Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock’s primary victory over six-term incumbent Sen. Dick Lugar last night was years in the making. Mourdock’s long-term courtship of the party faithful helped him consolidate the movement conservative vote behind him. With no threat of another challenger dividing the anti-Lugar vote, Mourdock was able to demonstrate enough credibility to draw in outside help.

Meanwhile, Lugar was able to utilize the superior resources available to a veteran of almost four decades on Capitol Hill. The senator spent $2.2 million on his primary campaign. Mourdock didn’t have the same resources at his disposal. For his campaign, he spent $725,000 — meaning he was outspent 3-1 by Lugar.

Mourdock started out small with cable buys in mid-February. He didn’t go up on broadcast until early March; six weeks after Lugar went up. Even then Mourdock was only on Indianapolis broadcast three weeks before the election. He mostly stuck with advertising on newscasts while Lugar expanded to all programming slots about one month before the election. In March, Lugar was up on broadcast in six Indiana TV markets while Mourdock was up in one.

With Mourdock’s back against the wall, ad spending by the Club for Growth became decisive. They placed $1.3 million on broadcast and cable. Combined with Mourdock’s media buys, it would almost equal Lugar’s total spending. They were also more willing to go on broadcast outside the newscast slots. And they were the first pro-Mourdock group to expand beyond Indianapolis newscast advertising.

Other outside groups also came in — but to help Lugar. One pro-Lugar SuperPAC, the Indiana Values PAC, was run by the senator’s former aides. It placed $390,000 during the last month of the primary. Another Super PAC, Hoosiers for Economic Growth and Jobs, placed $100,000 for one week in late March. The most prominent intervention on the pro-Lugar side came from the American Action Network (AAN).  It came into the race in the last few weeks with the goal of tilting the race toward Lugar. Its original outlay was close to $650,000, all of it on broadcast.  But on the afternoon of April 27, AAN cancelled all its spending beyond May 1.  This was a signal that insiders considered the race to be Mourdock’s to lose. Ultimately, AAN cancelled about $100,000 in spending, and laid out a total of $545,000.

Toward the end, the pro-Mourdock side was outspending the pro-Lugar side. In the last nine days of the election, the pro-Mourdock side spent about $100,000 on ads. The spending decisions of outside groups were crucial. If AAN kept its original schedule, the spending in this period would have been about equal. Other groups decided to join Mourdock once it appeared there was a real chance to defeat Lugar. The NRA spent $86,000 on cable and broadcast. This is significant because it’s rare for the NRA to target an incumbent Republican. Outsider conservative groups also hitched their wagon to Mourdock. Citizens United, a conservative group, decided to place $88,000 worth of cable in the last two weeks. Once Lugar looked vulnerable, others wanted to join in and defeat him.

On Election Day, Lugar narrowly won in the immediate Indianapolis area. This was the one market where Lugar had clear air superiority. Pro-Lugar advertisers were at 1800-2000 points per week for the last few weeks of the campaign, compared to only one week where the pro-Mourdock side was above 1000 points. But Lugar lost just about everywhere else in the state by about a 2-1 margin.

The northeast corner of the state, a heavily Republican area, went about 70 percent for Mourdock. The pro-Lugar side was actually getting its message out more here, but that didn’t make a difference in the end. The Mourdock side also emphasized performance in the South Bend market, where they were airing more broadcast spots than the pro-Lugar side every week for the last month. The effort paid off as Mourdock ran very well in an area that’s not a Republican stronghold.

Chris Palko works as an assistant media analyst at Smart Media Group, a Republican political media buying agency in Alexandria, Va. He is a graduate of American University and George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.

A version of this post was also published on Campaign & Elections’ blog, Campaign Insider.

Since the end of World War II, Republicans have nominated two Texans (both Bushes), two Californians (Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan) and two Arizonans (Barry Goldwater and John McCain). Dwight Eisenhower spent most of his adult life outside the United States. Gerald Ford was the last northern Republican president, but he only won the Republican nomination as an incumbent president. Bob Dole, meanwhile, was a senator from Kansas.

Not only is Romney the first real northerner on the GOP ticket since Ford, he’s the first Republican nominee who made his political career in the Northeast going all the way back to New York Gov. Thomas Dewey in 1948. The Republican Party, up to that point, was a party that was strongest in the Northeast, but that was eons ago politically. Dewey’s best state in 1948 was Vermont, which was Obama’s best state outside of his semi-home state of Hawaii in 2008.

Even compared to the Reagan era, the political landscape has changed dramatically. According to Rendezvous with Destiny, Craig Shirley’s account of the 1980 campaign, President Jimmy Carter spent the last week of his campaign in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas, Tennessee and California. These days, New York, New Jersey and California are safely Democratic and Mississippi, Texas, Tennessee and, most likely, Missouri are safely Republican. In the past two decades, Democrats became the dominant party in the densely populated coastal states and Republicans have locked up most of the South.

Part of this change has to do with regional identity. After running many Sun Belt candidates for president, Republicans are now dominant among whites in that part of the country. There’s little need to devote energy to winning over these voters. With most of the Sun Belt secure — California being the notable exception — a Republican candidate can afford to focus most of his energy on winning over swing voters in the North and Midwest.

Despite being from the Northeast, Romney’s best chances to change the electoral map may be in the industrial Midwest. He was raised in suburban Detroit and his father served as governor of Michigan. With the perspective of a northern suburbanite, Romney may be able to connect with voters in key suburban areas like Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee and Des Moines in a way that a Sun Belt Republican just couldn’t.

Chris Palko works as an assistant media analyst at Smart Media Group, a Republican political media buying agency in Alexandria, Va. He is a graduate of American University and George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.

A version of this post was also published on Campaign and Election’s blog, Campaign Insider.

For years, and still today, campaigns pull home addresses and phone numbers of past campaign supporters and campaign donors; people who they know support their candidate.  Campaign volunteers and staffers spend hours calling these phone numbers and encouraging continued support and generous donations. Carefully scripted direct mail pieces are drafted and strategically sent to these same individuals reminding them to fulfill their civic duty and vote on Election Day. Before digital, the way in which we could reach people was not as sophisticated. In the traditional space we put ads on TV and radio station we know our party’s supporters are watching and listening to and place our ads on the front pages of the local newspapers. The idea was to influence our supporters to spread the word.  But now are the influential voters the ones you can reach through the traditional space? Maybe, but the opportunity to be influential grows immensely as we tune into social media.

The internet is a breeding ground for influencers, specifically in the social space. Sites like Twitter, Facebook, and Google + were built to connect people, but these social giants have grown into powerful platforms for persuasion. 92% of consumers surveyed by Nielson said they trust completely/somewhat recommendations from people they know and 70% trust consumer opinions posted online. That is compared to 47% who trust TV ads and 46% who trust Newspaper ads. So getting connected to the right people online will help you boost your creditability. Furthermore, a study done by ExactTarget reported that through twitter and other social networks- 72% of consumers publish blog posts each month, 70% comment on blogs, 33% use social media to share opinions, 32% make recommendations and 30% seek guidance and direction. That brings me to my final point that there is not just “one” type of social consumer.  Just like people have different personalities and habits in real life, the same goes for online.  Here is simple breakdown of the different “types” of social personas.

The Sharers- These people have large networks with many followers on Twitter and Facebook. The reason? They love to share content, opinions and facts and data they find online. Getting something engaging in front of this social constituent will most definitely start a domino effect as they spread this content throughout their social networks. They are likely to be connected to other sharers are well.

The Creators- There are the reporters and the bloggers of the world. The ones who have opinions and want to create their own content surrounding topics they care about.  They will take something you have said and develop additional content- some may be negative, but any PR is good PR right? Don’t be afraid of the “Creators.”

The Participators- Similar to the sharers and the creators, these are the people who participate in conversations that are happening online by commenting, liking and sometimes also sharing content. They are more apt to make their own voice heard rather than sharing the opinions of others. However, they steer away from creating their own content; rather using the information and attitudes they find online as a platform to launch their voice.

The Listeners- The most passive but possibly the most important social media persona is the Listener. They are the watchdogs of the social space, observering and absorbing a variety of messages and personal outlooks and attitudes of other social media consumers. They are most important because they don’t often reveal their reactions to the various content they are consuming. We as campaign advertisers must work to control the content as best we can in front of these consumers making sure a combination of positive influence and strong campaign messaging reaches them.

It’s certainly not a waste to be continuing to seek support through traditional efforts, but its imperative we identify and activate our social influencers online.  Start by following your followers and figure out what category they fall in, get the right messages in front of the right people and watch the power of social unfold before you.

10. Forsyth County, N.C.     Population: 350,670     Largest city: Winston-Salem

Forsyth is like a county-sized version of North Carolina. Its racial demographics are very close to the state average. It has Wake Forest University, so there’s the presence of liberal-leaning academic whites like in the Raleigh-Durham area. Winston-Salem has a large amount of urban Republican neighborhoods like in Charlotte. And it has rural precincts on the outskirts of the county that are heavily Republican like the rest of rural North Carolina.

Past results: Bush won here in 2004 with 54 percent of the vote. Obama took it in 2008 with 55 percent.

9. Hillsborough County, N.H.     Population: 400,721      Largest city: Manchester

Most of New Hampshire’s population is close to the Massachusetts state line, which Hillsborough County straddles. It contains a vital grouping of towns and cities including Manchester and Nashua, the two largest cities in the state. Both are swing communities, in the electoral sense.

Past results: Bush edged Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) here in 2004 with 51 percent, but it flipped to Obama in 2008.

8. Prince William County, Va.     Population: 402,002     Largest community: Dale City

Prince William County is an exurban county about 25 miles southwest of Washington D.C. It’s on the edge between the traditional, conservative Virginia, and the more progressive suburbs outside the capital. Prince William has become very diverse in recent years, particularly in the I-95 corridor. A hard swing towards Obama was key for him winning Virginia.

Past results: Bush took 53 percent of the vote here in 2004, but Obama bettered that total (58 percent) in his 2008 win.

7. Chester County, Pa.     Population: 498,886     Largest city: West Chester

Of the four suburban Philadelphia counties, Chester was the only one that Bush won in 2004. The tail end of the prestigious Main Line is in the county, but so is the disadvantaged city of Coatesville. In between, there are plenty of middle-class suburbs, and even still some farmland. This is one of the few counties in Pennsylvania showing substantial population growth, so its importance is increasing.

Past results: Bush won here with 52 percent. Obama, in 2008, took it with 55 percent

6. Jefferson County, Colo.     Population: 534,543     Largest city: Lakewood

Colorado is a heavily polarized state divided between very liberal Democrats in Denver and Boulder, and very conservative Republicans in Colorado Springs and the rural areas. The balance of power is held by the handful of counties in suburban Denver. Jefferson County to the west of the city is truly a purple county closely mirroring Colorado’s overall results in the last two presidential contests.

Past results: In 2004, Bush edged Kerry here 53-47. Obama won in 2008 with 55 percent.

5. Arapahoe County, Colo.     Population: 572,003     Largest city: Aurora

Arapahoe County is to the southeast of Denver and, like Jefferson, it’s a purple county that determines which party wins Colorado. It contains most of Aurora, the second biggest city in the Denver area. The county, and Aurora in particular, has seen a major increase in its Hispanic population in the past decade. This development has made the county a bit more Democratic than its neighbors.

Past results: Bush took it with 52 percent of the vote. Obama did better – winning it with 57 percent in 2008.

4. Hamilton County, Ohio     Population: 802,374     Largest city: Cincinnati

Cincinnati is one of the most Republican metro areas outside of the South, but the central city county of Hamilton is a swing county. Hamilton County is worth watching, in part, because African-American turnout will be crucial. Sustaining high African-American turnout can make or break Obama’s reelection hopes.

Past results: Bush won it with 53 percent in 2004. Four years later, Obama mirrored his result – the first Democrat since Lyndon Johnson to carry the county.

3. Wake County, N.C.     Population: 900,993     Largest city: Raleigh

In the Raleigh-Durham area, Durham and Orange counties (Chapel Hill) are overwhelmingly Democratic, with a mixture of African Americans and academia-based white liberals. But Wake County (Raleigh and its suburbs) is much more competitive. Suburban communities like Cary are much more akin to the northern middle-of-the-road suburbs around Philadelphia and New York than the heavily Republican Sun Belt suburbs.

Past results: Bush edged Kerry here by two points. Obama took it in 2008 with 57 percent of the vote.

2. Pinellas County, Fla.     Population: 916,542     Largest city: St. Petersburg

The top-two counties are both part of Florida’s I-4 Corridor, which runs through the Daytona Beach, Orlando and Tampa areas. The I-4 Corridor is the most important region in this presidential election. In Pinellas County, St. Petersburg has some neighborhoods that are solidly Democratic, but most of the territory is split 50/50. Every precinct could make the difference between winning and losing.

Past results: Bush was in a virtual tie with Kerry here while Obama bested Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) 54-46.

1. Hillsborough County, Fla.     Population: 1,229,226     Largest city: Tampa

The most crucial county this fall is on the other side of Tampa Bay from Pinellas, the runner-up. Hillsborough County, which includes Tampa and its immediate suburbs, is the only county listed with more than one million residents. Still, it’s a fairly accurate small-scale version of America. It has a solidly Democratic central city that includes large African-American and Hispanic populations, and some outlying areas that are heavily Republican. The immediate suburbs are closely split. Whoever wins Hillsborough County in November is most likely the next occupant of the White House.

Past results: Bush won here with 53 percent while Obama finished a point better in 2008.

Chris Palko works as an assistant media analyst at Smart Media Group, a Republican political media buying agency in Alexandria, Va. He is a graduate of American University and George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.

A version of this post was also published on Campaign & Election’s blog, Campaign Insider .

There are two types of campaign attack ads, Bill O’Reilly noted last week. Ads based on facts and ads based on ad hominem, which in Latin is short for pointing out the character flaws or actions of your opponent in an attempt to negate the truth of his argument. O’Reilly’s two-ad analysis sprung from columnist Charles Krauthammer stating that President Obama and his fellow Democrats are going to run campaigns based on race, class and gender. We are already seeing this occur. 

Take this article, which portrays the Romney campaign tagline, “Obama isn’t working” as though, in fact, it were a nasty racial stereotype about black men. Unfortunately for Romney, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Democrats and their allies will likely continue ad hominem attacks on Romney and put their focus on what they’ve dubbed as the Republican war on women, immigrants and African Americans. Romney will need to have a nimble media strategy to deflect attention away from these character attacks. Here are three ways he can do that.

Host “Saturday Night Live.” Romney has been offered the host spot and is considering it, according to the New York Times. Other candidates have used the show to poke fun at their public images and Romney should seize the opportunity. There’s no question that the writers will target him throughout the campaign, so playing along on his own terms is worth considering. Still, in order for it to be a success, he needs to laughed with, not laughed at. Romney’s friends say he is a “barrel of laughs” and has a reputation for being a prankster. Revealing his lighter side could raise his likeability and put him up there with the president. Charisma gets votes, as we saw in 2008.

Disclose campaign donors. Romney’s camp won’t identify his major donors and is vulnerable to criticism for failing to do so. But this lack of transparency – the Obama camp, by comparison, has disclosed the identities of his bundlers — in Romney’s campaign could be turned into an advantage. He could increase anticipation and release the names of his financial backers when a real distraction is needed.

Put Ann in the spotlight. To most of the public, the first lady’s role is almost as important as the president’s. Moreover, candidates’ wives are naturally given a celebrity-type status that takes some of the focus off of the candidate. The Romney camp has many ways it could tout Ann, but it needs to start soon. In a recent Quinnipiac University poll, 64 percent of respondents didn’t know enough about her to form an opinion.

This is a big year on a local, state and national level and those who don’t get on board with digital this year will miss out on valuable, targeted opportunities to connect with voters.  Here is a quick check-list to help start to shape your digital strategy in 2012:

1-      BE proactive.  Thinking ahead is the most important thing you can do when it comes to planning your digital strategy. Knowing what you want to accomplish a few months down the road should help define your current strategy. Take Romney for example, who was one of only two candidates to qualify for the Virginia Primary.  Zac Moffat, Digital Director on the Romney campaign was quoted saying “the political team knew two months in advance what we wanted to do.” Team Romney utilized segmented emails to engage Virginians in the now, tracked them through their social media accounts, and followed up with phone calls to secure signatures. Thus, getting them to the future and ultimately on the Virginia ballot.

2-      BE consistent: Keep your message consistent across all channels, on and offline. The benefit to advertising through multiple channels is it allows you to extend reach, and increase frequency, but be careful not to confuse your audience with varying messages.

3-      BE relevant. Ensure all websites and landing pages are consistent with advertising messages. Don’t send someone to your website donations page from a banner ad or video if your message is about your voting record.

4-      BE a part of the conversation. Keep the conversation alive and engage with your supporters and non-supporters through social channels (Facebook, Twitter etc.). People like to listen and be heard when they are interacting in the social space. Post things daily, whether it’s a link, a quote, a video, and allow your followers to interact with it. What you will likely see is people commenting, people liking and people sharing. This is the digital way to Word Of Mouth. Check out Mitt Romney’s or Obama’s Facebook page and get an idea of what is engaging their followers.

5-      BE a risk taker. Don’t be afraid to try something new. The best thing about digital media is you can quickly gauge response, measure success, and switch out creative. If you have a great idea, try it, watch it, and if it’s not working try something new! The point being, do not be afraid to be creative in the digital space. There is no roadmap to success when it comes to digital media. As this landscape evolves, evolve with it.

6-      BE an observer. Learn from the winning moves and losing moves that Romney, Santorum, Paul and Obama are making. Keep up-to-date with news about their online campaign spending, visit their websites often, sign up for their email updates, and follow them on Facebook and Twitter. What you can learn through observation might surprise you.

 As you begin to play in the digital space you will start to see how each element of your overall campaign strategy can be influenced but what you do online. Don’t let that scare you because if you don’t jump on board now you will certainly get left behind.

On Wednesday night, Sarah Stone and I went to the Pohick Regional Library in Burke, Virginia to hear what Chris Cilliza had to say about the issues surrounding this year’s presidential election.  If you do not know Chris, he has a Washington Post blog called The Fix and is a political contributor to MSNBC.  Needless to say, the hour and a half discussion was interesting.  Most, if not of all, of what he said is already known to political-minded people (like Sarah).  I, on the other hand, needed to take notes and I am glad I did.  I later went back to the notes and highlighted quotes I thought I might want to use in a blog post.  However, instead of using them as quotes, I thought I would just use them as talking points to help summarize some of Chris’s discussion regarding the presidential election. 

“Obama is as strong as he’s going to be while Romney is as weak as he’s going to be.”  When Chris said strong, he meant cool, referring to Obama hitting three-pointers and singing Al Green on key.  In a new CNN poll released last week, Obama’s approval rating is over fifty percent.  At the same time, the exit polls are showing that voters are seeing the economy as the most important issue right now.  It is hard to deny the truth that many voters like Obama.  They find him to be likable and relatable and will vote him in for another term, regardless of their views toward the economy and direction of the country. 

Chris was spot on about Romney being as weak as he’s going to be.  In an article on ABC News, one poll shows that only 34% of Americans favor him for president and that is the lowest for any presidential candidate since 1984.  His main challenges right now are low popularity when compared to Obama and low support in the Republican base.  However, history proves that springtime favorability should not be taken seriously as Romney’s support base will grow once he becomes the GOP Presidential candidate.  He is continuing to move in a positive direction as he has recently received endorsements from President George H.W. Bush, Marco Rubio, and Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan. 

“Republicans have a Hispanic vote problem to face.” Another area where Romney can gain support is with Hispanic voters.  The Hispanic population has grown by 43% since 2000 and Hispanics tend to vote democratic.  Obama won 67% of the Hispanic vote in the last election and Democrats won 60% of their vote in House races in 2010.  As it stands now, this is a threat to the Republican Party because Hispanic communities are growing in predominantly Republican states like Arizona and Texas.  Due to this influx of Democratic voters, political scientists are predicting these states, along with several other battleground states, will be Democratic states by the time the next election rolls around.  However, this can actually be good news for Romney because Republican leaders are going to increase their efforts on connecting with Hispanics but not for the purpose of winning their votes.  Many Republicans and political leaders like Jeb Bush, as quoted in one recent article, believe that Republicans and Hispanics naturally have a lot in common, like principals surrounding freedom, family, entrepreneurial ideals, religion, and quality education.   If Republicans tout these similarities, a significant part of the population could find Romney more relatable and likeable than Obama and they still have plenty of time to do so. 

“The 2012 election is going look more like 2004 than 2008.”  This statement is obvious, but some people may still be anticipating another heated and entertaining battle to the White House, forgetting the many contrasts between this year and the last election year.  Facebook users are probably noticing their Facebook friends gearing up and preparing to share or defend their political beliefs online, but there could be disappointment in the reduced level of excitement surrounding this year’s race due to what it is lacking.  In 2008…

• Neither candidate was the incumbent President or Vice-President. 
• It was following the onset of the economic crisis and both candidates ran on platforms of economy, change, reform, and domestic policy.
• The public’s perception of the current President was low – criticizing him for the Iraq War and the federal response to Hurricane Katrina. 
• This was the first presidential election where one candidate was African American.
• This election utilized many social media websites for the first time, which increased the reach and engagement with voters between the ages of 18 and 29 as well as providing a platform for voters to express their opinions regarding the election.
• There was plenty of newsworthy controversy around one candidate for the opposing party to take advantage of.
• The media took sides, or so people felt.  One 2008 poll showed that 70% of voters felt the media wanted Obama to win.
• There was a vast difference between the candidates.  One Senator being fresh, charismatic, and inexperienced, while the other Senator lacking star power in comparison, but was a Vietnam War POW with experience.

“The George Allen and Tim Kaine Senate race will be the marquee race.”  Virginia is a major battleground state and Chris says the nation should focus on this U.S. Senate race for a preview of the presidential outcome.  This race will be interesting because Obama won Virginia in 2008 but Virginia elected a Republican governor in 2009 and won House seats in 2010.  There is hope for both sides but the race between the two former governors of Virginia is currently too close to call.  This should be worth paying attention to because this general election is going to be about state by state, not national. 

Their success has many parallels and could serve as a model for future candidates.

Huckabee and Santorum were the most outspoken social conservatives in their contests. Both appealed to blue-collar workers who are not natural Republican primary voters. Santorum has been able to capture the support of Huckabee’s Southern Evangelical base—a feat for an Italian Catholic from suburban Pittsburgh. In Southern contests, Santorum was able to run just as strong in the Jacksonian uplands of Alabama and Tennessee, and he did better in the coastal and urban areas like Birmingham, Nashville and Mobile.

Santorum has been able to outperform Huckabee in some areas, including Northern rural counties. This was most apparent in Michigan. Huckabee got nowhere in Michigan in 2008. He got sixteen percent and did not win a single county. Even heavily evangelical Ottawa County only gave him 23 percent. Santorum had much broader appeal. He earned 38 percent in Michigan, won most of the rural counties, and got 49 percent in Ottawa County. Santorum has done better across the board in the North, even with evangelicals.

Huckabee demonstrated little appeal to Catholic voters. He won just nine percent of Catholics in Michigan. In Louisiana, the governor took just 29 percent compared to Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) 55 percent. By comparison, Santorum got 37 percent of Catholic votes in Michigan and 46 percent in Louisiana.

Still, the most prominent Catholic GOP politician of his generation is losing his coreligionists to Romney. In Michigan, Romney received 44 percent of the Catholic vote, seven points ahead of Santorum. In Ohio, where Santorum lost by one point, Romney won Catholics 44 to 31 percent. Santorum was able to break free of Huckabee’s evangelical-only appeal, but wasn’t able to score even ties with Romney among Catholics, which would have been enough to upend the nomination race.

Santorum’s strategy also failed because he didn’t make enough inroads with blue-collar workers. In industrial counties such as Scott (Davenport) and Dubuque counties in Iowa, Saginaw and Bay counties in Michigan, and Mahoning (Youngstown) and Trumbull counties in Ohio, the Massachusetts millionaire beat the grandson of a coal miner. It may be the case that this approach is better suited to winning over independents than Republican primary voters.

What we have seen in the past two Republican presidential primary contests is that positioning yourself as the cultural populist outsider has become the most effective way to rival the best-known, best-funded candidates. The approach does have its flaws, though. Huckabee was never able to appeal beyond his Southern evangelical base. Santorum was able to run strong among Northern rural voters but still came up short in big contests. In spite of their failures, the Huckabee and Santorum experiences suggest that a better caliber cultural populist with broader appeal could be a leading contender for the Republican nomination in the future.

Chris Palko works as an assistant media analyst at Smart Media Group, a Republican political media buying agency in Alexandria, Va. He is a graduate of American University and George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.

A version of this post was also published on Campaign and Election’s blog, Campaign Insider.

 It is hard to believe the media when they say the Great Recession is no more.  If you have a hard time believing so due to soaring gas prices, the unemployment rate, or number of bankruptcies you are informed of, you are not alone.  According to USA Today, a recent poll shows that 63% of Americans believe the U.S. is still in a recession and 55% thinks the economy won’t fully recover until 2013 or later.  Can the media blame them?  The lack of healthy economical signs support this reasoning and validates Americans’ low consumer confidence.   However, 2012 is the year of the ‘Quadrennial Effect’; that’s not another term for the end of the world, it’s a sign of positive change.

The Quadrennial Effect is a series of significant events that occur every four years.  These events occurring in 2012 include the Presidential and Congressional elections, Summer Olympics, and European Soccer Championships.  The monetary and economical impact from these events brings a little peace of mind to policy makers as this affect is a stimulus package in the form of advertising.  These events that make up the Quadrennial Effect encourage significantly more advertising spending, which is put back into the economy and creates a nice financial cushion that the governments can’t provide. 

Even as the U.S. is recovering, the Quadrennial Effect has perfect timing.  The European Union is still in a period of reduced economic activity that this great coincidence is sure to neutralize.   Experts feel positive about the Euro Crisis because they are predicting that global ad spending will reach nearly $5 billion by the end of the year, a 5% increase from last year.    Without the Quadrennial Effect, global ad expenditure for 2012 would see a 5% decrease.

Another positive sign that things are defusing in Europe is that developing markets overseas are the biggest contributors to the impending momentum.  According to ZenithOptimedia forecasts, between 2011 and 2014, 60% of all of the world’s growth in ad spending will come from developing markets.  Brazil, Russia, India, and China are predicted to account for 33% of growth, while Indonesia, Argentina, South Africa, South Korea, Mexico, and Turkey will contribute another 16% of growth.

Here in the homeland, we are already seeing a portion of the Quadrennial Effect take effect.  In this case, political campaigns are contributing to the economy in two ways.  First, political coverage surrounding their campaigns provides valuable inventory for advertisers to buy.  On the other hand, they are the consumers buying up inventory in TV, radio and online.  To date, presidential campaigns have already spent $95 million on TV and radio advertising this year, and roughly another $6 million in internet advertising.  That does not include Senate and Congressional races.  Plus, it’s only March and this year’s presidential campaigns are predicted to execute the highest amount of spending in history.  So next time you start to complain about political ads cluttering your TV, think of all the money it’s generating for the economy.

As advertising budgets grow, so should consumer’s confidence.  If you would like to follow ad spending for a peace of mind, there are many online resources that offer this type of insight, like Ad Age and Media Post.  For the best insight into political ad spending, follow Smart Media Group on Twitter or like us on Facebook.