Where’s Mini-Mitt? In Search Of End-Of-Quarter Dollars

Sep 25 2007 Published by under Barack Obama, Fundraising, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Politics

(cross-posted at TechPresident.com)

There’s a lot of buzz in GOP internet circles about the glaring omission from Romney’s site. As we approach the end of the fundraising quarter, we all expected the return of mini-Mitt, the annoying and intrusive pitchman for the Romney campaign’s June finance crush.

With no mini-Mitt to talk about, I thought I’d look at what the campaigns are doing to grab those last minute dollars. There’s a lot going on, and it’s interesting to track the different tactics.

The House Party

In lieu of mini-Mitt, the Romney guys have rolled out a snazzy little splash page pimping the Rally for Romney (a clever rebranding of the standard “House Parties” tactic). Like Rudy’s House Party (scheduled for the 26th), the idea behind the Rally for Romney is to allow grassroots fundraisers to bundle checks and ship them off to the campaign before the end of the quarter.

House Parties are an effective method of raising money, but by comparison to traditional online tactics, I’m not sure they’re hugely profitable versus the labor. If your diligent at all about vetting the fundraisers your authorizing, you’ve got a lot of work to do. If your not, there is a good possibility your authorizing people with sketchy pasts to gather funds on your behalf.

I’m not sure that matters any more, however. Guilt by association used to be a significant reason for campaigns to watch their associates. If they’re raising small enough amounts, it may not matter.

The Celebrity Endorsement

McCain and Hillary are taking a slightly different tack. They have decided to roll out the celebrity e-mail. For Hillary the celeb in question shares a bed with her (at least occasionally), so I’m guessing it was no trouble to have Bill pen a missive.

McCain, however, decided to use the “Dancing with the Stars” definition of “star”, and rolled out an endorsement from former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach. Now, I’m not questioning the appeal of an octogenarian former football star, but I’d suggest someone with a bit more “name”. Couldn’t they find a current football player?

The celeb e-mail works, if the celeb in question is universally loved among your donors. Bill Clinton works because Democrats generally love him. Staubach is a questionable choice. I don’t know anyone but the most die hard Cowboy fan who will open their wallet simply because Roger asked.

The Viral Appeal

Obama is pushing a “matching funds” program that pairs supporters. If you give $25, some other philanthropist will match your funds. You can then exchange e-mail with them. I like the idea behind this, as it gives supporters a sense of community. Some might say it’s a bit goofy, but anything that makes people feel connected to the campaign empowers them to be a voice for the campaign.

The Give-Money-and-Win-Something Appeal

The Edwards camp is taking a page from the Obama playbook and offering a trip to meet up with Edwards for a handful of selected donors. His giveaway is a little different however. There’s no steak dinner at a fancy restaurant in store for the winner. Nope. The grand prize winners will be whisked off to N’awlins, Louisiana for a fun filled day of rebuilding Katrina damage.

I’m not knocking voluntourism. I think efforts to help the Big Easy rebuild are fantastic. I’m just not sure that helping John do a roof raising in the Ninth Ward is the type of tchotchke most people would be hoping for.

The Thompson finance team has a similar contest going, but it’s geography based. The town that brings in the most donations per capita by midnight on 9/30 gets a visit from Fred. It’s sort of a cross between Eventful and traditional fundraising.

There Can Be Only One

The downside to these efforts is the only people who will ever know if they’re successful are those in the respective campaigns. These aren’t likely to comprise the bulk of funds raised. The money rankings will come out in a week, and the winners and losers will be declared. Ultimately, the best online fundraising idea may belong to a candidate who doesn’t fare well overall.

Rest assured, though. In another 90 days, we’ll do it all again.

No responses yet

All Our Eggs in One Basket

Sep 19 2007 Published by under Barack Obama, Candidates, Democrats, Elections, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Politics, Republicans

As things look bleaker and bleaker for the GOP’s hopes next year, it’s becoming clear that our chances of holding the line in the Senate (which was already going to be difficult) and the possibility of picking up seats in Congress are both almost completely out the window. The math just isn’t there for us. We need to hold twice as many seats in the Senate as the Dems do. That’s bad. We also have a handful of incumbents bailing out, that’s worse. Throw in the marginal seats where we were already looking at a tough fight and we’re in deep trouble on the North side of Capitol Hill.

The House, sadly, isn’t looking much better. Sadly, the only thing I feel good about there is the comments Jack Murtha has been making lately. When Democrats start making claims that they’ll gain another 40-50 seats, I start to feel better. Their ability to forecast elections, and their tendency to over-promise and under-deliver is legendary.

That said, I do think the possibility exists that the Democrats could pick up another dozen. Frankly, I think it all depends on who gets the party nods for POTUS. We’re not in a mid-year, we’re in a Presidential cycle. That changes the dynamics of the election completely. There will be a lot of people who are turning out to vote for or against the nominees. Unlike ’06, this will not be an election about Bush, regardless of how hard the Democrats will try to make the GOP nominee into his stand-in. It will be about Hillary/Obama versus the GOP candidate.

If we’re facing Hillary, the number of GOP voters who will turn out for no reason other than to keep her out of the White House will greatly aid our chances at holding our own in Congress. If the Democrats pick Obama (or even Edwards, for that matter), the enthusiasm of the GOP voters will be greatly diminished. Only if we have an exciting candidate of our own can we get it back.

That’s the reason I got behind Fred. Mitt, Rudy and McCain just don’t rev the engine. It’s like going to McDonald’s and having three choices of shake flavors – but all of them are vanilla. Fred has the star power to make the race interesting, the others simply don’t.

I know, I know. Rudy keeps telling us he’s the only guy that can beat Hillary. It’s in every e-mail he sends out and it sounds more and more pathetic every time. Don’t buy it.

You need 50% plus one to win, and 40% of the electorate is Republican. If Rudy is hovering in the 25% range in polls of GOP primary voters, that means he’s got the backing of 10% of the electorate. If 30% of the electorate is having doubts before the first vote is cast, and 40% of the electorate are Democrats, you’re going to have a hard time getting from 10% to 50%. It’s just simple math, no matter how hard they try to bloviate.

The fact is all of our eggs are in the Presidential basket. If we get the right candidate, we can win. If we don’t, we’re in for a beating of epic proportions.

No responses yet

Context

May 21 2007 Published by under Barack Obama, Candidates, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Politics, Republicans, Technology, The Internet

The Washington Post today carries an article covering the state of online politics and the relative advantages/disadvantages of the two parties. I’m quoted in the article on a couple of topics. I think there are a couple of things Vargas gets wrong, but he gets the general theme right – the GOP is playing catch up online.

I’m sure I will continue to catch hell from former colleagues at the RNC. I’m not exactly the most popular guy over there given my comments about this issue. This article is unlikely to change that. I would like, however, to provide a little context for my comments.

Yes, I’m critical of our efforts. Yes, I am probably too critical. There are a lot of people who believe these conversations are a private issue – keep them in the family, and don’t air your dirty laundry in public. I respect that opinion, but I fundamentally disagree. I think that perspective is an example of the problem we have online.

Now, should anyone take my thoughts as the gospel? Absolutely not. I’m just some guy who has some thoughts about the party, and what I think it should do differently. And that’s the point.

The Internet fosters debate and discussion. It allows an open, and deliberative decision making process. By having this discussion publicly, we bring people to the process who have been shut out. Many of those people have very good ideas – not just about the Internet and ways to reach and move people, but about policies, and ideas, and ways to make the country better. The best ideas will float up. Are mine the best? Not hardly.

Despite my willingness to speak publicly, I am actually terribly self-conscious and am probably harder on myself than I would ever be on the party. I am only willing to speak because it is a discussion that I believe needs to take place, and I hope to encourage others to jump in.

As for my feelings on the RNC, Vargas quotes me accurately. However, my feelings about the RNC bureaucracy could probably apply to just about any large, storied institution. Entities like that become complacent by nature. They lose sight of their mission because they put too much emphasis on protecting their reputation. I don’t begrudge the RNC for that, at all.

The Internet, however, is less about tradition and more about innovation. Online, if your reflection on past success prevents you from evolving, you die. If you can’t adapt to the other guys better idea, he wins. In a business that is about nothing but winning, that becomes problematic. The slow-mover gets run over. For us, the question is whether we’ll see the car coming before its tires crush our rib cage.

With regard to Rudy’s site, it’s unfortunate that Vargas chose to single out my critique of Rudy’s. I don’t think Rudy’s site is necessarily better or worse than McCain’s or Romney’s (or Hillary’s for that matter). He could just as easily have quoted many comments I’ve made to the effect that most of the current crop of Presidential candidates (on both sides, and, I believe, excepting Obama) have failed to move the ball.

That said, I think we’re going to see some really interesting things in online politics this cycle, but I’m also hopeful that a lot of what will be remembered after 2008 will have been done by Republicans.

No responses yet

Campaign Reports and Cash On Hand

Apr 13 2007 Published by under Candidates, Fundraising, John McCain, Politics

The ever important figures for Cash on Hand are starting to come in and the shape of the race is adjusting accordingly.

Giuliani today reported $15 million raised (as previously reported) and $12 million on hand. That’s a substantial figure that could actually put him in first place in the money game. Romney’s people have said they’ll report more than $11 million, but we won’t know how much more until we see the report. In addition to his high COH amount, Giuliani reported very little debt (about $90k).

If McCain, who raised only $12.5, has a burn rate closer to Romney’s (48%) than Giuliani’s (32%), he will come out of the first quarter with a COH in the mid-single digits. That’s a bad place to be.

On another piece of news, the number of contributors to Rudy’s campaign is around 28,000. That’s only about 5,000 fewer than Romney, but those 5,000 raised $6 million more (an average of $1,200 per person). That gives you a further indication that much of Romney’s donor stable is tapped out and unable to give more. He had better hope that the Pioneer/Ranger model finds a LOT of new blood or his second quarter numbers are going to look pretty lackluster compared to the first.

Both Romney (with maxed out donors and a need for new blood) and McCain (with little money to carry him) face a tough time going into the lean fundraising months of summer. Summer is a hard time to raise money as donors are generally consumed with other things and less likely to engage.

UPDATE: After Mitt released a breakdown of his numbers today, I felt compelled to call him out on his “pure and simple” website fundraising. The complete post is available over at TechPresident.com.

No responses yet

And The Verdict Is…

Apr 02 2007 Published by under Candidates, Elections, John McCain, Pandering, Politics, Republicans

Fundraising numbers are out for Romney, and Giuliani (plus the also-rans, but who really cares, right?). The only X factor now is McCain. He either did terribly – which he said was the case because a) he started late and b) he is a terrible fundraiser – or he’s playing a masterful game of redirection and will now announce a staggering figure that blows Romney away. For the sake of his campaign, he really needs to hope it’s the latter.

If McCain turns in a number between 16 million and 23 million (more than Rudy, less than Mitt), he’s at least alive for another quarter. He’s had the advantage that this is perceived as a three-way race. Since Rudy’s organization has been less than stellar (technically he hasn’t even announced yet) McCain should be closer to Mitt with Rudy trailing. If he falls somewhere in the middle of the 16-23 range, that’s to be expected.

Coming in behind Rudy would be an indicator of serious trouble with the Arizona Senator’s campaign. If his number is less than 16, he’s going to have a tough time making the case that he’s a credible wishy-washy conservative to Mitt’s real-deal wishy-washiness. The race would likely shift to a two-way race with GOPers picking between the fiscally-conservative-socially-moderate Giuliani and the socially-pandering-fiscally-whatever Romney. A sub-16 number puts McCain on life support and he will have trouble surviving into and through the summer months. Look for staff departures, consultants let go, and a “revamped” operation. If his remarks about poor fundraising performance weren’t a clever effort to hide a huge number, they may be the precursor to a staff shake up.

While unlikely, a number above 23 would give McCain new attention and make folks take a fresh look. It’s not likely, but could happen.

While Tommy Thompson has inexplicably decided to jump into the race, this will be the quarter when the rest of the GOP field will start to drop out. The Brownbacks, Huckabees, and others can’t compete with the operation $20 million can buy. They’d be hard pressed to get to that number between now and January, and it’s difficult to get above 2% in the polls with no staff and no media. In the meantime, Romney and Rudy (and possibly McCain) are likely to put up big numbers again in June.

Look for a thin herd to head into the fall.

3 responses so far

« Newer posts Older posts »