Posted by Zapper in IPR comments:
What are we seeing here?
The American people seem to be fed up, and yet for the most part, they don’t respond.
We’ve seen a second Great Depression, continuing economic malaise with unemployment, massive deficits, the housing crash, foreclosures, bankruptcy, people barely hanging on to their jobs and financial lives, or scrambling for new jobs at lower wages, most thankful to be getting by, or desperate because they’re slipping below the financial waves. The government is failing, their lives are failing. What takes precedence?
Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, political turmoil and revolt around a troubled world, America’s wealth is being drained AND YET we were attacked and needed to respond … But how much is too much? It’s a lot to think about, and at the same time, just surviving and raising a family is hard. Voters would like a clear vision and a leader… But who? Who has a vision? Who to trust?
The war on drugs is failing, too many people have gone to jail for marijuana, and thousands are dieing in Mexico, yeah this is a problem. Most would agree that we could legalize marijuana, tax and regulate it like wine, end the trouble in Mexico, stop the waste of money and human resources and police resources that could be spent on real crime. But really, when your family and financial life is at stake, is this important enough to jump into politics?
They’re all crooks anyway. They make promises and never deliver. All politicians are alike. Who can trust anyone in Washington? How can you trust a third party or independent candidate you’ve barely heard of? Better to go with the one you know? Gut feelings? Flip a coin? Sure the yellow dogs will keep following their parties, but what about the rest? Too tired, too busy, too disillusioned – especially in this cycle – the 2012 election cycle.
Many polls show that a very large percentage, a majority in some polls, claim they would consider a third party, more than ever now. But they never do. They never have. Things are different, but still they never do and they never have.
But, this time things could be different.
Sure, there wasn’t enough interest in Americans Elect. But it offered nothing. No answers, no solutions, no hope. It was a technical effort. They provided an amorphous Party apparatus – a turn-key political party – an empty shell. But empty means nothing. It offered nothing.
Sure, to those of us who understand that Americas electoral process makes ballot access nearly impossible for an Independent or 3rd party candidate for POTUS, this sounded like a dream come true – for someone. Surely someone or several someones would jump at this opportunity.
But, to the American voters, AE didn’t exist and had no reason to exist. The average American thinks that any crank can run for President and get on the ballot anywhere and it’s easy to do so. How many understand how difficult it really is? Maybe between 1/10 and 1/100 of 1 % … maybe less than that.
So, AE has died … maybe. They still could come charging back with a later announcement that some savior has emerged, if someone charged forward and grabbed this thing and gave it a big shake. Someone who could command immediate interest and had his own money – a Perot or a Bloomberg maybe.
But, the chances are very small.
So, what about the LP?
For us, this represents a great opportunity.
Governor Johnson and Judge Gray have credibility. They could present themselves to be the answer the public is seeking, in a gentle, pragmatic but extremely Principled way.
They could present the LP program – with a bit more emotion and heart than Johnson usually delivers – and with a bit more Principle: a little stronger on the non-intervention (with wiggle for a holocaust); a 43% spending cut is good, but add pay freezes and caps for the highest level government workers ($100,000 cap for all, graduated cuts below, esp. cut Congress and the Pres. pay and staff) and stress cuts in spending for wars abroad and wars on drugs, cuts for wasteful interest expense with a balanced budget; and repeal of the income tax and abolition of the IRS, replaced by an amorphous consumption tax, but stop promoting the Fair tax as that will alienate more people than it draws, although it can be given as an example of one of the many ideas available.
But, how do we generate hope in the hearts of the American people? How can we show them that we have a plan and are ready to lead?
They’ve barely heard of Libertarians or Gary Johnson. We can’t get enough free media to reach them – not yet, not now anyway. Sorry to say, but Youtube, Google, the Internet and even a Blimp or two won’t do it.
We need to start major network TV advertising. We need to start NOW.
That is the only way they will hear our message and the only way they will notice enough to consider us, to support us, to donate to us, to register their interest in us enough to get to 15% in the polls and get in the debates.
Then we get the free media.
And then we get more attention, donors, money, supporters, increasing poll numbers and we can finally acheive breakthrough vote totals.
So, how do we get enough money to advertise on major network TV?
The obvious answer is that if we think of nationwide, major network TV, then we can’t. Not now. Maybe never. We have to advertise to get the donors we need to raise the money we need to advertise to get the donors we need …
OK.
The Johnson campaign needs to start an immediate segregated advertising fundraising campaign. Every dollar raised, 100% will be used to buy time, during the best morning, daytime and evening time slots on major network TV.
Production costs of a few good spots – call Travis Irvine now – should be fronted out of other campaign funds. Make at least three good spots now. Get them up on Youtube – real 30 sec spots or maybe 60 second spots. Better yet, three of each and a five minute spot. Show the donors some great spots and promise 100% of donations to put them on the air.
Limited funds. Yes sure. But we don’t have to go nationwide. Just major network.
It’s about time we learned to target our advertising and campaign spending. We need to go where the major network ads are cheapest and where small bucks have a big impact.
We need to advertise and spend enough money to drive our poll numbers up in whole states. State by state. One state at a time.
We have limited funds, so we start with the States with the smallest populations which generally means the cheapest ad rates to buy enough rating points to drive our poll numbers up past 15%.
This means we look at certain States, gather all of their ad rates for all of the major network stations in the media markets that are wholly contained withing these states or overlap with other targeted states.
We can pick 8 to 10 small states to target. A group of small states with a total population smaller than many of the individual large states. With ad prices that start in the tens of dollars instead of thousands of dollars.
We can’t afford CA or LA. We can’t afford IL or Chicago. We can’t afford NY or DC.
But we can raise enough money to begin to saturate several smaller states with major network prime time TV ads for:
Gary Johnson
Libertarian for President
2012
We have to be willing to fund other states than our own. We have to see that the best use of our donations is to help states where we don’t live. We won’t see our state party grow, not right away, but we will see it later.
If we give our campaign dollars now to these smaller states, we will reap the reward when our seeds grow and bear fruit. We can see the whole of American eventually covered with free and paid media buys – if we give our money away now to fund major network TV buys in the smallest of our States with the cheapest ad rates.
But where?
Don’t look for your own State on this list. Think bigger. Think of how we can build our whole movement, the whole Johnson campain, the whole LP.
Here is the list:
Alaska,
Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont
Montana, Idaho, Wyoming
New Mexico, Arizona
Nevada, Utah
North Dakota, South Dakota
We need to look into these 13 states.
Media markets. Ad rates. Major network TV only .
No cable. No internet ads. These are a waste of our limited funds.
We pick the best opportunities. At least 7 or 8 states to start.
The campaign should follow up in these states with campaign appearances and events. When you buy ads on major network TV in local markets, the news reporters will followup with prime time interviews of the candidates – They watch their own stations after all.
This will result in our inclusion in polls taken in those states. Just being in the polls results in free media. (And being excluded means being at zero in the poll.)
When we generate enough interest in the first group of states, we will get more free media and more donations. Then we can expand to a larger group of states – the next group of small states.
(Yes. It has to be several states to avoid being ignored as a single state anomaly. And it has to be small states to start with because that’s what we can afford. It has to be whole states and not large cities because cities don’t have electoral votes, states do. And for most of you it has to be a state you don’t live in, and you have to give more money to this effort than you do to your own campaigns in your own state, so that the growth will come back to your own state in the end.)
The time is now.
Major Network TV advertising needs to be our number one priority.
Small states first.
Gary Johnson and Jim Gray, please take note.
The staff supporting Johnson/Gray, please take note.
My fellow Libertarians, please take note.
The time is now and there is no time to waste.
Comments removed from this thread; see archive.org to find them.
The Clark campaign is the only LP POTUS campaign to break 1%.
They did not achieve this based on being the 3rd campaign – the NOTA choice – we had John Anderson for that. He came in at 7%.
The Clark campaign ran 23 nationwide major network TV spots. That’s all. It boosted them to 1%.
We’ve had 50 state ballot status since then …
We’ve had two elected US Congressmen, and an elected LP State Rep, all higher office holders than Clark …
We’ve had the 3rd place position and the chance to be the NOTA candidate, as well as fourth …
We’ve had more and less radical POTUS candidates …
The only difference: 23 TV spots.
We do not have the funds to duplicate that Nationwide TV ad campaign.
However, we can do better.
By Targeting small states, using leverage and earning free media.
George Phillies // Jul 22, 2012 at 5:14 pm
zapper, you appear to be totally ignorant of what the party has done in the past.
******
57 Zapper // Jul 22, 2012 at 7:25 pm
@55 Actually, GP, I am aware of what the LP has done in the past. You seem to have a need to defend failure and make up a pretend history.
However, since you claim, so far without any facts, that the LP has actually tried real advertising before, just name the states and years that the LP has spent a minimum of 10 cents per capita for the whole state on one or two flights of ads on Major Network Broadcast TV either as a party building project or on a statewide campaign for POTUS, Gov or US Senate.
You have failed to provide any such data in over two months.
This tells us the answer.
George Phillies // Jul 22, 2012 at 2:32 pm
The actual rational approach is dollars per impression, not larger or smaller audience.
The most notable feature of the numbers Tom is quoting is that even the largest network reaches an insignificant fraction of the voting population.
The rational alternative is (i) New York and DC; (ii) news networks, talk radio, “sports” and “women’s” channels, NPR. You are not trying to reach voters, though you do. You are trying to put bright shiny things up in front of newscasters, columnists, and the like.
51 George Phillies // Jul 22, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Simultaneous with this, you do bulk rate direct mail to all of the columnists, news reporters, TV people, etc., that you can find, though the very top end people will be shielded by legions of flak catchers.
******
52 Thomas L. Knapp // Jul 22, 2012 at 3:53 pm
GP@50,
“The actual rational approach is dollars per impression, not larger or smaller audience.”
I guess that depends on what you mean by “rational.”
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 120 million people will vote in the next election.
Any given party or candidate will either reach a substantial portion of that electorate, or not.
It’s worth spending more per impression to reach sub-sets of that electorate that are more likely predisposed to vote or support you.
It’s worth spending less per impression to reach sub-sets of that electorate that are less likely predisposed to vote or support you.
But if you ever intend to be competitive, you’re going to have to figure out how to reach, and persuade, a plurality of that 120 million — regardless of howe expensive it is to do so, in “per impression” terms or otherwise.
******
Answers for GP:
54 Zapper // Jul 22, 2012 at 4:01 pm
@50 & 51 You are advocating what the LP has always done and what has always failed – again, and again and again.
Failed leadership with no strategic vision is our problem.
Cost per impression is not important. It is the saturation of whole markets to move polls and build momentum. This gets free media worth multiples of the cost.
What you are suggesting by mailing directly to the media is what doesn’t work. You try mailing directly to the media. They get your junk mail and see that you are nowhere in the polls. They are not stupid. They can see that you are trying to use them. This is exactly what everyone looking for free media coverage on the news tries to do – Use the Media.
Likewise, the LP cannot afford to advertise enough in the large city markets or the national market to “impress” the media. Even if we tried this, they could see that that was the only thing we were trying to do – impress the media. Another fail.
Neither the LP nor the Johnson campaign has the money to do either NY city or DC in any case. The media wouldn’t see it and the markets are too big for us to move the polls in those less than Libertarian areas. The DC media market is bigger in population and less Libertarian leaning than the First 7 whole states listed in the Zapper plan. The NY City market is bigger and more expensive than the entire first 11 states.
Combined, the Johnson campaign could buy the entire first 11 states of the Zapper plan and run all four major broadcast networks throughout the entire group cheaper than what it would take to advertise effectively in Washington DC and New York City.
We could raise GJ to 15% in the polls in eleven states cheaper than trying to fool the media in two big cities – and to fool enough of the media we’d have to cover Chicago and LA at a minimum along with NY City and DC.
The best way to impress the media is to do real politics. Show them that you are actually able to reach voters and get some polling numbers. This means outreach to real voters in real states using real media. It means we actually work to build state LP orgs in these states, win elections there and win electoral votes there.
When we produce results somewhere we will be covered.
The best way to get media coverage is to do something serious and NOT tell them that you are doing it. They much prefer to cover the news that they’ve uncovered themselves, or seen covered by a competitor, without getting some useless press release.
Robert Capozzi // Jul 20, 2012 at 6:32 pm
34 z, I guess we’ll never get an explanation of how what you declare to be “reality” is in fact “reality,” or even compelling opinion. My guess is Team GJwon’t adopt the Zapper Plan.
Are you prone to the ex post “I told you so” carp syndrome? It’s good to know beforehand….
******
40 Humongous Fungus // Jul 20, 2012 at 7:39 pm
My guess is Team GJ won’t adopt the Zapper Plan.
Maybe not exactly…but I’ve heard they are adopting something along those lines….or at least seriously thinking about it.
******
41 Robert Capozzi // Jul 21, 2012 at 6:05 am
40 hf, that would be an interesting test, too. If they do a modified Zapper Plan, will Zapper be saying in mid-Nov., If only they did EXACTLY as I, Zapper, said, they would have gotten 50% more votes, blah blah blah….
******
More answers for RC:
Zapper // Jul 21, 2012 at 9:57 am
@41 Actually, RC, there is no “exact” Zapper plan since I haven’t taken the time or gathered the data to determine exactly what I would do.
If they asked, and if we could gather all the necessary data to even formulate and exact plan through their offices, I would be willing to help develop a more defined plan.
However, I will be happy to see some sort of modified plan and always expected they would develop their own plan, hopefully including my suggestions, but also including a knowledge of where GJ and JG will be campaigning and other relevant factors as discussed before (ballot access, a special referendum, situational conditions etc).
In order to reach the appropriate sales personel in each station and obtain the best available rates – especially run of station, news program packages and other packages with lower prices per spot (specifying times and programs is much more expensive) – requires that the enquiries come from a campaign representative and that correspondence is returned to an official campaign email or regular address.
We would need to put together a budget – available and anticipated funding – and then get prices for each media market that it was possible to target based on that budget. There is no need and no time to gather data and spend time on states that we will never have enough money to reach.
Since the LP has virtually no data used to make better choices, 2012 should be considered a base year for testing. We should gather as much data as possible about our advertising program – if we actually have one.
Obviously this means keeping track of the ads purchased, the prices, the demographics for all spots, by station, by market, program, time etc in all markets.
Each ad should carry an 800# to measure prospects generated within a time window following each spot. We will also want to gather data to help us look at the effects on polling numbers by state, before and after advertising, and effects on vote totals in the coverage area following the election. We can correlate prospects with the ads to determine effectiveness of each of the elements: which ad, market, demographic mix, time of day, type of program, actual program – states/markets where we don’t advertise will serve as controls as they should generate some prospects from other sources.
To actuallly test the Zapper plan at all would require targeting at least some whole states – small ones due to budget constraints – with enough ads to have a measurable impact. I have suggested a first round minimum @ 5 cents per capita followed by a second round of at least the same size.
If we chose at least 3 states: say WY, AK, ME we could at least see if there was any effect within a state.
If we could boost that to 8 states:
ME, NH, VT,
AK
WY, ID, MT
NV
… then we could start to look for nationwide leverage effects.
Running ads targeting enough small states to boost polling results is intended to gain leverage to gain free nationwide media – earned media – from such a polling surprise.
Leverage is one of the main short term benefits from the Zapper plan. We can generate free media – on a local, state and national level – worth far more than all the ads we could buy just running on cable, or on markets scattered nationwide, but not targeting a state.
I wouldn’t expect much nationwide leverage from 1 to 3 states. From a larger group of small states, say 11 as in my earlier post @34 of 10 plus NM, I would expect a lot of nationwide earned media. But can we raise enough funds?
In the end, 2012 should be a test year for advertising for the LP. A lot more useful data could be gathered if the budget allows enough advertising to be purchased.
In addition to running a high level of major network Broadcast TV spots in small states, if the campaign wanted to try a radio only program in one or two states, cable TV only in another, internet only in another, etc. as far as funds allow, that would generate useful data as well to compare and contrast.
Since every state is unique, the amounts spent per capita will vary, as will the mix of ads and a host of other factors, results will have to be interpreted with a lot of qualifiers, caveats, and conditions. We should be able to generate useful data for planning and more questions for future LP advertising programs to consider.
Beyond running the ad program – the Zapper plan – I have been concerned about the funding. This is separate from the actual ad program.
We have to raise a large sum, we need to maximize the excitement to encourage maximum donor support. Toward that end I have suggested that more funds could be raised by a special appeal for TV advertising funds that promises 100% will go on the air. Donors like knowing that their funds will be well-spent and I anticipate they would respond accordingly.
More answers for RC:
Yes, many have a hard time “buying” what I am explaining here. But, I am not selling. I’m explaining. This is free. I’m teaching. Listen, think and learn – or not – to quote you: “It’s all good.”
You’d prefer to see, and then pay for, credentials and a show. I’ve done that. I’ve been a paid consultant. Come in with an expensive suit, stunning brief case, and charge $5000 per day. They have to listen. They’ve paid in advance for the show. They buy before you walk in the door. This is one of the funniest things about being a paid consultant.
So, the consultant comes in, asks questions, talks to the client and all the clients workers, they provide the answers, the consultant packages it, uses his expertise to make a plan and presentation using the information they already had. However, they listen to the consultant instead of their own people. Plus they’ve already paid, so they’ve already bought. They follow the plan of the expert consultant.
If you go through the consulting training program, this is what you will learn. It’s the secret of consulting. And now you know.
You could hire a consultant or pay $2.4 million in promises and debt to a professional campaign team. You won’t find a better plan, but you’ll spend a lot of money. You’ll listen because you spent the money. If the consultant is truly an expert, he will take your money, repackage the Zapper Plan with tweaks and gloss to make it you forget it’s not new. You will thank him for his brilliant new plan, since it rings true – it should because you already knew it – you’re happy and satisfied, and the consultant moves on to his next job.
Here is your chance to get the best possible plan from a volunteer and member instead of wasting millions on an outside expert consultant.
Readers only have to use their minds and make an honest evaluation.
Think about it.
The reason Internet Advertising is nearly worthless is that most people we want to reach do not spend much time on the Internet. The majority of the American public is not spending significant time there. Millions of very young pimply faced teens and preteens dominate the net based on time. They tend to be too young to vote and they tend not to donate or respond to polls of adults.
Of course, there are millions of Adults worth reaching who do use the Internet. They are busy, use the net for a purpose and they tend to train themselves to skip over ads. Personally I don’t see the ads at all. When reading about types of Net ads I actually have to go looking for them. I can spend 8 hours on various sites, such as this one, Google, Ebay, Yahoo etc. and never see a single ad – apparently they appear on the pages and go unobserved, unseen.
A high percentage of clicks which must be paid for are accidental – in fact, I expect that an honest study would show that most paid clicks are accidental – nothing is read, there is no “Impression” although you have to pay. Ooops … click over … click back. No Impression. Pay anyway. These are nuisance clicks for Net users and should be called “pay per annoyance” instead of “pay per click.”
Many individuals have trained themselves to shut out these spots, or have never noticed them at all.
So, we have a medium that most don’t use enough to reach, most who use it (based on time)
are the wrong demographic, and adults tend to train themselves not to just ignore, but to shut out of their field of vision altogether.
Internet ads are cheap for a reason – and they are still overpriced for most purposes. We might reach tiny percentage of the public on the Internet if we spent a great deal of money – more than we have – move no polls and gain no leveraged free media.
However, if marketing hip products and services to teens and preteens, yeah I’d go for Internet advertising. They are open and looking and spend a lot of time on the net.
AFTER doing a leveraged TV ad project, reaching out specifically to HS and University students on the Net would be useful. This could be included exclusively as part of our outreach to University and young libertarian leaners and should be a separate project accordingly. However, we need to do Politics. We need to reach adults first who will show up in polls, donate, join, run for office and vote.
Internet – NO. Internet advertising has been tried by the LP and failed. The 2010 campaigns that I checked with ALL claimed no measurable results from Internet advertising expenditures.
Internet is a small niche. Internet-only users who can be reached nowhere else are a tiny segment of that niche. We can use Internet ads if we have the funds to fill in niches. There are few people who only use the net and no TV or radio at all.
Using Social media is different. Not ads, but individuals who are paid and who specialize in spreading a message around the net in a way that appears to be spontaneous, private, personal comments and endorsements.
This has to be done carefully if paid social media professionals are used – I would advise against using pros for this.
The LP should have enough real people with computers, time on their hands and ability to make contacts and friends on social sites and discussion boards to spread the word.
A little organization and encouragement toward developing a social media outreach program for the LP and our candidates would be a useful volunteer effort.
Unlike advertising, people actually go out looking for such commentary and discussion. If conducted in a polite and interesting way, we could reach out to thousands this way.
Question from another thread: RC asked:
Robert Capozzi // Jul 23, 2012 at 7:44 am
“60 z, right, well, we’d need to see the math for others to share your lack of doubt. Unless, of course, we are all to share – just because! – the view of a pseudonym who posts some interesting things, seems to have some insights, but never seems willing or able to put meat on the bones of his/her bold assertions! (Consider stepping outside yourself for a moment and imagine what you are asking us to buy!!!)
So, we’d need to see how you qualify network affiliate viewers. If it’s heavily skewed toward octogenarian shut ins and 14 year old, pimply faced kids, we’d want to see how you normalize for that.
We’d want to see your sensitivity testing. If Internet ads only reach 20% of the qualified (non-octo, non-pimply faced) network affiliate viewership (and Internet ad viewers, to be fair), but the CPM is 5% of the cost, saturation might be achieved on the Internet. Saturation might NOT be possible on the network affiliate channel.
As for network-affiliate news, I confess I almost never watch it. I’ve lived in major markets most of my life, and whenever I watch those news programs, the coverage of national prez campaigns is negligible and light…maybe a quick cutaway to national and state polling figures, for ex. Now, perhaps Missoula and Portland are different. Is there research that indicates that Missoula and Portland network affiliate local news covers things like 3rd party candidates for prez? Or is local news across the nation dominated by car wrecks, domestic disputes gone haywire, sports and weather? Ever open minded here, but my bias is that the latter is likely the prevalent observation.
“Free” media is a great thing…don’t misunderstand. I just wonder whether you are leaping to a grandiose conclusion based on no precedent. Yes, MAYBE if Team GJ were running saturation ads in Portland and he showed up at a Portland County Fair, the local news team MIGHT show up…MIGHT. Might that be worth a test? Perhaps. Would I stake an entire campaign strategy on such a gambit? Without numbers, no f-ing way.
My bias is that “free” media of any substance is a nationalized thing for prez campaigns. If there was evidence to the contrary, I will of course consider it. But if I were going to test that, ABQ’d be the place for GJ for obvious reasons.”
– Q: from Robert Capozzi
yeah, maybe …some day… maybe
… from another IPR thread …
zapper // Jun 1, 2012 at 11:02 am
From @49: ?JT // May 31, 2012 at 9:38 pm
Zapper: ?No way around it. We gotta get on major network TV first. Market by market. State by state. Starting small and growing as our donor base grows.?
JT: ?Are you talking about running ads on hit shows during prime time??
Yes. Starting with the news, but looking at demographics and cost of ads on all programs on major network stations, saturating a state, one state at a time, starting with the smallest states.
I suggested a list of 14 (13 plus one more later) although due to limited funds we?d need to start with about 7, mostly the smallest US states in population.
Although this topic has been discussed in bits and pieces on a variety of recent threads, most of the explanation is on this thread:
Zapper: Lessons from Americans Elect Collapse, Opportunities and Ad Strategy for Libertarians
May 18th, 2012 ? 100 Comments
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/05/zapper-lessons-from-americans-elect-collapse-opportunities-and-ad-strategy-for-libertarians/
I have described how to begin this ad campaign and I expect that enough money would come in to fund at least the first 7 states through targeted, dedicated fundraising where 100% of the donations were guaranteed to by air time for TV ads on prime time (morning, noon, evening and late news and perhaps other programs) covering an entire state ? one at a time, up to the first 7 states chosen from the list of 14.
Out of the recent money bomb and the matching funds, enough money (maybe $10,000) could be found to produce some high quality spots with a Libertarian advertising professional such as Travis Irvine.
In reality, no LP POTUS campaign has advertised since 1980. It?s expensive and we can?t afford to go nationwide. We can, however, achieve the same effect one state at a time and earn free media by showing how strong we are in targeted states even with a small advertising budget.
The big question remains for today: Is anyone in the Johnson campaign listening?
Someday, perhaps, we?ll see an LP POTUS campaign wise enough to run targeted major network TV advertising first:
before ballot drives
before hiring a paid staff
before renting an office
? only production of the first round of ads and fundraising come before airing the first spots in the first target states ?
And if the campaign can generate early funds or the candidate can make a sizable startup donation, even major fundraising can follow the first air dates.
The long term benefits of starting our targeted media plan now is the growth that we can see in our state parties.
They will expand in membership and number of candidates. We can add states with permanent ballot access.
If we continue such a targeted media plan in the off year elections, we can get great free media in these states and grow more. Such continued outreach would make the LP credible in the eyes of the media and the public. Once we are seen as credible and start to get coverage we will begin to win elections – especially if we stick to our principles. There is no need to dilute our message, although we should always present it in the best light. However, it is important to have educated, articulate, presentable candidates. We shouldn’t just put anyone on the ballot to fill a spot. Some candidates can be an embarrassment just because of personal factors.
Field organizing is a great idea. It’s more of a long term party idea. The LP could expand on the targeted small state plan, if such a plan got jump started under the Johnson 2012 campaign.
In Maine there was such an effort long ago that was part of a program that saw a county party started in every Maine county and local parties in at least two cities or towns in each county – Not only to build the party, but part of the requirement for ongoing Ballot Status in Maine.
The Maine LP contracted with a field director – Joseph Knight – who set up LP fair booths that were manned by him and volunteers at county and local fairs around the state. Sometimes there were 2 or 3 booths at simultaneous events. This contributed in a great expansion of the state LP membership and donor base at the time. The fair booths generated enough revenues through Operation Politically Homeless jars and other donations at the fairs from the general public to pay for the field coordinator.
A field coordinator program might not always work out to be self funding, but it should be inspirational enough to get donors to sponsor the program and general public fundraising can go a long way to defray the cost.
Knight was a dedicated LP activist who worked more for the plan than for money and he was good at making this outreach program work from the getgo – maybe because he believed that it would work was the reason the he could make the impossible come true.
Has anyone considered field organizing as part of a saturation strategy in selected states?
For this purpose, states that are relatively compact in physical size in addition to population would provide a relative advantage. Physically large states with a very concentrated population center, especially if it is near the border of other targeted states, would be good also.
to Eric Blitz,
Apparently you have not read my posts.
Or, alternatively, you did not understand them. If so, I apologize for explaining poorly.
As you have indicated, a nationwide TV campaign utilizing the Major networks is presently beyond the ability of the Johnson campaign.
Indeed, that is so. In fact, and you apparently failed to either read or understand this – overcoming that obstacle is the major benefit of the plan I have proposed.
Yes, you would need at least $32,000,000 to launch a competitve, saturation level media campaign on a nationwide basis. And I have advised and presented a way to avoid this problem.
Instead we should take advantage of the greatest boon to 3rd parties ever devised and so long overlooked: The Electoral College and the division of the US into States.
You see, in the US, States count. In fact, in reality, states are everything. There is no such thing as a national election.
We can build our party state by state. We can marshall our resources and target the states we can afford to saturate with our message, one at a time. We don’t have to have enough money to go national and we don’t have to have enough donors to go national.
And we DO have enough members and donors and cash available to do THIS media plan. And they are sitting on their hands waiting for some reason to donate.
They are out there Right Now.
So, we start with the smallest states; the ones that we can saturate on a small budget. These states will earn us respect, free media and bring in more members and donors.
If we start now we can use the growth from the first states to move on to additional states. Each time we add a state, we do so knowing we have enough money to reach saturation levels in that state. There is no wasted money. No wasted effort. And by building one state at a time we cannot fall short in our efforts.
Imagine you were starting a franchise chain: Call it Gj’s Lovely Pizzeria. Would you try to open one restaurant in every state and advertise in every state? No. Of course not. You would develop one market at a time, so as to target and maximize the benefits of your advertising.
Well, our markets are States. States have races for Gov, Senate, US House, State rep and State senate … guess what? Those are all by state. And our state parties will get strong if WE ever actually get smart enough to work together to win, one state at a time.
Donors will understand and donate to support this plan.
But first, we have to make some quality, professional ads that are ready to run – so show the donors. This is the investment money. The seed money. It is more important than your office space or any paid staff you might have. If Travis Irvine is available, he could give you some great ads – 30 sec, 60 sec, 5 min – to show the donors. CALL HIM. Buget this and take a risk. Be leaders. Try $10,000. If you can’t swing that to get started you shouldn’t have even shown up in Las Vegas.
While you’re making the ads, Do The Research. Call the major network stations in the 13 target states I’ve listed before, add Nebraska which I neglected as another possibility. Then we choose a subset of 7 or 8 to start with.
Then we go to the donors with a plan, the target states, the reason to donate and the ads. We send mail. We follow up with phone calls. We get some of the early big donors who will max out for this to call other known big donors – free fundraising by dedecated and committed voluteers – and ask them to match and max out – what’s the max now? $2,500? 200 donors can give $500,000? And you can’t conceive of raising that? With a real plan? And you don’t realize that with no plan those same donors might give $5000 total.
Then we do what we promised. We saturate the states we raise enough money to reach. Some of the individuals who respond to the ads for more information will become additional members, donors, supporters and future party activists and candidates.
From there we grow until election day. As the effort grows and bears fruit, we will be able to demonstrate our success to additional donors and expand the number of states. And, if the program fails – always a chance of failure or success in the risky things in life – well then we can cut our losses and not add any more states. This program is self funding, beyond the original ads … and they could be used anywhere, run on YouTube and at least get some exposure. So there is no downside.
However, there is a big downside to what is being done now.
Right now we are waiting for enough donations to do something. And we’re not planning anything because there isn’t enough money. And the donors aren’t giving because nothing is happening.
So, you can see the circle you’re in. Catch 22. Except this catch 22 has a way out. The Johnson campaign can take a risk, take this plan, run with it, get the ball rolling and make something happen.
It’s not up to me. I gave you the plan.
It’s up to you.
Zapper, I think this is a very intelligent strategy and that you should work on some level with the campaign to try to implement it.
RC @ 93… to wit: posts 27, 43, 47, 49 and 86.
RC @ 93… I guess we read English a bit differently.
91 nf, interesting perspective there. I’ve seen no naysaying here, only feedback. Team GJ is likely to be a shoestring operation, and they may find Proto Plan Zapper inspirational in some way. Or it may just be a shiney rock on the path. It might work this cycle and not the next, or vice versa. Multi-variable opportunties are tricky that way…
Zapper zaps all zappees and keeps on zapping.
I am pleased to see zapper has withstood all the naysayers thus far. Good for you, zapper!
@88 RC True, campaigns are finite. However, agreeing with the others who like experimentation and learning, we can choose and execute a strategy, execute the hell out of it, even make mid-course corrections – as we should – and still do so in a way that allows data to be accumulated and analyzed. Since each US state is quite different from the other 49 there can be no perfect “control” group, but we can still gather meaningfull data to be analyzed after the election.
@84 Wrote:
“As it relates to this thread, my suggestion would be to choose target markets (as Zapper suggests), and hit them with all kinds of ads. That is, TV, radio, yard signs on the street, flyers in doors, online ads (which can be targeted to infinitely small areas in most cases), candidate appearances, and anything else you can think of, or any-or-all of these that are within budget.” Matt Cholko.
Yes, using all kinds of media in the target areas, especially as election day approaches, does seem like a good idea. Yard signs, bumper stickers, fliers … these are generally the province of the local activists. However, there is a problem with the use of multiple forms of media as paid for by the campaign directly.
The problem in every LP POTUS campaign to date, with the exception of Clark in 1980, has been the failure to plan for TV advertising at all. By waiting to the end to see if there would be enough money in the budget to advertise on TV, the campaign managers have always guaranteed that there would NOT and could not be enough money left for TV.
TV advertising should be the biggest campaign outlay other than ballot access. If it weren’t for the high cost of ballot access or if we could raise more money, then even this wouldn’t be true. TV advertising should be the biggest outlay, even for our small sized campaigns. And, we should even consider whether or not it is worth spending the large sum required for the last few expensive states for ballot access instead of for TV advertising.
Constantly buying and losing ballot access without advertising and party building has not proven particularly successful.
Planning ahead means setting fundraising targets and making ads – now. Then we start raising money for TV ads – now. Since TV advertising is popular for donors, we should promise to segregate such funds and use 100% of the funds raised for airtime.
This would bring in funds from people who think this is the most important use of campaign resources or who excited by the prospect of an LP POTUS candidate actually appearing in prime time advertising on major network TV. Many of these donors would not give, or would not give as much for general campaign use or even for ballot access. It would not siphon much from other donations but instead would increase the total amount raised.
It’s also important to plan and budget the required amounts for TV advertising. Rather than see how much will be left over, we need to reserve the bulk of money raised for prime time Major network TV advertising in targeted small states, by tightfistedly refusing to spend on items of lesser importance, even though they appear to be low cost at the time. It is the aggreagation of low cost and less essential spending, the lack of strategy and the lack of planning that has precluded a successful LP POTUS TV campaign from 1984 through 2008.
Of course experimentation is generally a great idea. However, campaigns are very finite enterprises, not ongoing businesses.
Come up with a strategy, execute the hell out of it, make mid-course corrections, and see what happens.
I agree with Holtz @85 too. Experiments, properly conducted, are extremely valuable. I did not meant to, nor do I think I did, suggest otherwise.
Zapper you put a lot of effort into your post and I’m glad you’re thinking, but you should have researched more, friend.
Sure the LP needs to run national network ads. (Where are the divisions Herr Hitler ?) Where’s the money dude ? If we are gonna wish, wish BIG! Local Cable ads can be rather inexpensive. Everyone doesn’t watch network television. No ad is wasted, some are just more productive than others.
Your belief that free media will follow higher poll numbers might be true, but if it is 99% NEGATIVE media is that good ? NO! You don’t seem to understand the power of your enemy yet.
Ron Paul is winning, so Iowa doesn’t matter [long version] – http://www.facebook.com/pages/Somerset-Youth-for-Ron-Paul/261208490581481?ref=pb
If GJ got to 15% nation wide in polls by July 4, there would be so much negative media he would wish he had stayed in NM and never ran !
So-Called Battleground states (with -Electoral College Numbers) are Section 1 – FL-29, OH-18, MO-10, CO-9, IA-8, NV-6, NM-5, NH-4
Section 2 – PA-20, MI-16, NC-15, VA-13, IN-11, MN-10, WI-10, MT-3
Section One is more of a toss-up. But with serious consequences. Obama wins FL or OH all others won’t matter as Obama (a BAD P who doesn’t deserve it) is re-elected.
Research COST and cost benefit, then come back and finish your “boondocks” strategy for us. Good Buddy !
Feel free to share with friends and family!
SEVEN {7} Reasons Why Mitt Romney’s Electability Is A Myth – http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2011/12/27/7_reasons_why_mitt_romneys_electability_is_a_myth/page/full/
choose target markets (as Zapper suggests), and hit them with all kinds of ads
Since we were just in Vegas, remember that according to the data-driven economist CEO of Caesars Casinos, there are three things that can get you fired from his company: stealing, sexual harrassment, and running an experiment without a control group.
As distinct from the goal of winning minds, the goal of winning votes can be measured down to the precinct level. There is a maxim in advertising that half of it is wasted, but you don’t know which half. Experiments can help you find out.
I am in general agreement with Zapper’s strategy here, but I would like to make a more general point that seems to be lost here:
We would all do well to fall back on basic economics. In the USA, advertising is a relatively unregulated industry. Yes, there are still a s-load of regulations, but the fact of the matter is, ads generally sell for what they are really worth. There certainly are many great strategies for maximizing ROI, and Zapper’s may well be one of them (I think it is), but it is wrongheaded to say that pay-per-click or pay-per-impression or pay-per-anything ads are a bad idea.
I own a small business in northern Virginia. I buy ads all the time. I also studied marketing, advertising, and economics (among other things) in college. If there is one thing I can say for sure, it is that relying on one medium for advertising is a bad idea. As it relates to this thread, my suggestion would be to choose target markets (as Zapper suggests), and hit them with all kinds of ads. That is, TV, radio, yard signs on the street, flyers in doors, online ads (which can be targeted to infinitely small areas in most cases), candidate appearances, and anything else you can think of, or any-or-all of these that are within budget.
Brands absolutely are built by putting your name in front of people as often as possible. Some people don’t watch TV, some don’t read newspapers, some throw away flyers, but all people can be reached in some way. There is no magic bullet here. The LP and GJ have brands to build and “products” to sell just like every other advertiser.
So, while it is incredibly important to have a marketing plan (and to stick to it well, but also note what is and is not working), it is equally important not to fall into the trap of believing that anyone has all the answers.
To tie this back into the thread, let us remember that many people get their news online. Many people still read newspapers, many listen to the radio, and many listen to TV. Most do more than one of these. All of these mediums compete for ad revenue. So, Zapper’s claim that getting coverage from reporters/editors/whoever calls the shots will be helped by advertising with their employer can carry over to all ad media. This is not exclusive to television.
BH@73,
I don’t have the exact stats handy, but my recollection is that the Charles Jay campaign spent low-three-figures ($300 or so) on Google advertising in 2008. We managed more than a million impressions for that money.
Anecdotally, I believe that advertising contributed to what “earned media” we got, possibly including Jay’s appearance on Fox News, if for no other reason than that we piggy-backed Barr, matching his keyword bids (I believe he only spent $800 on Google ads), so journalists who were researching Barr and the Libertarian Party kept seeing ads for Jay and the Boston Tea Party.
80 p, thx fer clarifying. Promoting by challenging thru reversing the wasted vote notion seems to already be a theme TEAM GJ has adopted. Promoting him thru raising electoral college consciousness has the additional benefit of promoting GJ generally.
We need to do a lot of pay-per-click online ads. If they click on it, then they will be learning more about the Libertarian Party. If they don’t click on it, then we don’t pay anything.
Thanks!
And Robert, no, it’s not 1 or 2% that understand Swing State vs Non-Swing
LOL
If it was that bad I’d give up ..well maybe not…it’s bad enough that it’s a huge portion that don’t get it as it is. I don’t know what percentage off hand but it is far from either 1% or 99%.
@ Paulie 64 Interesting, I can see people still not getting it, plus they like to be able to say they voted for the winner, another thing I don’t understand.
Either way, based on his list, I am all good in Utah!
Happy B-day!
z, dude, I’m advocating targeting, actually, just a different approach than yours. Yours might be just what the dr. ordered, but it seems overthought to me.
@ 66 RC.
You seem too concerned with the lowest cost – CPM – without considering the strategic value of different voters in different areas.
The Ds and Rs target their ads. They do not spend too much time on CPM as they cannot buy the whole of the USA either. They are looking for Electoral Votes and winning state by state. Strategy comes first.
We also need to study, plan and target, state by state. With slightly different short term and long term goals in mind. CPM can be part of the decision making process as a factor, but it is not a strategy, nor is it even part of a strategy.
Short term: Targeting small states gives Johnson his best chance at earning enough free media to get to 15%. There is nothing to indicate that more competitive states will be more difficult to push up to 15% in the polls or over 1% in the General election.
Longer term: Targeting helps the LP learn about it’s market – strategy, what works and what doesn’t. We have never run enough LP ads to gather such data AFIK (other than in Maine 1990).
Long term: We need to target some states over a period of years to begin to build a grown up party that can compete for State Rep and higher offices within that state. We need to assist such states by putting an umbrella of advertising over them. In addition to advertising, we help in building a professional, well run State LP, with county affiliates in every county. We need to establish beachheads for the future.
74 z, yes, I understand few click thru. I suspect they are more useful as brand building…the eyeballs that see them is many fold more than click them. Likely unquantifiable.
Again, we’re going for 2% here….
@73 Your link to your site claims that the free media came from a press release.
Congrats. Good press work and PR are vital to any campaign.
However, we are looking here at the benefits of targeted advertising. This does not replace press and PR efforts, but these things should all be coordinated and complement each other.
Unspoken in all of this, of course, is the essential role of the message of the ads and quality of production etc.
@66 RC.
“Running overnight ads in Reno and Fargo is likely to be less effective than even Internet advertising. I also think you might be surprised how those little link click-thru ads can be used to build brand awareness.” – RC
I would agree about not running the overnight ads – anywhere – except as a niche filler in a rich campaign going for the win.
Likewise internet ads have a similar value as the overnights (the cost is low, but still higher than their value). Has anyone studied the percentage of people (very high, I suspect) that don’t ever click them (except by accident) because they don’t ever notice them.
I never saw these ads, in fact, until recently, I had never noticed they were there at all […] internet advertising is a waste of money for us
Pay-per-click advertising has no cost for users who don’t notice the ads.
We should get some perspectives on Internet advertising from people with actual knowledge/experience of it. George, have you ever written up the insights garnered from your online advertising efforts?
The best advertising is the kind that earns free media. In my 2004 congressional campaign I invested about $15 in an advertising campaign that resulted in a story on national cable news and an interview on the top-rated morning news program in the nation’s 5th-largest metro. I don’t know how many extra votes this got me, but hundreds of thousands were exposed to the LP’s message.
Thanks! I’m now 40 (grrrr) and IPR coincidentally turns 4 today. I was not there when it started so it has to be coincidence 🙂
See last year’s b-day post https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/05/ipr-3-years-on-the-intertubes/ for more details as well as https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/05/independent-political-report-turns-two-years-old/ and https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/05/west-virginia-libertarians-raising-funds-for-2010-2012-ballot-access-ipr-one-year-anniversary/
more…
The crumbs off the table are a Roman feast in this game…
67 p: It seems that relatively few people understand what a swing state or non-swing state even is or whether they are in one, believe it or not.
me: Less than 1%? Remember, 2% for GJ knocks the ball out of the park.
Advertising can educate.
“Romney will lose NY. Take a look at Gov. Gary Johnson. Vote your conscience.”
“Obama will lose TX. Take a look at Gov. Gary Johnson. Vote your conscience.”
Off the top, worth what you paid for it….
Happy Birthday to Paulie today!
Zapper – in case you are not I have both your email and Wes B.’s as well as his ph# which I am pretty sure is OK to share since he put it in a mass email iirc.
Mark, even in UT and WY I ran into many people who did not understand the whole swing/deep blue/deep red thing. Same went for DC, MA and other deep blue places where I did ballot access and likewise found numerous people who were afraid to put us on the ballot and thus cause their preferred “lesser evil,” whichever one it was, to lose the election. Yes, otherwise intelligent people even in 90%+ Democratic DC and almost equally lopsided states on the other side like UT and WY said that – and not just idiots or a handful of uninformed people, but many people who seemed to be intelligent, successful, and involved in critical thinking. People with strong political views, sometimes political activists. People of all ideologies, walks of life, and so on. It seems that relatively few people understand what a swing state or non-swing state even is or whether they are in one, believe it or not.
Hopefully Zapper is talking to Wes B about raising money for this. They do have potential as far as that goes.
61 z, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Arizona (possibly), Nevada (possibly, I think) swing.
z: Unlike the excitement generated by user content on sites such as YouTube, internet advertising is a waste of money for us just like buying newspaper ads would be a waste of money for a POTUS campaign.
me: All advertising is “wasted” to some extent. The question I’m familiar with is Do you have the budget to repeat the message enough for it to be effective at reaching a target audience to raise awareness of product X? There’s no getting around CPM, working your inductive idea through to see if the economies of scale are there to elicit the likelihood of the desired result.
My guess is No because I doubt they could raise the critical mass of money to execute the Zapper plan. Running overnight ads in Reno and Fargo is likely to be less effective than even Internet advertising. I also think you might be surprised how those little link click-thru ads can be used to build brand awareness EVEN IF you don’t click thru. See the words Gov. Gary Johnson enough, even for a fleeting second, and recognition builds.
And, yes, Paulie’s got a point. A SuperPac might be in the position to execute Plan Zapper with consequence.
NV, NM, NH and *maybe* ME, MT are swing states iirc. The others on your list tend not to be. Most lean heavily R, VT leans heavily D. AZ may be more swing than it used to be due to more Latino citizens and more transplants from other states. ID, WY, UT, AK and both Dakotas are pretty safe Republican bets.
I like Zappers idea but I have a different take.
Focus on the states which are either heavily R or heavily D, this way we can say that your vote doesn’t matter if you vote D or R so vote for who you focus. In my state Utah, it will go to the R so I push for independents to vote for the Libertarian candidate, this will send a larger message than voting d and r.
Hopefully Libertarian Superpac will consider it also.
@60 It’s still the same problem.
If we are trying for 1%, we still need to saturate a market with enough ads to have an impact on the voters.
We can run our ads in a couple of flights, such as 5 cents per capita early and 5cents per capita later, but we need to spend 10 cents per capita to have an impact.
So, we still can’t afford the big markets. And we need to raise money for whatever we do. Rasing money for an effort that doesn’t have some element of leverage to increase the value of the spending is just foolish.
The free media we can earn from early targeted media is more than all the media we could hope to buy even if we were running with Ron Paul sized donations.
@58 Here is my list of 13 states to look at. We’d have to start with 7 or 8 of these, so we could exclude for problems. Which of these is a swing state?
Alaska,
Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont
Montana, Idaho, Wyoming
New Mexico, Arizona
Nevada, Utah
North Dakota, South Dakota
The GJ campaign would need to consider many factors in choosing.
As to Internet advertising.
Most people do not get much from internet ads. They are cheap for a reason. Personally, I think they are way overpriced based on real impact. I spend a lot of time no the Internet. I have long known that the .com business model is based in large part on advertising revenue. It seemed to me that a lot of people were going to places on the net to do things I didn’t, because I never saw these ads, in fact, until recently, I had never noticed they were there at all, right there on pages I was using and visiting. Only the discussion of this issue got me to look for them. I was surprised to notice that such ads were right here on IPR, for example, as I have never read or even noticed them previously.
Unlike the excitement generated by user content on sites such as YouTube, internet advertising is a waste of money for us just like buying newspaper ads would be a waste of money for a POTUS campaign. (The 1988 Paul for President campaing notoriously wasted $50k on a single full page ad in the NYT that could have saturated a small state with TV spots.)
If we were a rich campaign, then buying the NET would fill in niches to reach those last few votes on the margin that are expensive but can mean victory in close states. This doesn’t seem to apply to us at the present.
59 z: We are all looking for a way to get over 1% or more in the November vote totals, even if the 15% polling seems out of reach.
me: Right, which is why my gut tells me the high-pop, lopsided states are the most target-rich environment. Big-numbers leverage vs. guerilla warfare in a short time frame seems on its face to favor going for a slice the big-numbers, using national leverage and the ‘net.
But we’ll see what Team GJ comes up with. Mostly I hope they learn from 08, where fundraising was poor and they staffed up for a Perot-type effort, prematurely so….
@55 Good point RC. The Johnson campaign would want to coordinate their appearances and events with the ads, at least in some states. This could help guide the chosen small state groups, it would make the selection of contiguous small states even more important, and the timing of the ad buys could also help with ballot drives in some cases.
True, even though we would certainly want to check out Alaska, and it might be hard to find the local angle, we would still include Alaska as an opportunity for an early 15% poll result based on ads alone. A bit of creative PR brainstorming should find a local angle to entice the local news – even if a GJ visit isn’t possible. Don’t forget that a visit by Jim Gray could go a long way in AK – especially given the AK history and Gray’s history in the decriminalization battle. I can see this one working.
GJ has an incentive to do this. He is looking for a way to break through to 15% for a shot at the debates. He should also be looking for a way to motivate donors and volunteers and to generate new volunteers.
We are all looking for a way to get over 1% or more in the November vote totals, even if the 15% polling seems out of reach.
Taking a shot at ad buying as part of a campaign for leveraged free media would be a great motivator with a real chance of success. It makes efficient use of scarce resources at the same time that it can increase the resources available.
Yes, it’s a little risky. But isn’t everything we do in the LP risky in many ways?
Let’s go people. Let’s get this ticket on the road.
more…
My other feedback is that statewide POTUS polls that get much coverage are in the swing states. Targeting the swing states – even the smaller ones – seems like a bad idea, as those are the states where the “wasted vote” syndrome is most pronounced.
z, OK, but why do targeted TV vs. targeted Internet?
@ 53 Correct. We want to show up in the polls in several states. This avoids the appearance of being a single state anomaly or explainable such as high polls in NM might be.
So, we invest in advertising at a level that is significant enough to, hopefully, bring about a significant increase in the statewide polls for POTUS for Johnson in several states.
We could only afford this in the smallest states. The Johnson campaign staff or a volunteer would need to gather the data for the most likely small states (I’ve suggested 13 likely targets) and select the best options.
Groups of contiguous small states would offer even better odds of having a positive impact since Johnson could show up in polls in neighboring states offering additional interest and legitimacy.
So, ME, NH, VT are a good grouping. The media markets overlap so that buying ME and VT will also cover a significant portion of NH. VT media also overlaps with upstate, Eastern NY which does add to cost, but is an investment in the NY LP for the future anyway, so not a loss.
This ad campaign would be a good test run for Johnson ads and themes, to see what sells. It has the potential to generate a breakthrough at lower cost. We can test the response from 4 – 8 million people with a budget of $200,000 to $400,000 dollars – already a significant and difficult challenge. However, this will let us know what we could do if we had $16,000,000 to advertise to all of America’s 320,000,000 people.
Let’s do something that has a chance for success.
Let’s do something that will help us learn how to campaign NOW, for the rest of 2012 and will provide a base for future campaign efforts in the future.
Let’s do something that offers vision and hope to our own members and donors, so they have can get some excitement and positive return from knowing that their donations and campaign efforts have the chance to payoff in several ways that we’ve NEVER tried before.
more…
Stipulating that I never watch local TV news in the major markets I’ve been residing in most of my life, I do wonder whether local TV reporters – perhaps especially in small markets – are equipped to cover national politics. If the candidate speaks locally, sure, I can see that. Otherwise…I’m skeptical, but make the case….
For Wills @ 47
“Wyoming”
66 percent of respondents said that they would support a change in state law that would “remove the threat of arrest and all other penalties for seriously ill patients who use and grow their own medical marijuana with the approval of their physicians.”
POLL: Lucas Organization
DATE: February 2002
It seems that Don Wills along with his Republican friends in the legislature are out of touch with the state.
The fact that state legislators in WY are not willing to change with the values and desires of the voters is nothing new. This happens in many states. It’s why the time is ripe for change in WY.
There was a similar situation about 2 decades ago in Maine regarding the blue laws – nearly all retail businesses being required to close on Sundays. The legislature wouldn’t touch the issue. They claimed that the people didn’t want to change.
So, the retail industry took on the issue. They sponsored a referendum, gathered the signatures and put the issue on the ballot. The blue laws were repealed in the referendum with a 2/3 majority.
So, Wills and the Republican majority are out of touch. This is no surprise. It makes them easier to defeat in the end.
LP candidates can and many have run well in WY. Ideally we would find an articulate, attractive, high quality, college educated Libertarian candidate for State Rep. Such a candidate could be competitive, and if several such candidates ran, the LP would see a percentage of winners. Over time the receptivity to the LP would grow, and the LP’s winning percentage would grow.
First we have to have leaders with ability and a positive attitude, who believe in Libertarian principles, and who want to and are willing to work hard to build the LP. Then, we work to take second place, becoming the number 2 party in the State. Then we start winning.
51 z, oh, I see. What is the CPM in Butte vs. Albany?
But, now I’m getting your logic. You want to show up in STATE POTUS polls. For ex., if GJ might get, say, 8% in MT, by running ads in Butte, you’re banking on that showing up as 15%, say, a month or so after running ads…is that the idea?
That might be interesting.
For me, the question is, is that more effective than running Internet ads to the max? There’s probably no analogs to such testing. But I don’t know if adding 8 points to the MT POTUS polling results gets the campaign all that much. It MIGHT have secondary effects if the political reporter at the Butte CBS affiliate covers the campaign, but I am skeptical that sporadic tick ups in local TV coverage would be worth much.
The Zapper Plan has some merit, though. Hopefully Team GJ know strategy and tactics well enough to assess and consider it….
@ 51 Yes. Because we cannot afford the ads in big states. So, we will have to buy much fewer ads. We will not be able to run all the times, all the stations. We will not be able to get the repetition required to reach saturation. We need to run enough spots so that the average viewer sees the ad multiple times … 6, 8, 10 times … and remember that they will NOT see most of the spots. This repetition is why we need to run in small states.
For an initial beginning run, we would need $900,000 to run in TX. We would need $1,600,000 in CA. But, only $55,000 in ME. Only $30,000 in WY.
Spending $30,000 in CA, TX or NY would have very little value to the Johnson campaign.
Remember that we have to saturate WHOLE states. We have to target a whole state. That gives us the best shot at making a measurable impression that will result in the free media that we need. Reporters in NYCity, LA and DC will notice if we show up high in the polls in several whole small states. But there are no POTUS polls that cover only Fresno, Albany or El Paso.
50 z: This free media could come about by being seen by news reporters watching their own local news stations. Which means that we need to advertise on the local major network stations during their early, noon, evening and late news.
me: OK. Are the reporters at the station in Butte MORE likely to do this than Fresno, Albany or El Paso?
GJ Needs You @ 49
You’ve missed the point so totally that it’s scary.
The Johnson campaign is likely to have quite limited funds. If we worked very hard, we could maybe come up with $200,000 to $400,000 this spring and early summer for a limited early advertising campaign. The reason for doing an early run is to generate some free media. This would help build the campaign with no additional cost, bringing in donors, supporters and media interest so as to have a bigger campaign by election day. It uses leverage.
This free media could come about by being seen by news reporters watching their own local news stations. Which means that we need to advertise on the local major network stations during their early, noon, evening and late news.
We can also generate free media by running enough advertising in a State to reach the minimum saturation point. These means that the ads run repeatedly on the major networks often enough that likely voters.
The average person, and the reporters as well to generate interest and curiosity, will need to see the ad multiple times, which requires numerous repeat showings, at numerous times, at prime times, on the major networks, every day for a week or more. Bracketing the news shows gives the best chance to reach voters and reporters.
Channels and cable without news programs and small viewership are a waste of money. We must advertise on the big, major networks.
To have this kind of impact, we need to reach whole states. By advertising to everyone in a whole state we can raise our profile in a noticable way. We can raise the polling numbers to a point that demonstrates substantial interest in Johnson. Polls are conducted by State and we must recognize that reality.
Now, to do this kind of saturation advertising and to reach nearly everyone in a state means covering all the major media outlets throughout the state with multiple ads. The cost of advertising is based on viewers. States with more people will cost more money to reach.
A good estimate of what we need to spend to have an impact is 10 cents per capita for the state. As this would be an early first round, 5 cents per capita would be an acceptable bare minimum.
So, how many people could we reach with our optimistic budget of $400,000 for an early round of advertising?
8 million people. That’s the max. Maybe 4 million.
It would do us no good to waste that budget in the big states. To reach California’s 32 million + people would take $1.6 million. And if we had that much it would still be wasted in CA. We need to show interest in multiple states.
The only way we can advertise effectively is to start with the small states. Saturate them. Anaylze the smallest 13 and choose about 8. Then begin the investment in those 8. Keep advertising in those states until we reach at least 10 cents per capita before adding any additional small states. If more money comes in, keep expanding upward.
We need to have a strategy and use our brains on this one. The reason the LP has had trouble making a good showing in the elections isn’t because our principles are too radical. If we spend a reasonable amount on advertising and take advantage of leverage, we can get 10% or more this year on election day in Wyoming, Alaska or any other small state.
We have never had the right leaders with good ads and a reasonable media plan to promote and build the LP.
@48 you should enjoy this GJ Ad – Gary Johnson 2012: End the Drug War Now – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson?feature=BF#p/u/16/MBOXUjHhrVM
Say what you wish, I say spend your money where the people are and it will do the most good. Wasting time and money in EC 3 and 4 States when CA alone is a 55 EC Vote state is IMO a foolish move as a third party. Get the LP brand out where the masses of people are, not to elks and carribou !
CA, TX, FL, NY, IL, PA, OH, GA, MI, NC and NJ are over HALF the people, the less territory to cover with limited funds and volunteers is by far the better strategy by the LP! (only FL, and perhaps OH and NC can be called battleground states SO the deadheat {wasted vote} can’t HONESTLY be used against us in these MAJOR states in ’12, ’16 and 2020!)
Online Town Hall with Gary Johnson & Vice Chair LNC Lee Wrights
Tuesday Night: Town Hall with Governor Gary Johnson & Special Guest Lee Wrights
Tuesday, May 22, 2012 … 6:00 p.m. PT/ 7:00 p.m. MT/ 8:00 p.m. CT/ 9:00 p.m. ET
Gov. Johnson’s next online Town Hall is set for Tuesday evening. Please join us online at 9 p.m. ET / 6 p.m. PT. To participate, go to http://www.garyjohnson2012.com.
Gov. Johnson will be joined by R. Lee Wrights, founder and editor of Liberty For All, America’s premier online libertarian newsletter and the new vice chair of the Libertarian National Committee.
Lee has been active in local, state and national Libertarian Party organizations since 2000 and is a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party. He served as an at-large member of the LNC and was the organization’s vice chair for two years.
These informal online video chats are an excellent opportunity to exchange ideas about important issues of the day, and we urge you to participate.
If you don’t have a web camera, you can still participate via text questions. If you have technical questions, please visit http://www.yowie.com/faq.
If you can’t join us Tuesday and would like to watch the video later, you can always go to Yowie.com to view my video archives.
Again, go to http://www.garyjohnson2012.com Tuesday evening and join what I am sure will be a great discussion.
Hope to see you online
Governor Gary Johnson
“If we could all just row (move) together in the same direction in 2012 we could accomplish greatness” – Me
============
(on the back cover of The Emperor Wears No Clothes)
“How Dangerous is Marijuana in Comparison to Other Substances?”
Number of American Deaths per year that result directly or
primarily from the following (selected) causes nationwide,
according to World Almanacs, Life Insurance Actuarial (death)
Rates, and the last 18 years of the U.S. Surgeon General’s Reports.
Tobacco………………………………340,000 to 395,000
Alcohol (not includeing 50% of all highway
deaths and 65% of all murders)…..125,000+
Aspirin (including deliberate overdose)…. 180 to 1,000+
Caffeine (from stress, ulcers and triggering
irregular heartbeats, etc.)…….. 1,000 to 10,000
‘Legal’ drug overdose (deliberate or accidental)
from legal, prescribed or patent medicines
and/or mixing with alcohol e.g. Valium/alcohol… 14,000 to 27,000
Illicit drug overdose (deliberate or accidental) from
all illegal drugs………………………….. 3,800 to 5,200
marijuana (including overdose)……………………… 0 (zero)
Zapper doesn’t have a clue about Wyoming. Paulie does. He spent quite a bit of time talking to Wyoming citizens.
Wyoming voters do not like drugs, and don’t want them legalized. Surrounding states have moved toward legalizing marijuana in one fashion or another. Such bills don’t even get introduced in Wyoming because they can’t find legislative sponsors. Drugs is the third rail of Wyoming politics. Voters rightly perceive the LP as wanting to legalize the use of *all* drugs. Doubling down on the drug issue would likely kill the already comatose Wyoming LP. May it RIP.
As for my wrong strategy, defeatist attitude and failure – zapper, that’s amazing how you know so much about my tenure, motives, strategy and attitude as the Wyoming LP chairman. You represent that I AM RESPONSIBLE for the lack of success of the Wyoming LP. That’s a lie. I resent such unfounded, truly ridiculous charges. Who are you? What is your real name? Do you even know me?
Zapper Gazing
The Wyoming LP cannot succeed if they try to ignore the full expression of Libertarian ideas. The more an alternative party tries to compete on economic issues in a State dominated by conservative Republicans the more that party will fail. There are plenty of Rs in Wyoming who would be happy to repeal the income tax, abolish the IRS, cut spending and cut regulations. That market is well represented, so why switch.
The Key to Libertarian victory in Wyoming is to stress Civil Liberties. Run MORE on legalizing marijuana and why. Run MORE on ending the Dept of Homeland Security and the TSA. Run more on ending wars and bringing the troops home.
In WY and similar States, we need to run for second place before we run to win. Don’t worry about the Big R party. Kill the Democrats. Take second. Then, you’ll be able to win office with a coalition of Libertarians, Liberals and voters in the middle who don’t like the extreme communistic-christian dominated Republican party but still appreciate fiscal responsibility, low taxes and balanced budgets.
Wills had the wrong strategy and a defeatist attitude and failed. We can ignore him, move on and win in WY by taking second place first.
Don, depends on where in Wyoming. I found Laramie and Cheyenne to have a lot of potential. Casper not so much. It all depends on who you talk to as well. Lots of different kinds of people in Wyoming, even the least friendly parts of it. Don’t lump everyone in together, there are different kinds of folks anywhere you go.
You are completely right about meth. Booze and cigarettes do a lot of terrible things to people too (ask me about that some time, I’m from Siberia originally) but does making them illegal make it better or worse? And how many people would use meth in anything like a pure form if it was legal? Caffeine can be boiled down and snorted, smoked or injected too, if someone was that motivated. The reason why people do that with drugs like coke and meth has a lot to do with them being illegal and therefore expensive and necessary to compress and hide.
As for dirty dangerous jobs, there are more than a few of those in quite a few states. I have had some myself and it was not in Wyoming.
True there are people who don’t want competition for their jobs anywhere you go, not just Wyoming. Guess what though, they are not everyone. You may be surprised how many people feel otherwise if you don’t limit your conversations to conservative “white” Anglos who are misinformed or uninformed about economics. And keep in mind that it doesn’t take that many people, relative to the overall population, to greatly increase the size and strength of a “third” party. There are enough small l libertarians everywhere I have ever been to vastly increase our size; the key is finding them and getting them actively involved. We have been very poor at that.
That is the point of this thread and many others that we should have here.
Don’t get me wrong – I think there is room for what you are doing in WY and we’ll see how well it works. I am curious to see what happens. But I think there is room for an LP there as well, and I believe if we make a real sustained effort one will take off. We’ll see about that too.
I also don’t think we have to be as rigid as you seem to think. While I don’t think the LP should exclude people who have the issue positions I have I also don’t think it should exclude people with the issue positions you have either. Anyone who wants it to exclude one or the other is making a fundamental mistake that will keep whatever they are doing perpetually very small. The Republicans and Democrats include many different people with different views but they agree on a general direction. Their platforms are mostly written for the benefit of single issue groups and true believers, thus tend to be more for party loyalists with relatively extreme views than their working coalitions in office and practical politics. They spend more time engaging in outreach and advertising than debating fine points of ideology, yet maintain working relationships with all types of issue groups and discussion fora where people have opportunities to engage in that as much as they wish. Why is that a bad model for the LP?
@26 – Don’t waste your time on trying to educate voters or build the LP in Wyoming. Been there, done that. Results: zero.
This is the most GOP of all states. The open borders & legalized drugs issues are the kiss of death here. Meth use is rampant in Wyoming oil and gas fields. Voters are generally very familiar with its effect; they do not like what it does to a human soul, let alone their teeth. And unlike in many states, folks in Wyoming actually work hard in dirty, dangerous jobs. They get paid very well for that work and don’t want any competition from illegals.
NF
As I said it does not matter to me who you are and if I knew I wouldn’t tell anyone.
But if anyone else does want to call me I would prefer that. If you don’t trust me I can’t help that. Not a big deal. It ain’t personal. If you don’t want me to know who you are or have your number, not a problem – don’t call me and just assume that I am speaking to other people who may be reading and may or may not comment here. Which I am.
Well as I have said many times on public forums… I am no one!
NF
In your case I don’t. It doesn’t matter to me. I prefer phone because it is much more portable and works a lot more places. I don’t have internet on phone and wouldn’t want to have that. Also, I don’t even own a computer and my ability to borrow one can go away at any time with or without notice.
If and when I am forced to communicate by computer rather than phone, which I like a whole hell of a lot less, I prefer public comments to email. That way anything useful I may have to say can benefit other people, not just whoever I am emailing, and anything that I want to keep somewhat private – I realize neither phone conversations nor emails are really private – has a much higher chance of not being forwarded with or without my knowledge or consent. Nor am I as likely to do so to someone else through careless stupidity.
I really despise email.
Gee paulie… do you know who I am? 🙂
I’m way overcommitted here. Anyone with a US phone line interested in discussing this on the phone, call any hour of any day 415-690-6352. If you are posting here anonymously there is a very good chance I already know who you are, but will not tell anyone if I find out or already know. Same if you are lurking. If I get your number I will not share it unless you say it’s OK.
If you are in another country email me instead. Travellingcircus at gmail dot com <– two Ls in travelling.
-If you are in the US please do not email me, just call me or if there is no way that's happening just comment here.
Zapper, I agree that leverage and ROI maximization is the name of the game. But, time- and resource-wise, the best likely effort is national news. Best bang for buck, most appropriate and effective. Flying to Fairbanks MIGHT be worth 2 days to speak to the Rotarians and to drop into Channel 8, but my guess is the opportunity costs are prohibitive….
NF @ 30 excellent advice. Thin skinedness and intolerance are major problems in the LP and a big part of why we are not more successful.
Matt
I talked to Wes B on the phone today and referred him to this post. He’ll consider ideas discussed here although he has made no promises.
I have a lot of specifics to suggest on strategy, but it may be too time consuming to attempt to do so at this moment.
For now I will say two things and I’ll try to be as brief as I can force myself to be.
1) I agree more with Zapper than with GJNY @27 and I will explain why later, maybe. I do wonder how much zapper has studied the evolution of media markets – cable vs network and so on – in recent years? To get applicable data we may have to look outside the LP because the LP has not done enough of either to provide valid comparisons. Also, what is the value of middle of the night infomercials – valuable or useless? What about other off-peak short ads? ETC.
2) I am very glad this kind of discussion is even taking place. For way too long, way too many LPers have been ignoring this kind of strategic thinking way too much. Let’s be careful though and not be too rigid in our thinking. It may be useful to try a variety of approaches and see which ones produce the best results the fastest, then let what is proving to work expand and what doesn’t not. Theories are great, but the proof is in the pudding, and prior performance – while useful to analyze – may not guarantee future results for a whole host of reasons. However by all means do pay attention to what has worked in the past and elsewhere and what didn’t; reinventing the flat tire is a bug not a feature.
Rich Moroney and anyone else
Please stop putting URLs with your name unless they are real working URLs. Just leave the box blank. I will fix it every time by taking out the non-working URLs but it is a big pain and I don’t need the aggravation.
Thanks!
Zapper, I would suggest that you put forth this idea to the Libertarian Action Super PAC. This is the kind of thing that would be better served by an organization without a contribution limit, and one more nimble than the Johnson campaign. Plus, damn near everyone trusts Wes Benedict to do a good job with their money.
I’ll commit $1000 towards this (or a very similar effort) over the next few months. So long as it seems credible.
Zapper said: “If we buy ads in the small states first we can earn the Free media needed to get there in the rest of the nation.”
I totally agree. I’ve thought this myself for a long time. Thanks for pointing this out to people.
Zapper if you are female my apologies for the above.
I want to give zapper a great deal of credit for putting forth a bold plan. I also hope he has very thick skin because now all the armchair Monday morning quarterbacks will show him how inadequate his ideas are and why they will surely fail. This IS the Libertarian Party, folks! C’mon in and be abused!
Zapper, I like your plan. I hope the Gary Johnson campaign notices it.
The name of the game is leverage.
If we try to buy our way to 15% by purchasing ads in the big states we will never get there.
If we buy ads in the small states first we can earn the Free media needed to get there in the rest of the nation.
Each small State serves as a fulcrum, the major network ads are the levers and our limited amount of money is the force that moves the lever. We can then “lift” the big states to 15% with free media earned from the small states.
We don’t have enough money to lift the big states without leverage.
I appreciate your time and thought put into your post. HOWEVER, you overestimate the funds availiable to use for any TV campaign. Have you donated yet ?
I will give a plan completely opposite to yours. Major effort needs to be made where the people are located. Few if any people understand that Gary Johnson can be elected POTUS by winning only 11 states. So I submit go after the LARGEST 13 states with 295 EC votes NOT the smallest 13 with 44 EC Votes. Gather the low hanging fruit in ->
CA, TX, FL. NY, IL, PA, OH, GA, MI, NC, NJ, VA and WA.
Target these states and you will see the most rapid growth in LP history. Local cable ads can be purchased in some cities for less than $5 in these large states !!!
I would also submit that 85% (the balance of the 15% needed to be in the FRAUD debate) of citizens still don’t know who Gary Johnson is, so we need 100% of those who even have heard of him to support him to get him to the debates. The poll thing is a sham, flim-flam. Something (A MIRACLE) will have to happen if GJ is included. The numbers can be rigged to block him. IMO The cheapest way to up GJ’s name ID is to use his current youtube ads. I think if everyone will “answer” a viral political youtube video with a GJ ad more people will see it and you won’t be spamming youtube if it is a political ad. So please consider using GJ ads to answer political youtube vids.
Who is Gary Johnson? – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson#p/u/13/XmzKH3iivYU
Gary Johnson 2012: The People’s President – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54PLUhpL8Y4&feature=related
Imagine President Gary Johnson – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUEa7V3TgGQ&feature=related
Gary “IRONMAN” Johnson 2012: The Athlete’s Guide to Good Government – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson?feature=BF#p/u/15/FmDLD4h7Ydg
All GJ web activity, short of spamming, is a positive name ID builder. Please participate when possible.
@23 Of course it helps to poll at 19% in WY. It would get us free media in WY. We could use it to build the WY LP – to increase membership, fundraising and vote totals.
We could also point to polls in WY to show why we should be included in polls in other states where we were being excluded.
Being included in polls and media coverage in one state can spill over into adjacent states and impact national opinion leaders and news centers as well. They too look at each state in predicting and analyzing the national POTUS race.
Polling at significant percentages in enough States early on – and I’m using 15% because the debate threshhold has some legitimacy because it is the debate threshhold – could lead to nationwide free media coverage on national Major network media.
That’s the kind of leverage we are trying to create.
RC @ 23: Actually it does help. It is a step beyond where we are now. We have to pass through the intermediate steps to get to the 15% national goal.
And what zapper is saying (i believe) is that we can get there the hard way: 1% in every state, then 2% in every state, then 4% in every state, etc. Or we can get there the easy way: 15% in 3 states while languishing 1% in the rest, then 15% in 5 states while 1% in rest, then 15% in 8 states while 2% in the rest, etc. The latter is the easier path.
@22 Yes! Through 30+ years w/ the LP, I admit to some dropping in and dropping out. That said, I’ve rarely seen this kind of thinking. And I applaud it. Not only is it the nuts & bolts stuff that’s necessary to actually win votes, it’s “size appropriate”. Too much of what I’ve seen in the past is either too timid/small so that it doesn’t include things like POTUS TV advertising. Or else it’s too grand in that it presumes we can run before we walk. Zapper knows the specifics and hits it on the head.
The problem is that the 15% threshold is for NATIONAL polls. It doesn’t help at all to poll 19% in Wyoming but 2% in NY.
One more important point on this:
The LP has NEVER tried targeting States before by running Major network TV ads at a saturation level.
Only the Clark for President campaign in 1980 has run significant advertising at the POTUS level.
However, a TV advertising buy of just $3000 in 1990 in Maine promoting the LP before tax time in April and before the LP state convention allowed for ads to run in all three media markets straddling the local Major network news broadcasts morning, noon, evening and late in addition to other spots. Some under $10. The result was that all 3 networks sent cameras and reporters to cover the state convention that year along with the 4 biggest newpapers in the state. Previously none had attended an LP event.
@20 Of course, as I stated from the outset, we would have to research the media markets in each of the 13 small states listed to find the optimal targets.
These are obvious:
AK
ME, NH, VT
NM
However, as to overlap in the Western states, this is part of the necessary research. Just off the top of my head here, broadcasts from Las Vegas NV into parts of AZ, Salt Lake City UT into WY, Billings MT into WY etc.
Local Major network affiliate ad buys are also included on cable throughout the target states since the cable transmission of these stations is part of the cable package. So we can reach those beyond the broadcast area and statewide coverage is facilitated.
19 z, yes, it’s true that there’s SOME overlap in smaller eastern states, although cable usu only shows one or the other.
In the west WHERE is there an overlapping media market? Perhaps between LA and SD, maybe SF and Sac…
We can also take advantage of overlapping media markets in contiguous small states in some areas.
For example ME, NH and VT have overlapping media markets. All three are so small that the cost of adding a second or third after targeting the first is even lower. We should find similar effects in some of the western state groups.
more….
Z, I don’t mean to come across as dismissive. Your idea may well be inspired. But inspiration needs to be checked with quantitative research for validation. In developing a marketing plan, at some point one needs to open a spreadsheet and work it through….
@14 Albany is not a whole state. We need to get 15% in the polls in whole states.
The cost per 1000 may be slightly higher in AK than NY, but the total cost of saturation in AK will certainly be lower than NY.
We can saturate 8 to 10 whole states (small states) before we can saturate half of New York State.
We need to saturate whole states, not single media markets within large states.
As to Internet ads, recent reports from other LP campaigns seem to show that they have very limited results, none that was measurable. It’s where people expect to see things they haven’t heard of and don’t really matter. Many people never even see these ads.
I am not a libertarian capitalist, but over the decades I have thought a great deal about things like zapper is talking abt.
I agree with his broadcast TV is halfadozen small states. The only thing I would add is that places like eastern Washington (Spokane, Wenatchee, Tricities, Yakima) and eastern Oregon (Bend), as well as northern inland CA (Sacremento), and other more rural sections of states where “small government” and “property rights” are popular, wpuld seem like fruitful media buys. Perhaps in the summer, after the initial investment in media zapper is talking about.
I think the key abt broadcast TV is that in this economic crisis more people are watching over-the-air TV than did just a few years ago. It would reach cable subscribers, but also all the people to poor to afford cable.
Running ads on cable is not going to reach the bulk of the people at any one time. Buying cable means filling in the niches when you are trying to cobble together a majority in a close race.
We are trying to build that first 15%, that means making our selves legitimate first. That means people want to see us on the networks.
The local Major network TV directors and reporters watch their own stations – especially their own news shows. This is where we need to be. They will see us on their own stations and they will want to cover us.
They cannot say we are not relevant to the campaign when we are buying ads on their own stations that are being shown right in front of them – especially if the ads are bought in the early months well before the election.
10 z: In a small state with far fewer residents and voters, the ad costs are lower, and the cost of getting to 15% is lower.
me: Not necessarily. Not sure it’s still used, but the metric I’m familiar with is CPM, or cost per thousand reached. The CPMs in Anchorage, Albuquerque or Albany could stack in ways that might surprise us. Albany might well be the lowest, as it probably has the most competition for media dollars.
My gut tells me that there won’t be funds for much if any network affiliate advertising, though. Without repetition, TV ads are just one-off, Hail Marys. My guess is that Internet ads – perhaps targeted to markets – is more likely the optimal path…
@9 The advantage of producing TV ads is that with a talented director, well conceived spots, multiple takes and good editing you should be able to get the amount of excitment, energy, emotion and heart that you desire into the ads.
@7 The problem with all of the states you’ve listed (except NH) is cost.
We cannot afford the ad prices in the large states. We cannot buy enough ratings points to reach saturation – the point at which most viewers will have seen numerous spots so as to have left an impression.
There’s already a Libertarian Superpac also …reminds me to give Wes B a call
In response to @4, RC:
The reason we need to target small states is that this allows us to use leverage.
If we buy ads in big states first, even just one, then we’ll have to buy enough to raise a large number to a significant point in the polls to make a difference. It costs more money to reach that greater number of people.
In a small state with far fewer residents and voters, the ad costs are lower, and the cost of getting to 15% is lower.
At the point where our percentage in the polls is high enough, we will get coverage and free media.
Free media means we leverage our TV dollars.
In addition, when we buy ads on small stations at lower prices, we can buy far more spots far sooner. We will be noticed by the news reporters sooner and get free coverage on the news sooner.
We need to earn our free media as early as possible this summer. If we could raise enough money to reach 7 million viewers in NY State it would still be less than half the State, so we’d need 30% in the polls outstate to make 15% of the whole state.
But when advertising to 7 million viewers in small states, we can saturate 8 to 10 whole states. We can get free media in all of them. We have a “diversified portfolio” of states with the opportunity to hit 15% in at least some of them as opposed to one bad shot at hitting 15% in a single state where we reach less than half of the voters (in the case of New York).
Buying Major network TV in small states where we saturate the whole state gives us the best chance at free media right away, and the best chance at being included in early polls, and the best chance at hitting 15% in early polls in a handful of states, resulting in the best chance of free media beyond these states.
(When Marrou ran for POTUS, I asked a news director of one of the local major networks why he didn’t cover Andre Marrou on the local news. His response was that if I could show him one State – any State – where Marrou was polling above 10%, he would cover him.)
Free media is the leverage we can get from the low cost ad buys on prime time in smaller markets in small states. We can reach the level needed to be taken serious sooner and at lower cost.
“with a bit more emotion and heart than Johnson usually delivers “
Don’t hold your breath on that one. There’s a reason why Johnson never caught on with voters.
However, these are very good ideas because Johnson is picking up attention in some state polls. A media campaign like this could result in even more.
Perhaps running ads locally on MSNBC in the TX market and running ads on Fox News in NY, CA, IL might be appropriate?
Robert: My comment from the other thread was very similar to yours:
“I have a different perspective on the ideal Johnson/LP strategy. I think some consideration should be given to targeting the solidly blue and solidly red states. Independent voters in toss up states like OH, IA, NH, VA, PA, NC are highly unlikely to vote third party, since they are more likely to consider that a wasted vote. However, since NY, CA, IL, etc. will always be blue and TX, MS, AL, etc. will always be red, it should be easier to convince independents that voting third party is not a “wasted vote”, since those states will easily vote red/blue, regardless of your vote. So, registering a protest vote in those states will send a message that it’s time to end the political duopoly and support LIMITED government, rather than BIG government.”
5 mc: …already established super PACs…
me: Paging Peter Thiel, paging Peter Thiel. What are y’all gonna do with Endorse Liberty?
Agreed 98%. My only disagreement is that I think major cable networks are just as good as the “big three/four” broadcast networks in many cases.
The problem is, at this stage in the game, unless the campaign or one of the already established super PACs wants to organize this, I don’t think there is sufficient time to make it happen. I have seen nothing to indicate that there are plans for something like this.
I like many of Zapper’s ideas here.
One different approach I’ve previously suggested for Team GJ is to target the big, lopsided states. I personally would not focus on broadcast TV as Zapper does. But, yes, to the extent that it’s possible, you CAN buy TV time in the big states like CA, TX and NY. I know NY the best of the 3, so to illustrate, upstate NY has several network affiliates. Off the top, Buffalo, Rochester, Binghampton, Syracuse, and Albany…maybe more. These non-NYC markets might approach maybe 7MM people.
While NY is a blue state, upstate often votes R. Northeastern Rs tend not to be especially socially conservative types, except maybe Buffalo which is heavily Catholic.
As for downstate, I do believe that there’s some excellent ways to target via the Internet.
Point is: The idea is to amass the most votes possible. It’s also to get in the national polls beforehand, which means getting the numbers up.
Targeting small states doesn’t do that.
Targeting lopsided states tends to maximize interest from the “losing” side…R-leaners in a blue state like NY is an example. D-leaners in TX might be another.
Of course, we should respect that Team GJ has many considerations and challenges on their plate. They’re doing this full time, and we’re just amateur brainstormers.
Regards the original post – the 100% segregated fund, the small states focus, the incremental steps from advertising to poll inclusion to poll results to increased funds to add states and etc. This is all good and is the sort of thing we should do and should be thinking about. Whether AE is dead or not, did things right or not, the LP/Johnson should be focused on the strategies and tactics that work for the circumstances that we’re in. And I think the original poster has done a nice job of that. Bravo!
1. Americans Elect was a “one size fits all” in a specialty market segment.
2. There is no check on apathy.
The main problem with American’s Elect was that it advocated too much centrist policy that could not differentiate from already established Democratic & Republican policy. There is great ideas in the middle, but you’re not going to get those ideas to have any merit unless you break the ties the already entrenched politicians have with money interests. Libertarians do offer a different perspective, but they have to be more concrete in their ideals than simply “defending liberty” because you lose lots of independents and progressives with that kind of dogma. Supporting candidates that are not tethered to money interests is a very good first step.