David Hoffman’s US Senate campaign email last night was probably the best email I’ve seen from a political campaign in the 2010 cycle for sure, and maybe even beyond that. Why was it so effective? One word: authenticity. So many campaigns are trying to copy the Obama-styled emails and communications that propelled him to the presidency. However, most campaigns fall way short.
From a new media perspective, Hoffman’s campaign is so interesting because I have not seen a federal campaign literally ask voters to contact their offices, promising a real person will return their email or phone call. Many campaigns pay lip service to “two-way” communications. Many of these tools are just c0-opted to broadcast messages, unfortunately.
Then there’s the commitment to new media. That signals the Hoffman campaign is interested in finding and working with online grassroots advocates who will be the campaign’s evangelists. The online community is commonly the group who starts the buzz and sets the agenda far in advance. That plan seems to be on solid footing in Illinois too, though it may not take off because for an online community, Illinois is relatively small. Then again, for a primary a campaign is really speaking to the ardent party supporters.
All of these aforementioned “principles” are setting up the Hoffman brand, it’s promise, that it has nothing to hide. The email was an invitation for people to come in, sniff around and if you like what you see, then support Hoffman. It’s a really great effort so far to ensure the campaign is “walking the talk” of its reform and anti-corruption agenda.
Here’s the email:
Dear Valued Constituent:
Now that we have a full campaign team up and running, I wanted to introduce myself, kick off some guidelines for our communications, and give you a look at the fight ahead.
I’m Dan O’Neil, the Director of New Media for Hoffman for Illinois. I’m responsible for the online team, which includes our Web site, email communications, social networking sites, and all other online outreach. I’m aided by Mike Hardy, our Online Content Director, and Lara Sanders, our Director of Online Organizing.
You may have already heard from Lara over the last week. She has been contacting volunteers who have raised their hands and offered to help us turn the page on politics as usual in Illinois. She is also working through all emails sent to the campaign with specific suggestions for events, fundraisers, and other offers and requests. If you haven’t heard from Lara yet, expect to hear from her in the next few days. You can contact her directly at (312) 772-3539 or lara@hoffmanforillinois.com.
A Few Guidelines
We’re running a different campaign for a different candidate.
We’d like this to be a two-way conversation. If you get a blast email, and would like to respond to us personally, by all means do! Let us know what you think about what we had to say, whether we’re contacting you too much or too little,or anything else
Our emails are written by real people, and we sign them as our own. You won’t get an email written by a campaign staffer that says it’s from David. You won’t get template pleas written by campaign finance professionals. If we’re going to do this (and we are), we’re going to do it together, and with honesty
Please feel free to forward on these emails, blog about their content, and tell your friends and family what we have to say
A good amount of our communication is via Twitter and Facebook. We like it, because it cuts down on inbox clutter, allows you to have greater control over how you get our messages, and keeps us in the context of the rest of your daily life
David on the Issues
Many of you have expressed a need to hear more from David on the issues that matter to you most. While we are getting ready to announce our formal policies on our Web site, David has already spoken out on a number of them:
An important milestone in the campaign is the Federal Election Commission financial reporting deadline of September 30. We need to have a strong showing on that day to prove that we will have the support we need to win in February and beyond. David is a strong candidate, and is capable of beating back the Republican challenge for President Obama’s former Senate seat.
We accept no PAC money or contributions from State or Federal lobbyists, so please consider pledging your support for our campaign.
We’re now less than four and a half months until the Democratic Primary Election on February 2, 2010. There’s a lot of work to do. We are fully engaged in this battle now, and we’re certain that together, we’ll win.
I’ve been active in progressive politics, issue campaigns and elections my whole career. Never have I been faced with a more complex challenge than my current job: managing a judicial candidate’s primary campaign. But like most voters, I didn’t know the first thing about judge races. All I knew was that these races were confusing. What’s the difference between county-wide races and subcircuit races? The “Yes” vs. “No” votes? Why are judges elected anyway?
The confusion aside, one thing I believed before I became a judicial candidate’s campaign manager and now believe even stronger, is that our judiciary is a critical part of our democracy. And just as we voters exercise our responsibility to hold our elected officials accountable and put the best person in the job, we need to do the same for Cook County’s judiciary.
I’ll try to clarify some things about judicial races. About half our judges in Cook County are appointed and half are elected. The appointed judges are appointed by sitting judges…
For supporters of the public option in the national healthcare debate, last week was disheartening as the Right mobilized disturbances of townhall meetings and used Nazi comparisons of Democrats that support the public healthcare option.
Last night at the Loyola Fieldhouse on Sheridan and Greenleaf, the 49th Ward Democrats turned out in a huge way to support elected officials pushing for the public option in America’s quest for healthcare reform. The un-airconditioned room was packed, with people sweating and bearing the heat to hear from Dr. Anne Scheetz, William McNary, Congressman Danny Davis and Leslie Combs of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky’s office. Not only did people not leave the hot room, but the crowd responded very enthusiastically to the speakers calling for healthcare reform.
Dr. Scheetz gave an impassioned presentation for single payer healthcare. Her knowledge of the issue was really impressive and she received a rousing ovation from the audience.
Bill McNary, President of USAction and always a great speaker, followed Scheetz. Among the highlights he offered were to check out healthcarforamericanow.org and sign on to the following principles:
People should have affordable coverage
Healthcare reform needs to offer comprehensive benefits
People need equal access to quality care
McNary really ramped up the crowd when he compared the struggle for healthcare reform to struggle for social security, medicare and civil rights in previous generations. He offered the ingredients to win the healthcare reform battle is: unity, discipline and passion.
Congressman Danny Davis spoke last, noting that he is a co-signer and longtime advocate of single payer healthcare reform. He had hoped that Congress would be on the verge of passing meaningful healthcare reform at this time. However, politics, Davis described, is “how you squeeze as much as you can get out of a process.”
Davis said he would not sign any bill that did not include a strong public option. He said that insurance executives should be ashamed to take a paycheck knowing there are those people out there with no access and no option to get healthcare. (The top guy at Cigna for example took home $12m last year.)
He talked about the opposition to a public option from the Right, calling it a contrived, organized effort meant to scare people. He concluded with the call for healthcare reform to be the legacy of this generation.
FYI, Jan Schakowsky is holding a townhall meeting coming up on August 31 at 6:30 PM at Niles West High School in Skokie. Make sure to get there early to ensure the fear mongerers do not make headlines.
Between last week and this week, the answer would seem like Democrats, and the White House in particular, were starting to lose any hope of passing healthcare reform legislation that included a public option. Cable TV news stations have been showing endless coverage of the Right’s disruptive tactics at congressional townhall meetings as Members of Congress returned to their districts to engage constituents on healthcare reform options for the August recess.
However, the notion that there is this massive and universal backlash against healthcare reform is hardly true. Of course it is a contentious debate, but the reality is that three of the House committees charged with creating healthcare reform legislation have seemed to reach written legislation, respectively. And in the Senate, one of two committees charged with concocting healthcare reform legislation have concluded.
The Right is making a lot of noise and usually extreme elements get covered in the media. But, like with the Tea Party movement meant to thwart President Obama’s stimulus package, the healthcare disruptions will end up being a minor distraction. I believe Americans do think the unruly and overly-aggressive tactics will be dismissed eventually as trying to stifle debate, while unconstructively trying to kill needed healthcare reforms.
The White House communications team responded this week with a page out of President Obama’s campaign playbook. If you recall, lots of rumors by the Right tried to damage Obama’s reputation – ideas like he is a Muslim or that he was not an American citizen. Obama responded with a sort of myth & fact website complete with text and video. It helped not only correct the record and debunk rumors, but it also gave activists a tool to make the case to their networks.
Now, through whitehouse.gov/realitycheck, the White House is refocusing its efforts to speak directly to people – hoping traditional media and bloggers/facebookers/tweets direct people to the site. It’s a great online communications effort. The website is well-designed, which is actually hard to do on this issue because there is so much information and disinformation regarding this debate, that people can easily be overwhelmed. But, the White House’s site lets video do most of the talking, which is an effective medium for getting the message across. It also has an FAQ page, a Q&A on consumer protections and a page for users to submit questions. I will try submitting something and see if I get a response.
The one critique I have is on video shareability. The site features all these great testimonials on healthcare from experts on the President’s team, but there is no place to grab a link and place in on my blog or website. That’s could be a very effective tool in spreading the White House’s message that can be utilized.
My prediction – the media focus on healthcare reform opposition will dissipate and rationality about passing healthcare reform will return.
Tonight was an exciting meeting at the Northside Democracy for America (DFA), the local arm of activists who endorse and work on behalf of progressive candidates and issues.
First off, nobody was happier at the end of the meeting than Jeff Smith. Smith is an Evanston attorney and longtime good government advocate who is running for state representative in the 18th District. He was unanimously endorsed by DFA, making him the first candidate to receive the organization’s endorsement for 2010 races.
After having Toni Preckwinkle speak to the organization two months ago, two elected officials with big name recognition came to speak to the Northside DFA. Cook County Commissioner Larry Suffredin and Congressman Danny Davis have both declined to officially announce their candidacy for Cook County Board President, as Toni Preckwinkle has, yet each man said they were definitely in the race at the DFA meeting.
Suffredin spoke first, bringing talking points up with him as he, from the outset, seemed extraordinarily careful about his message. Oddly enough, he started with defending his vote for supporting the 1 percent Cook County sales tax hike last year that has been wildly unpopular. Suffredin explained he gave Todd Stroger his vote for the tax hike primarily in a trade for establishing an independent board of health to oversee Cook County Hospital, and because Cook County’s finances were so badly mismanaged that the tax hike was necessary to get the County’s house back in order. Suffredin deflected the impact of the sales hike on Cook County, arguing that the collar counties are hurting for revenue as well. In other words, Suffredin suggested that the flight of Cook County consumer spending going to collar counties to save on higher taxes simply was not happening.
Suffredin commended the impact of the independent health board’s impact on the overall Cook County health system, claiming that the board has turned around its finances to benefit of $250 million.
I won’t speak for Northside DFA members, but I certainly was asking myself if Suffredin’s vote was really necessary to establish the independent health board. After all, reformers Mike Quigley and Forrest Claypool rejected the tax increase. It is hard to accept Suffredin’s argument that he is with the Quigleys and the Claypools when it comes to reform but also vote for the Stroger tax hike.
Clearly, Suffredin knows Cook County issues very well. But, I felt as though he was grasping and defending himself because he knew the vote for increased taxes was a mistake. He’s now voting for its repeal.
Danny Davis came and spoke next, using a much different tone. He projected leadership, experience and confidence. And while the local media is saying Davis will not run for Cook County Board President, Davis told Northside DFA that he is.
Davis presented the case that he’s worked his whole life representing progressive issues and wants to focus his Cook County Board President candidacy on healthcare, fixing the judicial/correctional system and reforming taxes. He didn’t say how he would approach any of these issue in specifics but his argument about his experience as a Chicago alderman, Cook County commissioner and Congressman sure sounded convincing. Interestingly, he did say that his strong suit was inspiring and motivating people and that he felt Cook County needed that type of leadership if it were to reform.
The last word here was something that Suffredin said in response to a question about waiting to declare if he was running. Suffredin flat out said that his strategy for not declaring is rooted in getting media attention. Simply, the longer he waited, the more the media would speculate and give him ink. Seems like it’s working.
This week has been the time politicos have been waiting for – who would run for the seat Mark Kirk vacates as he bids for U.S. Senate?
The safe bet would be to assume the seat will go Democratic. Two contenders with name recognition and a history have already signaled that they will run: Dan Seals and Julie Hamos.
It will be every interesting to see how each candidate goes about building a campaign for the 10th Congressional seat. Hamos, the State Rep from Evanston, has been working towards a state-wide run until Lisa Madigan announced she would not vacate her Attorney General seat. Hamos is looking to turn that disappointment into a victory in the Democratic primary.
Hamos has some built-in advantages for her in the 10th District. She’s already known in the area from her years as State Rep in Evanston (outside of the 10th District). She will have unprecedented support from elected officials (especially Jan Schakowsky next door in the 9th), who wants a woman and a progressive in that seat long-held by a Republican. Hamos has also built up plenty of good-will in the district as the area served as a fundraising hub for her state-wide race. I believe she has a lot of sympathetic supporters who feel that Lisa Madigan thwarted Hamos’ chances at higher office and now will support Hamos in the Congressional bid.
Seals, I think, faces a really uphill battle. He does have the advantages when he ran for the seat during the last two election cycles. He knows the district really well and undoubtedly brings lessons learned and insights to this campaign after losing two previous ones. But, he won’t have the backing he did when he was an unknown taking on Kirk in 2006 and again in 2008. From what I’ve heard, many residents in the 10th are hoping that Seals will not run, to open the door for new blood. That would be Seals’ death knell. He cannot count on the political kingmakers to bless his run this time around. He will need an even stronger grassroots campaign than he has had previously. Can he do it?
I think if he does run a better grassroots campaign, he can beat Hamos in a very tough battle. But looking at today’s events after Seals announced his candidacy via email, a look at his Facebook page has no announcement to about 500 supporters across several pages that he is running for Congress. That built-in network will be absolutely key to Seals’ support in the 10th and beyond. He needs that to be successful. He cannot rely on the Democratic organizations handing him supporters like they did in previous elections. Facebook is the start of grassroots outreach, and it’s a good bell-weather of a campaign at a given moment.
Hamos, meanwhile, has to do a good job of channeling her support and momentum from the statewide run into continung to give supporters a piece of the campaign. The Hamos team has done a great job at that so far. It has been interesting to see the media speculate about Hamos’ political future plans and the campaign make no announcement or outreach to her supporters (even to tell them to sit tight) since Madigan announcemed she isn’t’ running over a week ago.
Some really great research is beginning to disseminate through the blogosphere emanating from the Personal Democracy Forum just held in New York. In particular, is the user base and growth of the two largest social networks, MySpace and Facebook.
Northwestern researcher Eszter Harggitai found that MySpace’s users slightly declined or stayed about the same over a 0ne year period dating back to 2008. In fact, Facebook’s traffic increased 97 percent and MySpace’s traffic declined 5 percent from a year ago, writes Riva Richmond, blogging for the New York Times.
Both Richmond and Harggitai refer to social media researcher Danah Boyd, who has uncovered important demographic trends with Facebook and MySpace users.
Research by Harggitai, Boyd and others boils down to this:
Whites are using Facebook more and leaving MySpace
Asians are using Facebook at very high levels and MySpace very little
Hispanics are more likely to be active on MySpace than Facebook
African Americans seem to be more evenly split between using Facebook and MySpace but are using Facebook slightly more
Facebook users come from more economically advantaged families than MySpace users
Not commenting on the social stratification of the research findings, it is interesting for those who are running local political campaigns to take this data into consideration when putting together an online communications strategy. Supposing there is finite time in a campaign, plus limited staff resources, it is safe to assume that a campaign cannot effectively be all over each social network and use each well (i.e. John Edwards in 2008).
Therefore, especially for urban and suburban districts, it seems practical to use this data in order to assist a campaign in choosing what kind of social networking strategy they will employ. Campaigns have to ask themselves, does it make sense to use Facebook in a more predominantly African American or Hispanic voting area? This research would indicate that would be a bad idea. But, the realities on the ground are always a little different and must be measured for each case.
The lesson here is listening to statistics and going with the percentages. Other campaigns have tried and failed, others have won. Good campaigns listen to those lessons and put those findings to work to their advantage.
I had a really interesting conversation last night with Jeff Smith, a really sharp Evanston lawyer, activist and candidate for state representative in the 18th District. Smith is running in a field of other great candidates, including Patrick Keenan-Devlin and Eamon Kelly. Jeff and I were discussing the value of Facebook in building a support network and reaching voters during an election.
I took the position that Facebook offered an incredibly efficient medium to communicate and organize voters. Jeff countered that though that is true, most probable voters in his Evanston district probably won’t go on Facebook and would need to be reached the old fashioned way – knocking on doors and shaking hands.
The truth is, I think, is that we’re both right and we’re both wrong. From Barack Obama’s campaign down to Daniel Biss’ campaign for state rep in 2008, we learned that a good online strategy was made possible by the hard work candidates and staffs put in on the ground to introduce themselves to voters. Facebook was just the next logical place to go to continue the conversation and stay engaged in the campaign. In short, there are synergies between online and offline that are complimentary, rather than mutually exclusive.
Of course, the largest group of Facebook users are in the 18-25 range, but we also know the fastest growing segment of Facebook users is the 45-54 age group. Ask any teenage kid if their parents are friending them on Facebook and the likely answer is ‘yes.’ I believe that in the Evanston district, Facebook and other new media tools will be crucial to winning the campaign for state representative.
Jeff is right too – nothing replaces shaking hands and talking to voters. People want to feel listened to and putting a name with a face is crucial.
All three candidates have a solid presence on Facebook and all have comparable-sized networks. It seems as though all candidates believe it’s necessary to have a Facebook page. But how many will make it a priority? Who will use it as a strategic tool? Who will accidentally find it invaluable because of the reach and ease of use?
These are all questions I’ll watching out for in this race!
Teva Pharmaceuticals, the world’s largest manufacturer of generic drugs in the world, is uniquely positioned to benefit from the impassioned debate on healthcare reform, prompted by the Obama Administration’s call for a government option for health insurance.
Teva occupies an interesting place in the healthcare industry. Prescription drugs are a central part of American healthcare. Millions of Americans rely on pharmeceuticals to keep them healthy and Teva can meet this need through producing generic prescriptions. As the costs of healthcare and drugs escalate at alarming rates, Teva produces drug generics much cheaper than name-brand drugs, thereby providing relief to consumers facing healthcare costs that rise much faster than wages.
Patients, doctors and health insurance companies are all clamoring for generics, realizing that affordable access to drugs is a key to providing quality healthcare to Americans. Obviously, Teva understands this and the company has creatively joined the country’s healthcare debate in a centrist role. By not aggressively taking a position on the Obama insurance plan, Teva can safely raise awareness for its company and its products, all while driving home its message that generic drugs are quality products at vastly lower prices than brand-name drugs.
Whatever the outcome of the national healthcare debate, Teva will win. Increased access to generics is pretty much universally agreed on by all stakeholders in the healthcare debate (besides its competitors). Through sponsoring events, like the upcoming Year of Affordable Healthcare Series in Chicago, a Twitter page and a series of online videos (though it could be more creative than ripping off the Mac vs. PC genre), Teva is playing this debate wisely.
They’ve put themselves in a win-win situation. While Congress will not agree on how to fix healthcare, they all realize it is too expensive and lacking coverage among large segments of Americans. If there’s one thing everyone can agree on, generic pharmeceuticals are beneficial for all. I would bet any legislative outcome to the healthcare issue will address even more access to generics.
The lesson here? Realize the opportunity and seize on it. Furthermore, through good messaging and non-partisian approach, Teva has put together a winning grassroots public affairs strategy. That serves as a nice compliment to its other public affairs function through the DC office and its PAC, focusing on federal policymakers.
My one suggestion for the Year of Affordable Healthcare is that it would really benefit from a blog. If this is a tour and debate featuring Teva executives and guest speakers, it would be interesting for people unable to make events, to see and hear what happens. Guest bloggers, reports and opinions could easily be integrated into a blog. It would also make this public affairs effort’s Twitter account more valuable.
Tom Friedman penned a great column today in the New York Times discussing the reversal of a trend whereby democracy in the Middle East assisted in bringing to power more radical Islamic elements to governing positions in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine over the last few years. Now, demonstrated by the power of Twitter and Facebook, Iran’s “democratic” re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is being challenged by large swaths of the local population, threatening the legitimacy of the Islamic rule in Iran. Friedman points out that the failure of other Islamic movements in the rest of the aforementioned countries, may assist in the democratic weakening or removal of radical groups in favor of more moderate forces.
In short, democracy in the Middle East stands the chance of bringing the pendulum back to the political center after years of growing Islamic power. This was the strategy behind the Bush adminstration’s push for democracy in that region. Ironically, it was Bush’s lack of positive engagement in the region that assisted in bringing these Islamic movements to power in the first place. The Obama administration is now standing to benefit from more moderate and Western-friendly governments, ready to capitalize on a more American-friendly diplomatic position.
The real lesson from Iran, in my opinion, is that social media tools offer the power in direct democracy. With little outlet to express frustration and protest over the elections in Iran, Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms give unfiltered views and opinions for local voters to share with the rest of the world. In the process these sentiments have captured the world’s attention, built a growing protest movement in Iran threatening the regime, and has helped organize the opposition in ways which could not exist before these social media tools existed.
For politicos in the US, I see Iran lesson teaching us to be cognizant of situations that can help political movements or political candidates make their case and win popular support. Social media is the natural and best outlet to speak directly with supporters. But most importantly, after engaging in that conversation and helping to set its tone, stand back and let your supporters self organize and communicate with their own networks. Voters have to be trusted and by putting issues and passions into their own hands, they will pass on the rewards better and faster than a centralized movement.
between county-wide races and subcircuit races? The “Yes” vs. “No” votes? Why are judges elected anyway?
Suffredin spoke first, bringing talking points up with him as he, from the outset, seemed extraordinarily careful about his message. Oddly enough, he started with defending 
County Board President, Davis told Northside DFA that he is.
2008. From what I’ve heard, many residents in the 10th are hoping that Seals will not run, to open the door for new blood. That would be Seals’ death knell. He cannot count on the political kingmakers to bless his run this time around. He will need an even stronger grassroots campaign than he has had previously. Can he do it?
