social networking

Politics 2.0: The Pegasus of Connectivity?

I told a friend last night - via Facebook private message - that email is still the best way to get a hold of me.* I gave him my work email address, which is the one account out of seven I currently monitor to which I will usually give an immediate response. It's also one of two accounts pushing to my smart phone, so I can receive/respond on the go.

The ways in which we send, receive, and store information have been constantly revolutionizing politics for nearly 600 years, since Gutenberg first invented the printing press. Customer relations management (CRM) systems have become increasingly important (indeed useful and necessary) in the political sphere, as candidate and issue campaigns build vast, scalable email lists for purposes of campaign communication. Somewhat curiously, I have all issue and candidate campaign email delivered to my American University address - which also pushes to my smart phone, but which I rarely actually read.

But let's assume just for a second that I consolidate my email accounts into just one, and I take time to read more than I do now - and a political campaign was able to reach me (in theory) 24 hours a day. Why is it, in this world of nearly instantaneous, targeted, scalable communications, that we still rely on direct mail fundraising? When does the 140-character tweet, the Facebook status update, or even the 30-second YouTube video replace a clunky, 5-page typed fundraising ask - double-spaced in 12 pt. Courier New font - and on pink stationary, no less? Does it ever? What about when we move all of our CRM solutions to the cloud, and we're realizing huge cost savings in our campaign budgets because of it (this is speculative, I'll admit)?

I remember from my Leadership Institute training days back in college that conservatives tend to make quite a bit of money on direct mail fundraising campaigns - my own experience tells me that you're doing well to just break even, particularly if you're using consulting services. Maybe my metrics are a little bit off, and I'm not considering how a mail piece to an identified voter/supporter may energize them, arm them with talking points, and ask them to tell 5 of their neighbors about my candidate or issue. Maybe I need better mail pieces.

Not only in my experience are dollar-for-dollar returns on direct mail doing well to break even, but isn't this social tree 1.0? Isn't this what social media was supposed to solve, in terms of reach, velocity, and scale? I posited in my undergraduate thesis - flying in the face of practical, conventional wisdom - that there's some kind of interpersonal transaction that takes place when one voter connects with another that technology can't replace, and I don't mean to waffle on that conclusion - but I do wonder, as our technology evolves and more milennials and digital natives reach voting age, whether or not direct mail is a worthwhile long-term investment. For the meantime, it's probably okay to assume that the average voter views the on-paper direct mail piece as more authentic or genuine an instrument than something that flies across their computer screen or smart phone, and for that reason, direct mail is still useful.

Candidates and causes also have a swath of social media and social networking tools at their disposal, tools that reach millions of end users (if leveraged properly) and which are also dirt cheap to a campaign, if not altogether free. Rob Willington of RebuildTheParty.com demonstrated as much in Scott Brown's bid for Sen. Edward Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat in a special election following Teddy's death (wait a minute, that wasn't Teddy's seat - it's the people's seat). Rob's use of text-messaging, geolocation applications, YouTube, Ning, and Facebook makes a really interesting case study in the use of these tools on the Right in the MyBO era.

Another important long-term consideration for campaigns on the Right is cost. I asked Willington during a Personal Democracy Forum conference call back in March, and I'm paraphrasing here, "Given the availability of free online tools, why should campaigns invest in proprietary enterprise architectures (e.g. www.CandidateName.com)? Will they be useful in the long-term for anything other than an online depository for campaigns?" His answer - and it's a good one, and again, I'm paraphrasing - was that a proprietary enterprise architecture anchors the spectrum of social media tools the campaign uses (each having its own brand recognition) with the candidate's brand, and acts as a vote getter. You can download and listen to the podcast here.

But given this, it shouldn't be long, in theory, before we totally scuttle on-paper direct mail pieces for fundraising purposes (messaging and relationship-building purposes notwithstanding). Additionally, in order to be really successful in the long-run, these tools need to build relationships: voter-to-voter and voter-to-candidate/voter-to-campaign. Melissa Clouthier has an interesting political spin on Mashable's "21 Rules for Social Media Engagement." Clouthier's conclusions assume a high-level of social media adoption across campaign space, and while candidates on the Right are dominating some social media channels, they don't own the Internet anymore:

 

 

In the long-run, the best "technology candidates" on the Right - as is the case with all other technological paradigm shifts - will be the early adopters, like Scott Brown. The candidates who do a great job of building relationships through social media on the campaign trail will have the highest chance of success in using tools while in office, both to foster transparency and to protect incumbency. In the meantime, the Right needs to continue developing an accurate, meaningful set of metrics to measure the success of social media strategies against traditional strategic results to make sure that candidates and causes get the highest ROI and the largest reach per dollar spent.

George Scoville also blogs at Liberty Pundits and his personal site Intelligence, Please... He invites you to follow him on Twitter (@stackiii).

* The double irony of this isn't lost on me. Not only is Facebook not very well known for its privacy at the moment, but I sent a Facebook message to relay an enterprise email address.

Two Virginia Democrats Get It Right Online

Scores of articles have been written about Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell’s online prowess during the 2009 election cycle. 

Steve and I certainly tip our hats to Patrick Ruffini, Mindy Finn and Vince Harris, because they demonstrated for many skeptical onlookers how a Republican candidate who commits the right resources to his or her online campaign can be successful.  Unfortunately, not every candidate has the resources Bob McDonnell had, nor do they often commit to their online campaign with similar fervor. 

In working with several GOP House of Delegates candidates in Virginia last year, Steve and I saw both obstacles – resources and commitment to an online operation – manifest themselves repeatedly.  With perhaps only an exception for the benefits that ActBlue provides Democratic candidates, this problem extends to both sides of the aisle in the Commonwealth.

Trust us when we tell you, there will come a time (probably in 2011) when door knocking alone will no longer suffice for candidates seeking to become delegates or state senators.

Earlier this week, the 2010 Politics Online Conference was held in Washington.  The event drew some of the nation’s top political online experts from both sides of the aisle to share their insight on how candidates and advocacy groups can improve their online operations.

Here’s an unfortunate fact about the conference, though.  Out of the 140 members who serve in the Virginia General Assembly, Steve and I saw only two members attending the two-day event.  We understand that not every member could make it due to busy schedules and travel considerations, but it was odd to hear the McDonnell campaign as the backdrop to so many of the panel discussions and yet to see so few Virginians in the audience.   

State Senator Chap Petersen (D-34) not only attended the event, but he served as a panelist.  Joined by Democratic Congressman Mike Honda (CA-15), CNN’s Ed Henry (moderator) and Chicago Alderman Sandi Jackson (D-Ward 7), Petersen discussed how he uses social media to connect with his Fairfax constituents.

As conservatives who’ve worked hard against liberals like Peterson in Virginia, Steve and I were treated to the disheartening lesson that Chap Petersen really does get it.  He utilizes social media and digital technology for three reasons.  First, so constituents of his district are made to understand that he is working on their behalf.  Second, to provide a forum for his constituents to express their opinion.  Finally, to aid his fundraising efforts. 

Peterson was not the only Virginia Democrat to patrol the Politics Online Conference.  On Tuesday, we ran into Delegate Mark Keam (D-35), who attended both days of the event, sitting in on panels and workshops in an effort to gain new insight into how to better execute his online campaign.

Both of these gentlemen do sit on the “other side” from us, but Steve and I have to congratulate them on their efforts to better their online presence.

Yes, Virginia politicos might be making strong progress with adopting digital technology, but members of both parties, as whole, still have a long way to go before we can categorize their use of social media and digital technology as being “cutting edge.”

If we happen to have overlooked any other member or staffers of the Virginia Legislature who attended the conference, we do apologize and hope you were taking notes.

Ford O’Connell and Steve Pearson, Co-Founders, ProjectVirginia – “Where Politics Meets Social Media”

What's Behind the Right's Current Twitter Advantage + Using #TCOT vs. No Hashtags Whatsoever

Practicing Politics in the Twitter Era: If we are to speak of the age of online politics -- and I am not certain that we should -- let's say we've lived through the Blog Era (2001-04), the YouTube Era (2005-08) and now we are in the Twitter Era (2008-?). This screen shot of a blog post at Media Matters (of all places) juxtaposing tweets from Newt Gingrich and Matt Cooper -- proof alone that everyone in Washington is using Twitter -- provides a useful snapshot of the how Twitter works alongside the blogosphere (rumors of its death still exaggerated) in moving political messages online:

Zing.

So the Right had a vibrant 'sphere in the post-9/11 Warblogging Period, which drifted after the 2004 election, as frustrated soon-to-be-ex-Pajamas Media bloggers can tell you. The Left owned the YouTube era, which happened to coincide, not coincidentally, with President Bush's second term. Their political blog infrastructure was developed largely on the participation of bloggers and blog readers, not anyone using Twitter yet, most of the time because Twitter did not exist or see any significant usage until SXSW 2007. (You know who I can't find on Twitter? MoveOn.)

For at least a year now, the Right again has been leading the way on an Internet-based communication platform. So far it's to organize for Conservatism somewhat broadly as a unifying cause. Top Conservatives on Twitter is not quite a MoveOn for the Right -- a whispered-of but ultimately mythical animal not unlike the "Party-in-a-laptop" idea popular with some Neoliberals -- but it could have more value as a list than Gingrich's own Drill Here, Drill now efforts and even the (also short-time) #dontgo message it spawned last August. These new conservative projects are often built around Twitter itself. Sometimes this results in really annoying tweets, but at this point the right is doing more interesting things in this space. Twitter is smaller than Facebook, but makes up for it in volume of press hits (hopefully someone with Nexis can back this up for me) and news reports that its traffic is about to go all hockey-stick. Maybe it will go Galt as well.

Conservatives also have other, much older infrastructure whose blogging component counts a few successes but still relies on decidedly Web 1.0 websites, and so hasn't taken as big a hit in the Great Blog Crash of 2008-09. And like companies of the dot com crash (including Google itself), the concepts and websites that clawed their way out of the rubble did not and will not bring back substantial returns in the short run. Twitter, by its sheer simplicity, is kind of a Long Tail product in that we can (and often seem to actually do) use it in spare moments between the day, which means its audience could approach that of e-mail (especially since, you know, you need an e-mail account to join Twitter). Either could build that kind of reach, depending on who experiments more through the rest of the arbitrary era proper.

Using #TCOT vs. No Hashtags Whatsoever:

According to Internet marketing blog Hubspot, the right's #TCOT momentum means it vastly outnumbers the hashtags left-leaning Twitter users and bloggers... er, aren't listed as using, not here at least. Hmm. So which hashtags do the left use?

    Pause for dramatic effect.

Turns out the left-verse doesn't do hashtags at all, that I could see from checking these accounts over the weekend:

My question for the Left is whether the port side of the Twitterverse will adopt the same habit of hashtags that moves stories -- and if it does, whether it will even be led by the Kos-Greenwald-Marshall-Hamsher-Klein-Stoller-Yglesias Netroots movement. (Note: In the comments at Blog P.I. a fellow Twittizen points out there is a website collecting progressive hashtags: Tweetleft. And as she observes, organized hashtag use lies beyond "'the usual' accounts.")

And my question for the Right is whether they know any of the Top 5 Conservatives on Twitter, because I haven't got a clue.

Benchmark note: As of Sunday afteroon, Markos Moulitsas (2,411) has 7,288 fewer followers than John Culberson (9,699).

Adapted from a post at Blog P.I.

Web 2.0: Yes we will.

It's the Webster's opinion that the GOP has plenty of ideas, a solid core brand, and had a terrific '08 ticket sailing into a political perfect storm.  There are twice as many self-identified conservatives as progressives.  We easily will eclipse the Left's very impressive performance in rallying their base simply by giving space to rank and file citizens on the Web and giving them gentle guidance about practical ways they can make an impact -- with a click!

I've been speaking to the leaders of many advocacy groups and there is real enthusiasm for adopting a new, more optimistic populist model.  How?  By creating social networking webspaces that are inviting to activists and concerned citizens, inviting people to come to the fore in a site context comparable to my.barackobama.com. 

The good news is that the tech has been made ultra-simple, easier than blogging! -- and is free (or, in a premium service, at very modest cost) from Ning.com.  The Susan B. Anthony List's pilot of this model, TeamSarah.org, saw its community grow from 30 members two months ago to about 60,000 today -- with 6.6+ million internal pageviews.  And continues to grow post-election.  (Full disclosure: I architected Team Sarah for them.  Props to Emily, the site's key leader.  She really gets it.  We will get it too!)

Web 1.0 was 99% about informing and educating, 1% about listening.  Web 2.0 is 99% about listening and 1% about informing and educating.  Properly done, this is a recipe for creating intense and effective populist communities and is available to anyone who wishes to give it a try.  One has already begun to go to scale, others will too.  I've laid out a few how-to tips on www.thewebstersdictionary.com, the companion site to my recently published The Websters' Dictionary: How to Use the Web to Transform the World, which was deeply informed by many astute postings by Ruffini and may be downloaded in eBook form for free.

The "net" result is that we don't have to criticize, complain, or persuade anyone -- in the party, elected officials, donors, opinion leaders -- to do anything.  Anyone so inclined can just do it herself or himself.  (And by the way, the success stories all share an implicit common factor of having a lot of women involved, which is a secret key to succcess.  The Boy's Club Model is defective for reasons that may end up as a topic of discussion in thewebstersdictionary.com's own social network found under the tab marked "Bar & Grill."  If you wish your effort to succeed, make sure that women have full presence, status and participation.  If you don't know how to do this ... and many guys do not -- ask around until you figure it out.  But if you intend to win -- do it.)

The Web has put the power in our hands.  We have the tools.  We have the model.

Use your newfound powers only for Good!

Ralph Benko

"The Webster"

;  )

Get Out and Push!

[This is fairly obvious stuff to most of the folks who inhabit TNxR, but there are some who aren't as familiar with Web 2.0, so I've written it with the novice in mind.  Also, this is cross-posted at my personal blog, Walt's Wall.  I just thought I'd post it here in case anyone wanted to pass it along to less web-savvy others who might find it useful.]

OK, folks. You’ve had 24 hours to sulk and conjure all the nightmare scenarios and conspiracy theories you’ll need to cover you for the next four years. Now, it’s time to get real and get serious about putting the conservative house back in order. And, while it may soothe your anguished soul to believe that Barack Obama can be prevented from taking office, if only an expert safecracker could take a shot at the vault in the Department of Health Statistics in Honolulu, there are pressing matters at hand that demand immediate attention; matters that will actually make a difference in the long run.

 

You see, there’s a movement to rebuild. It’s a movement which I’ve been accused of taking part in destroying by some folks who are enraged that John McCain managed to secure the nomination of the Republican Party. The fact is, I supported McCain in the primaries. And, as it turns out, he was soundly beaten at the polls. My rationale at the time was the same as it is now: That McCain was the only candidate in the mix who had a shot at winning on November 4. That matter will obviously be debated ad nauseum for the next four to eight years and beyond, depending upon how long it takes for conservatives to get their act straight.

 

I was also an early supporter of Sarah Palin, having voiced the opinion that she would make an excellent vice presidential candidate a few days after McCain secured the GOP nomination. And, as is bound to happen when you stick your head out of the foxhole, I’m getting flak from all directions. The rightest of the right in the GOP don’t like me much for backing McCain, and the left side of the GOP don’t like me much for daring to suggest that some backwoods governor from a state without an Amtrak station could possibly serve as Vice President of the United States of America.

 

Of course, it goes a bit far to suggest that my opinion has any bearing on the course of campaign events. Still, I’ve been gifted with the hair shirt by people from both ends of the Republican ideological spectrum, and if I have to wear it, so be it. I’ll take the blame if it will help a few people to get out of the ditch and get behind the conservative movement once again.

 

Just so we’re clear on things, let me point out that this is not going to be an easy task. It’s going to take the effort of literally millions of people to get this train rolling again. But it can be done, and most importantly, it must be done. There’s a plenty at stake for the future of America without raising the specter of tanks rolling through the streets and mysterious squads of black-clad government agents descending upon suburban homes to snatch law-abiding conservatives from their beds in the wee hours. Tuesday’s election did not foreordaine this despite anything your coworkers forward to your email account.

 

Given my recent success (as it were) in choosing candidates and reaching accord with my fellow conservatives, I’ll reserve for now my opinion on just which way the conservative movement must lurch if we are to regain the trust of the voting public in operating the levers of government. Instead, I will focus on what other conservatives must do in order to exert influence on the direction of the party that will embody that movement. This will be the easy part, since none of the suggestions I make require any monetary investment, and the process of undertaking them requires minimal effort – scarcely more than a few mouse clicks and filling out a few form fields on web pages.

 

First off, I suggest that every conservative sign up on at least one social networking site. My personal preference is Facebook, where I have managed to build a “friends list” of just under 900 people in a matter of just a few months. Not all of the people on my list are politically active. Some, in fact, are old high school friends whom I haven’t seen in years. That’s part of the beauty of the social networking phenomenon, actually. It can be a gratifying experience on a personal level, whether you intend to use it in order to make political connections, to simply reconnect with long-lost acquaintances, or both. It doesn’t cost a thin dime, and it can be an incredibly informative tool if used properly.

 

When you set up an account on Facebook and other social networking sites (or “SocNets” in Web parlance), the site will offer to look through the contacts in your Web-based email accounts to see if there are any existing users in your contact list. This is purely optional, so you can decline to allow it to do so and go about searching for contacts manually. While it may seem somewhat invasive, it is much more convenient to permit Facebook to search for you. So, you have to balance your sense of comfort with the privacy of your contact list with your desire to establish as many contacts as you can in the least amount of time.

 

For social networking to be effective, you need to establish a good number of contacts: The more you have, the more quickly and easily you can communicate and share information. That’s not to say that everyone needs to have a huge list of friends. It all depends on what you’re seeking to accomplish. If your aim is to share information and keep abreast of the latest developments in a broad area of interest, it pays to have a lot of people in your network. Likewise, if you’re simply interested in staying in contact with a close, tight-knit community of people with a focus on a specific, narrow set of issues, there’s no point in establishing a huge list of contacts.

 

There are other sites which work in similar ways. Simply typing “social networking sites” into your favorite search engine will reveal dozens of choices. Pick out the one that sounds most appealing to you – there are several criteria to consider, such as demographics – but one will surely appeal to you. And, once you’ve settled on your preference, take the time to tinker and explore. But, whatever you do, don’t give up on it if you don’t immediately see its utility. My Facebook account sat dormant for several weeks while I wasted time dawdling on a MySpace page that I abandoned in fairly short order.

 

If privacy is your concern, there are settings that can be adjusted on your account that you can adjust to restrict who is able to access your page and see your activity. While nothing is 100 percent fool-proof when it comes to the nefarious activities of malingering web denizens, my experience has been completely free of hassle and harrassment.

 

Once you’ve set up on a social networking site, you’ll also want to sign up for a Twitter account. Like Facebook, Twitter’s utility isn’t immediately obvious. Much like my initial foray into social networking, I allowed my account to sit unused for several weeks before I finally decided to see what the fuss was all about and learn how to properly use it. Since then, it has become an integral part of my online experience.

 

Twitter is a a combination of social networking and blogging – some refer to it as “micro-blogging”. It’s an extremely efficient way of broadcasting your thoughts and activities and keeping up with those of others. It basically works by restricting your posts to 140 characters. This forces you to get to the point quickly, and the key to getting your point across is to be as interesting as possible within those 140 characters. The forced efficiency is part of the beauty of Twitter, actually. It has a way of removing extraneous information that only serves to get in the way of your message.

 

A huge part of the effectiveness of Twitter is broadcasting links to information that you encounter as you go about your typical routine on the Web. Yet, as anyone knows, link URL’s can be well over 140 characters long in some cases, making them too long for Twitter’s imposed limit. However, there are services called URL shorterners, or re-directs, which will cut down the number of characters to allow them to fit Twitter’s format. My personal favorite is called “is.gd”. Another popular one is “tinyurl”. Just type either of those terms into a search engine and you’ll find them. Once there, all you do is cut and paste the original URL into a form field and submit it, and you’ll be provided with an permanent alternate URL that will be approximately 18 to 25 characters long and will allow you to type in a description to accompany your link.

 

Of course, then there’s the matter of getting your link seen by others. It will do no good to send out every interesting tidbit of information you encounter on a given day if no one sees it. The way to do this is to begin “following” others’ Twitter messages – or “Tweets” as they’re referred to in the “Twitterverse”. Like Facebook, when you set up your account, it will give you the option to allow Twitter to scour the contacts stored in your web-based email account for users who are already signed up with the service. You can choose from a list of whoever the software discovers and immediately begin following their Tweets, or you can choose to follow none at all. Also, you can choose not to allow Twitter to scour your contacts if don’t feel comfortable with the idea.

 

Assuming you have a healthy paranoia about allowing unknown software to pilfer through your email contacts, you can always use Twitter’s search function to find accounts of people you want to follow. Many politicians now use Twitter to communicate with their online grassroots, and so do many major news sources like Fox News and CNN. Matt Drudge also has a Twitter feed that you can follow, as does Jim Geraghty from National Review Online’s blog “The Campaign Spot”. Some are more active than others, but you can expect to see Twitter used more and more in the future as awareness of the potential of this technology begins to dawn on more and more people who seek to influence news coverage or public policy.

 

Part of the etiquette of Twitter, and what makes it work, is the phenomenon called “follow-back”. Simply put, if someone follows your Tweets, it’s a good practice to follow theirs in return. You will find the option to do this whenever you search for a Twitter user and succeed in finding one. Generally speaking, if you set your account up in order to do so, you will be notified when someone begins following your Tweets, and vice-versa. Also, you’ll gain followers by simply using Twitter.

 

The key to gaining followers by using the service is to use the “reply” function whenever you see a Tweet that you feel calls for a response. When you do this, all the people who are following the person you reply to will see it. If your response is interesting or entertaining, there’s a good chance someone will begin following your Tweets. Remember to return the favor – and, if you’re so inclined, it never hurts to send a reply to that person, saying “Thanks for the follow!”

 

If all of this seems a bit complicated, it’s much easier than you’d expect. Just use your preferred search engine to find “Twitter how-to” or “Twitter tutorial” and you’ll find plenty of links to explain the ins and outs. And, once you’ve gotten a handle on it, you’ll want to find ways to integrate it into your Web habits: Twitter can actually be somewhat addictive once you’ve discovered just how useful and entertaining it can be.

 

One way to get integrated is through using browser extensions, or add-ons. There are several useful ones available for both Firefox and Internet Explorer. There are even some standalone Twitter applications that can be downloaded to make using it more convenient for those who prefer it that way. As you become more familiar with Twitter, you’ll likely want to find these tools to maximize your efficiency. Simply searching for “Twitter extensions” or “Twitter add-ons” or “Twitter toolbar” will lead you to plenty of options. They’re typically small downloads that install themselves and require little more than relaunching your browser filling in your account information to get set up and running.

 

One of the benefits of using a service like Twitter and following others and being followed is that you’re likely to be able to find help if you should encounter any trouble installing extensions and toolbars. There are lots of people in the Twitterverse who are more than happy to help out with minor technical problems.

 

The key is not to get discouraged or dismiss its utility too soon. Keep using it and keep searching for people to follow and before you know it, it will pay off. You’ll get links that are hilarious and some that are stunning. But, always, always remember that whenever you send out a Tweet, whoever is following you will see it. So, it pays to practice some discretion since, by its very nature, Twitter is not a way to transmit private information. It simply isn’t intended to be.

 

The reason services like Twitter and Facebook will be so important in rebuilding the conservative movement is because that is where technology is currently heading. The ability to connect with others and disseminate information as quickly and widely as possible will be crucial in the months and years ahead. New technologies will emerge that will eventually push these aside. But, as long as conservatives make it a point to stay abreast of trends in communicating and broadcasting information, we will be able to compete with the left. And, until we make an effort to do that, all the money and door knocking and phone banking and campaigning in the world won’t help ups to close the gap and eventually return to prominence.

 

There’s a movement already underway, and it’s being led by sharp, talented, and savvy young leaders like Patrick Ruffini, Jon Henke, and Soren Dayton at The Next Right – a right-leaning community/blog/forum dedicated to rebuilding the conservative movement through grassroots participation and exploitation of technology – otherwise known as “building the Rightroots”. These dedicated thirty-something activists have taken it upon themselves to start a process that is long overdue, and they’re getting the attention of the Republican leadership. Likely, they’ll have considerable influence over that leadership in the near future. As such, it behooves conservatives of every stripe to keep an eye on them and pay close attention to what they have to say.

 

Also, there’s a brand new group called NextGenGOP who have launched a blog dedicated developing conservative talent from an even younger pool of activists – those age 18 – 25. It will be crucial for the conservative movement pay attention to this group of voters because, as November 4 made clear, the Republican Party is graying quickly. And, unless the GOP can get a handle on what’s on the minds of the younger generation, it will be relegated to permanent minority status. The party, as a vehicle for conservatism, simply cannot afford to allow an entire generation of voters to get into the habit of voting for Democrats for no better reason than that the GOP never bothered to pay attention to them or their concerns. This isn’t simply a matter of winning the next election. It’s a matter of political survival.  If you know a bright young conservative who might be able to contribute, tell them about NextGenGOP.

 

So there you have it. That’s my advice, for what it’s worth, on what it will take to bring the Republican Party back out of the wilderness in which we currently find ourselves. As I said at the beginning of this post, it’s not my intention to influence the ideological direction, or to make any pronouncements on which government policy positions are needed to regain the trust and respect of the American voter. Rather, it’s my intention to point in the general direction that conservatives must head if they’re going to have any influence over the future direction of this great movement.

 

And with that, I hope to see a confident, forward-looking movement again in the near future. As I said, it’s not going to be easy. There will be setbacks and recriminations along the way – something I can attest to with complete confidence, as I’ll be bearing some of the brunt. But, for now, the time has come for conservatives to get behind this movement and push it up and out of the ditch in which it is currently mired.

 

There’s no time to waste.

GOTV: Past, Present & Future

Promoted and bumped. -Patrick

I've been involved with many facets of many different types of campaigns: local school board, city council, state legislature, statewide gubernatorial, congressional, ballot initiative, and in-state presidential organizations. When I occassionally speak at campaign management and organization seminars, I am often asked the question: what is the most important part of the campaign? That question is so hard to answer because (1) campaigns are short-term "fire-fighting" operations as much as they are long-term strategic organziations, and (2) each part of the campaign (or at least a good campaign) is interconnected.

Yes, most of the money that gets spent is on paid media, and some will say that because of this, fundraising is the most important facet. While I don't disagree, something that I focus a lot of my attention on is GOTV efforts, a low-cost and high-importance category that has to be planned from the very beginning of the campaign but is executed in the last 72 hours.

So here are a few items of interest that all deal with GOTV efforts:

How Revolutionary is Obama's Anti-FISA Group?

Earlier this week, Allen wrote about an intriguing twist to Barack Obama's use of campaign social networking tools: his supporters are actively using MyBO to organize against Obama's stand on FISA. The group is now up to 18,240 members, the largest such group on his website.

Obama is getting lots of credit for allowing this kind of thing to go on under his digital roof, most prominently from the Jay Rosens and Jeff Jarvises of the world.

But this development is more properly seen as a natural evolution in any open, networked system that is allowed to operate in the political space. The credit belongs to his supporters, not Obama.

It's now a truism that when presented with an open platform, users will hack it to serve their purposes, not necessarily those of the sponsor. Many times, those two sets of priorities are intertwined (e.g. supporters desire to get involved matched with a campaign's need for volunteers), though in this case, they weren't.

Tackling a Few Youth Vote Issues

Lately, it seems certain narratives about the youth vote and digital media have been coming up time and time again, without much analysis of how useful these things actually are, so I thought I would hit on a few issues with the youth vote and new media as a college conservative.
 

Facebook doesn’t work. This kills me. Facebook constantly comes up in discussions about the digital age and it’s still pretty useless. While the importance of social networking cannot be overlooked in terms of keeping in contact with those you might not otherwise and cementing ties from introductions and the like, Facebook still isn’t a platform for political discussion or information retrieval (unless it’s photos from last weekend). The candidates’ pages are largely like comment-enabled static web pages—sort of useless, unless you’re looking for a fight. A candidate who actually made a Facebook page, replete with favorite movies, their former college networks, and a candid photo album or two might be an interesting experiment, though.

Where Facebook does hold a lot of potential is in its corporate and outside applications. Facebook's privacy policy is a nightmare; information never leaves its servers, even if you deactivate, it remains there. In terms of micro-targeting and data collection on voters, Facebook may be extremely useful if it can be utilized properly, but I don't get the sense that it's being used to its fullest on either the data side or the interactive approach to actually contact and motivate people.

State Think Tanks Serve as Online Labs

Promoted and bumped. -Patrick

Check out the Drudge Report tonight and you'll see a photo of Al Gore and a link to "REPORT: Gore's personal electricity consumption 'up 10%'..." Look a little closer and you'll notice the source isn't a mainstream news organization or even a blog. It's the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.

This isn't the first time Drew Johnson's state-based think tank has hit the jackpot with a Drudge link. The organization broke news in February 2007 about Al Gore's enormous energy bill. That story, too, was picked up by Drudge, sending a slew of hate mail to Johnson in the process.

R-igg: A Digg for the Right

If you're a techie like me, you probably love Digg.  If you're not familiar with it, Digg is an immensely popular social networking website -- according to Alexa, Digg is the 32nd most popular website in terms of traffic in the United States, and the 112th most popular website across the entire world.  Digg allows its users to submit links to content, and then other users vote for or "Digg" the content (and if they dislike a link, they can "Bury" it).  Using a complex algorithm that takes into account number of up and down votes and other criteria, Digg calculates which links are the best, and places them on the Front Page.

Digg is arguably the best place on the web to find out the latest news in areas such as technology, science, entertainment, and sports.  It also features political and world news -- but the problem with this is that there is an incredible liberal bias among users at Digg.  Don't believe me?  Just check out the latest political stories: "McCain Stacks Fox News 'Town Hall' With Supporters" (from the Huffington Post); "Rep. Kucinich not giving up on Bush impeachment"; and even "Alert: Impeach Bush - Contact Your Congress Person," which links to a website encouraging you to contact your Congress person to support the impeachment of the President and has received nearly 2800 Diggs at the time of writing.

Don't get me wrong, there are other great places that index political news out there -- RealClearPolitics is just one example -- but they all lack the feature that makes Digg so powerful:  all of the content is generated and promoted by the community.

Out of the belief that members of the Right deserve better, I just today launched a website called R-igg.  I'm hoping that R-igg can serve as the social networking and social content tool for Right-minded folks like myself.

I would like to encourage you to visit the R-igg website, create a user account, and begin sharing links and content -- it's 100% free.  With your help, I believe that we can establish a Right-leaning alternative to Digg.  Thank you for your support in advance!

Aaron Marks is a founding partner of Three Group, LLC, a Pittsburgh-based new media firm that focuses on providing technology-based solutions for Republican candidates and organizations, and in particular has built Web 2.0 campaign management software called Mission Control.  Aaron also worked in new media and voter outreach on Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign.

Syndicate content