• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT2| We need to be more like Disney World

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Udall internal has him up 1%.

Beauprez in the final Colorado Governor debate finally apologized for his gross ad blaming the police chief's murder on Hickenlooper's policies, after defending the ad before. I'm guessing that's the finishing move on that race with Beauprez being done. Figure it worth noting for those that believe in same ballot bumps.

Still incredibly nervous about Udall though.
 

Chris R

Member
R affiliated poll has Begich up 10 in Alaska

It would be hilarious if this was the only poll that got it right.

Bwahahahaha

no :(

Begich is going to lose by at 5 or 6, as much as that fucking sucks. Just throw money at something and you can buy anything it seems.

I want to see polling numbers for our House race though, with Young shooting himself in the foot this past week (not that a single house seat matters in the big picture).
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Udall internal has him up 1%.

Beauprez in the final Colorado Governor debate finally apologized for his gross ad blaming the police chief's murder on Hickenlooper's policies, after defending the ad before. I'm guessing that's the finishing move on that race with Beauprez being done. Figure it worth noting for those that believe in same ballot bumps.

Still incredibly nervous about Udall though.

1 more week.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92haPeQMQrA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47KIyoQLtXA
 

KingK

Member
Udall internal has him up 1%.

Beauprez in the final Colorado Governor debate finally apologized for his gross ad blaming the police chief's murder on Hickenlooper's policies, after defending the ad before. I'm guessing that's the finishing move on that race with Beauprez being done. Figure it worth noting for those that believe in same ballot bumps.

Still incredibly nervous about Udall though.

I still feel pretty good that Udall will pull through. Polls have massively underestimated Dem turnout in CO for the last 3 cycles, and it doesn't seem like they're even trying to adjust their methodology. Plus there's the mail in ballots this year, so that should help with turnout too.

There's still a chance he loses (which would be a shame, because I like Udall), but I'm much more worried about Iowa at this point.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
I still feel pretty good that Udall will pull through. Polls have massively underestimated Dem turnout in CO for the last 3 cycles, and it doesn't seem like they're even trying to adjust their methodology. Plus there's the mail in ballots this year, so that should help with turnout too.

There's still a chance he loses (which would be a shame, because I like Udall), but I'm much more worried about Iowa at this point.

Big chance....85% chance x(
Slightly more confident in Braley.

Although both campaigns deserve grades of F though. Braley has successfully thrown away an easy race into a tossup and Udall has focused on a one-issue campaign.
 
Bwahahahaha

no :(

Begich is going to lose by at 5 or 6, as much as that fucking sucks. Just throw money at something and you can buy anything it seems.

I want to see polling numbers for our House race though, with Young shooting himself in the foot this past week (not that a single house seat matters in the big picture).
I think Begich has a good chance to overperform given how extensive his GOTV campaign is. I'm skeptical that he'll actually win, but I think he has a better chance than Pryor.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Meh, Bennet was supposed to lose in 2010 and he pulled through. This year shouldn't be nearly as bad as 2010. Polls all showed Obama and Romney in a dead heat in CO in 2012 and Obama ended up winning by over 5%.

Different Year, Different electorate, Different candidates.

The question is "Who is actually going to vote in 2014?"

1 more week and we get our answer........"cue election music"
 
Different Year, Different electorate, Different candidates.

The question is "Who is actually going to vote in 2014?"

1 more week and we get our answer........"cue election music"
Vote-by-mail what up

There was a poll of "drop-off voters" in Colorado, people who voted in 2012 but not 2010. 82% of them intend on voting or already have. That's great!
 

KingK

Member
Different Year, Different electorate, Different candidates.

The question is "Who is actually going to vote in 2014?"

1 more week and we get our answer........"cue election music"

This is also the first year that Colorado has all mail-in ballots. I don't see any reason to believe turnout would be less than 2010 when people don't even have to show up on election day to vote.

I'll eat crow if I'm wrong, and I'm not so optimistic on other senate races, but I suppose we'll see in a couple weeks.
 
Different Year, Different electorate, Different candidates.

The question is "Who is actually going to vote in 2014?"

1 more week and we get our answer........"cue election music"

It is an extremely important question. And I'm thinking that a lot of people are going to vote. I'm thinking that all the voter suppression efforts will again backfire and bring out a flood of people. Lots of people are lazy about voting . . . but if you push hard to take away their right to vote, then they'll come out and vote.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Vote-by-mail what up

There was a poll of "drop-off voters" in Colorado, people who voted in 2012 but not 2010. 82% of them intend on voting or already have. That's great!

I really want a Udall win but lets be real. If Udall loses, we should not be surprised no matter how god like the ground game is there. Udall can lose and it not be a wave for the R's.

I thought myself in January 2014 that if they could not beat Bennett in 2010, they wont beat udall in 2014 but udall's campaign has backfired so hard and Gardner has been so much better than buck that seeing a udall win would will quite frankly be an "upset" at this point.

Sigh I guess udall's camp is taking cues from Dunban "Against the odds we choose to fight"
 
I really want a Udall win but lets be real. If Udall loses, we should not be surprised no matter how god like the ground game is there. Udall can lose and it not be a wave for the R's.

I thought myself in January 2014 that if they could not beat Bennett in 2010, they wont beat udall in 2014 but udall's campaign has backfired so hard and Gardner has been so much better than buck that seeing a udall win would will quite frankly be an "upset" at this point.

Sigh I guess udall's camp is taking cues from Dunban "Against the odds we choose to fight"
I'm not saying Gardner winning would be this ungodly unpredictable upset, I'm saying there's reason to not take the polls at face value based on their predicative value in 2010 and 2012.
 
If I recall correctly, Buck just ran a typical Tea Party campaign with the dumb comments to boot. While Gardner is still from the Ted Cruz wing of the GOP, he hasn't said dumb stuff and looks serious and moderated one of his positions on birth control.
 
85
 

NeoXChaos

Member
I'm not saying Gardner winning would be this ungodly unpredictable upset, I'm saying there's reason to not take the polls at face value based on their predicative value in 2010 and 2012.

Agree to Disagree x).

Udall can overperform polls and still lose but ultimately the GOTV effort/turnout as you said will be the deciding factor in all races. 2012 proved that. R's were more enthused but lost.
 
I think the two funniest elections for me based on pure schadenfreude will be Kansas gov and Michigan Senate

Kansas because it's hilarious that Brownback is going to lose in such a solidly Republican state, Michigan because the media wouldn't shut up about it until well after it was clear Land was a terrible candidate
 
The nerds are at the frontline of 2014 democratic turnout.

There's an entire industry in American politics built around finding and mobilizing voters, largely constructed by Democrats who have been innovating in the field for more than a decade.

The nerd science of campaigning -- sifting through data, analyzing behavior, modeling segments of voters and persuading people to cast ballots -- is one reason President Barack Obama's team flabbergasted Mitt Romney's overconfident numbers-crunchers in 2012.

Many of those same Democratic operatives are on the front lines of the 2014 midterm elections, mining the electorate, state-by-state, to find enough voters to tip a race one or two points in their direction. Having a well-oiled field operation is never enough to overcome a bad national climate or a bum candidate at the top of the ticket. But in a tight campaign like so many of the deadlocked 2014 races it can make a serious difference.

With advanced analytics and targeting, the Obama team in 2012 narrow-casted its message to persuadable voters -- on Facebook, on television, on Pandora, on well-placed billboards, on doorsteps, wherever -- and tilted swing state electorates in their favor. It was done efficiently, without wasting money on television ads or mailers that were hitting the wrong households.

In press reports after the campaign, Obama's tech savants were hailed as "gurus" and "masterminds."

Bleeker was a grunt on the Kerry campaign. But like many of his young colleagues, he was a pioneer. Bleeker, now 29, went on to steer digital marketing for both of Obama's innovative campaigns, launching Bully Pulpit along the way to build full-spectrum digital campaigns for Democrats.

By matching voter files with consumer data and online behavior, Bully Pulpit creates models of voting universes and devises clever, eye-catching ways to engage with them in the digital space, where attention spans are notoriously short. The "Stop Tweeting Boring Shit" poster displayed prominently in its Farragut North offices is less a joke than a guiding principle.

Their goals -- fundraising, persuasion, mobilization -- are as varied as the tools they employ. They produce online video, display ads, micro-sites, Facebook and Twitter campaigns and email blasts for their candidates.

"We know how to reach people that are low TV watchers," says Mark Skidmore, a Bully Pulpit partner with a background in corporate marketing and communications. "We know from our modeling that 33%, as high as 40%, of voters might not be watching any television. So if you are spending the majority of budget on television, guess what? You are probably not getting any of that 40%."

With election day less than two weeks away, their offices resemble a day-trading firm, with scores of smartly-dressed young operatives glued to their computers and pushing out content aimed at mobilizing voters. "Right now, we are optimizing our campaigns," Clark says. "The strategy has been set. We know the story of the candidates. We have really good content and video and sites to direct people towards."

The truth is that they are each discrete domains, each requiring its own expertise and methods. Democrats, the successful ones at least, have won by synchronizing those activities both inside their campaign offices and across the spectrum of left-leaning interest groups, ensuring that the right voters are getting the right message at exactly the right time and place.

Another truth: Democrats are still better at most of it than Republicans.

"Republicans are still very much in the television persuasion model," said Zac Moffat, who led digital strategy for Romney's campaign and runs Target Victory, a leading GOP digital firm. "We are still having philosophical arguments about where we are, and meanwhile the Democrats arguing about the type of targeting to use."

After getting walloped in the field in 2012, the GOP vowed to overhaul their digital and data efforts.

In many ways, they have. The Republican National Committee, for instance, added a team of data scientists, juiced its email marketing and fundraising efforts (remember those George H.W. Bush socks?), and created a widely-used app for door-to-door canvassers. Today, 70% of RNC voter data being collected in the field is done digitally — up from just 5% last cycle.

Outside groups like American Crossroads and Americans for Prosperity have also revamped their data and digital programs, tapping into the RNC's voter file, Data Trust, and i360, another data hub affiliated with the Koch brothers financial network.

Opinion: Why the 'Seinfeld election' matters

But while Republicans have developed the tools and can point to a bevy of talented digital strategists in their ranks, they still haven't matched the culture or the manpower of the Democratic tech world that's been blossoming for over a decade.

There are schools and training programs in Democratic circles focused on field organizing and data; Bleeker himself teaches one at Georgetown University.

And there's a tradition of sharing information and best practices that's been well-established over the years, spearheaded by left-leaning interest groups and labor unions that began experimenting with voter contact techniques during the George W. Bush years.

Moffat is confident Republicans will catch up. It will take time, he says, for the party's established consultant class, schooled in TV-buying, to understand the importance of data and digital advertising.

"It's not that Republicans aren't building tools," he says. "The tools are there, it's just a question of why aren't people choosing to use them."
 

Wilsongt

Member
Augh.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/10/23/3583548/minnesota-ad-eric-dean/

The ad blames Democratic governor Mark Dayton for the death of 4-year-old Eric Dean, who was killed by his stepmother following the failure of state services to intervene. Yvonne Dean said that the party never contacted her family or asked for permission to use a picture of Eric. “I just can’t believe somebody would use [Eric's death] for political gain,” she told the Minnesota Star Tribune. “To use our family’s tragedy is crossing the line.”

According to Dean, when she called the Minnesota Republican Party this morning she was told that they would not stop broadcasting the ad on television. A member of the National Republican Senatorial Committee denounced the advertisement, saying “there is no place in politics for this kind of advertisement.” A spokesman for Dayton’s opponent, Jeff Johnson, declined to comment.
 

Jooney

Member
Wait, was that New Rules segment on Bill Maher yesterday really accurate about Kansas dem candidate (Paul Davis)? He's losing now because of a visit to a strip club back when he was in his mid-twenties? There's gotta be more to the story. I'd like to think that no way people can be so easily distracted, but then again, it's Kansas
sorry, metamorphingman.
.
 
Wait, was that New Rules segment on Bill Maher yesterday really accurate about Kansas dem candidate (Paul Davis)? He's losing now because of a visit to a strip club back when he was in his mid-twenties? There's gotta be more to the story. I'd like to think that no way people can be so easily distracted, but then again, it's Kansas
sorry, metamorphingman.
.

He went to a strip club once in 1998 because he was representing the owner of the club in court.
 

Akainu

Member
was that thing on maher true is the democrat in kansas about to lose cause he went to a strip club ages ago? priorities people.

edit: well damn
 
Wait, was that New Rules segment on Bill Maher yesterday really accurate about Kansas dem candidate (Paul Davis)? He's losing now because of a visit to a strip club back when he was in his mid-twenties? There's gotta be more to the story. I'd like to think that no way people can be so easily distracted, but then again, it's Kansas
sorry, metamorphingman.
.
Has Bill not been looking at the polls? Last three polls had 2 5-point leads for Davis (the Democrat) and a tie.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
I think it's more "How the fuck is Brownback not down 20 points given how bad he fucked up Kansas?"

Kansas is so entrenched in R blood that the D is toxic under most circumstances. Generations of kids have been raised under an R roof over the last 100+ years that any consideration of a D is probably frowned upon. Idk how Kansas goes from red to somehow purple. That state is the most conservative state in the nation. Non-D senator since 1932, no D state house since 1912, 3 times elected a D senate. Kansas is going to stay red in our lifetime unless people from CA move there. When our grandparents were little, that state was R and when their parents were born that state was R. Nothing short of migration of demographics from other more liberal states into Kansas will that state change anytime soon. The R's have simply built an empire/monarchy there of R dominate rule that only in very special circumstances will it buck trends and elect a D like Sebiulus

That's why an orman win is so important. Its time for Kansas to wake up from their R slumber and choose a non-traditional choice from what they have done for 80 years.

Idaho, Wyoming and Utah is probably headed that way along with most of the Appalachia. None of the above has elected a D Senator since the 1970's
 

Jooney

Member
Has Bill not been looking at the polls? Last three polls had 2 5-point leads for Davis (the Democrat) and a tie.

Bill doesn't read Poligaf, nor does he get his strife on. His loss.

So Davis 'losing' might have been in-artfully expressed by yours truly, but the larger point is that the gap is closing.

He went to a strip club once in 1998 because he was representing the owner of the club in court.

He did get a lap dance though, so it wasn't just a pure business visit.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Hm. The Des Moines Register endorses Braley. Notably they endorsed Ernst in the Republican primary. They also endorsed Romney in 2012.

Not something that would make or break a race, but maybe in Iowa it could move some undecideds.

This was also after Ernst blew off their endorsement meeting lol

Anything that helps braley is good news for him

BTW, concerning CO I was just thinking about the overall electorate. Since 2010, voters born in 93, 94, 95 & 96 are now in the electorate who were not in 2010. D's with their ground game must be targeting them and they are probably not in any likely voter screens especially the 1995-1996 range. I feel good about Udall's chances if that's the case.
 
Anything that helps braley is good news for him

BTW, concerning CO I was just thinking about the overall electorate. Since 2010, voters born in 93, 94, 95 & 96 are now in the electorate who were not in 2010. D's with their ground game must be targeting them and they are probably not in any likely voter screens especially the 1995-1996 range. I feel good about Udall's chances if that's the case.
Yeah, about that. They are the least likely to vote. Polls account for them
 

Chichikov

Member
You know, I think those guys are getting too much credit for that shit.
Don't get me wrong, the Obama campaign did a fantastic job at mobilizing volunteers, but the actual online campaigns that the Democrats are running are pretty basic online marketing/spam/telemarketing affairs.
Yeah, there's some art to that, but from where I stand, it doesn't seem to be all that exceptional, also, their potential "costumers" are much more tolerant to those tactis (as they tend to see them as advancing the greater good) so they play that game in a bit of an easy mode.
I mean if Comcast tried the same tactics it would backfire terribly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom