« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

A Primer for Rich Donors Who Got Taken to the Cleaners by Republican Consultants

When consultants told rich donors who were funding them that they were not making money off the Super PAC’s that the rich idiots . . . er . . . donors funded, they were being honest. They probably were not.

But ad heavy Super PACs outsourced the ad buys, the mail, the data collection, etc. to other groups that got commissions and you can be sure that a lot of these supposedly noble consultants working for free were making a killing off of commissions, referral fees, etc. through their relationships with the commissioned vendors doing the actual work. Read this old post of mine for a sampling of how these consultants can make money without actually making money.

Just as important as making money for these guys was control over the data. In fact, in singular importance this campaign season has been the buzz word “data.” But what the hell is that data and why is it so important?

Well, for starters, let me fill you in on one piece of technology that flew under the radar this season. It is called Gravity and it is probably the only major piece of campaign technology to come out of 2012 with a proven track record. About the only major donor on the right to have come into contact with it was Joe Ricketts. And Ricketts only came into contact with it because he was smart enough to direct Ending Spending, his group, to work with existing, small groups on the ground. About the only major group to use it was FreedomWorks, which, unlike a lot of other big groups on the right, decided not to go proprietary, but to go for winning at all costs. [See update in the next paragraph regarding Heritage Action for America]

It was the existing small groups like American Majority Action and the Madison Project using Gravity primarily and those groups were instrumental in its creation. With the exception of FreedomWorks, virtually everybody else went out to build their own thing. In fact, several of the very well known consultants as seen on TV and others you never see did their best to kill Gravity, stop it from being built, and convince donors who came into contact with it to defund the groups or pressure those groups to move away from Gravity. [UPDATE: I'm told Heritage Action for America joined FreedomWorks as two of the only major groups to use Gravity.]

Gravity, in fact, explains a lot about how the donors got so screwed in much the same way the RNC screwed itself with Voter Vault.

To understand Gravity, you rich donors need a basic primer. You may think you know this stuff, but I bet you really don’t. Let me break it down for you.

Of the 100% of Americans who exist, about 66% are eligible to vote. These are all rough estimates.

40% are actually registered to vote.

25% of the total American population will probably, actually go vote.

Therefore, a candidate needs 13% of the population to win.

But, and this is a big but, of the 25% of the population that can and does vote, 9% will vote straight Democrat usually and 8% will vote straight Republican.

That leaves 8% left.

2% of that 8% of people will be single issue voters. Of that 2%, most of the single issue voters will tilt slightly to the GOP on issues of guns or abortion, but there are also single issue pro-choice voters, single issue anti-gun voters, single issue gay rights voters, etc.

That all leaves 6% of the population. In other words, to win an election, a candidate must really get 4% of the population to support him because that is the majority of the undecided 6%. A Republican must get a bit more, but then can draw from single issue voters a bit more than Democrats.

Those percentages are the foundation of the data. But the data is more complicated than that.

To win a campaign, a campaign must win a state or a lesser division of a state.

Each state is broken down into congressional districts. Each congressional district covers parts or all of counties or, in Louisiana, parishes. Each county is further divided in precincts. Each precinct is divided into census tracts.

A campaign can determine a pretty solid estimate of how many votes it needs to win by going down to the precinct of each county in America.

Every precinct has a “dead dog” race that defines who the yellow dog Democrats are and who the pure Republicans are. These are the voters for either side who will vote for the dead dog over someone in the other party. A great example of this would be Angela E. Speir in Georgia.

Ms. Speir ran for the Georgia Public Service Commission as a Republican in 2002, when Democrats still controlled Georgia. She spent roughly $7,000.00 for this statewide office and won. For a long time, her race was the dead dog race. If someone wanted to see what a generic Republican and a generic Democrat would get in a particular precinct, her race was the one to establish that number given it was a statewide race in which she had no name ID and spent less than $10,000.00.

Find that number in each precinct for each party and that is the base number each side needs in a district.

Now, take a comparable race to the one you are running. Let’s say the 2008 Presidential race for the 2012 Presidential race.

First, population will have to be adjusted based on population growth or decline in registered voters in a precinct. Then start with the dead dog election numbers as a base of support and see how many votes Barack Obama and John McCain got in the precinct compared to that dead dog election. The variance from the dead dog election gets the margin of persuadable voters for 2012.

If, for example, the dead dog election established that 5,000 voters will always vote Democrat no matter what and Barack Obama got 8,000 votes in the precinct, then there are probably 3,000 persuadable voters in 2012.

Factor in new voters in the precinct whose voting history is not known, newly registered voters, etc. and suddenly you have a number. That number is the number of persuadable voters in the district beyond the base of the party you are working with. Those are the people volunteers must reach out to.

But how to reach out to them?

Well, one great way to start is consumer information. Does the person subscribe to Field & Streams? If so, probably an outdoorsman. Check NRA memberships. If both line up, you probably have a persuadable who leans GOP. The same works on the other side.

Take the voter data, lay consumer data and direct voter contact information on top, and suddenly the job of winning a campaign becomes very manageable. There is a defined, quantifiable list of voters to reach out to, keep up with, and track toward Election Day. More importantly, you will know what issues will resonate best with that persuadable voter.

That, my rich friends, is the data.

And every damn thing you fund should be targeted at collecting that data.

That is what Gravity did and does. That is why so many rich Republican consultants tried and are trying still to kill it. Why?

Because the folks behind Gravity chose not to control the data. All the consultants want to control the data. That is where they make the money. If they control the data, they are in charge. Again, go read this from January of 2009.

See, my rich friends, you think you are in charge. But go ask your Super PAC friends where the data is. Tell them you want the data. More importantly, ask them how they did the layers for the data. Did they layer consumer information on top of voter data or the opposite? Surprisingly, you can get completely different results putting voter data on top of consumer data, instead of adding consumer data to a known, quantifiable pool of voters. The latter is more accurate, saves time, and is what the Obama team did that the GOP largely did not do. It is what the Democrats did with their Catalist program.

Instead, you rich donors funded a bunch of Super PACs that spent a lot of money on ads, making killer commissions for the ad guys, did a lot of mail that made killer commissions for the mail guys, and did a lot of technology smoke and mirror baloney that made you feel like you were reaching persuadable, when really you were peeing money down a rat hole.

You got played.

Now I’ve just explained how to do real voter outreach to you. Now I’ve explained what the real data is and why it is so valuable. There are groups out there like Gravity doing this with smart donors and giving it to Tea Party groups so everyone can use the data, instead of setting up some consultant to be the king maker and power broker.

So rich guy, you want to win or you want to be the gate keeper? Right now, you are a gate keeper and you aren’t even keeping your money. Time to do better. Time to understand what the data is and that you want it collected, but not hordes if you want to win.

I don’t make a penny off Gravity, have no business relationship to anyone affiliated with Gravity, but I know the guys involved and I know they did it right, I know it worked well, and I know many of the very same consultants you rich guys funded tried to kill Gravity because it would end the consultants’ monopoly on the real data.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

  • davesinsanantonio

    Let’s hope they listen. Spending money is necessary. Throwing money away is foolish. Spending money ineffectively is throwing it away. Spending money for A when the other guy is only selling B won’t ever get you what you want. So, don’t buy your tires at a jewelry store. Don’t buy your jewelry at the grocery. Also beware of the guy who is giving you treasure for free. Remember TANSTAAFL! (There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch-Milton Friedman). If somebody tells you he is giving you something of value for free, grab your wallet and run the other way! TANSTAAFL! (Pronounced tahnstahful for ease of conversation.) And, it us universally true no matter how many times the libs claim differently.

  • tlhanger

    In a perfect world this all makes sense. But what about the counties that you are collecting the data and you understand it. Then election day the vote goes 114%, which is downright fraud. Or the counties that it shows not one single vote went for the Republicans and you know that is fraud too. Until the fraud gets addressed and voter ID laws (which are common sense) go into effect. Until people get jail time for massive fraud it will go on and no matter what you do, you will lose.

  • gscandlen

    Seems to me there is one other element you are leaving out — the 26% who are eligible but not registered to vote. I would not assume these people are lost. Maybe they have never been asked.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Loren Heal

    Fraud is a distraction. Sure, groups like Truethevote.org are needed, but they would not be if the Party were doing its job with GOTV, and especially with poll workers doing turnout checking. Until then, someone (outside the Party) has to investigate and report the abuses.

    But go and find a Republican who voted in the precincts that went 100% Obama.

    I’ll wait.

    There should be at least one Republican who voted in every precinct: the precinct committeeman (or chair or whatever the state calls them). Then, if a 100% number comes in, he’ll be in a position to say that he voted Republican and can claim fraud. But the 0/100 precincts don’t have any presence at all.

    And that is why we lost. Obama out-organized us. Was there fraud? Probably, because many of the groups in their alliance are scummy mobsters. But they were only able to carry it out because the Republican Party failed to organize on the ground.

  • jimmyg

    Thank you Loren. Erick is telling us how to win an election and some still are looking for reasons to justify the loss of an election.

  • tsullivan

    I agree with you both, and may I also submit that fielding an actual Christian conservative wouldn’t hurt either.

  • mlaforet

    Very good article…run it by some of the hot shots of the GOP, or get a replacement for Karl Rove & Preibus,who really understands this stuff

  • gwalt

    Erick,
    Great analysis. But in reality, we cold run Ronald Reagan, Jesus Christ or even Allah and if they have Republican after their name the media would expend billions of dollars of hours of air time destroying them. The soft porn Liberal morning shows indoctrinate with ever so touch freely Liberal feels goods. The media has taken the country so far left that anything center, moderate ( actual not manufactured) is now extreme right.
    Your child is a racist homophobe backwards thinking toothless gun nut bible toting sister marrying illiterate nut scratcher ……if they don’t embrace the left handed one armed black lesbian transsexual transgender atheist vegan.
    Destroy George Stephanopouls’ career ( to start). They expended (according to John Ziegler, your guest at RS 2009) $5,000,000,000 in 2008 and at least that in 2012 leading to an 18 point advantage. Reading Tim Groseclose and scientifically proven the bias gives Dems 8% in every election.
    We call them Mainstream Media, media. The “news”, etc.
    They have names and faces. Get a communications firm, Ari Fleischers outfit, or form a new firm to place ads, run PR to out the “anchors”. They control the message.
    Obama=God.
    Romney=Satan.
    We don’t need another Fox, Rush or Drudge or even Erick. We need to destroy the “medias” credibility.
    Period.

  • kywn

    What wealthy Republicans need is some sort of advocate so when they consume goods and services that turn out to be fraudulent that advocate could step in and do something to stop the fraud and prevent it from happening in the future. We could call it a “Consumer Advocate”. I heard Elizabeth Warren was interested in heading up this type of work, but Conservatives decided instead to launch her into becoming a United States Senator so she’s unavailable :) I also heard Scott Brown was fired from his last job so he might need work.

  • misterjayem

    Please consider this a possible explanation: Sometimes, when people aren’t buying what you’re selling, it’s simply the free market(place of ideas) at work.

    – MrJM

  • remalimo

    Gwalt, I do agree with you but we need to start now. For instance Ms. Rice is being offered up as a sacrafice for this admin. Wash. Post (WP)has attacked the Rep. that has stated or requested that Ms. Rice not be promoted to Sec. of State. WP has called the 80 or so Rep’s Biggots and other derogatory names. The Reps should have respond to the acquisations of the Biggoted Editorial Board by stating that the Bd apparently believes that Ms. Rice does not have the credentials or qualifications to qualify for the job so the Bd has to help her to get the job by slandering some 80 or so other people to get the job by intimidation.

  • justoneboomer

    Disclosure: I’m a lurker on Red State. You would consider me a liberal Democrat, but I do not bury my head in “liberal” media. Yeah. I watch MSNBC. But, I also watch Fox and read RedState every day. (Sorry, but I jjust can’t deal with Rush.)

  • http://eremitic-fellow.blogspot.com/ rbrianc

    Someone isn’t getting a Christmas card from Karl Rove this year.

  • evilbloggerlady

    Mon Dieu! Are you and Erik suggesting that rich Republicans were not well served by certain consultants? Who could that be?

  • t_cal

    Erick,

    I’m a software developer, and I would love to volunteer to work on Gravity. Who can I contact?

    Travis

  • constitutionalconservative

    Very good article, Erick, with a lot of wisdom. But it’s undermined by your being sloppy with numbers. Romney took the vote of a bit less than 20% of fotal American population (60.5 million of about 310 million) and lost his race. Your numbers might be a bit more accurate for a state-level race in an off-year election. So in the Presidential election of 2012, getting 20% of Americans to vote for you was a losing proposition, never mind your 13% number. In an article like this, getting the numbers at least approximately right is important.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Gravity’s team has a site at http://powerofgravity.com/ I believe.

  • http://www.powerofgravity.com ReaganConservative3

    I am a partner in Political Gravity, so please shoot me an email to marmstrong@politicalgravity.com Thanks!

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    The RNC actually provided a tool that precinct committeemen could have used. Not as good as Gravity or rVotes (the latter was pitched by its owner to the RNC and was up and running in Iowas, Ohio and Florida (and other states) and, therefore, easily could have been used by the Romney campaign). Here’s an article about GOP Data Center:

    http://www.redstate.com/coldwarrior/2012/08/19/rnc-provides-you-a-gotv-tool-for-getting-conservative-vinos-to-the-polls-will-you-use-it/

    Here’s an article about rVotes, etc., and what could have been:

    http://www.redstate.com/coldwarrior/2011/12/14/a-glimpse-into-party-politics-and-will-you-be-voting-for-your-national-convention-delegates/

    Conservatives who happen to be aligned with FreedomWorks or tea parties or right-to-life or whatever conservative group it happens to be need to join one more group: their respective local Party committee. Half of the slots, on average, are vacant and about one their of the precincts in America do not have even one Republican committeeman. GOTV starts where each of us live.

    Thank you,
    CW

  • kmtierney

    Then explain how what happened shocked the living hell out of the Republican money and data men, but didn’t surprise the Democrats in the least.

  • Bill S

    Democrats in Pennsylvania believe(d) that the GOP was all about trying to suppress votes in Democratic leaning areas.

    Odd that it came out exactly the opposite – many stories of PA precincts that produced exactly zero GOP votes. I’d say it’s the Republicans that should be worried about voter suppression, rather than the Democrats.

  • http://www.BillBowenAuthor.com RightinSanFrancisco

    Why doesn’t the RNC control the origination of data and make it available to all Republican candidates?
    www.RightinSanFrancisco.com

  • justoneboomer

    Pennsylvania is a little behind the times IMHO. Instead of letting poll workers have read only access to the data base of registered voters, they are given printed out binders which can only be as up-to-date as when they were printed. People with valid voter registration cards and photo I.D. had to vote provisionally if they weren’t in the “binder” at their division’s polling place. This applied to ALL voters and if it hurt anybody in Philadelphia, it was Obama. Democratic binders are as retro as Republican binders ;-)

  • justoneboomer

    As I mentioned above, based on my observation on election day (admittedly anecdotal), there was zero (or close to zero) GOP GOTV effort in heavily democratic precincts (we call them divisions) in Philadelphia. I’ve read that there were some precincts in Utah with 0 votes for President Obama. If that’s true, I’m not surprised and there probably was little or no Obama GOTV effort there because — why bother? That doesn’t mean there was voter fraud in those Utah precincts any more than it means there was voter fraud in Philadelphia. If it makes you feel better to blame Gov. Romney’s loss on voter fraud, then root it out and prosecute it — with my sincere blessing.

  • franklinwasright

    “Democrats were convinced that True the Vote intended to show up to challenge voters to slow the vote and create long lines. I didn’t see anyone from True the Vote.”
    What evidence was there that True the Vote was about voter suppresion? Did you have any first hand experience with the organization? Why is it that liberal organizations (Acorn comes to mind) that commit actual fraud are barely mentioned in the press, while grass roots organizations designed to fight corruption in politics (True the Vote, the Tea Party) are demonized in the press without any proof of wrong doing, they just happen to not be on the left.
    I am no longer a democrat because I could no longer stomach the prejudice on the left for anyone who disagrees with them. Since becoming an outspoken independent and opponent of Obama, I have family who literally don’t want to talk to me, they see Republicans as evil plain and simple (and I’m not even a Republican, but because I didn’t vote for Obama I was guilty through association).
    When we start dehumanizing other human beings, it is dangerous to a free and open society, and ultimately leads to violence against those we demonize. I just don’t see the kind of dehumanizing rhetoric on the right, as much as the left accuses them of it. It may occur on the fringe, but I don’t fault either party for their fringe element, as there are plenty of violent and paranoid folks on the edge of the right and the left. But on the left, this type of dehumanizing rhetoric became the main campaign strategy for Obama, even if he allowed the Super Pacs and other sources to carry his water.
    Argue all you want about how the “47 percent” remark was hateful and devisive, that was not Romney’s intent with the remark. But Obama’s intent was to divide and conquer, to pit the poor against the wealthy, women and latinos against white males, and so on. Religous individuals against secularists.
    I find it odd that “equality” is constantly touted by the party who prefers to divide everyone into their own little interest group, usually based on surface attributes such as race and gender.

  • fightnright

    “Was there fraud? Probably, because many of the groups in their alliance are scummy mobsters.”

    Now that would explain a lot in the 0% Romney voting districts, which would actually be a little ~more~ difficult to explain if it were in fact fraud.

    To effectively maintain fraud over a broad swath of precincts, you would expect to organize competent fraudsters to produce a plausible numbers narrative, not a perfect tally of dodgy-looking outliers that immediately catch the eye, It’s hard to understand why a competent fraud scheme would not somehow add in a minimal number of R/R votes over scores of districts – at least enough to count on one’s hands..

    “But the 0/100 precincts don’t have any presence at all.”

    Most likely; still if I lived in some of the districts (possibly) padded with BHO votes, I might be hesitant to risk outing myself as a Republican voter. People are cautious in even low-crime areas here in NJ about putting out an (R) lawn sign or a bumper sticker on their cars. Near Paramus, an historical monument bearing the name ‘Christie’ was defaced last year, the name was covered over in red paint during a dispute with the teachers’ union.

  • keithe

    We did run Ronald Reagan, he was blasted in the MSM as the most dangerous man in the world, and we still won.

    Why? Partly because Reagan had a bigger message than the MSM did. Candidates DO matter, and all the strategies and “data” can’t make a diamond from a cow pie. But also because people don’t put their unchecked faith in ANY institutions anymore, and that includes the MSM.

    We don’t need to “destroy the media’s credibility.” I don’t think its helpful for us to appear that we are out to “destroy” anything. This plays into the image of the angry old white Republican, on the attack once again. A better approach would be Reagan’s smile, sigh, and “there he goes again.” Then circle back to a message that resonates, told by a messenger that can connect with people on a personal level.

    Erick is right about the mechanics, but success will not come solely from formulaic application of a marketing strategy. It starts with the candidate. The left is always going to advance a narrative about our candidate so we need a candidate who has a built-in ability to overcome those attacks. The narrative against Goldwater and Reagan was similar – these guys will destroy the world. Goldwater couldn’t convince people he wouldn’t but Reagan could.
    I think of Romney as the ultimate formulaic candidate; right look, right talking points, right pedigree – he looked great on paper (at least to a lot of GOP’ers). But we knew ahead of time what the narrative would be – rich, out of touch, uncaring, greedy. What did he do to overcome that message? His themes were (1) I’m a businessman and I can fix the economy; (2) we need to create jobs; (3) I love America. Those themes don’t counter the narrative (#1 actually has the tendency to reinforce it). And when Romney was challenged with the predictable attacks he never responded well. He did nothing to put people at ease. This is why the “47%” line was so damaging – it fed the narrative.
    Solution – better candidates.

  • eltuba

    Nice clear nutsy boltsy explanation of what goes on behind the scenes.

    I’m not part of the big time donator scene so I apologize if the following questions come off as silly.

    Lets say I’ve finished paying for my sable Ferrari cozy with the platinum trim and I make it known that I’d like to make a big fat donation to the Republican party.

    Am I going to be approached by a slew of different organizations with competing ideas on how to best spend my money? Within the Party itself is there any central resource I could use to compare and contrast these organizations in an objective way? Is there any requirement that the groups looking for my handout supply some type of prospectus outlining their methods, past successes, whether they share data or not, etc., or am I just regarded as a cow who gets to be milked by whoever gets to the stool first?

  • gwalt

    Today Reagan could not win. In 2004 the media realized something: they could lie and unlike Dan Rather, if they don’t get too overzealous, they could affect the elections. Meacham himself said the media bias tilted to John Kerry 15 points. In 2006 they destroyed Republicans and Bush.
    Bush didn’t fight back. McCain didn’t fight back. Romney didn’t fight back.
    They call us racist anyway. Romney, and as far as I can tell today we too have no media plan….. against the media. The media are at war with us culturally, financially, racially and we do nothing.
    Look what they did to Herman Cain. The “woman” is broke, living in Axelrods building and she was trotted out as this poor afflicted woman who made accusations she nor anyone else could corroborate. Yet the media gave her top billing every morning and every night until he was forced to quit. Where is she now? Cain spoke above the media ( Urbansky filling in for Rush Friday nailed it).
    The woman was a big nothing. Today’s populace is dumber and lazier and will believe everything they hear.
    No, Reagan could not win today. The media would expend another 5 billion destroying him.
    Rules For Radicals—- don’t go after companies ( ABCCBSNBC), go after individuals.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Loren Heal

    I don’t think there was fraud. Social intimidation, or peer pressure? Sure. But that just comes from decades of refusal on the part of Republicans to compete.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Loren Heal

    So write it.

  • fightnright

    yes, I did get that from your posting. Just have been puzzled myself at the charge of fraud, as numbers came out (0%/100%) it would have required a rather amateurish and ham-fisted cheating technique.

    Or perhaps the ballot stuffers themselves were taken by surprise by the total absence of authentic Romney votes popping up here and there in the dozens of suspect districts, which might have better supported an enhanced/fraudulent BHO outcome.

  • Finrod

    You’re completely missing Erick’s point, and you’re threadjacking to boot.

  • Finrod

    Because the establishment bozos in the GOP would rather keep making money than win elections.

  • major

    I really need to hear about the integrity of Gravity.
    But the trick in our area, was to get volunteers to make calls!
    I have never seem such apathy, which did not help my enthusiasm level!
    I made calls, but was having a hard time understanding why I was calling people with a high voting record and absolute yes to voting for our side, even Akin!
    I saw somewhere here, where was the list for unregistered , able voters or undecideds?
    One good thing about the calls I DID make was, that it was encouraging for MY morale to see the enthusiasm in the calls to “sure things”.
    There was such a good feeling that Romney was going to win, because of f…ed up data?
    Down with the establishment, once and for all!

  • omgitsatax

    Roy Rogers was Native American.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Which has nothing to do with whether Lizzy Warren of The Ward Churchill Lodge can make a similar claim.

  • redeleven

    Thanks for writing this. I cannot express how valuable and informative this is.