Explain to me this: Obama’s pastor says some stupid shit, the Republicans attach Obama for it; Democrats say, rightfully so, that the pastor doesn’t represent Obama; Democrats dig up some stupid shit Sarah Palin’s pastor said and use it against here. Where is the logic in these arguments.
It’s similar to the Republicans attacking Obama for his lack of experience, and turning around and picking a VP that is just as green (if not even more so in my opinion). Granted much of this virollic argumentation is being done by those who support the respective candidates and not by the campaigns themselves, but can’t we agree that this sort of back and forth is anything but an honest and intellectual dialog?
What is equally frustrating are conversations that go like this: “Obama will raise your taxes!” Me: “Only if you are rich, really.” “Where did you hear that?!” “I read it on numerous reputable websites and magazines, not to mention I’ve actually heard Obama talk about what he wants to do with taxes.” “Well, you can’t believe everything you read.” WTF!?
Wes Clark tried to make a point on TV yesterday saying that John McCain’s military experience was null and void because he never commanded in a combat setting. That may be true, but that in no way disqualifies McCain’s myriad military credentials and the fact that he is an American hero, as Barack Obama said today.
Rumors about Barack Obama are still swirling around rural America. A local is interviewed:
“I’ll admit that I probably don’t follow all of the election news like maybe I should,” Peterman said. “I haven’t read his books or studied up more than a little bit. But it’s hard to ignore what you hear when everybody you know is saying it. These are good people, smart people, so can they really all be wrong?”
I recieved plenty of these rumor emails early in the campaign, and I can’t believe that they are still being passed around. Furthermore, people still apparently believe many of the falsities contained in these online rumors. For the record, Barack Obama is a Christian and a patriot. Not even his opponent argues that.
It does seem Obama has been altering his positions lately. Frankly, though, I hate the words “flip flopper.” Look, any rational person should change their position upon discovery of new facts. The question is, what constitutes pandering and what constitutes a rational evolution of one’s opinions? MSM and bloggers alike are quick to jump on any politician that changes positions, regardless of their reasons.
The fact is, positions can and should change, even over a short-term. This “flip flopper” nonsense needs to stop because the diatribe makes no meaningful point or contribution. I would further argue that “flip flopping” could be a good thing. Perhaps we would have been better off if President Bush “flip flopped” on the war in Iraq, or on his government spending habbits.
Peggy Noonan writes that McCain lags far behind Barack Obama in media coverage. I think a lot of this has to do with what I mentioned yesterday. McCain has a very poor online presence. Obama has a well greased political machine online that can drum up media attention like white teeth in England. Looking at Wonkette’s Wonkosphere directory, John McCain has plenty of opportunity with all the conservative blogs out there.
The Republicans are poised to lose this fall in the 2008 General Election. The Grand Old Party is proving to be just that: old. The Republicans, in large measure, have put little stock in how effective the Internet can be as a medium for their candidates. Certainly, most candidates have web sites, but most of those suffer from poor design and usability when contrasted with their Democratic counterparts. If Republicans want to win, they must take notice and improve their position.
The Intarweb
To be successful in distributing your message on the Internet you must understand it fundamentally.
Most people equate the Internet with the World Wide Web. This is not accurate. The Web is merely a part of the Internet, and since the Web is the most visible element it is often used synonymously with Internet.
The Internet as a whole is a public global network. The Internet includes elements such as websites on the Web, email, and instant messaging. It also includes lesser-known elements like UseNet, File Transfer (FTP), and Internet Relay Chat (IRC). Each of these elements—or protocols as they are technically known—are exploitable in the political arena.
This means that, in addition to websites, candidates need to have active campaigns in email, instant messaging, and even SMS text messaging. Furthermore, candidates may also want to target IRC as a way to facilitate grass roots contact with more tech savvy constituents.
The Proof in the Pudding
The 2008 cycle has seen poor turnouts and difficulty fund raising for Republican candidates. In contrast, Dems have seen twice the turn out (in some states’ primaries) and dramatically higher fund raising. While this is due, in part, to the current political climate, it is also because the Dems have executed a trans-media campaign better than the Republicans. The Dems are more agile and better poised on the Internet, and it shows.
As of this writing Barack Obama has raised nearly $250 million by more than 1 million individual contributors. Hillary Clinton saw similar numbers. This dwarfs any Republican campaign, but Ron Paul has seen relatively outstanding fund raising numbers because of his efforts on the Internet. Obama’s campaign is extremely well organized and has the best presence on the Internet. From his website to his email list to his social-networking pages, the freshman senator is a viable candidate because of his Internet presence.
On Demographics
After the moral debauchery of the Clinton Whitehouse, Karl Rove knew America was looking for a values candidate. He tapped the value-based, evangelical wing of the Republican Party and won. The Dems are doing something similar this cycle, they are looking at the existing political climate and targeting accordingly.
Some would argue this tactic would not work for Republicans. Sure, the Internet is filled with young, liberal voters, but it is also filled older, conservatives as well. This is where the GOP gets it wrong. It’s 2008, virtually everyone in America uses the Internet: rich, poor, young, old, liberal, conservative. It should be no surprise that John McCain’s website receives only a fraction of Barack Obama’s traffic. There is a field that is ripe to be picked, but the Republicans don’t know how to harvest it.
The Bottom Line
The Internet is a fast and powerful way to collect information, raise money, and inform voters. There is a fine line between spamming your constituents and facilitating meaningful and effective communication. Many web professionals have experience with towing this line; many online political strategists do not.
Republicans have a poorly implemented online strategy. They pay more attention to television and direct mail. Building a candidacy online, as well as the traditional mediums, is pivotal to winning and raising the money necessary to win. Online strategies are extraordinarily cost effective and cannot be ignored if a candidate wants to win.
Leading republican “online political strategists” have online presences that are representative of their work: cheap and poorly usable. I see candidates and consultants websites that pay no attention to search engine optimization (SEO) let alone adhering to web standards. Their efforts are lackluster and amateur. They do not take the medium seriously, and they will pay for that this fall.
How to Win
Although Republican contenders are behind the curve, there is still time in this cycle to correct. While there may not be enough time in the presidential race, most congressional campaigns are only in their infancies. Each campaign needs a knowledgeable online liaison. For Republicans, this likely means someone new to the political arena. Most internal consultants for the Party are novices when it comes to social networks, web standards, and SEO—not to mention SMS and IRC efforts—to build grass roots support online. Find web consultancies that are experts in marketing online and that cater to businesses. Look at their results. Make sure they have outstanding design skills and care about web standards and usability. These things matter, big time.
This article is not about laying out the best way to execute an online strategy for a campaign, this article serves as a warning to Republicans. Luddite campaigns are behind the curve and it shows.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled that child rapists could not be put to death. Barack Obama came out and said that he basically disagreed with the court, saying that child rape could be considered a capital offense. Today, the DC gun ban was overturned by the Court, and Obama came out and said he believed gun ownership was an “individual right” which is an interesting migration from what he has said in the past. The latest rulings and Obama’s subsequent comments may indicate he’s going strong for the center vote.
Update: Time has a similar take.
According to Daniel Finkelstein at the TimesOnline Hillary Clinton will not be Barack Obama’s choice for VP. The reason, Finkelstein argues, is that last week Obama appointed Solis Doyle to be the appointed VPs cheif of staff, and apparently there is bad blood between Doyle and Clinton.
Many of Hillary Clinton’s supporters say they will vote for McCain instead of Obama. These so-called PUMAs (Party Unity My Ass) are women over 30 who are jaded because they feel their voice has been silenced now that Clinton is out of the race.
Karl Rove called Barack Obama “the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by,” at a Capitol Hill Club breakfast this morning.
