Monday, September 24, 2012
Jayhawk Political Communicating Is Back!
The Jayhawk Political Communication blogspot is back! This blogspot will continue to host dialogue on elections and political communication initially inspired by the 2008 Political Communication graduate seminar at the University of Kansas. The 2012 Political Communication graduate seminar looks forward to earning additional international acclaim for the insight contained herein. We may even be fortunate enough to get new contributions from the original bloggers. Enjoy reading and post freely, even if you are not associated with the seminar. After all, what is political communication if not democratic.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Chambliss: No Supermajority for the Dems
While the Minnesota race remains too close to call, a very close and contentious election has come to a close in Georgia. As many of you likely know, the Senate race in Georgia went to a runoff between incumbent Saxby Chambliss and Democrat challenger Jim Martin because neither candidate captured over 50 percent of the vote on November 4th. According to MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/12/03/1696852.aspx), voter turn-out was down significantly, especially among African American voters. Overall turnout was down by nearly half; a quarter of voters in the run-off were black (as compared to one-third on November 4th). Chambliss won by a considerable amount with 57% of the vote.
The implications of this outcome are tremendous. It guarantees that Democrats cannot hold a supermajority capable of overriding a filibuster (60 votes are needed). This may prove to be an important barrier for Obama and a democratic congress to push their agenda through. It also reduces the stakes in the Minnesota run-off because that outcome can no longer swing control of the Senate.
The overhanging specter of the supermajority became an important tool for Chambliss's campaign leading up to the run-off election. He was able to successfully cast himself as the 'key firewall' that could hold off an impenetrable supermajority by the Democrats (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hHW-ZJ03DLcUGUM9z9p2nkbRAG-QD94R6TMO0). He and other high-profile GOP figures (such as Sarah Palin) were able to use this threat to whip up support and mobilize a strong conservative turn-out.
The implications of this outcome are tremendous. It guarantees that Democrats cannot hold a supermajority capable of overriding a filibuster (60 votes are needed). This may prove to be an important barrier for Obama and a democratic congress to push their agenda through. It also reduces the stakes in the Minnesota run-off because that outcome can no longer swing control of the Senate.
The overhanging specter of the supermajority became an important tool for Chambliss's campaign leading up to the run-off election. He was able to successfully cast himself as the 'key firewall' that could hold off an impenetrable supermajority by the Democrats (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hHW-ZJ03DLcUGUM9z9p2nkbRAG-QD94R6TMO0). He and other high-profile GOP figures (such as Sarah Palin) were able to use this threat to whip up support and mobilize a strong conservative turn-out.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
MN still to close to call
Most of the votes have been recounted in the Coleman/Franken race and we still are not sure who will win.
The following are outstanding variables: do we trust the Franken camps numbers or the MN secretary of state numbers? The Franken camp has him behind 50 votes as of this morning. The official MN numbers are bigger, the difference is that they count every challenged ballot as a no vote and the Franken people assume that all challenged ballots will eventually be counted. There is reason to prefer this assumption since most challenges by both sides are frivolous and the legitimate ones will probably balance each other out.
Second: 171 votes were discovered today. The precinct that found them apparently has a voting machine malfunction on election day that caused the votes to be overlooked. However, the Coleman campaign is challenging these ballots, suggesting that the numbers for voting in the precinct don't add up with the addition of these ballots. These ballots would net 37 more votes for Franken.
For those counting at home, this means Franken could be 13 votes away from officially blurring the line between politics and political satire.
Also breaking Franken's way, it looks like the state is willing to consider counting the rejected absentee ballots. Franken people think these ballots could represent a net gain of 25-100 votes for the Democrat.
Here is a decent article on the subject:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35382149.html?elr=KArks:DCiU1OiP:DiiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
and a good blog post (with updates on Georgia too)
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
The following are outstanding variables: do we trust the Franken camps numbers or the MN secretary of state numbers? The Franken camp has him behind 50 votes as of this morning. The official MN numbers are bigger, the difference is that they count every challenged ballot as a no vote and the Franken people assume that all challenged ballots will eventually be counted. There is reason to prefer this assumption since most challenges by both sides are frivolous and the legitimate ones will probably balance each other out.
Second: 171 votes were discovered today. The precinct that found them apparently has a voting machine malfunction on election day that caused the votes to be overlooked. However, the Coleman campaign is challenging these ballots, suggesting that the numbers for voting in the precinct don't add up with the addition of these ballots. These ballots would net 37 more votes for Franken.
For those counting at home, this means Franken could be 13 votes away from officially blurring the line between politics and political satire.
Also breaking Franken's way, it looks like the state is willing to consider counting the rejected absentee ballots. Franken people think these ballots could represent a net gain of 25-100 votes for the Democrat.
Here is a decent article on the subject:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35382149.html?elr=KArks:DCiU1OiP:DiiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
and a good blog post (with updates on Georgia too)
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
A Final Update: Maine's US Senate race one month later
Incumbent Republican Susan Collins, once seen as the most vulnerable member of the U.S. Senate in 2008, ended up beating her opponent Democrat Tom Allen by twenty-two points (61-39 %) . Surprisingly, when Maine Democrats won both House seats by very large margins, Collins won every county except one, took the state's bluest cities for the first time in her career, and became the only Republican elected to federal office in New England during this cycle. How did she do it? Most pundits claim that Collins' "message of bipartisanship and independence trumped her opponent's attempt to link her to President Bush's policies on Iraq, the economy, health care and energy." Thus, Collins succeeded in distancing herself from Bush. The Senator's election is said to be important news for the state, since the moderate "women from Maine" - including senior Senator Olympia Snowe - can prevent a Republican fillabuster and help the Obama administration usher in a series of reforms. In short, as some predict, look for Maine's senators to be picking up positions as chairs of Congress's most important committees.
All this raises a few questions: 1) Did any other Republican Senator succeed by following Collins; bipartisan message? 2) Is this the strategy Republicans need to adopt in the next election? Should they be composed of a party of mavericks?
All this raises a few questions: 1) Did any other Republican Senator succeed by following Collins; bipartisan message? 2) Is this the strategy Republicans need to adopt in the next election? Should they be composed of a party of mavericks?
Thursday, November 6, 2008
This doesn't quite seem fair...
...many of the things I was going to discuss have been hit on quite expertly by Lacey and J.D. I guess it's my fault for waiting until the evening to post. I'll do my best to hit on some different themes.
1. J.D. talked about technology in regards to what McCain could have done differently, I'd like to pose a question not about the past, but about the future. How will candidates in the future use technology? Will the facebooking, and the emailing, and the texting, etc., be part and parcel of political campaigning in the future? Or was this a unique part of the Obama "movement" phenomenon? You really could ask the same question about incremental donations. Will technology allow these kind of numerous small donations to become more commonplace? Or once again, was this an Obama thing?
2. So, Struthers asked "what happened" in regards to the most important issue of the campaign. A few of you gave some suggestions, but I'd like to know what each of you regard as the most important moment in this election, if there indeed was one.
3. Last, Struthers said something to the effect of "we've lived up to Dr. Martin Luther King's dream." Do you agree with the sentiment? If not, what's left to accomplish? What will it take to completely fulfil Dr. King's dream for our nation?
1. J.D. talked about technology in regards to what McCain could have done differently, I'd like to pose a question not about the past, but about the future. How will candidates in the future use technology? Will the facebooking, and the emailing, and the texting, etc., be part and parcel of political campaigning in the future? Or was this a unique part of the Obama "movement" phenomenon? You really could ask the same question about incremental donations. Will technology allow these kind of numerous small donations to become more commonplace? Or once again, was this an Obama thing?
2. So, Struthers asked "what happened" in regards to the most important issue of the campaign. A few of you gave some suggestions, but I'd like to know what each of you regard as the most important moment in this election, if there indeed was one.
3. Last, Struthers said something to the effect of "we've lived up to Dr. Martin Luther King's dream." Do you agree with the sentiment? If not, what's left to accomplish? What will it take to completely fulfil Dr. King's dream for our nation?
More discussion questions!
1) Mr. Strother talked about how after he went to the Obama rally he began receiving "personalized" emails based on his age, income level, etc. I believe Eddie also mentioned in after the study group, but it seems that Obama has utilized this campaign to perfect the art of microtargeting. Do you think that the McCain campaign suffered from their lack of microtargeting? Did Obama overdo the microtargeting? Also, as Eddie mentioned, some members of our class had a somewhat negative attitude towards microtargeting. Has your opinion changed with this campaign or do you still feel like it is one step too far?
2) Mr. Strother said that in some places nearly 30 or 40% of the population turned out for early voting, suggesting the idea that perhaps in future elections we will not so much have an "Election day" as we will a "election month." How will campaigns have to adjust their advertising strategies to ensure that their reach as many voters as possible before they cast their ballot? Do you think that the "late October surprise" that we have joked about will become non-existent?
3) Finally, we have all recognized what a historic event this election is. Not only was the first black man elected President of the United States, but for the first time a woman had a viable chance at the entering the executive sphere as well. What aspects of this campaign will live onto make history books in the future? Do you think Palin's poor showing in the campaign will discourage the GOP from stepping outside the box again? Do you think that the glass ceiling has been shattered, or was this just a pure publicity stunt on the part of McCain. (I know the questions I am asking are very black/white, but I'm curious as to the implications for the future of Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates for the future.) Was Palin a one-hit wonder, or will the nomination of a female running mate become a common thing?
2) Mr. Strother said that in some places nearly 30 or 40% of the population turned out for early voting, suggesting the idea that perhaps in future elections we will not so much have an "Election day" as we will a "election month." How will campaigns have to adjust their advertising strategies to ensure that their reach as many voters as possible before they cast their ballot? Do you think that the "late October surprise" that we have joked about will become non-existent?
3) Finally, we have all recognized what a historic event this election is. Not only was the first black man elected President of the United States, but for the first time a woman had a viable chance at the entering the executive sphere as well. What aspects of this campaign will live onto make history books in the future? Do you think Palin's poor showing in the campaign will discourage the GOP from stepping outside the box again? Do you think that the glass ceiling has been shattered, or was this just a pure publicity stunt on the part of McCain. (I know the questions I am asking are very black/white, but I'm curious as to the implications for the future of Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates for the future.) Was Palin a one-hit wonder, or will the nomination of a female running mate become a common thing?
Discussion Questions for November 5, 2008
1) Clearly, one facet that sets this election apart is technology. Ray Strother said… “Technology has changed everything…It has improved campaigns in my opinion.” Ray claims that the computer revolution has created an environment were campaigning has gone back to “door to door” and “person to person.” What are your thoughts on the role of technology in this election? What does it mean for future elections? And, what do you think about Ray’s anecdote about 9,000 people making phone calls at rallies? Is this ethical? Is this what modern democracy looks like? Regardless of your feelings about the outcome of this election, technology poses a host of new considerations for political communication. What should we be excited about? What aspects of technology should we be aiming our most critical scholarly lenses at?
Knowing what we do about the results of this election, if you could magically go back in time how would you advise the McCain camp? Is there a strategy that could have defeated a campaign as well run and consistent as the Obama campaign? Presumably, this is the question facing the Republicans in 2012. The Obama re-election campaign will likely be at least as strong and utilize at bear minimum the strategies that worked so well in 2008. To what degree does this election demand an overhaul of the status quo in presidential campaigns as Ray Strother has suggested?
2) Several weeks back Republican pollster Whit Ayers predicted the RNC’s strategy of “Don’t Let the Democrats Have it All” in the last few weeks of the election. At this moment we are still anticipating a recount in Minnesota and a run-off in Georgia, but knowing what we do now or will in the next few days about the make-up of the next Congress, what effect did this message have if any? Secondly, what strategies worked in the last few weeks and what seemed like pure desperation? In the North Carolina senate race between Kay Hagan and Elizabeth Dole the attack on Hagan’s faith seemed both desperate and uncommonly mean, did any one else see ads in their races turn extremely ugly in the final weeks? What if anything could change in the area of “negative ads” as a result of this election cycle?
3) Finally, yesterday, Ray Strother asked “What Happened?” As we look back at this election what were the “Words that Work” from this campaign? What campaign messages were “Made To Stick” and what messaging strategies have we already forgotten from this historic campaign? If you are the McCain camp, were there messaging strategies that could have worked that weren’t used? Could those that were used have worked if they had been more “on message?”
In what ways did we see concepts from “Applebees’ s America” rear their heads in this election? What role did the exurbanites play or not play in electing our new president? Eddie asked yesterday given the outcome of the election “how many people still have a problem with micro-targeting?” Personally, I still see micro-targeting as a massive and very serious threat to civil liberties and privacy. Additional thoughts? Ray Strother said elections will… “…never, ever be the same again.” What are the implications of strategies of this type for future elections? What’s next in the realm of the citizen consumer and political strategy?
Knowing what we do about the results of this election, if you could magically go back in time how would you advise the McCain camp? Is there a strategy that could have defeated a campaign as well run and consistent as the Obama campaign? Presumably, this is the question facing the Republicans in 2012. The Obama re-election campaign will likely be at least as strong and utilize at bear minimum the strategies that worked so well in 2008. To what degree does this election demand an overhaul of the status quo in presidential campaigns as Ray Strother has suggested?
2) Several weeks back Republican pollster Whit Ayers predicted the RNC’s strategy of “Don’t Let the Democrats Have it All” in the last few weeks of the election. At this moment we are still anticipating a recount in Minnesota and a run-off in Georgia, but knowing what we do now or will in the next few days about the make-up of the next Congress, what effect did this message have if any? Secondly, what strategies worked in the last few weeks and what seemed like pure desperation? In the North Carolina senate race between Kay Hagan and Elizabeth Dole the attack on Hagan’s faith seemed both desperate and uncommonly mean, did any one else see ads in their races turn extremely ugly in the final weeks? What if anything could change in the area of “negative ads” as a result of this election cycle?
3) Finally, yesterday, Ray Strother asked “What Happened?” As we look back at this election what were the “Words that Work” from this campaign? What campaign messages were “Made To Stick” and what messaging strategies have we already forgotten from this historic campaign? If you are the McCain camp, were there messaging strategies that could have worked that weren’t used? Could those that were used have worked if they had been more “on message?”
In what ways did we see concepts from “Applebees’ s America” rear their heads in this election? What role did the exurbanites play or not play in electing our new president? Eddie asked yesterday given the outcome of the election “how many people still have a problem with micro-targeting?” Personally, I still see micro-targeting as a massive and very serious threat to civil liberties and privacy. Additional thoughts? Ray Strother said elections will… “…never, ever be the same again.” What are the implications of strategies of this type for future elections? What’s next in the realm of the citizen consumer and political strategy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
