine and had more money to make it go.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  11. #9 nk:

    Obama won because Hillary and McCain did not deserve to win.

    In addition to the funding issue…I think that was a huge part of it as well.

    EW1(SG) (0f914b)

  12. Obviously Philadelphia was a priority for the Obama folks, but still-
    starting on Sat. November 1st we received at least 3 calls a day from the Obama campaign. Some were live people wishing to speak with each of the registered voters at this address (along with another one not at this address!?) while others were robocalls. They were all pleasant and often included confirmation of polling place. We also had two people in person at the door trying to communicate with the registered voter they couldn’t get on the phone (20 yo son). On election day another two calls from people, one early in day and one mid afternoon, plus another person at the door with something to put over the door knob. (The last person was a person from the neighborhood, I think, was older, and the only one that was rude.)

    From McCain- zip, zero, nada.

    Of course, since Gore invented the Internet, perhaps it will always be a better tool for the dems.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  13. I have great respect for Patterico but I do not understand what “Obama will be my President” means. America is my country, the President is her servant, I am an American, the President is just an employee of my country. He is not my leader.

    nk (95bfab)

  14. Our communication efforts were hampered by Youtube.
    Since the Democratic convention Instapundit, Malkin, HotAir, Patterico, Ace, Gateway Pundit (whom I think did more then anybody to drag the Rino John McCain across the finish line by shear strenth of will) and a plethora of lessor conservative, small government voices relied upon and used Youtube as the main conduit of vital video campaign information.
    This was such a mistake.
    Youtube is the enemy’s stadium.
    Contrast the first comment by Dave Surls about Peggy the Moocher. “YouTube video now viewed by hundreds of thousands” with the Youtube videos posted on Patterico, all of which were yanked almost immediately, well…

    Show of hands. How many of you saw a preponderance of “This video is no longer available”?
    Personally I didn’t see a single Youtube vid from now till before the conventions. They were all yanked.
    It’s a testimate of how poor a choice Barack Obama is, that McCain got 50 plus million votes.

    What would it take to set up a GOPtube service where our videos will hosted permanently and be available without censorship?

    papertiger (a38535)

  15. Two principal reasons McCain lost was because his staff was terrible at running a campaign, and because McCain was even worse, as Newsweek reports:

    “On the Sunday night before the last debate, McCain’s core group of advisers—Steve Schmidt, Rick Davis, adman Fred Davis, strategist Greg Strimple, pollster Bill McInturff and strategy director Sarah Simmons—met to decide whether to tell McCain that the race was effectively over, that he no longer had a chance to win. The consensus in the room was no, not yet, not while he still had “a pulse.”

    [snip]

    “Palin launched her attack on Obama’s association with William Ayers, the former Weather Underground bomber, before the campaign had finalized a plan to raise the issue. . .McCain had not signed off on it, and top adviser Mark Salter was resisting.”

    [snip]

    “McCain also was reluctant to use Obama’s incendiary pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, as a campaign issue. The Republican had set firm boundaries: no Jeremiah Wright; no attacking Michelle Obama; no attacking Obama for not serving in the military. McCain balked at an ad using images of children that suggested that Obama might not protect them from terrorism. Schmidt vetoed ads suggesting that Obama was soft on crime (no Willie Hortons). And before word even got to McCain, Schmidt and Salter scuttled a “celebrity” ad of Obama dancing with talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres (the sight of a black man dancing with a lesbian was deemed too provocative).”

    Loser!

    Official Internet Data Office (df6254)

  16. If we are looking at the meta-reasons why Obama won, any list that does not inlcude the daily fellatio from the MSM is incomplete.

    JD (008a90)

  17. Yes, the image of the Great One that was created and pushed through by the MSM had a lot to do with his election. Obama and his leftist illuminati ideals were glossed over by the media and all we got to hear was how he is going to right the wrongs created by the evil Republicans.

    Jeff (7082b1)

  18. This might be the most astute analysis of Obama’s campaign I’ve seen.

    I hope he does better running the US.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  19. Wow! You guys are sick. What’s wrong with the promise of a better tomorrow? I know some of those things will not likely be achievable, but at least he’s going to get us moving in that direction!!

    What did McCain offer? More division and strife. More separation. Well, not him, but that’s what his far right cronies would’ve demanded. That’s why they don’t like him, because he wants to unite us as well. I don’t agree with most of McCain’s policies, but he’s not a divider like the rest of the Republicans.

    Obama won because he’s trying to look out for Americans. People don’t want handouts, but they also don’t want their jobs going overseas. They don’t want to fight needless wars, and have everyone hate us. They want everyone to have healthcare, and more volunteerism. His organization had something to do with his win, but not a lot. Anyone can get connected. It’s the message that counts.

    Chris (ba1b2d)

  20. Comment by Chris — 11/6/2008 @ 9:50 am

    Wow, you can recite poofy rhetoric bereft of any substance whatsoever!

    Congratulations on achieving “comment celery!”

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  21. I noticed you didn’t say any great thing about McCain. I’d love to see something other than celery on your part as well.

    Chris (ba1b2d)

  22. Obama and his leftist illuminati platform might have fooled the people once. That is a “shame on him.” If, however, he fools them a second time in 2012, then it will be “shame on them.”

    Jeff (024c6a)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0962 secs.