04.07.09 |
Some Thoughts On A Quality GOTV Operation
I had some quality time walking door-to-door recently in NY20 to think about how most Republican campaigns approach GOTV. “Most” is a broad statement and I realize some of you work campaigns in areas where some of the methods I will discuss are not relevant. It is also important to consider the myriad of variables that affect a GOTV operation in preparation and execution. So, just for the sake of conversation, we were talking about a general election where turnout was expected to be between 50-55%. You could take the approach that in a district where you had a partisan registration advantage it would be all about base R turnout (assuming your candidate is winning most of the R’s). Let’s say you had already done your homework and had identified about 15% of the independents as favorable (presumably by a combination of volunteer and paid efforts). Let us also make another assumption that your candidate has a reasonable amount of local volunteers, Generation Joshua kids and maybe a few out-of-state partisans to execute your GOTV plan.
Let’s say you had a 5 day GOTV plan laid out (Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Election day). What to consider next-
· You would sort precincts into walkable and non-walkable for your door-to-door.
· Locations for phone banks. Keep in mind that the best place for phone banks is WHERE the volunteers are and probably not WHERE the press is. This would explain why some of the best GOTV phone bank centers are not at the Campaign HQ.
· Lists. Have you been using Voter Vault or something else? Make sure you have easy access and can print new lists and conduct new sorts based on a changing political situation.
· Campaign literature, paper, pens, clipboards, etc. When and where will you print these thousands of sheets of paper for calls and doors? FLS has great walkbook product I like that prints the list on card stock paper with a corresponding map. Of course if you have the volunteer resources you can just do it yourself with some card stock paper and 3 ring binders. Regardless if you pay for it or do it yourself I would strongly suggest a reusable book system that allows a volunteer to make notes and improve the list as they go.
· Food, stickers, t-shirts, etc. Have enough to keep your volunteers motivated but not so much that it is more than 15% of your total GOTV budget.
Then you would take your list of R’s and favorable Independents and put them into 3 groups, A’s, B’s and C’s.
· A’s will be our rockstars who vote in EVERY election no matter what.
· B’s are our Presidential voters who often skip primaries and off year elections.
· C’s are our new registrants and least likely voters.
Assuming we have enough lines and volunteers we will start with C universe on Friday. When complete we will then call the B’s and C’s. When that is done we will call the A’s B’s and C’s. So our weakest voters will get 3 touches and our strongest ones get at least one.
For door-to-door let’s assume that we can get people to drink the Kool-Aid and do multiple shifts over the 5 days. Ideally we would pair local volunteers with out-of town ones to prevent mistakes and getting lost. Then on Friday when they began going door-to-door they will be keeping the same list document over the course of each day.
· So if Bob the local volunteer is paired up with Heather the out-of-town volunteer on Friday they walk their precinct keeping notes on who they talked to, who needs an extra push (maybe even a call from the candidate) and who has already voted early or absentee. They also touch base at the phonebank to see who called their precinct and compare notes.
· On Saturday Bob coaches football and has to cut his grass so Heather from out of town is paired with someone else but she now has the list and first hand experience with the precinct.
· Sunday Bob is back with Heather as they continue looking to contact people they missed on Friday and Saturday. They are now gliding thru the precinct efficiently skipping the hostiles and touch base again with the undecideds.
· Monday Bob has to work but Heather is still on the trail and working with a new volunteer hitting houses and firming up C list voters. Heather is now on a first name basis with some of the voters in their precinct and she has a great list that is full of notes and updates.
· Tuesday Bob is back with Heather with their list in the neighborhood they have already walked several times. Meanwhile Connie (another local volunteer) has been at the polling site for their precinct since it opened. She has kept a list of all who have voted and during lulls she texts their voter ID number to Heather. As Heather and Bob walk the precinct they strike names of those that have voted to improve the efficiency of their list. They are ratcheting up turnout and increasing the GOP margin by a couple of points.
At this point of course I have only covered the traditional methods. I would assume that emails, texts, Facebook events and other online communications are going on concurrently with this operation. The important thing to remember is that most GOTV operations I have seen have failed not because of lack of volunteers or lack of cash but because of a lack of thorough planning. All of the things I have covered are not rocket science or overly complex they just require planning and follow thru.
On Tuesday this week as I headed to grab a coke on a break between precincts I happened to drive by the community center where the precinct was voting. I saw a man walking in that I had woken up from his nap. While talking to him at his door I clearly got the impression that voting was not a priority today. To see him walking into those doors to vote made all my work worth it. When Jim Tedisco is sworn into Congress later this month it will REALLY be worth it.
@chrisfaulkner
Filed in Social Media Platoon :: Written by chrisfaulkner |
| Comments (1,717) |
04.01.09 |
Inside Scoop on NY 20
I am beat.
With memories of Washington State 2004 and Minnesota 2008 looming in my mind here are some things to consider.
It’s 3:23 AM so forgive the horrible grammar and even worse sentence structure. Chris Faulkner P.S. Somehow I knew wearing my “Coleman Recount Team” polar fleece today was a bad idea … |
| Comments (1,780) |
03.25.09 |
I’m not a Ron Paul hater…really
I was teaching a candidate school recently in Minnesota and wandered into some dangerous territory. Our firm is often hired to do political education and one of our bigger clients is American Majority We teach several sessions that focus on Communications, Campaign Plans, Fundraising, Social Media and Grassroots Organizing (all ppts are available to download and steal here SlideShare ) The last session of the day focuses on Grassroots Organizing Online and Offline. One of the themes I present is how most grassroots movements are viral and require a “host”. I then go on to say that Ron Paul was too weak of a “host” to carry his “movement”. Full disclosure – I was a mail vendor for Fred Thompson’s campaign (that is a whole other discussion) and I did not support Ron Paul. Having said that, I was constantly intrigued by his supporters and his “movement”. I work in the business of political campaigns and like to think I am a student of how they work on a logistics and business end. So for the purposes of this post lets skip by issues and just talk nuts and bolts. First I have to take a dig at my strident Libertarian friends who loved Dr. Paul – learn a lesson from him 1. Run as a Libertarian for Congress and lose 2. Run as a Republican for Congress and win 3. Run as a Republican for President and get to take the stage, be in the debates and air your issues Pretty safe to say no one is accusing Dr. Paul of “selling out” even though he ran as a Republican. I can already feel the hate that point is going to draw… Moving on, Dr. Paul raised over $34 million dollars of which over 99% came from individual small donors. This is a supremely impressive feat for a guy who, candidly, has below average public speaking ability, no message discipline, fairly inexperienced campaign organization and barely eked into double digits in most public polling. So his campaign was obviously not as much about the “product” of the candidate. He benefited from a couple powerful motivators; 1. A disgruntled and angry free-market fiscal conservative base 2. A weak field of Republican options for President 3. A core Libertarian group that was already online $34 million, unfortunately, is still not enough to get serious traction in a modern Presidential Primary. That is compounded by the fact that his campaign spent almost 50% of their cash on “Administrative” expenses. That is just unacceptable. Barely a third of the dollars spent went towards actual voter contact. Ok, now all my grassroots friends can holler and say “of course that is what an evil money grubbing political consultant would say!” But folks let’s get real, modern campaigns are not small mom and pop businesses any more…especially ones for President. They can start that way but at some point you have to bring in experienced folks to run the ship…having said that the grassroots are still vital and important to success, but they have to have experienced leadership. Looking back at Howard Dean circa 2003…the guy almost became the democratic nominee and was much more viable than Paul. Both had strong grassroots movements but Dean had some adults in charge at HQ. Ultimately, I think both Dean and Paul were not strong enough vessels for their movements. So what happened to many of those early Deaniacs? They became the base of Barack Obama’s underdog campaign in early 2007. So why was Barack successful where Dean was not? 1. Obama is a FAR superior candidate “product” than Howard Dean 2. Obama’s team of very experienced political folks had a whole list of lessons learned from the Dean Campaign 3. The online left-roots had only grown larger and stronger since 2003 In short I would propose that Barack Obama would NEVER have gotten off the ground had it not been for Howard Dean. So if you were a Ron Paulie in 2007 what should you be preparing for? Look for the well spoken Liberty candidate. Can you imagine if Dr. Paul had the TV appeal or speaking skills of a Mike Pence or Jeff Flake? There will be a Republican candidate running in 2012 (in all seriousness they have probably already started) that will carry many of Dr. Paul’s limited government issues, learned from his mistakes and have a more experienced team around them. Don’t know who that “Candidate X” is yet but if you find them let me know. Candidate X is looking for your passion, your love of liberty and yes your dollars too. That candidate will finally be worth the absolutely incredible effort that so many Paul supporters poured into the 2008 primary. Be looking for that candidate because they are probably already looking for you. Filed in Social Media Platoon :: Written by chrisfaulkner |
| Comments (694) |
02.12.09 |
FaceBook Drops NoStimulus.com Ad After Complaints
Digg.com started as a place to promote stories ordinary people found newsworthy to see if others agreed. That was done by voting a story up or “Digg-ing” it. Another useful site feature if Digg users find duplicate, badly written or inaccurate stories, is “Bury”. A Bury cancels out a Digg. The potential for abuse is obvious. The practice of such abuse permitted by Digg’s operators is legendary. Left leaning stories are Dugg while Right leaning stories are Buried by aptly named “Bury Brigades” which prowl upcoming stories for anything smelling of Conservatism. Digg did nothing to address complaints of their idea being hijacked and gamed. Along with many others, for exactly that reason, I left Digg years ago. A similar scenario may be brewing at FaceBook. The Social Media giant approved and accepted an ad from Americans for Prosperity touting their NoStimulus.com site. NoStimulus.com features material supporting Americans who find the Stimulus Package dangerous and harmful. One feature was a petition to the Senate asking members to oppose it. Due to vigorous promotion, despite being hosted across 10 servers, the site was overwhelmed with traffic. Over 400,000 signatures will be delivered to the Senate this week. Success by organizations standing for Individual Liberty, Free Markets, Limited Government and Low Taxes cannot be unchallenged. CNS News is reporting FaceBook has pulled an ad promoting NoStimulus.com which they had previously approved. Not because ad content changed. That remains same content FaceBook approved. What changed was “public” input. FaceBook prohibits
FaceBook cleared AFP’s copy in light of these. So what changed? CNS goes on to report,
Go to AFP’s site. What is misleading? The ad promoted a petition drive and that’s what people found when they got there. What is misleading is the premise that AFP is somehow less than trustworthy for having run the ad. What is misleading is the suggestion AFP deceived FaceBook. What is misleading is any suggestion that FaceBook is not complicit in this. When can Americans expect the FaceBooks out there to tell busybodies to shut up and sit down? When will they have the spine to state the truth that “offend” is not the moral equivalent of “mislead”? I’m offended that FaceBook did what they did. Does that mean FaceBook will reinstate the ad? As a FaceBook user and AFP supporter, I want to know what was misleading? When different agendas compete, there’s going to be friction. I have no problem with that. When one side actually does “mislead”, I do object to that. Unfortunately for Americans, whether it’s the Fairness Doctrine, the preponderance of Left leaning thought in Universities and traditional media, paid blockers harassing petitions signature gatherers or any number of other examples, the Left cannot win a fair fight so they don’t fight fair. If they did, they’d get shellacked as Americans generally disagree with their actual views. As my colleague Kevin Jackson at The Black Sphere notes,
The latest skirmish seems more of the same. They cannot win on content; time to bring the slander, smoke and mirrors, distortions and lies. It’s too soon to tell if FaceBook is actually adopting the Digg.com model for irrelevance. Perhaps they’ll grow a spine and refuse to serve as a tool for the Left. Stay tuned … Filed in Facebook :: Written by Ken Marrero |
| Comments (1,455) |
02.03.09 |
We knew Google was evil… but this is just nuts!
These “junk results” (this is what I consider them) basically show Google.com as the referrer, and include no data on the keywords or keyphrases searched to reach our pages. Usually what we see is the full URL for the search query, which gives us keyword data and in turn helps us understand our audience and what they’re looking for. At first I had no idea why this was happening, and my first instinct was to blame GetClicky for providing the junk data. However, when I logged in today I saw a link to this GetClicky blog post. I’m not going to quote any of the post here because unless you read the entire page you might end up a bit confused. In summary, though, Google is testing a change in the way they handle referring URL’s that essentially blocks analytics programs from being able to track search data. What this means for you and I is that if Google proceeds with this (and we’re already seeing it roll out into production stage), you and I will have no clue what people are searching for when they find our pages. And if that doesn’t already get your blood boiling, here is the real kicker… Google can STILL track data and provide it via Google Analytics. Why? Because Google still has this data internally, so there is really no reason to assume they can’t push it into Google analytics. In other words… Google appears to be telling webmasters and anyone who tracks search data that you have to use Google Analytics or you simply can’t track search data at all. Which, in effect, might render stat trackers obsolete. The Smackdown blog has a great rundown of the situation. I highly recommend you have a read. I think this is a really low blow if it turns out to be a permanent change. What say you? Filed in Google :: Written by Eric Odom |
| Comments (2,106) |
During the past few days I’ve noticed a lot of junk results in our 01.23.09 |
Lessons from the 2008 Trenches #4
Alicia Davis is a principal with TargetPoint Consulting. TargetPoint is a leader in the field of micro targeting and, unlike so many pretenders out there, has written most of the conventional wisdom on how to do advanced market segmentation at the individual level. Alicia joined Target Point Consulting from the Republican National Committee where she most recently served as Regional Political Director. Prior to returning to the Republican National Committee, Alicia served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for External Affairs and Communications at the United States Department of Commerce.
As my main man Ron Burgundy would say “She is…kind of a big deal.” CF – What campaign on the GOP side showed real innovation in fundraising? CF – What campaign on the GOP side had the most effective use of New Media? CF – What candidate on the GOP side best leveraged earned media to get traction? CF – What campaign on the GOP side showed the greatest comeback? CF – What campaign on the GOP side had the most effective GOTV organization? CF – What GOP candidate has the biggest ideas for the future of our party (even if they lost)? CF – What GOP campaign was really good at the small stuff? (yard signs, bumper stickers, t-shirts, etc) |
| Comments (881) |
01.23.09 |
Lessons from the 2008 Trenches #3
The ongoing RNC Chairman debate is interesting to watch. I have been an employee and vendor to the RNC and really think there are a lot of folks with a lot of opinions, both good and bad, about the RNC. What seems to be in short supply is people who actually know what goes on inside the building. That will be another post… One of my favorite parts is the Victory Department. What is the Victory Department? In a nutshell, they are the folks that plan, train and monitor GOTV and AB/EV programs around the country. Notice I did not say implementation, that is for the campaigns to do. Michael Beach has been the National Victory Director for the last two years. Michael got his start in Ohio, the mother of Presidents…and great political staff, as a field staffer he then moved to Nevada where he headed up GOTV and AB Chase programs for the State Party. In 07 he was brought in to take a hard look at the metrics of what we were (and were not) accomplishing with our voter contact activities. Few people in the building have killed, or tried to kill, more “sacred cows” in their time than Michael Beach. Here is the results of our chat. CF – What were some of the biggest changes in application and technology that our side saw when compared to 2004 and 2006? MB – There were many technical advances that were made this cycle, but the two that stand out to me were in data gathering and volunteer productivity. Despite only having a field operation active for 20 weeks in 2008, we were able to collect 10 times the amount of data that was collected in all of 2003 and 2004. Improvements in volunteer efficiency played a major role in the collection of data. Improvements such as our VoIP system allowed our volunteers to go from making an average of 30 calls per hour to an average that approached 38 calls per hour. CF – Was the base engaged? How so? MB – On the volunteer side the base was definitely engaged. The goals for our volunteer GOTV program were very aggressive and nothing that we accomplished would have been possible without the support of our base. Our volunteer program made over twice as many volunteer contact attempts during the post-convention period in 2008 as was made during the same period in 2004. CF – Which states showed the greatest adaptation to new techniques and tech for GOTV? MB – The majority of our states ran very effective GOTV programs, but the states that stood out to me were the ones that were not top tier targets in 2004, but were very competitive in 2008. North Carolina (1400+% increase in data collection over 2004) setup an excellent operation despite starting a few weeks later than the larger group of target states. Virginia (500+% improvement in data collection over 2004) was able to get buy in from a wide variety of down ballot candidates and integrate them into our GOTV program. California (1500+% increase in data collection over 2004) provided a great amount of output into the state during the summer and then provided other western states with significant help during the GOTV period. Following the November election we moved into Georgia and setup a full GOTV operation for the Senate runoff. Despite not having a great deal of recent history running statewide GOTV efforts that involved the RNC we were able to work with the NRSC, GAGOP and Chambliss campaign to setup an excellent program in just a few weeks. The statistic from this race that sticks out the most to me is the fact that we collected over twice as many AB votes from our GOTV universe in the runoff as were collected during the general despite a significant drop in overall turnout. CF – Which campaigns showed the best ability cooperate with other campaigns to achieve better turnout? MB – There was buy in from day one from the majority of our targeted and senate candidates. By the summer of 2007 the RNC had met with over 35 campaigns to discuss the Victory program. The next challenge for us is to get better engagement with non-federal statewide races as well as state senate and house races. CF – What was the most valuable tool in the GOP GOTV tool box this year? MB – AB/EV data collection was the most valuable tool for our GOTV program this cycle. The RNC and McCain campaign devoted significant resources (labor and technology) towards the collection of AB/EV data. We were able to identify the majority of voters that had cast an absentee or early vote and then they were removed from our paid and volunteer universes. CF – Which states showed the most improvement in GOTV from 2004 to 2008? MB – Colorado, Maine, and Ohio are excellent example of states that made improvements across the board from 2004. These three states all made large improvements in their data collection over 2004, but their AB/EV programs were the ones that really stood out. Each of these states was collecting data for almost every county/municipality on a daily basis despite the fact that there was no statewide file. This allowed us to no exactly where we stood in terms of votes in the bank and also gave us the opportunity to be reactive to what was actually happening on the ground. CF – Which states showed the most innovation and use of tech in their GOTV? MB – Florida has taken all of their experiences with AB/EV to develop an excellent reporting system that allows you to identify the AB/EV broken up by several variables. Nevada tested a very aggressive online voter registration program that we feel will play a major role in future elections. Missouri utilized a phone from home program that had a few features that were more advanced than even the neighbor to neighbor tool that the Obama campaign utilized. The list of states that stood out from a technology standpoint could have been longer, but our states did such an excellent job of sharing best practices with other states, that good ideas were quickly adopted on a national scale. The ability to move best practices out on a national scale is the main reason that I feel that we need to have a very strong national Victory team in DC to compliment the work that our state programs our doing. Filed in Social Media Platoon :: Written by chrisfaulkner |
| Comments (658) |
01.23.09 |
Lessons from the 2008 Trenches #2
Part 2 of our series was with Erin VanSickle. She is the communications director for the Republican Party of Florida. She served as the RPOF’s press secretary during the ’06 election cycle and served as press secretary for the Florida Senate Majority Office prior to that. Florida GOP’s Lessons from the Trenches CF Tell me about Florida? EV Due to its sheer size, the State of Florida necessitates more than retail politicking—it requires any statewide campaign to have a methodical and energized ground game that can conquer ten media markets and a message that resonates with an incredibly diverse population—Hispanics from distinct countries of origin, African Americans, Veterans, seniors, the Jewish community, and military families, to name a few. This vast state compels campaigns to master a complex political strategy that incorporates the ever-critical I-4 corridor, “condo commandos,” Hispanic Little Havana, and conservative Northwest Florida. As a political party, the Republican Party of Florida is here to provide support, guidance, infrastructure, and fundraising for campaigns, from the presidential campaign down to the Broward County Sheriff’s race. CF What does Obama’s victory in Florida over the McCain campaign say about the political ground game in Florida? EV It shows that this was a perfect Democrat year. The Obama campaign simply had more resources. The Obama camp out-spent McCain 7-1 in Florida, an extreme TV state where TV advertising is critical to success. I would note, however, that because of the Republican team in Florida, McCain came within 21/2 points of winning Florida—which says a lot about the folks who worked tirelessly across Florida on behalf of the Republican ticket. Additionally, while Florida Democrats were awash in cash, political operatives, and newly registered Democrat voters, the Florida Democrat Party utterly failed to take advantage of it, defeating not one single Republican incumbent in the Florida House or Senate. Congressmen Gus Bilirakis and Bill Young both got 60+% in Tampa – an area Obama carried. In Miami – another area Obama carried – Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart both fended off credible, well-funded, DCCC-backed candidates. I think our performance across the board bodes very well for the Florida GOP. CF How did the Florida GOP stack up against the Democrats as far as mobilizing grassroots supporters and organizing GOTV? EV Under the leadership of our Executive Director, Political Director, and 72-hour Director, Florida led the nation in the number of volunteer voter contacts six of the last seven weeks of the 2008 Election Cycle. Through our volunteer efforts, we contacted more voters in 2008 than in 2004, touching more than four million voters this year. We made over one million phone calls and knocked on more than 100,000 doors during the 72-Hour Program. The RPOF also created a new Absentee Ballot Request Walk Program and implemented Absentee Chase efforts, which were nationalized by the RNC. Additionally, we installed VOIP phones and used bubble sheets with cell phones to better capture data on targeted voters. On the grassroots communications front, we launched a text message pilot program of using text messages to contact volunteers and voters. We also upgraded to an enterprise level blast email distribution system that allows for more segmentation in selecting email recipients. Additionally, each Victory staffer was provided with an account and personalized segments for each county to aide in volunteer recruitment and retention and to provide greater communication between field offices and volunteers. CF Do you think you utilized New Media effectively? EV I think there is always more we can do. For example, we are going to have a hands-on training session at our Annual Meeting in January to show folks how to use text-messaging. Keep in mind that many of our grassroots activists are older Floridians who haven’t necessarily had much experience with cell phones, the Internet, email, or social networking. That said, we’ve accomplished a lot this election cycle, especially this year, communicating to both grassroots supporters and the media via Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, our Conventional Wisdom blog, and text messaging. The challenge is to integrate them all together. We’ve done some comprehensive prospecting, cleaned up and built our e-mail lists, implemented the new email system I referred to earlier, and synchronized fundraising efforts. We also advertised online on carefully-targeted sites to maximize the effect. I am especially proud of our Conventional Wisdom blog (http://rpofconventionalwisdom.blogspot.com/), it was an instant hit and picked up by the media. Disclaimer—Mark Halperin’s The Page was our inspiration and I hope he checks our blog every now and then to see how we’re stacking up. We originally launched the blog during the Democrat National Convention (hence the name “Conventional Wisdom”) to provide a running commentary of video messages, articles/updates, and exclusive political cartoons to bracket the Democrats more creatively, but we ultimately kept it going because it was popular. We also created a Voter Action Center through our website, a one-stop shop allowing users to register to vote, request an absentee ballot, find Early Voting/Election Day voting locations, sign up to volunteer, find their local field office, etc. The VAC utilized Google Maps so it was helpful for voters. CF How did you leverage earned media? EV We quickly found that “earned media” is often synonymous with “new media” and we used it to our advantage to communicate with the grassroots and the media. For example, we created a web ad once Tim Mahoney’s multiple affairs were exposed utilizing his own tape-recorded voice (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCp9mNtZkQM); the media loved it and it fired up the grassroots the way no email response ever could. We had over 2500 hits the first day alone, which is pretty impressive for a state party web ad. We also launched several microsites, including a Real World spinoff highlighting a Democrat congressional candidate. Our Democrat fundraiser tracker microsite (http://rpof.org/dem/) garnered national attention; this was back when the Democrat presidential candidates were boycotting Florida because of the early primary. Remember that they could come hold fundraisers in Florida, but the DNC forbade them from holding grassroots events. So we illustrated the hypocrisy and ensured that the negative narrative continued. Once Obama was the nominee, we rolled out the welcome mat for him for his first trip to the state, reminding people that he had not campaigned in Florida; the music was “Welcome Back Cotter” and it certainly got in your head. That microsite also got us quite a bit of national media. CF What new fundraising techniques did you use? EV We tried our hand at low-dollar asks based on news and events. For example, we launched a “67 Days, 67 Counties” 67 days out from the election, with a goal of getting folks to donate a dollar for each of Florida’s 67 counties, based on the fact we only had 67 days left in the campaign. As economic times got tougher though, we returned to more traditional fundraisers instead of asking mainstream Floridians to donate. That said, we will continue to identify news stories, holidays, events, etc. that we can take advantage of for non-traditional fundraising. CF What should readers/bloggers know about the Florida GOP? EV We do things a little differently here in Florida. Under Governor Crist and Chairman Greer’s leadership, we’ve focused on putting partisan rhetoric aside and instead running on our record. It’s worked for us, keeping the Governor’s approval at record-breaking highs and allowing us to build the party during these Democrat-friendly times. Florida was a bright spot on a relatively tough election day for the GOP, with zero Republicans defeated in the Florida Legislature and a strong showing among our Congressional candidates. Even in the extraordinarily-Democrat Broward County, the first Republican to win a countywide election in 30 years was elected Sheriff. Look, Floridians voted to maintain overwhelming Republican majorities in the State House and Senate, voted strongly to cut taxes, and voted to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. I think this demonstrates that we’re doing something right to get our message out, and I’m proud of that. Filed in Social Media Platoon :: Written by chrisfaulkner |
| Comments (633) |
01.23.09 |
Why Haven’t You Customized Your Twitter Background
As more and more people get on Twitter, you really have to do something to make it stand out. In this post I want to show you how to “pimp” your Twitter background. I bet you already tried to have your own customized Twitter background, but you could not get the images and the text placed correctly on the screen, and the outcome was a jumbled mess. Take a minute and check out my new Twitter profile (and Follow me if you aren’t already). I worked with a designer friend of mine, and she helped me knock out a really slick one. I am sure you see how much more interesting it can be (and market yourself in the process), let’s start with the measurements. The width between the left browser edge and the left edge of the white Twitter posts area is around 245 pixels. On the other hand, the width between the right browser edge and the right edge of the white Twitter posting area is 250 pixels. So when creating the design of your new background, you should leave five pixels dead space on both sides of the white Twitter posting area. These are the general standard measures accepted by majority of Twitter background designers: Image width: 1255 pixels I assume you are trying to build a personal brand via Twitter. Therefore your custom Twitter background should represent your logo, your photo, and a little bit about yourself. Try to include something about your free market and conservative beliefs to help promote the movement. Starting the Background Design Photoshop, Fireworks, or even the free Paint program that comes with Windows, it does not matter. All you need to do is to create a new graphic that is 1255 x 555. This is going to be the background image for your Twitter profile. You need to leave Twitter post area empty. If you know how to use a guide, then create a vertical guide at 450 pixels and another vertical guide at 1005 pixels. The space between these two represent the Twitter post area. If you don’t know how to use a guide, just draw two imaginary vertical guides and leave the are between them blank. You need to locate your photo, your logo, and any other information you want to include out of this zone so that it will not clash with the Twitter post area. You may try a few times for the best result, so you should be patient. Done? Now save your graphic as either a GIF or JPG file. Make sure that the file size is less than 800K. This is the maximum size allowed by Twitter for a background image. Now you just have to upload your new background. Note: You may have to change the design colors to match your new design. Filed in Twitter :: Written by brianhorn |
| Comments (1,566) |
01.03.09 |
Free Form or Focused?
I’ve been mulling over a question for a few weeks. “Which Social Media strategy provides the best community value – Free Form or Focused?” Dictionary.com defines “Community” in part as “A social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists.” Social Media taps directly into that definition as it helps us find, evaluate and associate with those who share our passions. FaceBook, StumbleUpon, the soon-to-be-out-of-Beta RootsHQ and most Social Media tools allow users to create groups around a topic to build community. But how do I define my group to be of greatest value to the greatest number of people? Too narrow a definition and l have no members. Too broad and my community is so big it stops being a meaningful community. It’s a tricky proposition. It may seem you’ve perfectly defined your community and your results may still prove disappointing. Top Conservatives on Twitter (TCOT) is an excellent example. The group seems to be meaningfully defined: Conservatives on Twitter. The challenge is found in how “Conservative” is defined for group purposes. Facing a similar challenge to define “Conservative bloggers”, The Tennessee ConserVOLiance opted for “political Conservatives blogging primarily politics”. This excluded Conservatives mainly blogging something other than politics. It reduced group size but provided a precise identity and mission for members and visitors. TCOT chose a broader definition of “all Conservatives on Twitter”. This expanded the group but reduced value to the community as members must sift through a lot of tweets to get to what they became members to find. Groups provide value to both founders and members. Why I join a community may not be the same reason it was created. I like TCOT because it connects me with individual political activists. But I dislike having to eliminate non-politics tweeting Conservatives and, more recently, Conservative organizations, to find them. I prefer a more focused community and find myself less involved at TCOT than I might be because I do. Others may be delighted to find so many Conservatives offering input on a wide range of matters in a more free-form fashion. Yet surely some who would have been vibrant, contributing members at TCOT move on completely for exactly this reason. They lose the value in TCOT’s community and TCOT loses the value of their involvement as well. For those of us finding and founding new communities, it’s a good object lesson. Think through the scope of your community. Take time to discuss it with peers. See how similar groups dealt with the issue. Make sure you’re comfortable with the community definition on the front end, whether you’re a finder or a founder. You’re going to be living with it for a while. If it’s true “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”, time spent defining your community will pay off later in reduced “medical” care. Blue Collar Muse Filed in Mass Collaboration, Social Media Tools, Twitter :: Written by Ken Marrero |
| Comments (789) |
