Posts Tagged ‘2012’

Secret to Success This Electoral Cycle: Money, Data, Adaptability — and a Narrative

Wednesday, October 5th, 2011

From Advertising Age, 10/4/2011

http://adage.com/article/special-report-advertising-week/election-12-narrative-data-bad-twitter-behavior/230209/

Advertising Week Panel Predict Billions Spent on Niche-Targeted Micro-Campaigns; Twitter as Negative Campaign Tool

By Ken Wheaton

With the 2012 electoral cycle already well underway, campaign managers overwhelmed by a wealth of new media options, thousands of bytes of data, billions of dollars in advertising spending and multiple third-party players should remember this: “Story telling in political advertising is more important than ever.”

That was Catherine “Kiki” McLean, senior partner, global head of public affairs and managing director for Porter Novelli Public Services, at an afternoon Advertising Week panel discussion about political advertising. Ms. McLean, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, joined Purple Strategies’ Rob Collins, Smart Media Group’s Kyle Roberts, ASGK Public Strategies’ Eric Sedler and Time Warner Cable Media President Joan Hogan Gillman.

The panel kicked off not with an obsession over what Facebook will mean for the candidates or how Twitter will change everything, but rather with four old-fashioned TV ads, chosen by panel members based on their strengths and, in one case, its weakness. The unfortunate ad was for Maryland gubernatorial candidate Bob Ehrlich, who lost his last try for office.

The problem, said Ms. McLean, wasn’t the tone or even the message, but that the ad “told you nothing about what it would be like” if Mr. Ehrlich won the election. The other three ads — one of which was not a political ad, but an Allstate ad about the recession – ranged from humorous to serious but all had clear narrative voices.

Of course, having great ads will be just one part of an increasingly complex equation. The number of candidates might not be any higher than in previous years, but the number of groups — from candidate’s campaigns to political party committees to SuperPACs — spending money will be up dramatically. While the national media will be caught up in a presidential contest likely to approach $3 billion, Smart Media’s Mr. Roberts pointed out that in 2010 one congressional contest in Roanoke, Va., saw $8 million in outside money. That’s only expected to increase this time around.

Note to media companies, Mr. Roberts said only half-jokingly: “We need a lot more inventory.”

Time Warner’s Ms. Gillman, who has a background in politics, was quick to point out that Time Warner, which happened to sponsor the panel discussion, was in a position to help candidates (as are, one assumes, other cable providers). But cable companies, she added, have had to adapt with the times. Political campaigns are now optimizing their messaging in close to real time and local cable providers have no choice but to be able to put an ad up — or take it down — within a 24-hour time frame.

She also raised the point of data mining and niche targeting, which cable providers, as well as various online outlets, now make available to candidates.

Mr. Sedler, who founded ASGK Public Strategies with top Obama campaign advisor David Axerod, picked up on the data theme. “There is so much data … you’re going to see dozens and dozens of micro campaigns underneath macro campaigns.” He envisioned, for this cycle, “hundreds of campaigns that will be visible only to niche audiences.”

That, of course, is where online and mobile come in — banner ads, YouTube videos, candidate web pages, blogger outreach. And social media?

The panelists spent little time discussing the flavor of the last three years until asked to do so by an audience member. Those spending hours and hours of time on Twitter and Facebook might be forgiven for thinking that large percentages of the billions to be spent will be funneled that way, but the seasoned political consultants see the platforms as an efficient way to, well, preach to the choir and keep the believers engaged.

“Smart campaigns are going to spend significant resources to build a social-media voice” prior to and during next summer, said Purple Strategies’ Mr. Collins. After all, “picking up a Facebook friend on Oct. 31 is not the best use of that platform.” (Mr. Collins, noting the possibility of ad oversaturation and voter exhaustion, emphasized the need for campaigns to distinguish themselves early in the cycle. “Before Labor Day, spending can move numbers,” he said. “After Labor Day, it just locks in numbers.”)

Mr. Sedler noted that the best use of Facebook is as a “mobilization platform not a persuasion platform.” Though he did note that it’s changed dramatically since 2008 now that, theoretically at least, 50% of voters can be reached through the platform.

Perhaps his most interesting comment was made about Twitter. Seen typically as a conversational medium and portrayed as something that’s done good (Haiti and Tsunami relief efforts, Democracy movements), it’s also been a quick way to spread gossip and, from time to time, false information.

Mr. Sedler seemed to think political operatives might be unable to resist the dark side of the medium. “Twitter was a non-actor in 2008,” he said, but “my sense is you’ll see a lot of negative stuff put out via Twitter.”

Statewide Political Shifts 2008-2011: Eastern US

Monday, August 15th, 2011

Statewide Political Shifts 2009-2011: Part One

How has the American political landscape changed since the last Presidential election?  It is apparent from the results of the 2010 election that a significant change has occurred.  Going from a banner Democratic year in 2008 to a strong Republican cycle in 2010 is the best evidence of this.  The question now is how these changes in the past two and a half years affect the next election cycle.  By looking at a series of important states, we can get an idea of where the electorate will be in 2012.  First, let’s look at the states on the Eastern seaboard.

How can we figure out these changes?  First, look at the percentage of the vote Obama received in 2008.  Second, determine the two-party Congressional vote in 2010 (this removes all third parties and ensures Democratic and Republican results add up to 100% exactly).  Then, show how many points Obama’s average approval rating for the first six months of 2011 in each state (compiled by Gallup) varies from the national average.  The baseline for this poll is 47 percent, which polled adults (a more Democratic friendly sampling).  Finally, one key variable that can tell how the political landscape has changed since 2008 is the change in party identification.  Gallup also does numbers on party ID every year, and it has changed significantly since 2009.  Every state in America has had a decline in Democratic Party identification (though Democrats still retain an advantage in Party ID overall).

Now let’s look at these states more in depth:

Maine: Maine wasn’t seriously contested in 2008.  Obama won Maine by over 15 points.  However, 2010 was a dramatic change in the statewide political scene.  The GOP won the Governor race and control of both chambers of the legislature.  On two-party Congressional vote, Republicans received 44 percent, a major improvement, but the two Democratic representatives held on to win.  Obama’s approval in Maine is 3 points higher than the national average.  Maine had the third largest Democratic Party ID decline (behind Rhode Island and New Hampshire).   Maine is probably still a blue state, but it is more Republican friendly than in the past decade.

New Hampshire: Obama received 54 percent in New Hampshire.  In 2010, Democratic Governor John Lynch was reelected, but the state legislature has veto proof Republican control.  Senator Kelly Ayotte won her election by almost twenty points.  On two-party Congressional vote, Republicans got 53 percent, good enough to knock off two Democratic incumbents.  Obama’s approval ratings are running 7 points behind his national average, more than in many Deep South safe Republican states.  All of the indicators listed here have been dreadful for Democratic chances in New Hampshire.  All factors considered, New Hampshire experienced the hardest swing away from the Democratic Party of any state in America.  If these trends even stay static, then New Hampshire has to be considered at least a lean Republican state in 2012.

New Jersey: New Jersey also wasn’t seriously contested in 2008.  In 2009, Chris Christie won the Governor’s race, a huge accomplishment considering it was a state that had teased Republicans for years.  On the two-party Congressional vote in 2010, Republicans actually won it by a margin of 51-49 percent (there were no statewide races in 2010).  Obama personally is outperforming these levels, as he is running 7 points ahead of the national average.  In New Jersey, Democratic ID is down 7 points.  As of now, Obama is running a handful of points ahead of where he might be expected to be.  His relative personal popularity keeps it out of the swing state column—for the moment.

Pennsylvania: Obama won Pennsylvania by 10 points, much higher than the small Democratic margins in the Bush years.  Come 2010, the GOP won back the Governorship, an open Senate seat, five House seats, and took control of both houses in the state legislature.  On the two-party Congressional vote, Republicans got 52 percent in Pennsylvania, one point ahead of Pat Toomey, one point behind the national two-party vote and three points less than Governor Tom Corbett.  The Democratic decline is 6.5 points in Pennsylvania.  Obama is one point more popular in Pennsylvania than the national average.  It looks like Pennsylvania has shifted to being one point more Democratic than the national average; the typical Democratic advantage on the Presidential level has been 3 points in the past 50 years.

Virginia: Obama ran at his national popular vote level in Virginia.  In 2009, Republicans easily won the Virginia Governor’s race.  Bob McDonnell was a strong candidate running against a second rate Democrat, but it turned around what appeared to be a state trending blue.  On the two-party Congressional vote, Republicans got 57 percent in Virginia.  Obama’s approval rating is running one point behind his national levels.  Virginia saw a decline of 6 points in Democratic ID in the past two years.  It is becoming increasingly difficult to see how Obama and statewide Democrats can hold onto the state in 2012.

North Carolina: One of Obama’s most audacious and satisfying victories in 2008 was winning North Carolina, a state Democrats hadn’t seriously competed in on the Presidential level for years.  But in 2010, Republicans won control of both chambers of the legislature while a somewhat vulnerable Richard Burr sailed to reelection.  Republicans received 54 percent of the two-party Congressional vote, an artificially low number due to a Democratic drawn Congressional map that will be redrawn by Republicans in time for 2012.  Obama is running one point behind his national average in the state.  It is almost impossible to imagine that Obama can win North Carolina again, a state he won by one point in a great Democratic year.  It will be one of the first 2008 states the campaign writes off.

Florida: Obama won by 3 points in Florida, below his national average.  2010 was a Category 5 wipeout of Democrats.  Republicans held on to the Governor house, strengthened their majorities in both chambers, elected Marco Rubio with 49 percent of the vote in a 3 way race, and won an impressive 62 percent of the two-party Congressional vote.  Obama’s approval rating is at the national average.  No state in America had a bigger swing from the Obama 2008 numbers to the Democratic two-party vote in 2010.  Democratic Party ID declined by 5.5 points and Obama barely won in a good Democratic year.  Florida is best described as a Republican-leaning swing state, most similar to Ohio in behavior.  Obama won’t win Florida unless he is above the margin of error nationally.

Overall, North Carolina and Virginia look almost definitively gone from the Democratic column, Florida and New Hampshire are tentatively leaning Republican, Pennsylvania is almost at the national average–and perhaps tilting GOP, and New Jersey and Maine are on the margins of swing state status, but both have shifted right since 2008.

Next time, I will look at the states in the Midwest.