MyDD :: Atwater & '05 Turnout

Atwater & '05 Turnout

by Jerome Armstrong, Tue Sep 06, 2005 at 11:58:06 PM EST

Greg Stevens (who is running the negative ad show in NJ for the Republicans) should have listened to what Lee Atwater said on his deathbed. He didn't:

Forrester's media strategist is Greg Stevens, a former press secretary to Kean and one of the most successful and sometimes controversial political consultants in Republican politics.

Stevens, whose firm produced the "Swift Boat" TV ads questioning John Kerry's heroism, is recuperating from an operation to remove a brain tumor but is said to still be calling the strategy shots for Forrester.

Neither side is expected to spare any punches in the weeks ahead.

Wilson says he wishes politics wasn't the blood sport it has become. He remembers Ray Bateman, the 1973 GOP candidate for governor, whom he met when he was 10 years old. Bateman, he recalls, was a friend of Brendan Byrne's before he ran against him and they are still good friends today.

Asked if he isn't part of the problem, Wilson says, "I don't know a single person in politics who would not prefer to talk issues and run positive campaigns. Unfortunately, the consumers - that is the voters and the media - don't want to hear that kind of stuff."

Well, at least Stevens will go down fighting. Wilson is full of it. The GOP's chances in NJ (and this relates to VA as well) revolve around this key sentence in the story:

The GOP strategy is to copy the techniques used by national Republicans to defeat liberal Democrats in moderate states, such as Ohio - the key state in President Bush's re-election victory.

That's driving down turnout for the Democrat, and voter-segmentation & the 72 hour turnout program driven by the RNC.

From what I've heard, Demzilla is dead. Kerry dropped the ball (and it hasn't gotten picked up) on this in '04 by hiring 80's throwback consultants that said it wasn't needed, and that they just needed to concentrate on "domination" through the last week on the networks in the key states. They met their turnout model. I'll give them that one. But that the Republicans exceeded it is telling us about something that works better than what we do. If the Republicans manage to win both the NJ and VA GOV races based on higher turnout of the base, then Dean's DNC will have lost to Mehlman's RNC. Sure, we need to build-up our party throughout the nation, but that voter-segmented targeting is where the Republican edge is right now.

Tags: Republicans (all tags)

Permalink :: 25 Comments :: Post a Comment

Background info (none / 0)

A little background please. What do you mean when you refer to "Demzilla" and "voter-segmented targeting"?

Thanks.

TAKE BACK OUR PARTY: Democracy Bonds

by LiberalFromPA on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 12:08:06 AM EST

Re: Background info (none / 0)

This is a blog, not that WaPost... try wikipedia or google.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 12:15:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

It's a perfectly valid question. I'd kind of like to know what the hell you're talking about, too.

by craverguy on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 12:23:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

Why the hell should I have to spell it all out?

Ah, here ya go.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 12:38:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (3.00 / 1)

In the future, you might want to try using hyperlinks in the post itself. That is, after all, one of the advantages of hypertext... you can link to definitions of the terms with having to "spell it all out."

by Constantine on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 01:38:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

Because you want people to understand what you are saying?

It's called communication.

by billcoop4 on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 05:05:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

You should spell it out because, I assume, you want to expand your readership beyond your own geeky reference group. If you just want to talk to yourself, that's your choice, but you won't have much influence that way.

I created an account here just to tell you this, but if this is your attitude, I don't expect to be around much.

by David in NY on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 12:42:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

"Voter-segmented targeting" is gibberish as far as I can tell, but what I think Jerome means is the direct marketing style voter targeting, where your analysis is based more on individually expressed preferences than on immutable personal characteristics. He can correct me if I'm wrong, though.

Bleeding Heartland - Iowa's Progressive Community-oriented blog

by ItsDrewMiller on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 08:42:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

I'm referring to both the direct marketing style voter targeting, and the polling that proceeds it which segments the voters for that sort of targeting which makes the difference in a close race. That's why we never got Demzilla off the ground-- because our DC pollsters are too lazy or ineffectual to even do that type of political polling (it's not demanded of them too). Targeting them is just the execution. The Republicans excel at a particular type of voter segmentation-- those Republicans with low brand loyalty. Typically, the Democratic model has been to blast over the networks to convince those voters with no brand loyalty. We're not even playing in the same decade.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 09:24:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Demzilla and Data Mart (none / 0)

As I recall, Demzilla was a database of 2 million or so Democratic Donors and activists; Data Mart was a database of all registered and eligible voters. That was the plan, anyway.

The RNC gathering church enrollment records is a counterpart to this -- lists with high potential for being turned into GOP voters.

The Democrats do the same crappy thing every election -- buy the voter registration lists from the government, and throw away the corrected information gathered by grassroots volunteers after election day.

The Denver Democrats are trying to revitalize their grassroots, by reviving their precinct organization. It's not a bad idea -- but without a message, better lists, and a real strategy for reaching distinct demographic groups, it's just more of the same old same old.

It's like the Democrats are a football team with one play -- run off tackle and gain three feet in a cloud of dust. Since it didn't work last time, let's do it again this time.

I've been trying to get the local Dems to integrate the data from Cole's cross reference Directory with the voter registration lists -- that way, volunteers walking the neighborhoods will have the most up to date data on who lives where, and be able to have an effective voter registration program with unaffiliated non voters. After offering the suggestion in our precinct group, I finally ran into the guy whose doing the database revamp -- it was the first he'd heard of it. Typical politics -- insiders smile and thank you for your suggestions, and immediately throw them in the trash.

Here's hoping Howard Dean restarts the Demzilla and Data Mart projects -- lord knows we need them.

by ck on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 11:36:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

Thanks for the response. Does this mean that we did/do have the marketing data (magazines, cars, etc.) but just never figured out which archetypes went with which voting behavior? If that's how it worked out, that's pretty pathetic.

Bleeding Heartland - Iowa's Progressive Community-oriented blog

by ItsDrewMiller on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 01:17:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Background info (none / 0)

Yea, that, and the data wasn't kept up.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 02:42:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

Can't agree with you Jerome.

The two governor races are suprisingly un-indicative of what happens next. Don't forget that in 2001, Dems won both and then were rat-f*cked in the 2002 election.

That's not to say that killing off Demzilla wasn't the bad idea it is...or that voter segmentation isn't important. Dean's legacy as DNC Chair largely will be shaped by what happens in the midterms. That's where his leadership and strategy will be indicative.

Corzine's ties to McGreevey appears too small to me to hold up his chances to be governor.

by risenmessiah on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 02:15:45 AM EST

Re: Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

The DNC may be losing to the RNC, but name for me please the time when that was not so. What's important is that Dean has to raise more money than the guys who came before him, which he is.

So far this year, his fundraising is vastly outpacing what McAuliffe's DNC was able to get in 2004. 2004 was an election year. 2005 isn't.

If Dean is doing this well in a non-election year, i expect he'll break records in 2006.

by craverguy on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 02:36:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

Umm, no. Check your numbers.

Bleeding Heartland - Iowa's Progressive Community-oriented blog

by ItsDrewMiller on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 08:21:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

I am checking my numbers. Specifically, I'm looking at the news article I saw recently entitled "Dean DNC Breaks 2004 Record."

by craverguy on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 08:57:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

That specific phrase doesn't show up in google. The DNC is raising about 1 million a week though last I heard, whereas the DNC raised almost 1 million a day in 2004. Do you have a link to show where you're getting your facts?

Bleeding Heartland - Iowa's Progressive Community-oriented blog

by ItsDrewMiller on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 01:09:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

Did you read my last post about their being bellweather?

Sure, I'd agree with that assessment.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 08:37:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dean DNC Losing to Mehlman's RNC (none / 0)

Yeah, I did read that. (Or at least I think I did.)

But I thought you were extrapolating that these gubernatorial contests in 2005 would cement Dean or Mehlman's legacy.

The Virginia race has captured everyone's imagination but if Kaine loses its because Warner didn't walk around with him and say..."he's my boy". Northern Virigina is even more "blue" now than in 2001...and the traditional Democrat bases in Vuh-gin-ya are still there. Additionally, Kilgore is using 1980s style issues (like the death penalty) to wring out the vote.

Also, the whole "Exurbia" strategy of 2004 in regard to voter segmentation was sort of a joke. It it existed because when younger voters stay in school longer, they are unable to seek out affordable housing and settle down as quickly as those with only a high school education or a BA. By 2008, the "exurbs" may be all people who are looking for affordable housing, and they might not all be "red staters".

Add in the gas price metric and you'll see the Republican target someone else in '08...but they haven't decided completely yet who that is. There's a desire by Mehlman to attack strength by hitting minorities but there's also a reluctance to do that and concentrate instead on women and Hispanics.

by risenmessiah on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 02:14:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hispanics and Exurbia (none / 0)

That's who they will continue to try and hit. They see white people flocking to the outer suburbs to escape the higher taxes and minorities. This is there type of people and they know it. Many of them are not political at all, but still care about some issues, in particular taxes.

They will continue to hit Hispanics because they obviously have to. Security is the only way they attempt to persuade more women, and assuming nothing crazy happens (I hope to God nothing does), their numbers will not be as good in 2008 as 2004.

by Eric11 on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 05:07:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Taxes (none / 0)

High gas prices are little consolation for lower taxes. In addition, the tax burden is most beneficial if the metropolitan area spreads over multiple states, instead of just counties or cities.

I'm not sure what exurbian paradise is due for an incoming assault of my collegiate pals about to be turned loose from grad school. All relocated for work, not for optional reasons. Still, states like Colorado could find themselves turning indigo after being purple before long.

Ken Mehlman is eager to break into the black community, but I think other Republicans are less eager and want to concentrate on Hispanics. We'll get some idea next year of course. This year though, it's going to be all eyes on Virginia.

by risenmessiah on Thu Sep 08, 2005 at 04:02:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I Agree Some and Disagree Some (none / 0)

I have trouble understanding how anyone could contest Jerome's basic point-that the Rs use of a "voter segmentation" strategy based on the use of technologically advanced data tracking and polling methodologies gives that party a huge turout advantage. And not just in turnout. Voter segmentation also is of great assistance in voter persuasion/education as well as voter mobilization.

Let me give an example of how this works. Rs use this to send voter-specific "under the radar" appeals to a specific voter group, let's say the Christian right. Using this approach, they can say all kinds of things that would hurt them with another segment of voters, let's say swing independants, such as opposition to abortion under all circumstances, or prayer in schools or opposition to evolution. The info sent to the Christian voters both persuades them to favor the Repugs and makes it more likely that they will vote. This strategy is used often and effectively in West Virginia, where I live. Believe me, it works very well here.

Matching the Rs effort should be one of our very highest priorities.

The only thing I disagree with in Jerome's post is when he says "voter-segmented targeting is where the Republican edge is right now." Now, Im not always on Jerome's "wave-length " so I may be misunderstanding what he means. What he seems to be saying is that this is THE key componnent in the Rs advantage. If that is what he is saying, I disagree. I think the Rs most significant advantage is their committment to a central core of issues and their ability to communicate those beliefs consistently. For example, you never see a whole sale abandonment of principle as we had on the bankruptcy bill and are about to have on the estate tax. As shown by recent polling by the Democracy Corps, their strength and our weakness gives the Rs a tremendous political advantage.

Andy Katz

by Andy Katz on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 10:51:35 AM EST

Re: I Agree Some and Disagree Some (none / 0)

I tend to look at things and spotlight them as the end all, but obviously, there are other things involved with their advantage. My point is that they win by inches, and whatever advantage they have that we can take away, needs to happen.

by Jerome Armstrong on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 02:43:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Segmentation is Huge (none / 0)

Voter segmentation is a colossal advantage. I'm guessing that people here don't understand that because they don't understand what it is.

It's exactly what the private sector does when marketing to individuals. Think direct mail, or think why which TV commercials appear during certain programing. You can custom-match issues to voters. If Kerry did it, considering how close that election was, he might have won.

If Jerome is right about Democratic consultants not being on the segmentation bandwagon, then he's right that we have a serious problem with consultants. Otherwise I think a lot of (not all) consultant-blaming is really scapegoating and blog bloviating.

But Jerome, I'm thrilled you're with Mark Warner. I think Warner is a big talent, with a great bio and geography.

by Andmoreagain on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 11:08:22 AM EST

Corzine losing in New Jersey? (none / 0)

seems fairly impossible now. Forrester is a pathetic candidate. you can turn out voters as much as you want, but if they think your candidate sucks, it's not going to matter.

Virginia is, I think, a tossup, though obviously favoring Kilgore (albeit not by that much). we are lucky in that it's one of two Southern states where Kerry didn't lose ground compared to 2000 (the margin shifted about .13% to Bush; Kerry's only gain was in North Carolina, a similarly insignificant amount).

by johnny longtorso on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 11:29:19 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.