links for 2007-11-29
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 29th, 2007 8:19 am
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2007-11-28
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 28th, 2007 8:18 am
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
Live from St. Pete
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 28th, 2007 12:57 am 
Tomorrow morning, I’ll be heading down to St. Petersburg for the Republican Party of Florida CNN/YouTube debate. I’ll be blogging, vlogging, and Twittering throughout the event. After the debate, I plan to head into over to the spin room and hopefully catch a few words with the candidates and top staff, and turn the camera on the media types.
It’s been four months since the big Save the Debate fight, but a lot has changed since then. With 36 days to go till Iowa, this is now one of the last big debates of the cycle and could easily serve as a turning point, rewarding the candidate who is quick on his feet and attuned to the new media environment. Had the candidates simply accepted the September 17th date, the “Internet debate” wouldn’t have been anywhere near as crucial. Watch for this to be the most watched primary debate so far this cycle. Already, YouTube users have submitted more questions for the Republicans than for the much-hyped Democratic debate.
Four months ago, there was a real danger our candidates would get left permanently behind when it came to the dominant medium of the 21st century. The YouTube snub seemed to symbolize an indifference to competing with Democrats in a key strategic battleground.
Today, our candidates are getting it. Mike Huckabee is reinventing his campaign and surging in Iowa with help from his bloggers. Fred Thompson did get it for a while… until he sacked key new media savvy staffers like Mark Corallo and decided to run an uninspiring cookie cutter campaign. Mitt Romney crowdsourced admaking with results better than his traditional media team. And let’s not forget rhymes-with-Pon-Raul.
Republicans meet in St. Pete at the cusp of real success online. I for one am hoping they all do well tomorrow night.
![]()
Comments (1)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2007-11-27
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 27th, 2007 8:22 am-
My Huckabee Ranger account. This is slick. Excellent positioning with the left-side nav.
-
I may actually kick in ten bucks. This is cool.
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
Chris Bowers’ Tunnel Vision
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 26th, 2007 11:35 pmOnline politicos are always debating the right metrics for online political strength. TechPresident looks at site traffic, MySpace and Facebook friends, Meetup members, Eventful demands. I prefer harder metrics generated from the campaigns themselves, like money raised, e-mail list size, number of house parties, volunteers mobilized online.
If you’re Chris Bowers, none of that matters. Instead, what “stuns” Bowers is the Republicans’ “complete lack of creativity and self-directed content production.” He’s talking about some GOP user-generated video contests.
I’m not really sure why Republican activists have apparently no ability to engage in self-starting activism of this nature. I’ve floated some theories on this in the past, but this complete lack of creativity and self-directed content production stuns even me. Republicans are clearly facing a massive creativity gap at the grassroots level, one that cannot be easily explained away. …
Truly and utterly pathetic. Republicans seem to have created an army of zombies that can’t think for themselves. In the past, I have been reluctant to apply the term dittohead to the Republican rank and file, but their continuing failures to conduct any self-starting activism whatsoever is making the word more apt all the time.
This is esoteric to the nth degree. Not only does this not matter in the grand scheme of 2008. It doesn’t even particularly matter in the new media+politics space. Republicans don’t have as many people indulging their “creative”, artistic side. They’ll never win the Avenue A/Razorfish office straw poll.
In a nutshell: Republicans should resign themselves to endless Democratic victories because they don’t have the support of famous Hollywood directors like Rob Reiner and their wannabees.
In 2004, Democrats had all sorts of “creative” people making ads on their behalf. I seem to remember, based on some digging I did at the time, that the Hitler/MoveOn ad was made by someone at an ad agency in Seattle. As discussed at a post-election forum at the University of Pennsylvania, MoveOn also had Hollywood directors voluntarily submitting anti-Bush ads for air later in the cycle. Strangely enough, most of the ads — TLC’d in the mecca of creative genius — didn’t test as well as the dull and dark cookie cutter spots MoveOn aired instead.
But Bowers also ignores the most significant such contest held to date — Mitt Romney’s create-your-own ad contest, which received over 100 submissions. Smartly, Romney’s team provided users with the raw materials with which to remix spots, lowering the barriers to entry. The winning ad — which actually made it on the air where it could influence voters — was far better than anything the Romney media team had produced to date (a remarkable achievement considering the amateur ad-maker limited himself to the same footage used by the pros).
Bowers has to grasp at straws (focusing on ads made from scratch) because the Democratic field has become stagnant online while much of the interest and energy is surged to the Republicans. I don’t feel much kinship with supporters of rhymes-with-Pon-Raul but you can’t deny that in terms of “self-starting online activism,” the Paulbots run loops around the netroots. In October, second tier Mike Huckabee raised more online than second tier John Edwards and Chris Dodd combined — the top two finishers in the almighty Kos straw poll. Zephyr Teachout, Howard Dean’s former online community director, now says that Huckabee has the best online campaign of any candidate.
On the blogs too, top tier Democrats are conspicuously lacking in “self-starting online activism.” In October, unofficial candidate blogs for Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, and Thompson had three times the activity as unofficial blogs for Clinton, Obama, Edwards, and Richardson.
Rather than pointing fingers at Republican experimentation and innovation, Bowers would do better to examine the netroots’ failure to evolve since 2003, their staggering failure to inflict so much as a scratch on Hillary Clinton’s inevitability, and the fact that their online energy has been drained to celebrity-minded forums like Facebook and MySpace and in-house campaign email lists where candidates are free to ignore them. When Barack Obama, your best hope for defeating Hillary Clinton, feels free to flagrantly blow you off, what does that say for the vaunted influence of the netroots?
![]()
Comments (4)
Trackbacks (1)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
Ron Paul Has Won
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 26th, 2007 10:30 amHe won’t win the nomination. He won’t win any primaries. But for Ron Paul’s quixotic bid for the White House, it’s “Mission Accomplished.”
Take a look at this from Sunday’s Washington Post. Not just the article but the killer packaging:

In the past few months, Ron Paul has dramatically raised the profile of libertarianism inside the Republican Party. My small-l libertarian friends seem more comfortable describing themselves as such, even though they’ll go out of their way to disassociate themselves from Ron Paul and the big-L kind.
Libertarianism in the GOP took a big hit on 9/11, and it’s slowly coming back, with Ron Paul as the catalyst. Its underlying ideals still have appeal well beyond the cramped confines of the LP. If it’s possible to be known as a pro-life, pro-war, pro-wiretapping libertarian, then sign me up. Markos too brands himself a “libertarian Democrat,” though he’s never read Hayek and supports big government social programs.
Some campaigns can win big without ever coming close to winning an actual contest. Pat Robertson’s 1988 campaign signaled that Christian Conservatives had arrived in the GOP. Ron Paul is doing the same for libertarians. This is not a counterweight to the religious right per se, since Paul is identified as pro-life, but it does potentially open up a new army of activists on the right not primarily motivated by social/moral issues.
Not every losing single-issue candidate succeeds like this. Immigration-restrictionists still lack an outlet in the GOP, thanks to Tom Tancredo’s embarrassing tone-deafness as a candidate. Sam Brownback’s campaign had hoped to galvanize single-issue pro-lifers, but was hobbled by his dry persona. Duncan Hunter looks mostly like a campaign for Secretary of Defense.
Assuming Paul loses, where does small-l libertarianism go from here? His movement already did the smart thing by making peace with social conservatism. Libertarianism is no longer aligned with libertine stances on abortion and gay rights.
To become the ascendant ideology within the GOP, I suspect they’ll have to find a way to do the same thing on national security. The war on terror writ large is the one big thing social and economic conservatives agree on, and Ron Paul is vocally aligned against both.
Mainstream Republican libertarians might be gung-ho for Paul’s small-government idealism, they might adopt Glenn Reynoldsish skepticism of the homeland security bureaucracy, and even John McCain has lately made a thing of ripping the military-industrial complex, but there is no way — I repeat NO WAY — they will embrace Ron Paul if he continues to blame America for 9/11 and imply that America is acting illegally in defending itself around the globe. Even if they aren’t the biggest fans of the war, most people that are available for Ron Paul on the right are by temperament patriotic and will never vote for someone who sounds like Noam Chomsky.
As someone who routinely called myself a libertarian prior to 9/11, here’s how I would square the circle: Absolute freedom within our borders, for our own citizens; eternal vigilance and (when necessary) ruthlessness abroad. For libertarian ideals to survive, they must be relentlessly defended against the likes of Islamic extremists. Take a look at Andrew Sullivan’s writing right after 9/11 to see this ideal in its purest form; far from a religious crusade, ours was a war for secularism, tolerance, and free societies where gays don’t get stoned to death.
The key principle is one of reciprocity. If you behave peacefully and embrace the norms of a libertarian society, we leave you alone. If you seek to destroy a free society, we will destroy you.
If they’re serious about defending their ideals and seeing to it that libertarianism survives more than a generation in actual practice, I don’t see any reason why libertarians couldn’t embrace a more conservative positioning on national security.
![]()
Comments (93)
Trackbacks (1)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2007-11-26
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 26th, 2007 8:21 am-
Innovation starts with, wow, this really sucks. But what if…
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2007-11-25
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 25th, 2007 8:21 am
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2007-11-24
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 24th, 2007 8:21 am-
Funky new-age communist hippy Dem voting rules in Iowa…
-
I remember this, but the numbers bring it back in vivid form.
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2007-11-23
by Patrick Ruffini :: November 23rd, 2007 8:17 am-
American taxpayers have financed a military dictator in the hope that Musharraf will suppress the fundamentalists and provide logistical support for Nato operations in Afghanistan. Has this worked? No. Islamic militancy is mushrooming.



















