FutureCampaigns

Friday, October 24, 2008

Polling trends and Google trends

Polling data is abundant online for this election and it's becoming quite a popular thing to follow.

Today, Daily Kos published results from eleven different polls. Pollster.com and fivethirtyeight.com are two good sites for polling data online. They also put up a tracking poll primer today.

Also I read an interesting article by Daniel Sinker showing the Google search data for Obama vs. McCain and how it parallels polling data.

I also like Slate's poll tracking application for the iPhone - it's been a good way to watch results on the fly.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, September 26, 2008

Online Debate Coverage Tools

See my latest article at The Huffington Post "Off the Bus" about some of the fun and practical online tools for debate coverage by bloggers and viewers.

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Interesting Take on Twitter

TechCrunch has a great article up about "Why Twitter Hasn't Failed," exploring why Twitter is different in terms of distribution in feeds than facebook, FriendFeed, and other sources that produce feeds to specific audiences (vs. blogs where we don't often know where they're going.)

In the political context, we can see that Twitter does have a very targeted marketing capability in this respect. Campaigns - like Obama for America - can track exactly who receives their tweets from the candidate and use it to help hone message.

Labels: , ,

Friday, August 8, 2008

Latest Online Campaigning Tactic - Attack Websites

Here's the latest in my column for The Huffington Post - "Smear 2.0: Attack Ad Culture Goes Online." It goes into detail about the latest campaign sites launched on specific issues targeting the media and the public. The sites are mostly being used as a campaigning tool by Democrats, but Republicans have launched a few as well.

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 16, 2008

New Data Reported on Internet Use in Political Campaigns

The Pew Internet and American Life Project released their latest report yesterday. It's chock full of stat nuggets in terms of percentages of adult Americans who are online, politicking online, watching videos online, and using social networking online all for the purposes of finding and choosing candidates to vote for in the election.

Most of the numbers aren't surprising. That 46% of Americans of voting age are doing something online related to politics is, however, a big deal in terms of providing data supporting that candidates in future elections need to take advantage of online technologies more and more in order to increase their chances of winning. It's also important in terms of people working on tech related to politics: it means we're here to stay.

Convincing candidates and potential candidates to use online technologies for their campaigns when money is tight is always a challenge and is sometimes a gamble. In more rural areas where the majority of voters are not necessarily online, tried and true field and direct mail methods still work best. But these numbers show a shift in terms of who's online and they show that nearly 75% of Americans have access to campaign communications via the Internet or cell phones. Even for those campaigns, not having an Internet presence at all could be dangerous.

So for everyone out there working on campaigns, here's the story: incorporate online methodology within your campaign, and for Democrats seeking a younger voter base in particular, integrating technology-based strategies within the entire framework of the campaign organization, as Obama has, will make your field organization stronger. Build the best web site you can, get people working on smart email communications, put up a blog, and find ways to make the campaign have two-way traffic, receiving information back from potential voters, not just sending out the usual sound bytes to them. Create a dialogue with potential constituents. Learn about their needs. Utilize social networks. Make the campaign engaging and interesting.

There are a lot of lessons within the data, but I encourage anyone interested to look at the reports yourselves and take what you will from them. The campaigns of the future will only build on what we have now, so learning about what worked in '08 will only improve chances your candidate will win in '10 or '12.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, June 5, 2008

PC Magazine on Top Tech Issues for Next President

For a comprehensive look at the major technology issues on the plate for the next presidential administration, PC Magazine has a great article out that covers 5 biggies and what the positions are on those issues of the candidates (McCain, Obama and Clinton since it was compiled before Obama had enough delegates and since she could potentially be a VP nominee). This stems from discussion that happened at the Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference in May.

I first attended CFP in 1994 in Chicago. Every year, they have an incredible group organizing the conference. This year, they honed in on what we would like to see in a next presidential administration in terms of information and communications (ICT) technology policy recommendations. This wasn't the first time, of course. CPSR and other organizations have done this in the past - analyzing policies of current and potential future administrations. I'm glad it's elicited some results in terms of recommendations and positive media attention.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Two Great Chronicle Articles: Web to TV & Blogging with Babies

In today's Chronicle, two interesting articles:

First, "Web sites enable campaign TV ads on the cheap" by Joe Garofoli tells about how the web and sites like VoterVoter.com and SpotRunner.com are making video ads easier and cheaper to create and disseminate, and it discusses the ramifications of this in terms of the presidential campaign.

Micah Sifry of techPresident (and the Personal Democracy Forum) is quoted about how technology and "mass participation" is changing the face of politics. Anyone who has worked in a statewide or national campaign knows that the majority of campaign budgets go to TV advertising even now with the Internet gaining speed and digital democracy becoming a more prevalent term.

Still, the majority of voters are reached through television and it's expensive. This is why the Internet staff always takes a back seat in terms of campaign strategy; it's just a fact that television still makes the rules. I see the tides turning, but it will take time. Sites like these will help with the transition to new media as new generations of voters who are online gradually become the majority.

Second, one of my co-contributors at the Silicon Valley Moms Blog Group, Charlene Li is mentioned in Ellen Lee's article, "In parenthood, sometimes a blog is born," which I know from personal experience has many truths. Granted, I wasn't twittering from the delivery room, but blogging helped keep me sane while on bed rest and going through a lengthy postpartum recovery.

The article also quotes Elisa Camahort Page, BlogHer cofounder, and it throws around buzzwords like Web 2.0 as much as possible to get socnet cred. What is most poignant about this piece to me are the stats about how much moms are targeted now in advertising online. It's always been that way on TV, but now mommybloggers are discovering their power with corporations and other sponsors to this effect. Beth Blecherman has a great post up at SVMoms that touches on this, and I think it may be eligible for some kind of "most links in a post" award.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , , , ,

Monday, October 29, 2007

Obama on Net Neutrality

Anne Broache of CNET has a good article up about Obama indicating during the Mtv and MySpace forum that he's in favor of Net neutrality. This is nothing earth-shattering, of course, as all of the Democrats are in favor of an equal opportunity Internet, but it sounds like Obama has a good grasp of the concept, citing that companies like Google might not exist if it weren't for Net neutrality.

Broache also noted that, while Net neutrality is not a "make-or-break issue akin to healthcare, immigration or the Iraq War," it still holds some heat. As the question was posed by MoveOn, I would venture to second that assertion since they wouldn't waste their bandwidth on a question of little importance. As someone who works from a remote office and who has used everything from 300 baud to a T3, I say speed does matter and anyone who says otherwise is just selling something.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, October 25, 2007

10 Online Video Questions for Presidential Candidates

Most people who read this blog probably have already heard about 10 questions, but just in case you haven't, it's a project put together by TechPresident and several other partners, including BlogHer.

The idea is to choose ten questions from a selection of self-submitted videos to ask each of the presidential candidates. The first phase of video submission ends on Nov. 14. Don't be shy - pick up your camera and give it a try!

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, October 15, 2007

More from New York Times on Women Online & Politics

Today, Katharine Seelye followed-up her post, "Women, Politics and the Internet" (I mentioned it two weeks ago - she quoted me from my comments to her original inquiry) with Part II introducing some of the bloggers I know and love locally who started the Momocrats blog (looking forward to working with you gals in the general election!)

Seeyle also asked readers to let her know what online outreach methods are working to reach out to women. I look forward to reading what she learns, but I think what Mindy Finn is doing with tagging for Mitt Romney's campaign is certainly one good way. It still baffles me that so many campaigns are barely utilizing online tools, but it will happen.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Connecting With Elizabeth Edwards

he Silicon Valley Moms Blog and sister sites (via conference call) Chicago Moms Blog and DC Metro Moms Blog had a unique opportunity to meet with Elizabeth Edwards in San Jose yesterday. As I've been contributing to the blog now for over a year, this was my second chance to meet with this remarkable woman, with whom many of us feel a connection. Except this time was different - she's no longer on a book tour; she's the wife of a presidential candidate. And while the discussion shifted to more specific policy issues than personal, it was still intimate and inviting.

As you can see from my liveblogging, we covered topics from tax brackets to math education to healthcare translators. And Elizabeth Edwards still loves us. (After one of my fellow contributors challenged her parenting choices a few weeks ago, there was some heated exchange that got picked-up by "Good Morning America" and taught our blogger and many others a lesson in taking care of what they post. Eventually Elizabeth and Rebecca made up, but it was an interesting few days for the blog.) And we still love her. Even if some of us won't be voting for her husband.

So what is it about Elizabeth Edwards that makes us all like her so much? As we noticed when we met with her last year during her book tour, she has this down-to-earth quality that shows both her intelligence and her kindness, without any superficial attitude or put-on interest. She genuinely likes to meet new people, she has a wonderfully light way about her, and she sat down with us like we were all old friends. She's also a little bit of a geek, hanging out on the blogs late at night in hotel rooms while traversing the campaign trail, which I find endearing. And she has dealt with major life challenges with the death of her son and her breast cancer, both of which have only added more depth to her persona and more commitment to the causes meaningful to her. I find her both incredibly inspiring and acutely insightful.

Where do we go now? Well, she's promised to meet with the DC Metro Moms Blog and the Chicago Moms Blog as well, so hopefully that will transpire. The SVMoms still seek to meet with other candidates and their spouses, regardless of party, and I hope to help facilitate that. Although I realize it is a long shot because Elizabeth Edwards is unique in her connection to mommybloggers, I think the other candidates could benefit greatly from the discussion with the women in our network - all of whom are highly educated, qualified people in their own right, not just moms, and all of whom represent a key group of women voters.

Some of us from the SVMoms Blog spoke today with various members of the press about our meeting, and one of the points brought up was that this event really has no precedent. The reporter in one case couldn't recall another time where a group of bloggers was given such intimate access to a candidate or candidate's wife. I think this holds great promise for blogs to provide another vehicle for kitchen table and New Hampshire-style living room meet-and-greet democracy. If we can take these small conversations taking place in person and somehow transmit that feeling through the web, we might all feel a little closer to the national political process after all. Thank you Elizabeth.

...
Also posted here on the BlogHer site.
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , ,

Last Week's San Mateo County Democratic Tech & Politics Event Recap

Normally, I'd do a better job of writing about these events from last week, but it was a pretty crazy week. Anyway, my apologies for lateness to those who couldn't attend the event and wanted to read the synopses here. The Technology, Politics & Innovation Panel set up by San Mateo County Democratic Party leaders Andrew Byrnes and Daniel Yost, was well organized. It was nice to see more local people who work in this area.

Tuesday's event in Menlo Park featured six panelists: Peter Leyden, Michelle Kraus, Perla Ni, David Chiu, Josh Becker and Dave Pine. Peter gave a nice presentation about how he and the New Politics Institute are working in Congress to get more people up to speed on technology. He spoke about how ad revenue is gradually shifting over and how campaigns are benefitting from placing Google ads, for example.

Michelle formerly ran Digital Campaigns, she has participated in The Huffington Post and she has an organization called Technology and Politics in Menlo Park. She gave an interesting example of producing a low cost video ad opposing Prop. 90 in the last CA statewide election and how they were able to reach over 300,000 page views a day and capture 2 points during the election from that campaign.

Perla Ni spoke about how Voterwatch makes Congressional videos searchable and how difficult it is to make change on the Hill in terms of opening up these videos to the public, how long it takes to get access to the video transcripts and how cumbersome it is to find real information about what is discussed. She spoke about reaching out to blogs to draw attention to this issue. David Chiu co-founded Grassroots.org along with Perla, who recently founded Voterwatch.org. David addressed how often this field changes in terms of technology being used in campaigns. He talked about how important data and message are in campaigns.

Josh Becker formerly worked as a press secretary in Washington. His focus is on how we get people to use tech tools locally in campaigns, and he spoke about getting the "smart, entrepreneurial people" in Silicon Valley together to make substantive change. Then Dave Pine spoke as "Mr. Local." A former General Counsel for Handspring, he's now running for local office. He spoke about how technology is changing things for local elections in terms of managing contacts and voter data, YouTube videos, eVites, and Cafe Press. He mentioned the Burliingame Voice as an example of a local blog that gets some good discussion.

After their presentations, we had a lengthy Q&A discussion and then we discussed more local political engagement issues. There was some talk about whether positive or negative campaigning will make more of an impact in this election. I concur with what David Chiu said which is essentially that both will happen, but I'll take it further and say I think the media will still focus on the negative things like the YouTube videos making fun of candidates, but that the positive things like the social networking will even it out. (I'll admit it - I thought the sites like MySpace and Facebook were just representative of meaningless stats at first, but I'm beginning to believe that they may actually affect how some people learn about candidates and how they vote.)

There was some exciting talk about how young people ("Gen X") are voting more now and the correlation between that data and use of the Internet in politics. Then we discussed getting a San Mateo County blog going. I typed furiously and got most of the meeting into notes, so if anyone wants the full transcript, I'd be happy to send it out by email.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Liveblogging SVMoms Meeting Elizabeth Edwards Today

Today, I had the opportunity, along with the Silicon Valley Moms, to meet with Elizabeth Edwards again, wife of presidential candidate, John Edwards. Last fall we met with Mrs. Edwards and we all really enjoyed that experience, so we worked hard to make it happen again.

This time, we decided to live blog the meeting and since I'm the tech politics mom, I got that exhausting, but exciting job. (Carpal tunnel, what carpal tunnel?) Elizabeth Edwards talks so quickly and brilliantly (and often tangentially), it can be difficult to follow her threads, but it turned out well. We discussed a variety of issues from healthcare to education to the US's place in the world. We all felt honored she was willing to share her precious time with us.

Here's my liveblogging post. There will be more follow-up on the SVMoms blog about the meeting over the next few days.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Change.org Presidential Matchmaker Feat

One of my favorite sites in the whole world (and as it turns out, it's locally run)is Change.org. Tonight, I met the founder, Ben Rattray, who is - no surprise - both knowledgeable and passionate about enabling people to take action for important causes and candidates. While poking around Change.org further, I found a cool Presidential Matchmaker widget that matches you up with presidential candidates.

Surprise - my selection on issues matched me up with Hillary Clinton at 81%. The only reason it wasn't closer is because the issues are listed as one-liners so it's difficult to know exactly what they're supporting and in some cases I'd support something Hillary "strongly supports" and vice versa, so in reality we're probably more in the 95th percentile on the issues. I think the feature could actually be more specific, but it does a fairly good job laying out a variety of issues and it's fun to use.

At the bottom of my comparison list was Duncan Hunter at 22% in common with my views. The only place we remotely agreed was that I answered that I was ok with churches assisting people on welfare (although I might change my mind on this if I knew more about the issue) and he's strongly in favor. Why? I don't see why letting churches give food to some people in their communities is bad unless that means it's in lieu of the government giving funds. I don't think it should be an either-or proposition and I don't think the government should reduce welfare support just because churches might pitch in. I know the issue goes deeper than this, but that's not the purpose of this post. No way am I voting for Duncan Hunter in any universe, but Change.org always gets my vote.

You have to join Change.org and select the Politicians tab in order to see the Matchmaker feature. Enjoy.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Maplight.org Presidential Fundraising Widget

Maplight.org now has a really cool Presidential Fundraising Widget. The widget is configurable in terms of candidates' names, parties, colors, graphing type, and font sizes. Check it out at maplight.org/widgets.

I wanted to put it up on my blog here but the embed code isn't being pasted in its entirety into their box and I didn't feel like spending very long looking at the source... anyway it's a fun widget to play with on their site.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: ,

Monday, July 30, 2007

BlogHer Second Life Politics Panel - Audio/Video Online

The panel I was on in online at the BlogHer Second Life conference on Saturday was recorded on TV in Second Life so it is now available for viewing on the SLCN.TV web site. I called-in from the Chicago Navy Pier conference center so that's my real voice in the recording. My avatar is the extremely pale, red-headed cybergoth. Watching the avatars doesn't show much except the avatars sitting on stage, but listening to the audio you can hear me and my co-panelist, padlurowncanoe dibou (Kathy Walker), to my right, discussing the topics. Queen Tureaud (Erin Vest), organizer of BlogHer in Second Life, also moderated. There is a slight lag in the conference call-in system so expect more pauses between speakers and occasionally there's some audio feedback but otherwise the recording is very clear. (Note: If you use a Mac, don't run the Quicktime video in Safari - try Firefox instead.)

The panel discussion begins with some information about candidates in Second Life and how that's working, what people do at the candidate headquarters in Second Life, and how the official campaigns have responded so far. Then we discuss political blogs and candidate blogging, along with topics related to social networks and other online tactics for campaigns. We responded to questions IM'd to our avatars by other Second Life residents, and carried on discussion about where we think online campaigns will go in the future.

Some background on candidates and campaigns in Second Life: Second Life is this virtual world with "8 million residents" around the world. They say about 100,000 people log on each week. Four of the current leading presidential candidates have campaign headquarters there - Clinton, Edwards, Giuliani, and Obama - but it seems that only Edwards and Clinton are doing much. The person who started the Clinton headquarters is my co-panelist, although her headquarters in Second Life has not been officially connected to the people in real life. When I visited the virtual Clinton HQ, for example, the most developed of the group, it was very different from a real life campaign headquarters - it has a piano lounge, a lecturn for speeches, an area for swimming, and a nice comfy couch area for conversations. My co-panelist made the interesting point that if someone in Second Life wants to visit a campaign HQ, they want their activities to be different and more recreational than in real life. So I think they have done a good job of creating that environment there as a way to gain interest for the candidates.

I think the conclusions we reached in the panel were that Second Life is still a very experimental place in terms of politics - most of the campaigns are not in-tune with what's happening there and haven't spent much time or resources on it - but that it's likely if Second Life continues to grow as it has, that they will take notice and put more efforts in later in this campaign and definitely down the road in future years. That echos other thoughts from our panel and other BlogHer political panels about how use of the Internet in campaigns is growing in genearal (blogs, social networking sites like MySpace, YouTube videos, etc.).

I enjoyed participating in the panel in Second Life. There was a slight learning curve involved in getting my bearings in the Second Life world and visiting the candidate headquarters there before the panel presentation, but the panel itself was just like being on a conference call while controlling a game character and instant messaging simultaneously. I stayed online for a few minutes after the panel to meet a couple of the questioners in the Second Life audience as I would have in an in-person conference, and then returned to the real life politics panel at BlogHer.

You can see all of the Second Life BlogHer panels here.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , , ,

Saturday, July 28, 2007

Candidates Missed a Great Blogosphere Media Spike Opportunity

I'm sitting here at BlogHer watching Elizabeth Edwards interviewed by Lisa Stone, BlogHer founder and journalist. We're all very excited she's here. A blogger from the Edwards campaign is also here, as is a representative from the Clinton campaign.

Obama's headquarters is down the street. No one from his campaign is here. I just commented Zephyr Teachout's post at TechPresident about this. We're excited they will all be present at the Yearly KOS conference here in Chicago at the end of the week responding to that invitation from the progressive Democratic blogger communities.

So what do we need to do to get the nominees to come next year to BlogHer? As I noted in my comment referenced above, we have huge communities of swing voters represented here from all over the political spectrum.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, July 23, 2007

Tonight's Debate and Where to Read the Live Blog Reports

Tonight's Democratic presidential debate on CNN was well run, and Anderson Cooper did a good job keeping the questions moving along. I'm sad they gave very little time to the issue of the environment, but I enjoyed some of the videos and curve balls. The candidates I thought did a good job responding with interesting answers as well. I had a lot of fun participating in the live blogging tonight, thanks to Morra Aarons for putting out the call to everyone in the BlogHer community. I think we had a pretty good discussion. Check it out for more about the debate content.

I was also hopping around the leading Democratic blogs while we were commenting here, and the Edwards thread was interesting, but I have to say a few of the commenters were off-base, like one that slammed Richardson on his response about the VVPATs (Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails) - he actually answered that very well. (I've studied e-voting issues for several years. It's tricky getting it right, but VVPATs are the only way to go.) But the Edwards blog had the most lively discussion by far. They have a very interactive online organization.

The Obama live blog included several threads supposedly by topic, but not a lot of responses. It would've been better just keeping them all in one place. I commented on the Clinton blog and it came up pretty quickly considering the comment moderation (which I must add is absoltely essential on a Presidential blog). Unfortunately, I don't think many bloggers or people involved in the Clinton campaign knew they were liveblogging there so there weren't very many people participating. (Of course, maybe they were all in SF partying!) Check out the HillaryClinton.com blog for a post about their 30 second video contest finalist ads.

Jerome Armstrong at myDD.com had a really good post and the comments there were interesting. With over a thousand comments in the collective Daily KOS threads, of course there were some echoing what we were saying on BlogHer, but it was a lot easier to follow all of the discussion on the BlogHer site with fewer participants. All in all, it was a great way to watch the debate.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , , ,

techPresident on Compete.com Data - Site Visits Mirror Recent Polls

I thought this post by Micah Sifry of techPresident was prescient - according to compete.com, site visit stats so far this year mirror polling data both nationally and in key states like Iowa and California. As of June, Clinton has a strong lead. Republican data isn't as strong as Democratic data in general - it's widely known they aren't campaigning as heavily online - but their rankings still line up fairly well.

...
Originally posted at sairy.com, the personal blog of FutureCampaigns founder, Sarah Granger.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, November 6, 2006

Blogging 101 for Politicians: Tiptoeing Through the Minefield

Politicians don't do blogs.  Or at least that was what they said in the old days, before the 2004 election cycle.  The reasoning was that blogging was just another way to catch foot-in-mouth disease and find oneself subject to more ridicule.  Still, in 2005, when I participated in a political training program, one of the core messages was "don't write much - especially online".

It took me a while to decide to start blogging for that reason, but eventually I decided that it is more important to me to have free speech and use it to write than to run for office and win.  So if I ever decide to run and I lose because of something dumb I wrote ten years before that gets exploited in the wrong way (like this post, perhaps), that's just too bad.  I think it's sad that candidates feel compelled to hide their opinions for fear of offending voters.  They do it because they don't want their words misused or their ideas misconstrued, but that can also cost them elections.

But let's take a step back and reiterate what Elizabeth Edwards said: "the Internet is the last real democratic institution."  Her point is that the Internet can be like the New Hampshire living room or the local town hall meeting.  It's a place where true constituent communication is achieved one-on-one.  This is why politicians started turning around and saying, "hey, wait a minute - I want a piece of this."  (Okay, so I don't know any who actually used those words, but you get the idea.)

Here's today's history lesson.  Everybody remembers that Howard Dean came along and raised a zillion dollars online for his campaign, but what many don't remember is that just as he was becoming the flavor of the month for the Democrats, Gary Hart snuck in under their radar and launched what Wired News and 'political analysts' called the "first true weblog to be put up by a politician," meaning that he wrote his own posts and the comments were left open.  By doing that, he broke new ground.

Senator Hart was considering an official run but had a small, mostly online grassroots "testing the waters" campaign going and I ended-up running the Internet part of the organization.  That's a story in itself, but the truth is that selling the idea of a blog to him wasn't actually that difficult.  He's the kind of person who thrives on communicating with the people and does it through a variety of vehicles even now, including blogging for the Huffington Post.  He's highly intelligent, he understands the "technology revolution" and tends to take more risks than most other politicians due to his experience.  Two other people who were helping me with the campaign thought that a blog would be a good idea, so I gathered all our arguments in favor and pitched it to the would-be candidate.

Running a presidential candidate's blog was a lot of fun.  I heard through the grapevine that it was one of the most popular blogs in the world for a while, so that gives you an idea of how many people were visiting.  There are numerous political sites now that I'm sure get more hits a day than we were back then, but the norm of political sites is still that they are written by political writers, not the candidates.

One of the things that makes blogging difficult for politicians is that it is just another thing for them to do in a day packed with events .  In our case, our candidate found ways to write up posts rapidly while riding in the car or on his computer at night.  We only asked for one every week or two, so we could maintain interest on the site but not overwhelm him.  Being a prolific writer, it was easy.

Other campaigns caught-on and began launching their own blogs, but theirs had other people posting on them beyond just the candidate.  We stayed behind the scenes.  That was the way the people at the top of the organization wanted it.  Had it become a full-blown campaign with an official announcement and the whole works, we would've expanded the blog to more contributors - we already had draft posts in the works at the time.  As the 2004 campaign continued, the candidates kept posting, but less often as election day approached.  Now it's something seen more in smaller campaigns than at the national level.  Look at any Congressional candidate's web site for the 2006 election and you'll see there's not much being written by the candidates themselves.

The thing about tiptoeing around blogging as a politician is that it can be like a mine field: if you step in the wrong place, your whole leg might get blown off.  This isn't really any different than saying something inane to Letterman, but it travels faster.  Most politician-candidates feel that this is not worth the risk, so they leave all of the blogging, commenting, heckling and trashing to those who are pretty much full-time political bloggers.  There are other issues to consider when blogging as a politician, of course, but that's for another day.

...
Originally posted at the Silicon Valley Moms Blog.

Labels: , ,