GOTV

Like a lot of people who work somewhere in the general orbit of politics, I often find myself playing the role of low-budget pundit with friends and acquaintances.

"How's the election looking?" they ask. "Who's going to be the running mate?" "What big October surprises do we have in store?"

Honestly I kind of suck at punditry. Answering damn near every question with "who the hell knows" probably won't get you invited back as a talking head on CNN, and a careful analysis of the possibilities doesn't really seem to thrill a party crowd gathered around the punch bowl.

I'm ok with that. Anyone who claims to have all the answers is probably as full of it as the TV pundits anyway.

But there is one question that I get asked that really ticks me off -- not because it's a bad question, but because I don't have a good answer.

That question: "What else can I do?"

I know tons of people, of all ages, who really care about the outcome of this election, and who want to "help." But they don't really know how.

For young people who can afford to do it, there are definitely some jump-in-with-both-feet options, like volunteering or working full time for a campaign, or hooking up with the League of Young Voters (where I work), or taking a trip with Swing Semester, or getting involved with one of the great "young progressive" organizations on the right column of this website.

But when it comes to young people who need to work full time, or people in my parents and grandparents generation, or even my peers in their 30's or 40's, the options thin out a little bit.

Everyone knows they can donate money. That's a good thing to do, and it's important. But it's only sorta satisfying, and reduces a person's potential talent and energy to all the creativity and skill of having a credit card.

Sure, I could tell people to volunteer at a local campaign office. That's definitely important. Sometimes that can even be fun or satisfying. And sometimes it stinks.

I could tell them to get out there and make phone calls or knock on doors. That can be enjoyable sometimes, when you're not feeling apologetic being the guy on the other end of those phone calls and front porch visits we all "love" so much. After trying it once, plenty of people have no interest in a return engagement.

Donating, stuffing envelopes, phone banking, or knocking doors. Are those really the best ways we can offer people to engage?

The truth is, the way most election work is done these days is shockingly inefficient. The amount of time and money that campaigns end up spending in ineffective ways is staggering. We have to play the game because it's the best option we've got right now. But if you step back and summon a little perspective about the way voters are identified and turned out, you quickly figure out that we're still just emerging from the prehistoric age here.

There has to be a better way. I've been thinking about it and I've got some ideas about how we might be able to step back a bit, think outside the box, and figure out how to use the massive well of talent and energy that's out there from people of all ages.

I hope other people are hard at work at the same task. There's a lot of powerful passion, energy, and skill out there to be tapped, and we're only just at the beginning of learning how to do it. Holler if you're down to help, and let's get to it.

--------------------
Sam Dorman is the Managing Director of the League of Young Voters

We talk a lot here about the importance of field work and peer to peer campaigning as the gold standard for getting people to the polls. But what exactly does that mean and why, in the day to day operations of a campaign is it important? How does it work and how does it fit into the internal workings of a well-run campaign?

If you've ever asked yourself these questions, you need to go read this piece at FiveThirtyEight.com explaining the importance of "voter contacts":

The other day, after Jonathan Martin wrote a piece that suggested John McCain’s field campaign was moving up closer into competition, we wrote that if Martin’s reporting is accurate with McCain's numbers, the state of the organizing race is now something more like a 35-to-1 edge for Obama rather than the 567-to-1 edge it held earlier in the summer. That’s not a field office edge or number of organizers edge, that’s the voter contacts edge, and both ratios are absurd.

Despite publishing an inside scoop on Obama’s Ohio numbers, our piece didn’t make much noise. But it’s not because the numbers aren’t shocking – they are – it’s because reporters and most people don’t really understand how to put voter contacts in context. Marc Ambinder will note that the Obama campaign has “preternatural self-confidence" about its strategy, but that confidence has to come from some type of hard data.

So let’s explain what voter contacts are, and what they are not. A voter contact occurs whenever someone from a campaign – organizer or volunteer – collects information from a voter about candidate preference or indecision, party preference (strong, lean, independent), or important issues to that voter in making the ultimate choice between candidates. A contact would ideally get an answer on all these questions to qualify as a contact, but even if the voter is only able or willing to give some meaningful data feedback, that counts. It takes about 4 attempts for every 1 contact, or roughly 25%.

Every bit of information gleaned helps the campaign make choices about how to target these voters for further messaging and GOTV. A strong Obama supporter will be targeted for volunteer work, early voting and/or GOTV. A strong McCain supporter will likely be ignored. A voter who describes herself as normally a Republican but who is undecided in this race and has health care as a critical issue will be targeted with persuasion mail pieces and/or person-to-person contacts about each candidate’s health care positions and voting records.

In case you missed it . . .

• A loophole in Ohio voting law that will allow for one-stop registration and voting this fall could be a huge boon to Obama (and young voters) in the state.
• Yesterday activists launched a campaign on Facebook against Evan Bayh as the potential VP pick called 100,000 Strong Against Evan Bayh. You would already know this if you were friends with Future Majority on Facebook.
• Huckabee youth group "Huck's Army" is now recruiting for McCain.
• Future Majority friend, activist, and videographer "noneck" Noel Hidalgo was deported from China this week for filming protests in Tiananmen Square. Noel and his crew might be following me around during the DNC convention producing video for FM. Let's hope it doesn't get quite so dicey in Denver.
• Jared Polis won his primary in Colorado and will go on to become the next Democratic congressman in his district. Not only that, he is the first openly gay candidate elected to congress and he may well be one of - if not the - youngest congressman in the country. I'm proud to have had Jared as a guest in our live blog series. Congrats to him and everyone who worked on the campaign.
• I'm sure I don't need to tell you this, but in the next few days, Barack Obama will announce his VP nominee via text message. This was a great idea on their part. They probably received thousands of cell phone numbers that can now be used to get out the vote in November via text.
• The New York Times has more on that in Garret Graff's op-ed about text messaging in the Presidential campaign.
• Blender asked the candidates about their favorite songs. John McCain - what happened to Usher? I thought he was your favorite artist?
• The Washington Post has the skinny on the hottest parties at the DNC.
• In Nevada, a 22 year old is running against an incumbent state Senator who has held office since 14 years before his challenger was born.
• The Wall Street Journal finally picked up on James Fowler's study of the Colbert Bump.
• Generation Vote has a put together a Youth policy platform.
• The Post Chronicle has some thoughts about what Obama's youth supporters need to do post-election day.
• Tom Friedman actually wrote a decent piece about McCain's energy policy.
• It's Getting Hot in Here explains the whole "Gang of 10" energy compromise and why it's a win for Obama.
• David Burstein of 18 in '08 explains the significance of just one vote.
• Medill reports that this may be the geekiest of all conventions.
• Wow:

Charles Franklin at Pollster.com has an interesting analysis (with graphs) of the relationship between age, voter turnout, and share of the electorate.

Franklin argues that even though younger voters are turning out in greater numbers, and were a huge factor in making Kerry competitive in '04, they still turn out less reliably, and it's in Obama's best interest to court the 58+ crowd. It's a pretty evenhanded analysis and you should go read it.

That said, I have two bones to pick.

First, as I've often noted, young or older voters isn't an either or proposition. It's about balance. How do you allocate resources to each group and what is the most effective way to do that. Peter Levine, the director of CIRCLE, has, I think, the correct response:

To be sure, older voters are prime targets. No one would advise a campaign otherwise. The question is where an extra dollar of campaign money makes the most difference. I would not be surprised if the marginal impact is actually greater among the young. Youth voting rose proportionally in 2004 and made a difference in the campaign. That happened despite very modest levels of investment in youth voting by the Democratic Party and nominee. It's quite plausible that each dollar spent on youth paid off quite nicely. (See our estimates of cost-effectiveness here; although unfortunately we cannot compare impact by age group.)

This is something I've heard a lot recently from folks - that registration and GOTV of youth is cheaper than persuasion of older voters (usually because it requires far few contacts). Something to think about.

My second bone to pick is that I think Franklin isn't seeing the forest for the trees. Even if there is movement between parties among older voters, we know that for the most part people's partisan habits generally stay fixed after their first few major elections. Dollars spent reaching out to young voters now builds those loyalties and lays the groundwork for future elections. It builds the party and helps break the mutual cycle of neglect we've seen between American youth and the political process. That's a positive long-term benefit not at all considered in Franklin's analysis.

It's not necessarily Franklin's fault. His website is dedicated to polling analysis of the current race - not long term party building. But it's something that should be discussed as a potential ROI on youth outreach. Too often polling analysis misses that bigger picture.

Yoink. Stolen from Loaded Orygun. The Oregon Bus Project's innovative "Trick or Vote" canvassing program is going national this year:

While ghouls and goblins roam the streets, volunteers in 21 cities and 12 states will distribute voter guides and vote reminders in what will be the nation’s largest non-partisan get-out-the-vote canvass.

Trick-or-Vote is going nationwide this year with the help of youth advocacy partners like 18 in ’08, Rock the Vote, United States Student Association, League of Young Voters, Forward Montana, New Mexico Youth Organized, New Era Colorado, Washington Bus, Change the Game and Generation Vote. “What’s the one day of the year we culturally are ready for a knock on the door?” asks Trick-or-Vote National Coordinator, Alex Aronson. “Halloween conveniently falls a few days before the election every year. You may be too old to trick-or-treat, but you’re never too old to trick-or-vote.”

The Best Way on the Best Day: Studies show that face-to-face contact is the most effective method to boost voter turnout—increasing participation by as much as 8–12% (“Getting Out the Youth Vote: Results from Randomized Field Experiments,” by Donald Green & Alan Gerber, Yale University, 2001), and nonpartisan contacts further increase the likelihood of electoral participation. “It’s important that we engage young volunteers,” explains Bus Project Executive Director Jefferson Smith, “Not left, not right, but forward.”

That's awesome. It's so great to see a best practice like Trick or Vote move outside the organization that spawned it and become a nation-wide best practice for youth outreach. Halloween is the one day of the year that people expect to have strangers knocking on their door. And who can resist earnest young volunteers in costume encouraging you to go to the polls? If you and your organization aren't already using Trick or Vote in your neighborhood, it's time to hop on that bandwagon.

First some youthy news:

• Two articles are out today on polling. The Michigan Messenger does a great job analyzing a PEW study on the demographics of cell-only and "cell-mostly" users and how pollsters are dealing with under-represtentation of these demographics in their polling. If that's a little too data-geek for you, Campus Politico has a good "polling 101" story that might be a little more your speed.
• At Tapped, Tim Fernholz questions the effectiveness of a voter registration drive launched this week by the Hip Hop Caucus.
• Matt Zeitlin at PushBack follows up on that post, noting that celebrities are not an effective way to move young voters to the polls.
• Teaming up with SPIN, CMJ, and others, Head Count has launched a 90 day voter registration challenge. They hope to register 100,000 voters by the end of the 90 days. You can watch a video of SPIN at the Warped Tour interviewing an artist about the program here.
• NDN notes Connecticut Democrats are out-registering Republicans among young voters by 4.3 - 1. That registration and turnout advantage might help Democrats defeat Republican Chris Shays in the fall. Shays is the lone Republican congressman in New England.
• South Carolina young Republicans are not feeling the love from John McCain, and Young Republicans nationally are having a tough time drawing young people to the convention.
• Meanwhile, Young Democrats are thriving in delegate-rich Florida.
• Tech President argues that 2008 is a boring year in tech/politics. While 2004 and '06 saw huge paradigm shifts in how we organize, 2008 is all about refining those practices.

Some less-youthy, but very interesting news:

• Democrats are getting ready to spend $20 million to register and GOTV latinos.
• The Nation writes about MoveOn's 10th birthday and how far the organization has come.
• A new study by the RAND Corporation tells us the obvious - to win the war on terror, we need to stop fighting the war on terror.
• Finally, the Washington Post has a front-page story basically calling "liar liar pants on fire" on the McCain campaign for their latest ad attacking Sen. Obama.

The author prepares for Trick or Vote in 2007

Pop Quiz Time:

1. What is the single most effective way to mobilize voters?
   a) Visibilities
   b) Sitting on a couch and bitching
   c) Talking to ‘em face-to-face
2. What holiday always immediately precedes Election Day and has a built-in tradition of door-knocking?
   a) Halloween
   b) The 4th of July
   c) Festivus
3. What does everyone love?
   a) Rick Rolling
   b) Costumes!
   c) Voting
   d) All of the above

All of us who work in the field of youth engagement face big competition. The biggest competition we face – for volunteers, for attention – is not from one another’s organizations either. It’s from the Wii (which is sweet) and the bar scene and friends and loved ones. Our biggest challenge is overcoming that noise and building a politics that is fun and exciting and relevant to people’s lives.

That’s what makes Trick or VoteTM so freaking sweet. It’s the Best Way on the Best Day.

It’s actually such a sweet idea it doesn’t even really need an explanation. But here it is in a nutshell: Get some people who are a bit too old to trick or treat (go as young as high school and as old as the retirement home for your recruitment), rally ‘em in costume, meet in a centralized location, train these folks to canvass effectively, and knock some doors.

In short, we combine a cultural more (knock doors on Halloween) with hard-minded political research (knocking doors is an effective voter mobilization tool).

The result?

• More volunteers. In Portland in 2004, 850 canvassers assembled for the largest mass canvass in the history of the state. By all accounts, this year will be even bigger.
• More virgin volunteers. Out of that same crowd in Portland, more than one-in-three were first-time political volunteers who came out of the woodwork for a program well-suited to help our fellow citizens lose their voter virginity.
• More conversations. On Halloween evening, people are home – either waiting for trick-or-treaters or getting ready for their parties. They’re even prepared to open the door. And they’re definitely ready to engage in a conversation. All of which means that we don’t just hit more doors, we hit more doors in a more effective manner.
• More voters. Do the math -- more canvassers, more conversations, and more doors? More people are hitting the polls.

The Bus Federation wants to take Trick or VoteTM national this year – and we can do it with your help. If you’re part of a local or national organization that is serious about doing Trick or VoteTM, get in touch soon so we can coordinate our efforts. Contact Alex Aronson at the Oregon Bus Project @ 503-233-3018.

Just looking for a project for the fall and think you could pull off a kick-ass Trick or Vote in your hometown? Or even just want to assemble 15 of your closest friends and friends-of-friends and friendly-friends-of-friends’-friends and go hit some doors? Drop us a line. I swear to you, you’ll be glad you did.

Major props, by the way, to our friends at the Bus for this innovative program -- Trick or Vote is their brainchild.

Answers to the pop quiz: 1-b, 2-c, 3-a

Matt Singer is the CEO of Forward Montana, dedicated to training, mobilizing, and electing a new generation of progressive leaders. Forward Montana is a charter (get it?) organization of the Bus Federation.

On the Op-Ed page today, the New York Times is running a surprisingly information-free look back at "what went wrong" with the Clinton campaign. How bad is it? Apparently, Clinton lost because she is too much like Hermione Granger. Seriously. How bad is it? So bad that Mark Penn and Michael Kinsley offer the best of slim pickings. There was one bright light though.

Buried in the 10th paragraph of an 11 graph piece (the most column inches of any contributor), in which he argues that it's not his fault, Mark Penn says this:

Are there a lot of other things the campaign could have done differently? Of course. We should have taken on Mr. Obama more directly and much earlier, and we needed a different kind of operation to win caucuses and to retain the support of superdelegates. From more aggressively courting young people earlier to mobilizing the full power of women, there are things that could have been done differently.

Emphasis is mine. This is a far cry from Mark Penn at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner:

At least two of Hillary Clinton’s upper-echelon advisers, Mandy Grunwald and Mark Penn, were decidedly unimpressed .

“Our people look like caucus-goers,” Grunwald said, “and his people look like they are 18. Penn said they look like Facebook.”

Penn added, “Only a few of their people look like they could vote in any state.”

While the importance of young voters as a Democratic constituency is far from the only lesson to be gleaned from this primary campaign, it is an important one. Young Voters in Iowa were subjected to major outreach from the Obama campaign and from outside partisan and nonpartisan organizations including (but not limited to) the Young Voter PAC, Rock the Vote, the Young Democrats, and the Student PIRGs. As a result, they overperformed their share of the electorate and came out in equal numbers to the "reliable" senior demographic. That was the beginning of the end for Clinton.

Here's to hoping that other Democratic candidates down the ballot learn that lesson. And here's to hoping that they know that there are many resources available to their campaigns to help learn how to reach that audience. From live-blogging here at Future Majority, to working with organizations like Young Voter PAC and Rock the Vote, or local youth orgs that may be organizing in their state. Reaching young voters is not rocket science, and there are many folks willing to help you do it.

In conversation, the President of one of YDA's state chapters raised a really interesting question: What would happen if campaigns stopped putting money into the senior vote and redirected that to youth?

It's a provocative question. Campaigns tend to spend no money on young people "because youth don't vote," and they expend a large share of resources reaching out to the "reliable" senior vote. When you think about it, it's a little ass-backwards. Voting is a habit and seniors tend to be full-on addicts in their turnout rates. If we stopped spending money reaching out to them and encouraging them to get to the polls, would they turnout anyway? Probably. It seems highly unlikely they would quite voting cold turkey. Couldn't that money be better spent reaching out to people whose voting habits are not so "reliable" and whose partisanship is still up for grabs?

It's not an all or nothing proposition. You don't need to stop spending ALL money on seniors, but perhaps adjusting the proportion spent on seniors and that spent on young people might yield better returns on investment overall? What would happen if half the money spent robo-calling, direct mailing, and door-knocking seniors went to contacting young people?

Conversely, if we did see a big drop-off in senior turnout under such a campaign, doesn't that speak to the importance of doing outreach to ALL demographics? If less resources and contacts means a smaller senior vote, the same is true of young voters. You can't claim they're unreliable and not worth resources if the very act of withholding resources is what drives down their turnout numbers . . .

It would be interesting to run this as a field experiment in a super-safe Democratic seat. I don't think we will, but it would be a good piece of data to have.

Stuff you should know and see that I won't be blogging in depth:

• Looks like we have another YEO! John Tyler Hammons, a 17 year old freshman at the University of Oklahoma was elected the mayor of Muskegee, a town of 38,000 people. He ran on a good government platform and won in a run-off against the former mayor, capturing 70% of the vote. Way to go John. - The Politico
• Young evangelicals continue to abandon Bush and the GOP over Iraq and the economy. - Huffington Post
• The Godfathers of GOTV testing and research, Gerber and Green, have a new book out pimping Peer to Peer as the best form of organizing. Direct mail and robo-call consultants everywhere are not happy. - Campaigns and Elections
• Two articles say that Obama will need the "senior vote" if he is to beat McCain. I tend not to agree. There are more voters under 30 than over 65, and in some contests we are already performing on par with their turnout. It all depends on how many new young voters show up in November. - Democratic Strategist
• Obama is the king of voter-generated music tributes. - The Politico
• Republicans held a fashion show on the National Mall to show off their new convention swag. This was my favorite photo. And no, this is not a joke. - Minnesota Monitor

Who at the GOP thought it was a good idea to bring back MC Hammer pants? And I'm pretty sure that if that little girl were a lib'rul, we'd hear wingnuts screaming about flag desecration.