Organizing for America, the arm of the Democratic National Committee has become the full-time political and policy advocacy campaign for the Obama Administration according to a report released by TechPresident’s Ari Melber. Having taken control of the 13 million email addresses acquired through willful engagement in his president campaign, OFA has become the “behind-the-scenes” grassroots voice of the White House. This experiment in grassroots organizing by an Administration enters into a new realm of presidential politics…the jury is still out as to whether or not this is effective or even worth the effort.
“Governing with public approval requires a continuing political campaign.” – Patrick Caddell, pollster for President Jimmy Carter and Democratic strategist.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt employed breaking technology, the radio, to convey his message to Americans. By the mid 1950s, half of American households featured a television enabling politics in to the home. In the 1990s, the internet started growing, thanks to Al Gore, and Americans engaged themselves in the digital medium. Now days, we have internet + cell phones + social networks + real-time lifestyles = ALWAYS CONNECTED.
A common theme was the attempt to engage the electorate. It was commonplace for individuals to campaign and lobby their elected officials, but the effort most commonly happened on the local level. As technology progressed, the form of engagement progressed, but now days; this effort is in real time. The Obama White House is utilizing “its technology” like never before to “organize the citizenry With staffed offices established in every state and a talented crew assembled in its headquarters in Washington D.C., the comparisons to other grassroots experiments shows that OFA the most expansive and well-connected form of organizing we have ever seen.
With such an expansive effort of coordination between the White House and the DNC, one must inquire as to whether or not this merely a façade for executing a 4-year reelection campaign. Again, Caddell clearly states that governing with public approval, what is needed to win reelection, requires a continual political campaign.
Is OFA merely the reelection campaign of Barack Obama? I say yes…look at the other side of the coin.
The Tea Party, I contend a grassroots voice for the right, yet its actions, mainly protests, have been decried by Congress and the Democrats and President Obama has even labeled them “Tea Baggers.” Actually, the Tea Party is more grassroots oriented considering its funding is not attached to one of the major parties. Why the blatant double standard in characterization from the majority in Congress? I have my suspicions, but I willfully digress in order to let you devise your own analysis.
In conclusion, I deem the efforts of OFA as noble in its attempt to engage the general electorate in the policy debate, but I think the Administration is playing the most dangerous of political games in striking a divisive tone against the Tea Party, a grassroots organization as well. If the White House and the DNC continue to fund their national effort under the guise of OFA, then they must accept and positively engage the Tea Party followers to a fact-based policy discussion instead of merely discrediting their efforts. In the meantime, it will be interesting to see if the Obama Administration is able to maintain this support in order to re-activate the base in its most vulnerable time – the 2012 President Election.
Do you think the castigation of the Tea Party by the White House and Congressional Democrats is hypocritical considering the immense resources and coordination with OFA?
President Obama has headlined a fundraiser, campaigned publicly, even allowed his senior advisors Axelrod and Plouffe to assist with the re-election campaign of Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick. Coming from similar backgrounds, both grew up in Chicago and attended Harvard Law School, Governor Patrick and President Obama have a special political relationship. President Obama has taken on a personal mission to help save Governor Patrick, who is enduring low approval ratings and facing a tough election.
In the Bay State, one person has defied President Obama’s message. One person has overcome the Obama machine. One person has won the hearts of the citizens of Massachusetts and his name is Senator Scott Brown. Scott Brown campaigned and won based on the message that he was Republican that would stand up to the President’s agenda. Yesterday, Senator Scott Brown used his political clout to endorse fellow Republican Charles Baker for governor that Baker “will bring real change to Beacon Hill and work to restore fiscal sanity to Massachusetts government.”
Thus, we have Senator Scott Brown and President Barack Obama getting ready to go toe-to-toe once again. Political pundits say that if Patrick loses, “many people would say, ‘This is the way to try and beat Barack Obama in 2012.’” Referencing the relative identical campaign themes of Gov. Patrick and Pres. Obama and illustrated by a recent statement by Pres. Obama, “the campaign Deval Patrick built is the same campaign for change that you and I built across this country.” This is the same campaign “theme” that the voter of Massachusetts rejected by electing Senator Scott Brown.
This election will be very interesting to watch over the course of the next few months. Do you think a loss by Governor Patrick will be alarming to President Obama’s prospects in 2012 or is Obama’s candidacy sheltered regardless?
The Nancy Pelosi Fire Bomb
Within hours of Nancy Pelosi proclaiming, “After a year of debate and hearing the calls of millions of Americans we have come to this historic moment. Today we have the opportunity to complete the great unfinished business of our society and pass health insurance reform for all Americans that is a right and not a privilege.”
The Republican National Committee launched a web site called “FirePelosi.com” aimed at raising money to campaign against 40 House Democrats. The 40-hour fundraising campaign (recently extended for 24 hours due to the initial success) has raised $1,297,597. This fundraising effort underscores the Speaker‘s faltering approval ratings.
What is truly remarkable about this effort is that the Republicans are showing their new media expertise. If we reflect on the last year and half, the campaigns of Virginia’s Governor Bob McDonnell, New Jersey’s Governor Chris Christie and Massachusetts’ Senator Scott Brown utilized the new media tools and fundraising efforts revolutionized by the campaign of President Barack Obama. The leveling of this new technological playing field means that 2010 will be very interesting.
"Chalk Board" Humor
Perhaps we are about a week late touching on this topic, but in case, you have not seen this clever idea from MoveOn.org. Glenn Beck has become somewhat of a polarizing figure in the political debate in America, especially on the left side of the aisle. Therefore, the MoveOn.org crowd in cahoots with Brave New Films and SEIUhas created a personalized web video that puts your name on the infamous Beck “Chalk Board.” (Click the previous link for the application) The site also posts automatically to your Facebook account if you choose. Regardless of you political leaning, it is a humorous application.
Tags:
glenn beck,
nancy pelosi,
rnc,
moveon,
democrats,
health care reform,
bob mcdonnell,
chris christie,
scott brown,
barack obama,
seiu,
brave new films
Much ado has been made concerning the successful integration of social media and online outreach (“new” media) into political and issue advocacy campaigns. This is neither a fad nor a generational thing. Social media and online outreach, in my opinion, will replace aspects of the traditional campaigns as the technologies continue to evolve and the audiences continue to grow.
According to Pew Internet and American Life Project, 74% of all American adults (18 and older) use the internet and this number has been growing rapidly ever since 2000. There are countless explanations as to why the shift from traditional media to “new” media is occurring. Whether it is, people’s lives are busier and turn to the online world for convenience sake or the ability to multitask on the internet, the transition is happening and it is happening quickly. Thus, it is better to embrace this shift than be left in the dust.
What does this mean if you are a candidate that is considering running for public office or the executive director of a trade association trying to defeat a piece of unfavorable legislation? It means you need to invest time and resources into “new” media. I am not advocating investing all of your resources into this platform, but it must become a serious consideration in the allocation of funds. The record of accomplishment of new media is exceptional, if utilized correctly. In the past two years think about Bob McDonnell’s campaign or the golden standard of Obama’s campaign.
Again, I am not advocating the abandonment of traditional marketing avenues, but strongly favor integrating “new media” to supplement the efforts. “New media” is cheaper to use and allows your message to be spread in real-time. That being said, it also means you must be in defense mode at all times and must establish a sound strategy, otherwise your efforts could be for not. For my parting thoughts, if integrated correctly, “new media” campaigns can provide a high return on your investment for your efforts, but it will take hard work and lots of patience and a well executed strategy.
