links for 2008-03-31
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 31st, 2008 7:36 am-
Interesting. Mark this.
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-30
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 30th, 2008 7:30 am
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-29
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 29th, 2008 7:31 am-
This approach — not directly asking for donations — has been part of the campaign’s strategy of slow-walking its way into supporters’ wallets. Newcomers are led to a blog and an online store and are offered a chance to join local Obama groups.
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-25
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 25th, 2008 7:18 am-
Low dollar fundraising in the GOP primary in 2007: Paul $17.1M, Fred $9.3M, McCain $8.5M, Romney $6.4M, Rudy $4.1M, Tanc $3.2M (!), Huck $3.1M
-
There is a corollary effect here: As the value of the package declines, the value of the individual article increases.
-
“[C]onservatives succeeded only once they learned to rely on networking over hierarchy, on talented people over specific projects, and on ideas over marketing.” What we need today. Must read.
![]()
Comments (1)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
1M+ Donations to Obama in March
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 24th, 2008 11:50 am(Correction? See update.)
If you’re a Republican (like me), it’s time to grab the Rolaids again.
According to publicly available donor data on BarackObama.com, the Obama campaign has already received more than one million individual donations in March. Obama had received 727,972 donations in his record-breaking $55 million February. And we still have a week to go in the month.

[Update: The Obama campaign has pulled down the original graphic in response to this post, but not the version at Ben Smith’s, so I’ve reposted a screengrab of that here.]
This graphic stood at 963,525 just as February was turning into March (note: a script seems to run that increments this old graphic in 2,000 chunks, but it was accurate in February).
What this means in terms of a bottom line number for March is anyone’s guess, though it appears highly unlikely (to me, at least) that the campaign won’t exceed its February haul. The average contribution plummeted from around $140 in January to $75 in February. If the lower February number holds, that could mean $75 million raised already this month. But it seems likely that the average contribution would have drifted further down still as repeat donors become a bigger slice of the pie. Here are arguments on both sides of the ledger though:
Why the Number Could Be High: What was happening at the end of the last month with Obama’s online donors? It was the One Million campaign, with the pitch of making a matched donation to reel in new donors with the goal of reaching one million donors to the campaign. The logic behind this seems to suggest a very high number of small donations, as people chip in $5 or $10 to help the campaign get towards its million donor goal. Crucially, the goal was set in numbers, not dollars, making gift size less important. The Obama campaign has done relatively little goal-based fundraising in March, so online contribution averages may have drifted up to more normal levels with less of a frenzy to meet a goal.
Why the Number Could Be Lower: We already saw at the end of February how the Obama campaign was getting tapped out of new donors. Towards the end of the month, they seemed to be reeling in 5 donations for every 1 new donor recruited. That ratio is likely to have been even higher in March (with even more donations this month than last it almost certainly has, in fact). And the first-time donors are the ones likely make larger contributions in excess of $100. For repeat donors, it’s more likely to be $25 here, $50 there. More donor longevity means smaller donation averages.
What It Means: That Obama was able to attract so much support in March is nothing short of staggering, given the bad month he has had, from perceived losses in Ohio/Texas to the Jeremiah Wright controversy. Or Obama donors could be rallying to his side in troubled times (look how Hillary was able to reel in donations after announcing a self-loan).
The accelerating pace of donations demonstrates conclusively the snowball effect that kicks in the longer a successful low-dollar fundraising base has been in place. In a sense, it seems to be momentum-proof. It also suggests a campaign that has become tethered to its supporter base as if by umbilical cord. Given the omnidirectional reinforcement supporters get from the email channel, the earned media channel, and the social channel, online donors are constantly connected to the campaign, even in slower periods. There is no limit to number of contacts a campaign can effectively have (unlike in direct mail), as the campaign is “always on” regardless of how many emails or Will.i.am videos one receives.
I also wonder if the huge March number is also a factor of recurring monthly contributions really paying off in a big way.
Whatever the total, Obama looks headed to a monster March in fundraising. $55M would be a low estimate.
UPDATE: Ben Smith noticed this yesterday, and the Obama campaign is claiming a technical “glitch” in the counter but won’t say how much it’s off by. The graphic seemed to be rising at improbably high rates after it was yanked from the site in February, however the number of donations was accurate.
![]()
Comments (22)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-24
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 24th, 2008 7:17 am-
How Internet jobs are becoming integrated into offline jobs.
-
Great people shouldn’t have a resume.
-
Good tips on email from Mike Arrington
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-23
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 23rd, 2008 7:18 am-
Search as the universal gateway to web content
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-22
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 22nd, 2008 7:21 am-
Diabolical.
![]()
Comments (1)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
links for 2008-03-21
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 21st, 2008 7:21 am-
Wow.
![]()
Comments (0)
Trackbacks (0)
del.icio.us
digg it
subscribe
Defending Soren Dayton
by Patrick Ruffini :: March 20th, 2008 11:33 pmEarlier today, Soren Dayton, a friend and frequent collaborator in the blogosphere, was suspended from the McCain campaign for making a note of this video in his Twitter account.
A few notes here. I use Twitter a lot. And I’m “looser” on Twitter than I would be on my blog. My Twitter account has been updated 2,863 times since last June, while I’ve only penned no more than a couple hundred mostly long-form blog entries. My Twitter posts contain a lot of rough thoughts that are then refined into blog posts. So, there’s a greater volume of chatter, and the sense that the tool operates more like a secure backchannel than a public blog.
Of course, this is really an illusion. Everything you say on Twitter is publicly accessible, unless you choose to protect your updates for friends only. If you can screencap it, folks in Peoria on the other side of the Fox News filter won’t care if it was Twittered or blogged. This is a stark reminder that anything that you write on a social media site, now matter how “protected” is ultimately just as accessible as anything you put out in any other medium. (It didn’t take long for people to sniff out “Kristen’s” Facebook profile.)
I’m not going to argue that Soren was right in posting the link. But I do agree with Matt Lewis that there was some overreaction here. If they go further with this civility routine, they risk alienating conservatives in talk radio and the blogosphere who are doing the necessary work of defining Obama and rendering him just as radioactive with the base as Hillary.
A month ago, McCain-Obama looked like a bad matchup for us: a Republican nominee who didn’t do much to galvanize the base against a Democrat who didn’t either.
The New York Times kerfuffle and now the Wright story is slowly changing that. With an assist from Hillary Clinton’s overtures to the right-wing of the Democratic Party, Obama is now a more polarizing figure in key swing states than she is. It is now clear that conservative media will do to Obama what they did to Kerry, Gore, and Clinton. This can be an unalloyed boon to the McCain campaign, as it pretty much takes care of his conservative problem and frees him to go after swing voters.
This is not about “Barack Hussein Obama” or Muslim smear emails, which need to be repudiated. It is about a Presidential candidate’s literary muse going all Susan Sontag on us on the Sunday after 9/11. It is connecting the dots on the post-patriotic milieu that surrounds Obama seemingly everywhere he goes. These are legitimate issues for public discussion, if not by McCain himself, then certainly by talk radio and the blogs. If McCain doesn’t want to be part of that, that’s understandable. But he should get out of the way and let talk radio do its thing.
In many ways, the Bush campaign had the right approach with the Swift Boat Veterans. Any functionary or board member who had been connected in any way with the Swift Vets resigned from the campaign. The campaign told them — and, crucially, any 527 — to take down their ads. They repeated that they respected Kerry’s service — without turning into a mouthpiece for the Kerry Vietnam narrative.
But nothing was done to single out or disrespect John O’Neill and the other veterans who had earned their right to speak. The tone was firm but respectful.
With this campaign, there has been a tendency to do the necessary distancing, but with sharper words and a sense that freelancers are thrown willfully under the bus. First, Bill Cunningham, who was an important part of Ohio GOTV in the ‘04 election. Now this.
It is pretty well understood by most serious people that the Rev. Wright is not a racial/foreigner/Muslim issue, nor was it an unprovoked attack on Obama on these grounds, not in the way Ferraro was, or the Somali email that Clinton’s staff circulated without reprimand (which was 10x worse than this, btw), or Bill Clinton’s South Carolina comments.
I’m not suggesting the McCain campaign traffic in it directly. Politically, they probably had to do what they did today. Most people in this business understand that moves like are a game – a show — that the campaigns put on for the media, that won’t swing a single vote at the end of the day — but that if handled poorly, could cascade into a larger issue. See: Clinton, Bill — South Carolina.
But what I am suggesting is that McCain in the future calibrate his response to different situations, and recognize the value in drawing certain personal contrasts with Obama. Voters are motivated less and less by issues, and more by personalities and narratives. So, a key McCain strategic goal is to turn the Obama persona in against itself, so that the rock star/Messiah/hopeandchange routine turns into a liability in dead-serious times when people are worried about losing their jobs and/or getting killed.
The challenge in modern Presidential campaign is not simply to paint your opponent as wrong on the issues, and to prevail in a civil debate. It is to render the opponent unacceptable to 48% of the electorate, and merely less preferable to 3%. Despite McCain’s troubles with the base, conservative media (and Hillary) are doing the heavy lifting on the unacceptable part. McCain should get out of the way, and jump in ONLY when someone crosses a racial and/or religious line.



















