Rich Miller picks up on what Rick Klau and I complain about on a regular basis, the absolute shoddiness of the State Democratic Party’s on-line outreach efforts.
The response to Miller is telling:
UPDATE: Someone over at the House Democrats (the people who run the state party) reminded me that when they were in the minority, they had lots of time to publish their own faxed newsletter. Yes, I remember that well. They’re a little busy these days. No time to invent computer games.
So from 1995-1997 they had a fax. That’s the response?
Second, does anyone notice the problem here? The House Democratic Caucus isn’t the State Party. I respect Madigan though I have a love hate relationship with his brand of machine driven politics. I don’t trust him on a lot of issues, but I respect him. That said, the fortunes of the Illinois House are not the fortunes of the Illinois Democratic Party.
The Republicans are moving forward with a series of initiatives to attract younger and more connected voters. Despite my straying from the reservation when it comes to issues like school funding and attacking Pangle, I want the Democratic Party to win in Illinois because for the most part the Democratic Party is more concerned with investment in education and infrastructure. Certainly there are good folks in the House GOP, but look at Alan Keyes and those who put him in power and forgive me if I don’t trust that party.
The Democrats are missing an opportunity to utilize the netroots for campaigns where it could matter. In the short term, it doesn’t matter, but in the long term, it certainly will. Obama’s campaign was suited to developing this strategy, but the wave took them in a different direction. I don’t begrudge that at all given the way the race has gone, but the Party needs to think about the long term and I can tell you that many electeds could benefit including Senator Durbin who is popular in the blogosphere and I think it’s safe to say that Bean, Renner and Cegelis have outpeformed at least partially due to online efforts. I’m not a triumphalist in saying that all three are doing better than expected only because of the internet because that isn’t true, but it does add a small crucial help to the system.
If nothing else, you could take shots at me for making fun of the Governor.
Oh, wait, the Speaker does that too.
With all due respect, no one votes on the basis of a website.
Could it be better? Probably, but making it a priority is pretty dumb at this point.
And I’m not sure what you mean by “machine driven politics,” but my experience is that this is, simply, identifying supporters and turning them out on election day. The “machine driven” is generally downstate codewords for “Oooooo spooky Chicago.” There is no machine in Chicago outside Daley, Madigan and Burke’s ward. There are some ethnic machines as well, but in all cases all they are doing is effective GOTV.
Republicans are all about fear, race-bating and gay-bating. The party is morally bankrupt. If Pangle was any good, she wouldn’t support her party on the evil things they do in Iraq.
Madigan is right: all the electronic-masturbation in the world doesn’t do as much as shoe leather. Don’t ever forget–Dean lost.
Lots of people communicate and can be motivated on-line. Shoe leather gets is supporters from on-line efforts now days and if you don’t believe it–check out ACT/MoveON/etc.
There’s also another important component in terms of information–look at the tort reform–why isn’t insurance a part of it?
It doesn’t take much to do either.
Machine driven is to me the idea of isolating each race and running them entirely separate of the others–creating a problem in governance, but perpetuating the power. I don’t think it is evil, but I do think it stops Democrats from making many of the changes it needs to.
Sorry Ralph, the Dems poor web site sends a strong message: “We don’t care about the public including members of our party. We don’t want you to become too informed or too involved. Your party leaders have things under control. We’ll call you when we need your votes or your money.”
Indifference to people that want to get involved is an invitation for them to cross the aisle. So-called “electronic-masturbation” was one of the things that got me involved in the campaign this year.
The only thing a political candidate web sites does is allow opposition to troll for information. Arch, you seem like a nice guy with a good heart. But you are like a teacher. Those who know work, those who think they know, teach. No offense, but You are out of your league on this. Cross’ site is nice but I have never seen a real post by an outsider. All the insiders post. Same for Rich Miller’s site. It’s great info, but nothing more. I’d rather spend the money on mail, tv or radio to reach those voters than take my chance on spending $1000’s to reach a voter in a select legislative district via a web site. TV move voters. No study to date has proven web sites do the same.
That’s simply incorrect. First, it can promote stories you want the press to pick up on. Second, it can raise money–not as much as big donors, but it’s relatively cheap. I’m not sure where you get the idea that it’s expensive compared to other media. The Missouri Party, before the personnel were fired, did it and did it cheaply. Roy Temple was using it very effectively to attack the Missouri Republicans before that.
It can recruit volunteers and the relationships can create a two-way form of information. Passionate volunteers can do much of the oppo for free as long as they feel like they can contact someone. Not very good at specific bills, but very good at tracking down quotes.
If you think that voters are passive receptors of information, perhaps a web site isn’t a good idea, but that’s only if you view it as an on-line billboard.
==Arch, you seem like a nice guy with a good heart. But you are like a teacher. Those who know work, those who think they know, teach. No offense
And fuck you. Offense was intended. You want to rely on a study? Who the fuck is going to do that for you? Someone like me.
I’m over 25,000 unique visitors this month and I’m a guy who does this as a hobby. The costs? dirt cheap really. It reaches voters, activists and the press. Most are insiders, but that is significant numbers of people who do matter.
And another one of those ‘teachers’ you derided, significantly used a cheap on-line presence as a key fundraising and outreach mechanism to nearly win the MO-3 against a Carnahan in Missouri.
The Illinois Democratic Party is winning because it has the demographics on its side, but there will be a time when it needs to fight off challenges coming from a strong grass roots operation. Without the electronic tools to organize that effort cheaply, it’ll be at a disadvantage.
Ok professor. Sorry for insulting your thin skin. Unless you run campaigns for a living (I do), you have no idea what you speak. I have had my pollsters in this election and the last ask the following question: Please name the primary source for information about (blank) campaign. TV 59%, radio 22%, direct mail (after 9 pieces of mail hit )8% newspaper 5% , INTERNET less than 1%( website has been up over a year–we actively promote it on mail, and tv). other i.e family, met candidate etc. 5%. It’s one thing to watch the campaign. It is entirely different to be on the field and play. No offense, but stay in the stands. You have a great website, but don’t try to pass yourself off as an campaign operative. Your not.
I didn’t try to asshole. Look, why is it that you think you know my entire background? Or what experiences I have? Your entire rant doesn’t address anything I said either.
If you come in insulting, don’t be surprised to be insulted back. If you don’t like it, don’t be insulting.
Are you tracking your unique visits? Are you doing anything with the site? Or is it a billboard? And I wouldn’t expect it to be the high on the list of primary sources for information, but that also doesn’t mean that television commercials are driving voting behavior that much. Your question isn’t asked the proper way nor given the appropriate controls to tell the difference between behavior and an attitude. That’s pretty basic stuff so you should think about asking more about how to interpret your results.
.
First fucking now asshole? WOW. I hope the little ones are in bed. Run your sorry little behind over to the Pew Institute site and look up some of their polls on voting behavior before you run your very incorrect mouth again. Oh, and have a great night.
How about addressing something I said? Or are you going to continue to argue against something I don’t advocate?
$2 milllion.
$2 million Obama on TV? Not these last 5 days. No way Archie. They be lying to you. I will find out and let you know. BTW, I think you posted this in the wrong place. Also, I’m new to blogging, tell me the questions and I will answer them.
I didn’t mean the last 5 days–but their last ad buy for the end of the cycle was $2 million. About the last 2 weeks total from what I understand.
And I posted it both–blip in the system.
from 10/20 thru today, he has spent +-$509,000. I’ll find out tomorrow what is placed thru election day. Not to say he can’t place more.
Cool. And I’m sorry. I’m very snippy right now–I’ve been dealing with a troll and the election is a few days away. Let’s start this over again.
perfect. We start over. Now tell me what a troll is? (I’m sure your not refering to the ones that live under bridges).
A troll is someone who makes provocative posts to get a rise out others on the internet–see the guy down in the bit about the explosives if you want an example.
he has just under $200k for the rest of the campaign.