Twitter’s Political Index: The Newest Frontier in Democracy

Gone are the days of soapbox politics, trucks equipped with megaphones, and cardboard signs littering every intersection. Now the best way for a candidate to get their name out and reach voters is through mobile technology. From assessing voter sentiment to online political fundraising, the internet continues to become a staple in the modern day electoral process.

On the cusp of social media trends is the ever-increasing presence of Twitter. With the introduction of Twitter’s Political Index, up to the minute sentiments and public opinions are only a mouse click away. “Twitter teamed with data analysis firm Topsy and polling companies The Mellman Group and North Star Opinion Research in order to evaluate and weigh the sentiment of each day’s tweets regarding Barack Obama or Mitt Romney as compared to the 400 million tweets sent on other topics,” explains PCMag.com writer Stephanie Mlot. “Twitter doesn’t intend for the Index to replace traditional polling, but instead reinforce it, providing a better-rounded picture of the general public’s feelings toward the election.”
Adam Sharp, Twitter’s head of government, news, and social innovation commented on Twitter’s blog, “Just as new technologies like radar and satellite joined the thermometer and barometer to give forecasters a more complete picture of the weather, so too can the Index join traditional methods like surveys and focus groups to tell a fuller story of political forecasts.”
But really, how reliable is the information that is being posted concerning voter opinions on this new electoral resource? The first concern that comes to mind is that users of social media are probably in a younger demographic therefore skewing an accurate slice of what the voter demographic looks like. However, pingdom.com reports that the largest age bracket of Twitter users fall into the 35-44 year old category making up 25% of their audience and 64% of Twitter users are over the age of 35. (Just in case you’re interested, 61% of Facebook users are 35 and older.) Another question regarding reliability concerns whether or not the opinions voiced provide an accurate view of a slice of public opinion. Techland.Time.com shares that “the average Twitter user is a female, age 18-24, with a split between people making less than $30,000 and people making $50,000 – $74,999 a year. Most have a college degree or higher and live in an urban setting. The survey asked a random sample of 2,257 adults. Hispanic (18 percent) and African Americans (13 percent) are twice as likely to use Twitter than Whites (5 percent).”
So how does this political index actually work? BuzzFeed staff reporter Matt Buchanan has a great summary: “Topsy pores through every single tweet in real time, determines which ones are about Obama or Romney, and then assigns a sentiment score to each tweet based on its content. That is, whether it’s positive or negative toward Obama or Romney, and just how positive or negative it is. Add all the data up together and you have something like a real-time approval score for Obama and Romney, determined by what tens of millions of people are saying, which Twitter is going to release daily at election.twitter.com.”
Can you truly put your finger on the pulse of the nation just by logging on to Twitter’s Political Index? Sharp replies that the social media view often mirrors worldwide feelings regarding a candidate and that the last two years’ Political Index scores for President Obama often parallel his Gallup approval ratings, sometimes even foreshadowing future polling numbers.
The advantages to this new resource can be integral for future elections. Damage control, online fundraising, voter communication, streamlining hot topics, and political strategizing can enter into a whole new level with such a vast audience with information accessible in real time. The potential for this frontier is incredible and I am excited to see what happens next!

Will the Money Keep Pouring in for the Presidential Candidates?

Is it just me or does the road to the Oval Office keep getting longer? It seems like the presidential candidates have been battling it out for an immense amount of time and slowly but surely the field has been narrowed down to a few frontrunners. Will the fundraising dollars to support these monumental campaigns still pour in?

There are several reasons why this election is a landmark in our country’s recent history: first of all, this is the first time in the post Watergate era that neither candidate is choosing to accept public funds. Secondly, a large portion of the monies collected has come from Super PAC’s which were deemed acceptable by the Supreme Court in 2010. Finally, the use of social media to gain supporters and donor dollars has never been used to this extent in any previous election. These factors alone will cause a huge impact pertaining to the results in this November’s election.

Paul Blumenthal of The Huffington Post explains that, “The public matching-funds system began in 1976 in response to the campaign finance abuses of the Nixon administration, uncovered during Congress’ investigation of the Watergate scandal. Presidential candidates who can show broad support through fundraising across the various states become eligible to receive matching funds from the government so long as they abide by strict spending limits. These funds are available for both primary and general election campaigns.” In this election both candidates have declined this option in favor of garnering unlimited funds from individuals and are able to avoid spending limits.

Super PAC’s have been rather controversial but influential, nonetheless. “Super PACs and political nonprofits have already poured more than $100 million into the 2012 elections, much of that on negative ads. Independent group spending this time is expected to easily eclipse the record $304 million spent in the 2010 cycle,” comments Blumenthal.

Social media has been the third major influence on this year’s presidential election. Online ads with Yahoo, thousands of Tweets, the implementation of Facebook pages and countless text messages have become the norm concerning modern campaigning. Not only is this appealing to a newer generation of voters, but it is making politicians more accessible to the public. Online fundraising has also increased creating a whirlwind of support like never before.

The times are changing and so are the ways that the politicians are attempting to climb up Capitol Hill. The winner will be the one who incorporates all three avenues brilliantly.

The PAC Powerhouse of Political Campaign Fundraising

As I think back to the Constitution and the original form of our government in its essence of democratic purity, I can’t help but wonder what our forefathers would think of the current electoral process.

Would they be aghast at the immense amount of cash raised and spent? Would they be flabbergasted at political fundraising mixed with the advancement of technology? How would they feel about Super PACs? However, I also ponder if these questions are fair to pose in an apples-to-oranges comparison. In a world in which powdered wigs, wooden teeth and only male voters existed, do the same principles apply?

In a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, it was found that 69% of voters believe that PACs should be banned. Furthermore, 78% of independent voters believe that they should be eliminated. Do PACs really deserve such a bad rap?

Restore Our Future, the super PAC supporting former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, has already spent nearly $34 million in early presidential primary states on his behalf. Winning Our Future, a super PAC associated with former House speaker Newt Gingrich, has already gone through $16 million. President Obama is also gaining momentum using a PAC; Priorities USA Action is in effect and is run by two former White House aides.

The Washington Post reports that, “All told, super PACs have raised more than $130 million and spent $75 million in the 2012 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Given that the 2012 election isn’t for another eight months or so and that super PACs focused on House races have already begun to crop up, it’s easy to see that number cresting $500 million or even nearing $1 billion before the election is over.

What does the future hold for political fundraising? Online fundraising through sites like Fundly are at an all time high and the candidates are spending time, money and strategic planning on optimizing social networking. We’ll just have to wait and see how technology and major donor giving influences the outcome of the presidential election in November.

Republican Candidate Romney Looking for Individual Donors

Can $3 make an impact on determining the future President of the United States? According to Mitt Romney, it can!

“Donate $3 today to be automatically entered to be Mitt’s special guest for Election Night on Super Tuesday,” reads an email appeal from the Romney campaign to supporters. A video was also put on the web petitioning donors to give $20 to battle the “Obama Attack Machine.” With the power of the Super PAC’s and Romney’s own personal bank account rivaling that of a small nation, why would these miniscule gifts tip the scales in Romney’s favor?

Reporters Matea Gold and Melanie Mason from the Chicago Tribune wrote that, “Although he has outstripped his Republican rivals in fundraising, he also is burning through cash. Romney spent money nearly three times faster than he raised it in January, leaving him with $7.7 million. Since then, his campaign has shelled out at least $2.7 million for television advertising alone, according to sources familiar with the ad buys.”

Furthermore, Romney’s donor numbers are vastly different than his political rivals. Just 9 percent of the nearly $63 million Romney raised through the end of January came from supporters who gave $200 or less. The Campaign Finance Institute found that two-thirds of the money he has raised so far has come from donors who have given $2,500. However, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, as well as President Barack Obama, have had about half of their funding come in from small donors.

Online political fundraising is definitely proving to be the favored choice for candidates to reach the masses. “Romney’s campaign is trying to reverse that imbalance by soliciting single-digit donations via the Web. 

That’s a tactic regularly used by the Obama campaign to gather new email addresses for future fundraising,” reports Gold and Mason.

So which is more important: investing more time into smaller donations to gain voter support or investing less time into major donors to garner more money? With democracy, I would have to say it’s both.

Romney Continues to Lead GOP in Political Fundraising

How many dollars does it take to win the Oval Office? That seems to be the billion dollar question of the hour. In a capitalist society, supporters plus donations can’t be entered into a well formulated calculation to determine the outcome of an election.  However, if money makes the world go round, than campaign season must have the earth ready to spin off of its axis.

It’s clear that running for president must be one of the most expensive investments anyone could make. Time, money, energy and emotional stamina are all high costs for the candidates to imbue into any campaign to have even the slightest chance for victory. Mitt Romney is certainly paying his dues as his commitment to being a contender in the 2012 presidential is paying off as he leads the pack of GOP hopefuls.

Romney is currently at the top of the list of the six Republican presidential candidates and boasts of raising over $56 million dollars for his campaign, according to the New York Times ($24 million came in during the last three months of 2011). GooglePost.com states that, “Romney drew in $24 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 alone and is going into the new year with more than $19 million cash on hand. Romney’s fundraising figures dwarfs the other Republican presidential candidates in comparison… Rivals Texas Rep. Ron Paul collected $13 million in the fourth quarter while former House speaker Newt Gingrich raised $9 million.”
So with an unrivaled amount of fundraising numbers from other GOP contenders, it seems like Romney’s biggest obstacle to the White House would be the incumbent who has currently raised approximately $88 million according to opensecrets.com.

How does Romney’s fundraising savvy compete with recent history candidates? “Romney’s fourth quarter total is competitive with what then-Sens. Hillary Clinton ($27 million) and Barack Obama ($23.5 million) brought in over the final three months of 2007 and dwarfs the amount that eventual GOP nominee John McCain raised during that period ($10 million). Romney also raised more in the final quarter of 2011 than then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush did in the final three months of 1999 ($11 million),” explains a report in The Washington Post.

While Barrack Obama still may lead the pack in political fundraising, it seems that Romney is up to the challenge for competing for funds. Both are mastering the skills it takes to garner online support and both are using social media in the political realm like never before.

Social Media is Changing How Candidates Garner Support

The days before the Internet are about as inconceivable as the time before TV remote controls were used and Henry Ford’s invention of the car. When something becomes such an integral part of our everyday life, it somehow seems that it was always there. The same feels true concerning the upcoming 2012 presidential election and the use of social media and the internet. How in the world did candidates share their opinions, platforms and garner funds without this vital piece of technology?

There is one Republican presidential candidate who is truly using this resource to its potential. In fact, the Internet is probably the main factor contributing to the fact that he is still in the running to be the next president. Buddy Roemer, former Governor of Louisiana, is putting all of his eggs into this digital basket. Alex Fitzpatrick writes on Mashable that “The first move the campaign made was hire a social media firm to create its website. Roemer’s team has been actively building an online team of supporters called ‘Free to Lead,’ which Sierra calls the campaign’s ‘online army.’”

“Online is the most important part of our campaign,” Campaign Manager Carlos Sierra says. This certainly seems to be the case since “the Governor’s campaign is unlike that of any other Republican presidential hopefuls. As a staunch supporter of campaign finance reform, he’s refusing donations from Super PACs and he has limited contributions to $100 per individual. A whopping 98% of Roemer’s donations were made online.

“Roemer’s team has spent virtually all its advertising budget on digital ads, eschewing traditional media with the exception of radio (Roemer is using Fundly, an online donation tool, to raise money for more radio airtime,” explains Fitzpatrick.

Roemer is also creatively using Twitter and YouTube to gain a following. On Twitter “So far 121 people have donated their accounts, allowing his campaign to tweet through their accounts daily to 62,664 unique followers” and he is streaming a bunch of videos on YouTube.

It will be fascinating to see how Roemer’s efforts using technology and popular social media networks will impact his progress in the current campaign and how it will impact future fundraising. Fundly is excited to be a resource used by Roemer and we strive to create the best online products for all of our clients, whether they are in the political or philanthropic arenas.

Facebook Changing the Political Landscape

The times are definitely changing. No longer are buttons that say “I Like Ike” or traditional door-to-door canvassing enough in the campaign world. In these times of fast-paced media, iPads, laptops and iPhones, candidates are turning to social media to gain approval and public support from voters.

Laura Phelps writes in the Miami Herald that many local and presidential candidates are putting a lot more stock into social media sites. Consultant Josh Koster, a managing partner at Chong and Koster, a progressive digital-media communications firm, said “campaign budgets used to be about two things: raising money and spending it on TV. But this year’s budgets reflect today’s new media market as more Americans go to the Internet for news. This is the first major election cycle that online strategy is receiving a large media budget for advertising.”

Michael Beach, a co-founder of the Republican digital-strategy firm Targeted Victory, estimates that approximately 25% of a candidate’s budget is designated for online strategies. He believes that while social media won’t fully replace commercial spots and voter recruitment campaigns, it will continue to have a larger role in the upcoming election and beyond.

Phelps brings up some interesting figures when it comes to politics and the internet. She states that, “60 percent of all U.S. adults and 76 percent of U.S. adult Internet users are on Facebook, according to the Pew Research Center.” Furthermore, “22 percent of adults online used social networking sites such as Facebook to connect with campaigns or learn about the election.”

“Facebook and social media make it much easier to organize to raise money and to engage supporters because successful campaigns ultimately are about social organizing,” said Andrew Rasiej, a co-founder of techPresident, a blog that covers how candidates use Web technology. “If a political conversation is happening on Facebook, then to be able to donate where the conversation is happening is key.”

Obviously Facebook and Twitter aren’t just affecting how people are socializing, but it also is impacting the political world and how voters are choosing to support their candidate. Fundly is proud to be a part of this monumental change on the electoral horizon with so much emphasis on social media, and we are excited to participate as a democracy and technology partner together to reach the masses. We have several candidates using our social fundraising platform to reach their supporters, collect donations,  and we would love to come aside your campaign to help you achieve your potential.

Presidential Election 2012: Is History Repeating Itself?

I came across an intriguing article in the Huffington Post written by Al Checchi that really got me thinking about the upcoming 2012 Presidential Election. There are some striking similarities to the election in the 1980’s in which Ronald Reagan became our president and the pattern seems to continue some 30 years later. Is there nothing new under the sun?

Now think back with me to 1980, when the country was in a similar economic recession that we are facing today. President Carter’s approval rates were declining and many Democrats scoffed at the thought of extreme right winger and former actor Ronald Reagan becoming the Republican candidate for office. Many people were discontent with their financial situation, the U.S’s declining global influence and the expansion of government. Sound familiar?

Checchi writes that, “Seventy-five percent of the public feels that we are on the wrong track… As in 1980, Republican primary voters appear poised to cast aside another eminently qualified centrist and do the arguably more unthinkable and nominate for the presidency the former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich. Again, they appear to seek the more radical alternative…Democrats who are gleeful at the prospect of a race against the controversial Gingrich would do well to remember their similar elation over the Reagan nomination. Not only did the ‘amiable dunce’ and ‘right wing’ Reagan win a smashing electoral college victory (489 to 49) but he led his party to an unimagined gain of twelve seats and reversed fifty years of Democratic control of the Senate. Equally noteworthy, he went on to win an even greater 525-13 re-election victory and ushered in an era of significant political realignment.”

I think this is going to be an exciting year for politics and so far the race is far too close to predict who our next president will be. I’m surprised at the balance much of the media is providing; it seems that every day I find equal articles stating why President Obama will win or why Newt Gingrich is going to be the new president, or others close in the polls like Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Michele Bachmann. Mr. Obama is clearly campaigning with all his might, but Gingrich is gaining speed and political fundraising savvy at a surprising rate.

All I know is that on November 6, 2012, I’ll be glued to my TV and laptop like the rest of the nation.

Romney Continues to Lead GOP in Political Fundraising

How many dollars does it take to win the Oval Office? That seems to be the billion dollar question of the hour. In a capitalist society, supporters plus donations can’t be entered into a well formulated calculation to determine the outcome of an election.  However, if money makes the world go round, than campaign season must have the earth ready to spin off of its axis.

It’s clear that running for president must be one of the most expensive investments anyone could make. Time, money, energy and emotional stamina are all high costs for the candidates to imbue into any campaign to have even the slightest chance for victory. Mitt Romney is certainly paying his dues as his commitment to being a contender in the 2012 presidential is paying off as he leads the pack of GOP hopefuls.

Romney is currently at the top of the list of the six Republican presidential candidates and boasts of raising over $56 million dollars for his campaign, according to the New York Times ($24 million came in during the last three months of 2011). GooglePost.com states that, “Romney drew in $24 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 alone and is going into the new year with more than $19 million cash on hand. Romney’s fundraising figures dwarfs the other Republican presidential candidates in comparison… Rivals Texas Rep. Ron Paul collected $13 million in the fourth quarter while former House speaker Newt Gingrich raised $9 million.”

So with an unrivaled amount of fundraising numbers from other GOP contenders, it seems like Romney’s biggest obstacle to the White House would be the incumbent who has currently raised approximately $88 million according to opensecrets.com.

How does Romney’s fundraising savvy compete with recent history candidates? “Romney’s fourth quarter total is competitive with what then – Sen. Hillary Clinton ($27 million) and Barack Obama ($23.5 million) brought in over the final three months of 2007 and dwarfs the amount that eventual GOP nominee John McCain raised during that period ($10 million). Romney also raised more in the final quarter of 2011 than then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush did in the final three months of 1999 ($11 million),” explains a report in The Washington Post.

While Barrack Obama still may lead the pack in political fundraising, it seems that Romney is up to the challenge for competing for funds. Both are mastering the skills it takes to garner online support and both are using social media in the political realm like never before.

Is the Middle Class the Battlefield for the 2012 Presidential Election?

I’ve read countless articles proclaiming that the Latino voters, swing states, Baby Boomers and many other factions will be the group for the 2012 presidential candidates to win over in order to control the Oval Office. Now, the newest members of society to be targeted are the middle class. Is there any truth to this latest claim?

On ABCNews.go.com, Associated Press reporter Erica Werner explains the important role that the middle class will play in the upcoming election come November 2012. “Highlighted by the Occupy movement and fanned by record profits on Wall Street at a time of stubborn unemployment, economic inequality is now taking center stage in the 2012 presidential campaign, emphasized by Obama and offering opportunities and risks for him and his GOP opponents as both sides battle for the allegiance of the angst-ridden electorate.”

Just for argument’s sake I looked up on Wikipedia who makes up the middle class and how many people are included in this broad, loosely used term. There are several models and definitions being used which can include anywhere between 25% to 66% of American households. Generically speaking, it’s anyone who makes an individual income equal to or greater than the national median of $32,000 or a $46,000 income for a household. On the high side it includes incomes varying from the low six figures. Clear as mud, right?

So, now that we know who is in the middle class (um, sort of), why is this group of voters so important for the candidates to earn their support, both financially and in the voting booth? Werner explains that, “Obama is viewed as more likely to help the middle class than is the GOP, so he can capitalize on this by playing on concerns about inequality and contrasting his positions and the GOP’s on issues like tax cuts for the wealthy,’ John Sides, political science professor at George Washington University, said by email. ‘However,’ Sides added, ‘it’s an open question whether that strategy would enable him to overcome a weak economy and win.’”

With unemployment reaching 8%, social security dwindling and the weakening of the value of the dollar, the middle class are taking the brunt of the economic downturn. With the broadening gap between the rich and the poor, the middle class seems to be in the crossfire of a precarious future. Whether the Democrats or Republicans can restore confidence to this cautious group will very likely have a major impact on who the future leader of this country will be.

As the political fundraising for candidates on both sides heats up to fund more ads and build support, online platforms like Fundly make fundraising easy for candidates and their supporters to raise money fast via social media.