Political Campaign Strategies

Obama raises $40 million in March

2008-04-03T13:15:00.000-04:00

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama, second to none in the race for campaign cash, raised more than $40 million in March and boosted his vast network of donors to nearly 1.3 million, the campaign announced Thursday.

The amount is less than the record $55 million he raised in February, but still a sizable amount that sustains his place as the fundraising leader among all presidential candidates. The money gives him a substantial financial advantage over Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton as they compete for votes heading into the April 22 Pennsylvania primary.

Clinton is expected to have raised about $20 million in March, but her campaign has not announced any totals. Details of their March fundraising will be made public in official reports filed with the Federal Election Commission April 20.

The Obama campaign said it attracted more than 218,000 first-time donors in March.

"Many of our contributors are volunteering for the campaign, making our campaign the largest grass-roots army in recent political history," campaign manager David Plouffe said.

Obama has been the candidate most successful at blending high dollar donors with small contributions by deft use of the Internet. He has had the highest number of donors contributing $200 or less.

"We knew that he was going to outraise us," Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson said. "He has outraised us over the last several months."

Wolfson said the campaign will have the resources they need to compete and be successful in the upcoming primaries. He pointed to Clinton's base of support from online fundraising, saying she had raised about $1 million online on March 31.

Obama's announcement comes as both Democrats return to a popular financial wellhead, raising money in California to help finance a heavy stretch of spending in April. With their race for the Democratic nomination showing no signs of ending, tapping donors for more cash has new urgency.

Obama has scheduled fundraisers at the homes of four different financial backers Sunday afternoon and evening in northern California. Clinton attended one fundraiser Wednesday in Silicon Valley, and had three planned for Thursday — in San Francisco, Pasadena and Los Angeles.

Most of the events are for donors giving the $2,300 maximum allowed by law.

Obama raised a record $55 million in February; Clinton raised $34.5 million.

Though the New York senator trails Obama in delegates needed for the nomination, Clinton advisers and fundraisers said her donors remain enthusiastic. But her fundraisers also say she relied too much on large donors early in the cycle.

"That pool is reduced," said Larry Stone, a Clinton fundraiser in Silicon Valley who also is the Santa Clara County assessor. "Hillary came really late to the game in effective fundraising on the Internet as compared to Barack Obama ... Many of the solid enthusiastic Clinton supporters were maxed out."

But Stone added: "A big boon to the fundraising has been these appeals for her to withdraw. It makes supporters angry, especially women."

Clinton aides said Wednesday that they anticipate Obama will outspend her by 2-to-1 in Pennsylvania. In the first round of campaign ads, Obama spent about $2 million to Clinton's $450,000, according to data compiled by TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political ads. Obama is also already airing ads in Indiana and North Carolina, which won't hold primaries until next month.

"We don't expect to match Senator Obama ad for ad," Wolfson told reporters during a conference call Wednesday.

Clinton entered March with $11.5 million to spend in the primary compared to $30.5 million for Obama. Moreover, Clinton owed $8.7 million to several campaign vendors at the end of February. A spot check by The Associated Press of several vendors found many were paid last month, after the March 4 primaries in Ohio and Texas. The cost of those two contests, together with efforts to reduce campaign debt, have kept fundraising a priority for her campaign.

Clinton, Emphasizing Web Presence, Sees Rise in Online Donations

2008-03-22T03:33:00.001-04:00

Clinton, Emphasizing Web Presence, Sees Rise in Online Donations

Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

Members of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Internet team at campaign headquarters in Arlington, Va. Mrs. Clinton has been prominently mentioning her Web site.

By MICHAEL LUO

Published: March 22, 2008

In the middle of her victory speech after the Ohio and Texas primaries this month, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton paused to reel off the Web address for her campaign.

“Go to www.HillaryClinton.com,” she said, drawing applause and cheers from her throngs of supporters. “This is your campaign and your moment, and I need your support.”

The prominent mention of her Web site was intentional, part of the Clinton campaign’s recent efforts to keep pace with Senator Barack Obama’s fund-raising juggernaut. The campaign has nearly doubled the volume of her e-mail solicitations, showcased her Web site more at events and intensified online advertisements asking for small contributions.

To good effect. Although Mr. Obama has continued to raise significantly more money than Mrs. Clinton, largely because of contributions gushing in over the Internet, she has managed to stay competitive through a surprising surge of her own online.

Mrs. Clinton’s rebound from a dismal fund-raising performance in January, in which she raised $14 million compared with Mr. Obama’s $36 million and was forced to lend her campaign $5 million, is a significant underlying story line driving the race at this point.

Both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama released their fund-raising numbers for February late Thursday to the Federal Election Commission, with Mr. Obama raising $55 million and Mrs. Clinton bringing in $35 million.

While far less than what Mr. Obama raised, which included more than $45 million collected over the Internet, and despite the fact that she finished the month with $8.7 million in unpaid bills, Mrs. Clinton’s total was crucial to her popular vote victories in Texas and Ohio on March 4.

It was driven not by the affluent donor network that her campaign has been known for but by about $30 million in Internet contributions that arrived mostly in small-dollar increments. Her contributions over all averaged just more than $100 in February.

Mrs. Clinton’s advisers struggle to explain fully her online surge, which has continued into March, saying it was unexpected to them, as well. In January, the campaign brought in $7 million online, a monthly record for Mrs. Clinton but a pittance compared with the $28 million Mr. Obama raised online. Previously, Mrs. Clinton’s best quarter online came from July 1 to Sept. 30, 2007, when she raised $8 million.

The uptick in Internet contributions could not have come at a better time for Mrs. Clinton. Many of her high-dollar donors have reached their contribution limits of $4,600, diminishing the importance of the powerful money machine created by her husband and other top Democratic supporters.

But in a sign of just how much the center of gravity has shifted for Mrs. Clinton’s fund-raising apparatus, about half of the contributions in February were less than $200; in the last quarter of 2007, less than 20 percent of her contributions came in those smaller increments. Meanwhile, about 55 percent of Mr. Obama’s contributions in February were less than $200, compared with 45 percent in the last quarter of 2007.

Many of Mrs. Clinton’s advisers had privately been resigned to ceding the Internet to Mr. Obama, pointing to demographic differences between their supporters, which they said left her at a profound disadvantage.

A survey in late December by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that 31 percent of Obama supporters said the Internet was their main source of news, compared with 20 percent of Clinton supporters.

The disparity is driven by the fact that Mr. Obama’s supporters tend to be younger and wealthier than Mrs. Clinton’s, said Michael Dimock, an associate director at the center.

For instance, a Facebook group, One Million Strong for Barack, has more than 500,000 members. A similar group for Mrs. Clinton has fewer than 25,000. In contrast, the Facebook group One Million Strong AGAINST Hillary counts more than 948,000 members.

“Our challenge from the start of the campaign has been to bring more of Senator Clinton’s supporters to the Web,” said Peter Daou, Mrs. Clinton’s Internet director.

Online campaigning experts, however, put much of the onus on the campaigns themselves, crediting the Obama campaign with doing a better job of understanding the ethos of the Internet.

“It’s my sense from everything I’ve checked, from the ads to the Web sites to the videos, that the Obama campaign is much Net savvier than the Clinton campaign,” said Michael Cornfield, a professor at George Washington University who specializes in new media in politics.

Mr. Daou, however, argued that the Clinton campaign had taken advantage of many of the same Internet tools as the Obama campaign but had simply encountered a demographic divide.

Mr. Daou said the campaign had tried to use the Internet in a way that was befitting of Mrs. Clinton’s personality and her specific needs, concentrating, for example, on policy rollouts, or doing video messages from her and online public forum-style meetings. He attributed her online surge, in part, to those earlier efforts to establish a rapport with supporters.

Nevertheless, the campaign has taken steps to improve its results online. In February, the campaign sent out 20 queries to its list of national subscribers, roughly split between direct requests for money and softer sells that asked for volunteers or thanked people for their support. In January, the campaign sent out 13 such e-mail messages.

In comparison, a rough count of e-mail solicitations from the Obama campaign found about 20 solicitation e-mail messages sent in January and a similar number in February, also roughly split between direct queries for donations and other e-mail messages intended to establish a rapport with supporters.

The Clinton campaign also turned over her Web page almost entirely to fund-raising in February and has sponsored a variety of online fund-raising drives. It has also been experimenting with new ploys, including transforming the sign-on page to her Web site into a donation page for 72 hours recently, an effort that netted $1.6 million.

But Clinton advisers say it was news about Mrs. Clinton’s loan to her campaign that prompted a groundswell of grass-roots support.

News of the loan broke on the morning of Feb. 6. Online donations had already been coming in at a steady clip after the crush of states voted on Feb. 5. They began to spike that afternoon and surged the next day. In the end, the campaign collected about $4 million on Feb. 6 and slightly more than that on Feb. 7, the campaign’s two best days ever online.

Robin Purnell, 54, who earns $14 an hour working at an insurance agency in Gary, Ind., has long been a supporter of Mrs. Clinton but had not donated to her campaign. After learning about Mrs. Clinton’s loan last month, she decided to give $25.

“That’s kind of when it dawned on me,” Ms. Purnell said. “Maybe we need to do more than get the word out.”

Since then, Ms. Purnell has given several more times, for a total of about $175. To save money for her donations, Ms. Purnell said she often skipped lunch or avoided eating out. “Everybody’s got to make sacrifices,” she said.

Barack Obama Speech On Race - Full Length

2008-03-19T03:24:00.000-04:00

Strategy plays big role in caucus wins

2008-03-09T05:08:00.001-04:00

Analysts Say Passion, Organization Key to Obama Caucus Wins

By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON

The score on Democratic presidential caucuses this nomination season could hardly be more lopsided: Barack Obama 11, Hillary Rodham Clinton 2, New Mexico pending. And a lot of those Obama wins were landslides.

Obama's big win Sunday in Maine, a state where demographics and other indicators suggested Clinton would do well, begs an answer to the question: Why doesn't Clinton win caucuses?

Clinton and her allies point to the nature of a caucus. Blue-collar and shift workers, they say, don't have the time or flexibility to show up at a certain time and stay for a couple of hours. If you're out of town, you're out of luck. Ditto if you can't get a babysitter.

Political analysts say passion and organization are key to caucus wins and Obama has them in greater measure. "He's got both an army of campaign workers and an operatic presentation" that excites people, says Lawrence Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. "It's a very potent, very unusual combination."

Clinton has targeted early and large states. On Super Tuesday, she focused on and won New York, New Jersey, California and Massachusetts.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, said Obama has tried to compete in every contest "in pursuit of delegates." He said that has meant TV ads in New York and California, two states Obama never expected to win, and taking caucus states "very seriously."

Clinton strategist Mark Penn said the campaign invested where returns would be greatest. "Our funds at the time were limited. We put them into the Super Tuesday states that were successful," he said, and that in turn has sparked new contributions.

Caucuses still to come this year are Hawaii on Feb. 19, Wyoming on March 8 and Puerto Rico on June 7. Texas holds a primary March 4, then awards one-third of its delegates at evening caucuses open to people who voted.

So far, Clinton has won American Samoa and Nevada. Obama has won Iowa, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Washington state, the Virgin Islands and Maine. Six contests on Super Tuesday helped keep up with Clinton on delegates.

A closer look at three caucus states:

"Idaho. John Foster, executive director of the state Democratic Party, said the largest factor in Obama's 80%-17% win was a self-starting group of "very passionate volunteers" who became active last spring and later were augmented by a part-time paid campaign staffer.

The Clinton effort came together a month before the Feb. 5 caucus, Foster said. "They were certainly aware of what was happening here. But strategically they didn't invest a lot here."

The upshot, he said, was a team of "establishment party folks" up against "a lot of young new people who were extremely motivated and just worked themselves ragged for six months."

"Washington state. Kelly Steele, a spokesman for the state Democratic Party, described a similar scenario of Obama fans organizing "organically" and later supplemented by paid staff. Clinton was backed by both U.S. senators from Washington and featured them in TV ads. She did three events in the state while Obama did only one.

Whether it was a primary or caucus, Steele said, "Obama simply had more support." A SurveyUSA poll of Washington released Friday, the day before the caucus, showed Obama at 50%, Clinton at 45%. Obama won easily, 68%-31%.

"Minnesota. Jacobs said Clinton made a "triage" decision not to spend much. "She wasn't running ads. She didn't have much of a paid staff," he said.

A poll by Jacobs' center and Minnesota Public Radio, released five days before Super Tuesday, showed Clinton leading Obama 40%-33%, within the poll's margin of error. Two days later, Obama drew 20,000 people to a rally in Minneapolis.

Jacobs said they emerged "supercharged, talked up the caucuses to their friends, and Obama's ground troops made sure everyone got to the right place." The result: 66% for Obama, 32% for Clinton. She is running, Jacobs said, against a "phenomenon."

Rep. Todd Tiahrt - Petition to Stop Tanker Jobs

2008-03-08T19:43:00.001-05:00

I am outraged by the recent Air Force tanker contract decision.

I am outraged by the recent Air Force decision to award the KC-X Next Generation Air-fueling Tanker contract to a foreign competitor in the name of the Northrop Grumman/European Aeronautic Defence and Space Team.

An American tanker should be built by an American company with American workers. America must not outsource its national security. This decision shockingly creates French jobs in place of Kansas jobs. This is unacceptable.

I believe that the Tanker Competition was unfair and poorly evaluated, and if not overturned will negatively impact the United States for generations.

If allowed to stand, this contract award to a foreign company will:

1) Hurt American workers by the loss of U.S. jobs;
2) Outsource an essential military asset to Europe;
3) Force the United States to be dependent upon Europe for our national defense;
4) Result in an inferior tanker for the United States Air Force; and
5) Result in the US being more vulnerable at a time when we must be less vulnerable

I am urging the Air Force to reverse this dangerous decision to award the KC-X Tanker contract to the Northrop Grumman/European Aeronautic Defence and Space Team.

I invite you to take the following survey.

Todd Tiahrt
Member of Congress

Survey results as of 5:55 p.m. (CST) 3-7-08
44,661 -- outraged and oppose the Air Force tanker decision
3,445 -- support the Air Force tanker decision
69 -- no opinion about the Air Force tanker decision

How do you feel about the Tanker decision? Please register your opinion, and I will keep you informed and up-to-date about tanker news. VOICE YOUR OPINION AND HELP STOP THE OUTSOURCING OF AMERICAN JOBS.

http://www.house.gov/tiahrt/tanker_survey.htm

US lawmakers blast Boeing defense contract snub

2008-03-08T19:40:00.002-05:00

US lawmakers have reacted angrily after the US military awarded a 35-billion-dollar aircraft deal to Europe's Northrop Grumman/EADS group, in a major blow to US manufacturers Boeing.

"It's stunning to me that we would outsource the production of these airplanes to Europe instead of building them in America," said Republican Senator Sam Brownback about the Pentagon's decision.

"I'll be calling upon the Secretary of Defense for a full debriefing and expect there will be a protest of the award by Boeing."

The US Defense Department announced Friday that it was awarding the deal for a fleet of in-flight refuelling craft to the Northrop Grumman/EADS team, in a huge coup for Boeing's main rival Airbus.

The surprise choice of EADS marks the European group's entry into the lucrative US defense market, where so far it had had only a marginal presence.

Boeing voiced strong disappointment after the contract slipped through its hands and said it would ask for an explanation.

"Once we have reviewed the details behind the award, we will make a decision concerning our possible options," said Boeing spokesman William Barksdale, hinting at a possible protest.

While European political and industry leaders have hailed the decision, many Republicans have been left seething.

"We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers," said Republican Representative Todd Tiahrt.

"I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."

Boeing, the second leading US defense contractor after Lockheed Martin, had been considered the heavy favorite for the contract and according to its website is the largest employer in Kansas.

The contract for the newly named tanker, the KC-45, is one of the largest Pentagon contracts in recent years and the first order on a tanker market valued at more than 100 billion dollars in more than 30 years.

Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), parent of Airbus, will provide up to 179 tankers for the US Air Force.

"The tanker is the number-one procurement priority for us right now. It is the first step in our critical commitment to recapitalize our aging fleet to move, supply, and position assets anywhere," said General Duncan McNab, US Air Force chief of staff, in a statement.

The stunning victory for EADS comes as group CEO Louis Gallois seeks to build up its presence in the defense sector, judged to be less cyclical than civil aeronautics.

Gallois told AFP the contract was a "great subject of pride" for the company and would "encourage it to pursue its strategy in the United States."

A spokesman for French President Nicolas Sarkozy said he had called Gallois "to pay homage to this historic success."

"He is delighted that after recent difficulties, EADS has come back brilliantly with record orders, particularly in one of the most difficult and demanding defense markets in the world," said David Martinon in a statement.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in a statement, called the deal "an immense success for Airbus and for the European aerospace industry."

Airbus will assemble the tankers in Mobile, Alabama, and has vowed to transfer assembly of its commercial 330 aircraft there, creating jobs.

Republican Alabama Senator Richard Shelby welcomed the decision. "Not only is this the right decision for our military, but it is great news for Alabama," he said.

The contract was expected to bring up to 1,800 jobs to the Mobile area and 5,000 to the state, he added.

Boeing and the EADS-Northrop team had been competing for more than a year for the prize, which offers a cushion for decades in case of a downturn in the highly cyclical market for commercial aircraft.

EADS's winning offer is a modified version of the Airbus 330. The commercial plane will be militarized by Northrop Grumman and its American partners to prevent the transfer of sensitive technology to a foreign entity.

Boeing had proposed a version of its long-haul cargo plane, the 767-200.

In May 2003, a similar tanker contract was awarded to Boeing, but it was annulled under allegations of procurement fraud, for which Boeing paid a record 615-million-dollar settlement to the government.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080301224212.az5r6vht&show_article=1

Boeing loses $35 BILLION refueling tanker contract - AMERICAN JOB LOSS EXPECTED

2008-03-08T19:35:00.001-05:00

WASHINGTON — Northrop Grumman and the maker of Airbus planes beat out Boeing Co. to win a $35 billion government contract to build military refueling planes, the Air Force said today.

The selection of Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman and its Paris-based partner, European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., came as a surprise to Wall Street.

It is a big blow to Chicago-based Boeing, which has been supplying refueling tankers to the Air Force for nearly 50 years and had been widely expected to win the deal.

Gen. Arthur Lichte, the head of Air Mobility Command, said the selected plane, which will be designated the KC-45A, offeres more fuel capacity, more cargo space, more flexibilty and more availability than the Boeing model, which is a modified version of the KC-767.

To suggestions that the selected plane has foreign connections, Lichte replied:

"This is an American plane flown by American airman with an American flag on its tail."

The Boeing proposal would have resulted in about 40,000 U.S. jobs, while the Northrop-EADS plane will create about 25,000. But Assistant Air Force Secretary Sue Payton said job creation was not a factor in selecting the plane.

The cost was secondary to the plane's performance and capabilities, Payton said, adding she would not discuss where Boeing fell short until after the company had been briefed.

The contract positions EADS to break into the U.S. military market in a big way. And it opens up a huge new business opportunity for Northrop Grumman.

In after-hours trading, shares of Northrop climbed $3.74 to $82.37, while Boeing’s stock price fell $2.59 to $80.10.

The Air Force has estimated the tanker contract will be worth between $30 billion and $40 billion over 10 to 15 years. It is the first of three deals that could eventually be worth as much as $100 billion over 30 years to replace the entire Air Force fleet of nearly 600 refueling tankers.

As the winners of the first award, EADS and Northrop will be in a strong position to win the two follow-on deals, analysts believe.

Military officials say the Air Force is long overdue to replace its air-to-air refueling tankers, which allow fighter jets and other aircraft to refuel without landing. The service currently flies 531 Eisenhower-era tankers and another 59 tankers built in the 1980s by McDonnell Douglas, now part of Boeing.

But the new contract has emerged as a major test for the Air Force, which is trying to rebuild a tattered reputation after a procurement scandal in 2003 sent a top Air Force acquisition official to prison for conflict of interest and led to the collapse of an earlier tanker contract with Boeing.

That scandal was "a half decade ago" and not a factor in the selection, Payton said Friday.

The Air Force hopes to begin retiring some of its oldest KC-135E models as soon as possible, said Lichte, who formerly served as wing commander at Fairchild Air Force Base.

The tanker deal is also certain to become a flashpoint in a heated debate over the military’s use of foreign contractors since Boeing painted the competition as a fight between an American company and its European rival. The Chicago-based company is expected to protest the decision.

Payton said she was sure the award would withstand scrutiny: "We have done everything according to acquistion regulations."

The EADS/Northrop Grumman team plans to perform its final assembly work in Mobile, Ala., although the underlying plane would mostly be built in Europe. And it would use General Electric engines built in North Carolina and Ohio. Northrop Grumman, which is based in Los Angeles, estimates a Northrop/EADS win would produce 2,000 new jobs in Mobile and support 25,000 jobs at suppliers nationwide.

“I’ve never seen anything excite the people of Mobile like this competition,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said. “We’re talking about billions of dollars over many years so this is just a huge announcement.”

Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire said she was disappointed by the announcement.

"This is unfortunate news for Boeing and the state of Washington," Gregoire said.

Wall Street Journal Op Ed Compares Obama to Ronald Reagan - Stating They Underestimated Reagan Too

2008-03-04T00:06:00.001-05:00

A Gentleman by the Name of Hayes, wrote an Op Ed in the Wall Street Journal stating that Ronald Reagan's rhetoric was underestimated by the Democrats and that is party why he won and that Obama is being underestimated now by the Republicans in the same way. I beg to differ, and will go toe-to-toe with anyone who wishes to join with Mr. Hayes to debate me on this topic, as he will need all the help he can get.

You see this Op Ed piece and Mr. Hayes fails to realize that Ronald Reagan was one of the best Governors that California ever had, he was President of the Screen Actors Guild prior to that, he also did talk radio for a year on politics. He was very wise, and accomplished in every regard. And he could back up his words quoting Milton Friedman, Henry Kissinger, and had an incredible array of topics that he could speak on for hours straight. To compare Mr. Obama with Ronald Reagan without considering these other points, is apples and oranges.

It is amazing the amount of Press that Obama is getting, and how often he makes mistakes while speaking, for instance the other day he stated that NAFTA was sending job overseas, wrong, over the borders okay, but that is not what he said. In fact, in OH he says NAFTA is a mistake, but in TX he will have to backtrack that when talking to the Longshoremen, and in El Paso, and in San Antonio where they send over to Mexico so many US Products. And its 65% Hispanic in San Antonio. There is a big difference between offering hope and giving lip service.

Oh sure, you can get away with it for a while, but what happens when you have to explain the cliches, or the positions behind your words? Then what? Ronald Reagan knew his stuff. Obama's handlers will need to be very careful to make sure he sticks to the "chicken soup for the soul" routine, but its a long time until November, and the Media loves to build them up and tear them down. Oh you want me to back up my words do you? Okay how about Howard Dean and John Kerry? If the Democrats run Obama, they need to send him back to learn a few things to compete.

Besides we are talking about the United States of America, the greatest nation ever created in the history of mankind; 17 trillion dollar GDP, and 303 million people. There is a lot at stake here, this is not a joke, we need someone who can handle it and who gets it, but I just don't get that from Obama.

"Lance Winslow" - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/. Lance Winslow's Bio

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Lance_Winslow

Obama campaign skilled at using technology to reach out, raise funds

2008-02-26T06:14:00.000-05:00

By BRIAN C. MOONEY
Boston Globe
Published on: 02/25/08

COLUMBUS, Ohio — When George Goodburn of Upper Arlington got an e-mail 12 days ago announcing an organizational meeting for Barack Obama's presidential campaign the next night in nearby Columbus, he was fired up and ready to go.

Arriving at a plumbers' union hall to meet campaign officials, however, Goodburn was stunned. "Five hundred people showed up on 24 hour's notice," he said. "It was incredible."

More than any previous presidential campaign, Obama's effort is transforming politics with its use of technology. The astounding fund-raising figures are well documented - the campaign keeps a running tally on its website as it closes in on 1 million donors. But Obama's team has taken the use of the Internet to another level by allowing masses of volunteers to self-organize over the past year and communicate through their own social networking site, my.barackobama.com.

Created with help from Chris Hughes, one of three Harvard roommates who invented Facebook four years ago, MyBO, as campaign staffers call it, has about 500,000 members nationwide, a network of groups and individuals that the campaign ultimately harnesses for the old-fashioned nuts-and-bolts of electioneering - identifying supporters and getting them to vote in primaries and caucuses.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/02/25/obama_tech_0225.html

Small Donations Add Up for Obama

2008-02-20T05:23:00.001-05:00

By MICHAEL LUO

CHICAGO — A cluster of cramped cubicles, tucked away in a rear corner of Senator Barack Obama’s campaign headquarters here, serves as the heart of a fund-raising machine that has reshaped the calculus of the 2008 election.

Mr. Obama’s finance director, Julianna Smoot, who has helped him raise more than $150 million so far, does not even have her own office. A Ping-Pong table is the gathering spot for Friday lunches for her team.

The setting, which has the feel of an Internet start-up, is emblematic of how Mr. Obama, of Illinois, has been able to raise so much money. On Wednesday, the Obama campaign will report to the Federal Election Commission that it collected $36 million in January — $4 million more than campaign officials had previously estimated — an unprecedented feat for a single month in American politics that was powered overwhelmingly by small online donations. That dwarfed the $13.5 million in January that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York is expected to report Wednesday and the $12 million Senator John McCain’s campaign said he brought in for the month.

Mr. Obama’s startling success, however, has also now put him on the spot, tempting him to back away from indications he gave last year that he would agree to accept public financing in the general election if the Republican nominee did the same. The hesitation has given Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee whose advisers concede he would most likely fall far short of Mr. Obama’s fund-raising for the general election, fodder for a series of attacks.

“This type of backpedaling and waffling isn’t what inspired millions of people to invest in Senator Obama’s candidacy,” said Jill Hazelbaker, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain.

Under rules of public financing, a candidate has access to $85 million from a taxpayer-financed fund for the general election, a substantial amount to spend for the roughly two months after this year’s conventions. But this election cycle has shattered fund-raising and spending records and upended expectations.

The details of Mr. Obama’s January fund-raising illustrate just how much his campaign has been able to chart a new path for the presidential race. He brought in $28 million online, with 90 percent of those transactions coming from people who donated $100 or less, and 40 percent from donors who gave $25 or less, suggesting that these contributors could be tapped for more. (Donors are limited to giving $2,300 per candidate during the primary season.) More than 200,000 of the campaign’s nearly 300,000 donors in January were first-time givers to Mr. Obama.

The campaign’s success over the Internet has freed Mr. Obama from having to take valuable time off the trail for fund-raising events for major donors — just $4 million in January came from traditional fund-raisers.

“We know we don’t have to get him in front of as many major donors now,” Ms. Smoot said.

Mr. Obama has done just a few traditional fund-raising events in January and none in February, in contrast to the Clinton campaign, which has been keeping up a steady diet of fund-raisers with either Mrs. Clinton or her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Mrs. Clinton’s operation has also been pushing to improve its efforts online, with her campaign saying Tuesday that it brought in $15 million over the Internet in February, with donations jumping after news broke that she had lent $5 million to her campaign.

Mr. Obama’s January surge surprised even members of his finance team. When Meaghan Burdick, who works on Mr. Obama’s online fund-raising efforts with Joe Rospars, the campaign’s director of new media, drew up a set of projections in December, she came up with three possibilities for January in the event Mr. Obama won Iowa, finished second or third, with a victory expected to draw $10 million to $15 million over the Internet.

At the center of the Obama campaign’s online effort is an e-mail list, which now numbers in the millions but started out with fewer than 50,000, culled mostly from Mr. Obama’s Senate run.

That list grew as Mr. Obama’s many rallies drew thousands of people, where attendees gave their e-mail addresses to the campaign, as well as other initiatives to draw more people into the campaign’s orbit.

But tapping small-money donors can be a balancing act. Campaign officials say they believe they have gotten better at calibrating efforts at making sales pitches for cash while also trying to encourage people to participate in other ways. As a result, a recent e-mail message asked supporters to write letters to superdelegates making their case for Mr. Obama.

The campaign’s online donors have also come to form the backbone of its vaunted grass-roots operation across the country, with information about new donors quickly transmitted to organizers on the ground to enlist for phone banks and other volunteer efforts.

“We want to make sure that the experience people have with us is not solely around money,” said David Plouffe, Mr. Obama’s campaign manager.

After Mr. Obama’s victory in Iowa, the campaign collected $2.8 million online. But it was the two days after Mr. Obama’s stunning loss to Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire that campaign officials point to as when they began to realize they were in for an extraordinary month.

On the evening of the primary, Mr. Obama’s finance staff settled in to watch the results from their cubicles. When the television networks called the race for Mrs. Clinton, their spirits sagged. But Ms. Burdick was staring at her laptop, watching a graph showing how much money was coming into the Obama campaign over the Internet. Within minutes, it was shooting upward.

“This is crazy,” Ms. Burdick said, calling over to two of her colleagues sitting near her.

Within three hours, the campaign had cleared $500,000. In the morning, when Ms. Burdick checked again, the campaign had raised $750,000. Over the course of two days, Mr. Obama collected $4.4 million online.

The campaign sent out an e-mail message from Mr. Obama to donors the morning after the New Hampshire defeat.

“I know you just made a donation, but we are about to enter the most decisive period of the campaign,” he said, signing his name at the end, “Thank you, Barack.”

In Birmingham, Ala., Matthew Lane, 38, logged into his e-mail and received that message. Although he earns less than $20,000 a year as a storyteller in public libraries and as a freelance writer, he decided to give $25 on top of a few small contributions he had made dating to March 2007.

“The campaign has been so incredibly grass-roots, it does sort of feel like you are making a difference,” Mr. Lane said, “even in giving in small increments like that.”

And this month, after the Feb. 5 primaries, Mr. Lane decided to tack on another $25 donation.

Barack Obama's 'Yes We Can' video analysis

2008-02-16T05:36:00.002-05:00

In the US presidential election, YouTube looks as if it will play a key role. The video networking site is already providing what may be the biggest ever audience for a political speech, 13 million and counting.


	Musical meeting of minds: Will.i.am and Barack Obama

A politician's address to the party faithful is not something normally noted for its entertainment value, but an online version of Democratic candidate Barack Obama's concession speech from the New Hampshire primary on January 8 is currently attracting more than a million hits a day.

Granted, it was a rousing address, but it has been made considerably more palatable by the addition of light hip-hop beats, a softly strummed acoustic guitar, and a chorus line of celebrities singing out the rallying cry, "Yes, we can." Artfully shot in black and white, faces and voices layered one on top of the other, this is the political speech as pop video.

Cut from the speech's original 13 minutes to a concise and uplifting four and a half, the video achieves things politicians can usually only dream about, but which pop takes for granted: it puts emotion at the centre of the message, it never bores, and it is effortlessly cool. It is a party political broadcast for a generation who would never watch a party political broadcast.

The song was conceived by Will.i.am of superstar hip-hop trio Black Eyed Peas, and the video was shot by Jesse Dylan, son of rock's original protest superstar, Bob Dylan. The pair claim that it took just a few days from conception to completion. Will.i.am had the idea while watching a televised political debate on January 29, and by Feb 2 it was online, in time for the Super Tuesday polls.

The speed with which it was made is reflected in the slightly haphazard list of celebrity participants they managed to cobble together. Soul star John Legend, jazz supremo Herbie Hancock and indie film pin-up Scarlett Johansson are among those lining up to singalonga-Obama.

If anything, these familiar but slightly alternative faces (joined by sports people, actors, comedians and ingénues) lend the project a counter-culture hipness that might have been undermined by the usual A-list suspects.

The retro feel of the black-and-white images is particularly inspired, invoking notions of the '60s Civil Rights movement, and drawing oblique yet deliberate comparison to two of the most inspirational and affectionately recalled American leaders, President Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr: "A president who chose the moon as our new frontier, and a King who took us to the mountaintop", as Obama calls them in his speech.

Legend sings this last phrase, arms thrown wide in exultation, while Adam Rodriguez from the hit TV show CSI: Miami intones, "Si, se puede!", referencing the catchphrase of Mexican American labour rights activist César Chávez and directly appealing to the increasingly significant Hispanic vote.

Although made without the Obama campaign's participation, Yes, We Can is an almost perfect piece of political propaganda, aimed at exactly the young voters who might be inclined to support a socially liberal black candidate but are often apathetic when it comes to actually turning up at polling stations.

It is a rallying call that bypasses the usual media channels to bring the message directly to the people who need to hear it, in a place where they will be most likely to find it, in a form in which they might actually pay attention to it.


	Rallying call: the 'Yes We Can' video on YouTube features a succession of famous faces

What works most effectively on YouTube (with its small screen, low visual resolution and download speed limitations) are soundbites and visual gags. Hillary Clinton's campaign team got in early with a spoof Sopranos video introducing her campaign song, Céline Dion's overblown ballad You and I.

While it achieved generally positive media coverage, in retrospect it looks hammy and badly tuned to the tastes of the internet audience, and consequently generated hit numbers in the mere thousands.

The first real internet success of the campaign was I Got a Crush on Obama, a witty video by satirists Barely Political, in which a scantily dressed girl gushes over Obama footage to a light R&B backing track, suggestively singing, "You can Barack me tonight."

It quickly notched up in excess of six million hits, becoming one of YouTube's most popular clips of 2007. Although it was not created by the Obama campaign, the Senator's mild reaction to something that might have been deemed disrespectful suggests that he understood its potential benefit to his campaign. "It's just one more example of the fertile imagination of the internet," Obama commented. "More stuff like this will be popping up all the time."

Will.i.am's Yes, We Can video fulfils his prediction. Its immediate impact can be gauged by other videos posted last week, using similar black-and-white footage of Republican candidate John McCain, in which his words are twisted against him (and the multicultural casts in the background eventually stop singing to register their disgust).

These are satirical in intent, and harsher in feel, but they indicate that Yes, We Can has already achieved iconic status.

Pop and politics have been linked ever since Bob Dylan first took up an acoustic guitar. Their usual relationship, however, leans more towards antagonism than endorsement. During the 2004 presidential election, major stars including REM, Bruce Springsteen and Dave Matthews embarked on the Vote for Change tour, a series of concerts staged in swing states to encourage people to kick out George Bush.

Despite its high media profile, it failed to sway the vote in any of the targeted states. As things heated up, superstar rapper Eminem rush-released Mosh, a virulently anti-Bush polemic, complete with punchy cartoon video urging his fans to the polls.

A decidedly modern reinvention of the protest song, Mosh received massive media attention and (in the pre-YouTube era) became one of the most rapidly and widely dispersed online videos - but to no discernible political effect.

What Will.i.am has crafted is not a protest song at all. Where Mosh, like most protest music, was overwhelmingly negative in its message, trying to stir the vote with anger, Yes, We Can is selling hope, a much more seductive concept. It is being accepted by the internet audience because it has the authenticity of something that has sprung directly from the internet, something that Obama's opponents (Democrat or Republican) are likely to find difficult to counter.

Obama is arguably the first natural candidate of the internet age. He has underdog status, while his skin colour alone lends him a (possibly spurious) association with a century of American counterculture cool. Crucially, at 46, he is young enough to be comfortable with the medium.

His head speechwriter, Jon Favreau, who presumably came up with the words that fell so well into the cadences of a hip-hop song, is just 26. There is a generational shift taking place, and the Yes, We Can video may just represent the moment when it breaks through to the surface.

American political commentators have been downplaying its probable impact, suggesting that it is preaching to the converted. But the big question right now is: can Obama continue to upset the traditional balance of power by getting his young converts to the polls? The message beaming out across the net is: yes, he can.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/02/16/bmobama116.xml&page=1

Yes We Can - Barack Obama Music Video

2008-02-15T23:50:00.000-05:00

John McCain : Candidates@Google

2008-02-02T15:19:00.000-05:00

Barack Obama : Candidates@Google

2008-02-02T15:16:00.000-05:00

Barack Obama's Victory Speech in South Carolina "Yes We Can"

2008-01-26T22:12:00.000-05:00

Barack Obama’s Victory Speech in South Carolina - Transcript

2008-01-26T21:39:00.000-05:00

The following is a transcript of Barack Obama’s prepared remarks for his victory speech in Columbia, S.C.:

Over two weeks ago, we saw the people of Iowa proclaim that our time for change has come. But there were those who doubted this country’s desire for something new - who said Iowa was a fluke not to be repeated again.

Well, tonight, the cynics who believed that what began in the snows of Iowa was just an illusion were told a different story by the good people of South Carolina.

After four great contests in every corner of this country, we have the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of Americans we’ve seen in a long, long time.

They are young and old; rich and poor. They are black and white; Latino and Asian. They are Democrats from Des Moines and Independents from Concord; Republicans from rural Nevada and young people across this country who’ve never had a reason to participate until now. And in nine days, nearly half the nation will have the chance to join us in saying that we are tired of business-as-usual in Washington, we are hungry for change, and we are ready to believe again.

But if there’s anything we’ve been reminded of since Iowa, it’s that the kind of change we seek will not come easy. Partly because we have fine candidates in the field - fierce competitors, worthy of respect. And as contentious as this campaign may get, we have to remember that this is a contest for the Democratic nomination, and that all of us share an abiding desire to end the disastrous policies of the current administration.

But there are real differences between the candidates. We are looking for more than just a change of party in the White House. We’re looking to fundamentally change the status quo in Washington - a status quo that extends beyond any particular party. And right now, that status quo is fighting back with everything it’s got; with the same old tactics that divide and distract us from solving the problems people face, whether those problems are health care they can’t afford or a mortgage they cannot pay.

So this will not be easy. Make no mistake about what we’re up against.

We are up against the belief that it’s ok for lobbyists to dominate our government - that they are just part of the system in Washington. But we know that the undue influence of lobbyists is part of the problem, and this election is our chance to say that we’re not going to let them stand in our way anymore.

We are up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as President comes from longevity in Washington or proximity to the White House. But we know that real leadership is about candor, and judgment, and the ability to rally Americans from all walks of life around a common purpose - a higher purpose.

We are up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner; it’s the kind of partisanship where you’re not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea - even if it’s one you never agreed with. That kind of politics is bad for our party, it’s bad for our country, and this is our chance to end it once and for all.

We are up against the idea that it’s acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election. We know that this is exactly what’s wrong with our politics; this is why people don’t believe what their leaders say anymore; this is why they tune out. And this election is our chance to give the American people a reason to believe again.

And what we’ve seen in these last weeks is that we’re also up against forces that are not the fault of any one campaign, but feed the habits that prevent us from being who we want to be as a nation. It’s the politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon. A politics that tells us that we have to think, act, and even vote within the confines of the categories that supposedly define us. The assumption that young people are apathetic. The assumption that Republicans won’t cross over. The assumption that the wealthy care nothing for the poor, and that the poor don’t vote. The assumption that African-Americans can’t support the white candidate; whites can’t support the African-American candidate; blacks and Latinos can’t come together.

But we are here tonight to say that this is not the America we believe in. I did not travel around this state over the last year and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina. I saw crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children. I saw shuttered mills and homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from all walks of life, and men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. I saw what America is, and I believe in what this country can be.

That is the country I see. That is the country you see. But now it is up to us to help the entire nation embrace this vision. Because in the end, we are not just up against the ingrained and destructive habits of Washington, we are also struggling against our own doubts, our own fears, and our own cynicism. The change we seek has always required great struggle and sacrifice. And so this is a battle in our own hearts and minds about what kind of country we want and how hard we’re willing to work for it.

So let me remind you tonight that change will not be easy. That change will take time. There will be setbacks, and false starts, and sometimes we will make mistakes. But as hard as it may seem, we cannot lose hope. Because there are people all across this country who are counting us; who can’t afford another four years without health care or good schools or decent wages because our leaders couldn’t come together and get it done.

Theirs are the stories and voices we carry on from South Carolina.

The mother who can’t get Medicaid to cover all the needs of her sick child - she needs us to pass a health care plan that cuts costs and makes health care available and affordable for every single American.

The teacher who works another shift at Dunkin Donuts after school just to make ends meet - she needs us to reform our education system so that she gets better pay, and more support, and her students get the resources they need to achieve their dreams.

The Maytag worker who is now competing with his own teenager for a $7-an-hour job at Wal-Mart because the factory he gave his life to shut its doors - he needs us to stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship our jobs overseas and start putting them in the pockets of working Americans who deserve it. And struggling homeowners. And seniors who should retire with dignity and respect.

The woman who told me that she hasn’t been able to breathe since the day her nephew left for Iraq, or the soldier who doesn’t know his child because he’s on his third or fourth tour of duty - they need us to come together and put an end to a war that should’ve never been authorized and never been waged.

The choice in this election is not between regions or religions or genders. It’s not about rich versus poor; young versus old; and it is not about black versus white.

It’s about the past versus the future.

It’s about whether we settle for the same divisions and distractions and drama that passes for politics today, or whether we reach for a politics of common sense, and innovation - a shared sacrifice and shared prosperity.

There are those who will continue to tell us we cannot do this. That we cannot have what we long for. That we are peddling false hopes.

But here’s what I know. I know that when people say we can’t overcome all the big money and influence in Washington, I think of the elderly woman who sent me a contribution the other day - an envelope that had a money order for $3.01 along with a verse of scripture tucked inside. So don’t tell us change isn’t possible.

When I hear the cynical talk that blacks and whites and Latinos can’t join together and work together, I’m reminded of the Latino brothers and sisters I organized with, and stood with, and fought with side by side for jobs and justice on the streets of Chicago. So don’t tell us change can’t happen.

When I hear that we’ll never overcome the racial divide in our politics, I think about that Republican woman who used to work for Strom Thurmond, who’s now devoted to educating inner-city children and who went out onto the streets of South Carolina and knocked on doors for this campaign. Don’t tell me we can’t change.

Yes we can change.

Yes we can heal this nation.

Yes we can seize our future.

And as we leave this state with a new wind at our backs, and take this journey across the country we love with the message we’ve carried from the plains of Iowa to the hills of New Hampshire; from the Nevada desert to the South Carolina coast; the same message we had when we were up and when we were down - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope; and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we can’t, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people in three simple words:

Yes. We. Can.

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/26/transcript-barack-obamas-victory-speech-in-south-carolina/

Bill Clinton Sleeping At MLK event

2008-01-24T16:08:00.000-05:00

In light of all the "I'm more of a civil rights supporter" than you are back and forth between Clinton and Obama, this is priceless and worth watching at least 2 times.

Wonder what the "first black president" was dreaming about? Well it certainly wasn't Hillary or he would have run outta the church screaming....

http://chickenhawkexpress.blogspot.com/

McCain And Obama Are Leading

2008-01-21T19:13:00.001-05:00

An ABC News/ Washington Post poll showed that McCain is now at the top of Republicans. From the Democrats, Obama has caught up with Hillary Clinton and recovered his earlier lead position, which he gained during the Iowa caucuses.

Obama's gain is, in great part, due to the support he has received from the African-Americans. They now back Obama by a 60 - 32 percent margin, while only a little earlier, they supported Clinton by a margin of 52 - 39 percent.

Below are some of the major changes over the last month:

* McCain's popularity within the Republican Party as the most electable contender has almost tripled. His rating as the strongest leader within the party has doubled. He has won double-digit gains in trust to resolve the Iraq problem and terrorism.

* Mike Huckabee's favorability rating has also risen by 21 points, to 42 percent.

* On the other hand, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani favorability rating has dropped by 4 points and is now 46 percent.

* Fred Thompson's favorability rating too has dropped by 3 points, to 30 percent.

* Mitt Romney's personal favorability rating has shot up by 6 points, to 34 percent.

* Obama's favorability rating has shot up by 12 points, to 63 percent. He now leads male voters, 9 points over Clinton.

* Hillary Clinton has gone up by 8 points in her favorability rating, which is now about 58 percent. She now leads women voters by 11 percent over Obama.

* John Edward's favorability rating has similarly risen by 8 points to 57 percent.

While 29 percent voters say that the economy in the US is the most crucial issue facing the country, 20 percent voters believe it is the war in Iraq. Ten percent voters hold health care as the most important issue.

View us presidential election videos and news.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Emma_A_Johnson

Bradley Endorses Obama's Campaign

2008-01-21T19:11:00.001-05:00

Barack Obama's run for president has found backing from the former basketball champion, Senator Bill Bradley. According to Obama's aides, Bradley, who has himself in the past run for president, would be campaigning for Obama.

The aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity, hoped that the endorsement would help Obama to displace Hillary Clinton from her position as the national front-runner. Clinton, in the recently concluded caucuses in Iowa last week, came third in Iowa's caucuses. According to a recent poll, Clinton was caught in a tie with Obama in New Hampshire.

In a press release, Brady praised Obama saying, "Barack Obama is building a broad new coalition that brings together Democrats, independents and Republicans by once again making idealism a central focus of our politics". Bradly also went on to say, "Because of his enormous appeal to Americans of all ages and backgrounds, Obama is the candidate best positioned to win in November. ... His movement for change could create a new era of American politics _ truly a new American story."

As of now, the optimism in the Obama camp seems justified. Obama is running very close to Clinton, with both leaders enjoying 33 percent support in a CNN-WMUR poll. The poll was conducted two days after Barack Obama's victory in Iowa. Another poll conducted by The Concord Monitor and Research 2000, had Obama leading at 34, with Clinton just behind at 33. However, he will face a tough fight from Clinton who is planning to take on Obama in New Hampshire where the presidential primary is scheduled.

In a statement, Obama said, "Bill Bradley has always called on Americans to reach for what is possible in our politics....As a presidential candidate and author, he has continued to challenge us to build a mandate for pragmatic solutions and progressive change, and I am truly grateful that he has endorsed my candidacy."

Incidentally, Obama's state director, Matt Rodriguez, was earlier a top aide in Bradley's campaign. Bradley was a contender in the 2000 presidential primary against Vice President Al Gore. He projected himself as an alternative to the incumbent Gore. He failed because the independents, the biggest voting bloc in New Hampshire's, chose to back Senator John McCain.

Bradley considered another bid in 2004, supporting the Vermont Governor Howard Dean, but then opted out.

Find more on Democrat Barack Obama - latest information and collection videos about his presidential election 2008 campaign, speeches, and quotes.

Emma Johnson has majored in American History. She writes on politics and current affairs.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Emma_A_Johnson

On the Road: Obama and Race

2008-01-15T15:22:00.000-05:00

CARSON CITY, Nev. – The question came from the woman in pink.

“Let’s get down to brass tacks here,” declared Christy Tews, rising from her front-row seat to size up Senator Barack Obama. “We have never elected a black man in our country.”

“I’ve noticed that,” he replied.

“How can you address that issue or overcome that issue?” she said.

With those words, a subject that has loomed over the presidential campaign in recent days came into crisp focus here late Monday evening. Ms. Tews, 68, prefaced her question by saying she is searching for a Democrat who can win. Period.

People stood on chairs to see Barack Obama at the Carson City Community Center in Carson City, Nev. (Photo: Ozier Muhammad/The New York Times)

“That is a wonderful question,” Mr. Obama said. “I’m glad you asked.”

On the Democratic side of the ticket, the Nevada caucuses on Saturday are the third stop in the race for the White House. While the campaigns have had modest outfits in place for months, they are merely a fraction of the Iowa or New Hampshire operations. And the candidates essentially are starting from the beginning as they meet voters for the first – and likely the only – time during the abbreviated campaign season here.

Chastened by his loss in New Hampshire, where he rode a wave of confidence from his victory in Iowa and seldom took questions from voters, Mr. Obama is dutifully interacting with voters as he makes his way through Nevada. He sought to address Ms. Tews’ concerns directly, beginning with his biography, followed by his improbable entry into national politics.

“People said, ‘he’s very talented, he can do a great job in the Senate, but they will never elected a black guy named Barack Obama,’ ” he said. “You can’t even pronounce his name!”

As Mr. Obama continued, he reminded his audience of several hundred people in a community center, and an overflow auditorium with a giant projector screen that seated just as many, that he defeated seven rivals in the primary before going on to win the general election by 30 points. “Or was it 40?” he mused. (He left out the part about how his opponent, Alan Keyes, was recruited to Illinois to join a contest already in progress.)

“I’ve seen how we can reach out and people will take you for who you are. I really trust in the American people,” Mr. Obama said, explaining his appeal as a senator. “But I recognize that the presidency is different. I recognize that people will attack you and send out all kinds of emails, accusing me of being this or being that.”

This is the first year Nevada has played such an early role in the presidential race. The definition of a caucus – a routine part of the vocabulary in Iowa – is being urgently explained to voters across the state.

Yet here in the Nevada capital on Monday evening, the gathering of voters quickly picked up on the fact that they could ask the presidential candidate anything. So there was the usual variety of questions devoted to health care, veterans issues and immigration, as well as the concern about Mr. Obama’s ability to win high office.

“I started from scratch and have been competing against the top political operation in the country that was built over 20 years by the former president of the United States of America,” he said with a grin. “I don’t know if anybody has noticed, but we’re playing it even right now.”

But it was the question from Ms. Tews, who lives in nearby Washoe Valley, that seemed to draw the most attention on a day when Mr. Obama called a truce over an intensifying argument over race with Mrs. Clinton. One hour later, she followed suit.

“I don’t want to sound naïve. Will there be some folks who probably won’t vote for me because I’m black? Of course,” Mr. Obama said. “Just like there will be some of you who wouldn’t vote for Hillary because she’s a woman or John Edwards because of his accent. The question is, can we get a majority of the American people to give us a fair hearing? I believe that I’ve already proven it.”

His race, he said, will not diminish his chances.

“If I don’t win this primary or if I don’t win the general election, it will be because I haven’t persuaded the American people that I can make their lives better,” Mr. Obama. “I think I can, because I have a track record.”

So what did Ms. Tews think of his answer?

She said she was unaware of the specific elements of his background that led to his career before becoming a senator and presidential candidate.

“There was a point during when he was speaking that all of a sudden, I said to myself, this man is electable,” Ms. Tews said in an interview. “It was the way he was actually looking, the expression on this face, which was open and inclusive expression. It seemed convincing.”

The last time she participated in a caucus, she said, was when she lived in Kansas and supported Senator George McGovern. “My dad, who was a Democrat, said, ‘You did the wrong thing. He can’t get elected,’” she recalled. “And my dad was right.”

So how about the 2008 race?

“I came here undecided, but I’m leaning Obama,” she said, before reaching over to shake his hand as he worked his way through the crowd. “He has some convincing statistics behind him and a convincing record. I wasn’t that aware of it.”

As a camera crew rushed over to film Ms. Tews, she took on the air of a seasoned participant of the presidential campaign, sounding much like one of her fellow early-state voters from Iowa or New Hampshire.

“Clinton was here Saturday afternoon, but I wasn’t able to get to her,” said Ms. Tews, sounding out a multitude of political offerings. “But isn’t John Edwards coming here tomorrow or the next day?”

Obama's Iowa Victory Speech

2008-01-04T01:14:00.001-05:00

Media Love for Hillary Clinton Is a Republican Asset for 2008

2008-01-01T02:10:00.001-05:00

I am not sure when it happened, but recently the American media decided that Hillary Clinton will be the next President. They didn't even wait for Oprah's endorsement. As a political consultant and researcher, I am used to rhetoric being offered as fact. But this time around, a new variable requires greater skepticism. In the 2008 Presidential election, will voters support a female?

The assumption is yes. The voices of this election refuse to address this issue in fear of being banished to the island of the non-P.C. In attempt to communicate forward-thinking views, serious examination of the gender effect has been omitted. "Look at me, I won't even acknowledge Hillary's gender because society has moved past this consideration." But in fact, a real dialog on America's historical and continued evolution beyond discrimination has been lost. With over twenty years of political work, I know that selling a candidate requires answering the most difficult questions first.

In the 2006 U.S. Senatorial campaign, I was presented with a female candidate who was relatively unknown and saddled with a last name that was unwieldy. What to do? The logical solution was to emphasize her first name. The incumbent was also a woman and two very different female names was a good way to set up a natural contrast. We decided to change all of the print materials and yard signs to display "BARBARA." I was confident in the decision, but needed research to confirm.

My firm conducts political research using a unique algorithm. Our results are trusted because of our accuracy. We included name response along with the issue research we did for this candidate. Surprise, over twenty percent of likely voters did not like the name Barbara. More importantly, they fell into two distinct groups which could be specifically targeted with a different approach.

Recent Gallop Polls have indicated that nearly 90% of American voters would support a female presidential candidate. This could be misleading, as it is the politically correct response to give. In my own surveys, I have inquired "Would you vote for a women for the office of ...?" This is quite different asking if a voter prefers candidate A over candidate B, where candidate A is female. It is not a matter of politics, but rather of voter evolution. The person who actually casts a ballot in America might not be ready to vote for a female in the quantity required for an Electoral College victory.

Scott is a Political Advertising Agency and Voice Works specializing in Radio. We represent National, State and local candidates or issue campaigns. Over twenty years experience. 2006-2008 Agency of record for U.S. Senate Campaign in Texas. We assist Independents, Republicans and Democrats. Scott Radio services include: Voice Work, Advertising Agency, Research, Publishing and Political Consulting.

http://www.scottradio.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Scott_Perreault

The Last Man Standing Could Be John McCain

2008-01-01T02:08:00.000-05:00

His Presidential campaign was left for dead by almost everyone in the late summer of 2007. Many of his senior advisors had quit his campaign or had been fired. In just six months, his campaign had run through its sizable financial war chest ($25 million) and was broke. However, these sad occurrences were not even his worst problem.

McCain had just negotiated a compromise bill with Democrats behind close doors. The Republican Party's conservative base hated the path to citizenship for illegal aliens proposal that was a result of his sponsored bill. Both conservative and independent voters saw the compromise bill as amnesty for illegal aliens and swarmed Washington like angry bees around honey. The very people whose votes McCain needed to win the 2008 Presidential election killed his immigration bill. His Republican supporters felt betrayed and his public opinion poll numbers plunged well below 10% nationwide. He sank to fourth place in public opinion polls in the early primary voting state of New Hampshire.

McCain was running a campaign that could not manage money, made bad hiring decisions, and had a tin ear concerning one of the most important issues to his base of support. Worse, he was making decisions behind close doors and looked like a Washington insider. This in an election year in which the public almost unanimously disapproves of the way Congress is doing its job. Indeed, by the early fall of 2007, John McCain looked like the ultimate Washington insider. He appeared to the Republican Party as old, out of touch, and his campaign looked to be finished.

What McCain has done since his campaign's late summer low point is what he has done successfully throughout his life. This man, when faced with extreme adversity, simply does not quit. McCain stopped spending money and carried his own bags. He took buses instead of planes. He poked fun at himself and at his advanced age. He was always open and amicable to reporter. He has continued to campaign tirelessly. It has also helped McCain that the troop surge in Iraq which he has long supported is working.

The voting public appreciates McCain's campaign persistence and the fact that his campaign is not staged and reliant on every public opinion poll. The result is that McCain is suddenly surging as the election draws near. He has moved within two points of the lead in the New Hampshire primary that he has to win. Nationally, McCain is now within 4% of Republican leaders, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee.

In the last few weeks, his support has doubled in Iowa. In addition, the latest polling has indicated that McCain has the lowest core opposition of any candidate in this year's election in either party (Rasmussen). Republicans will also consider that McCain is leading in a trial match up with every Democratic candidate in the general election.

In this Presidential election campaign, the voters want change. However they do not want to create unnecessary political risk inherent with that change. Therefore, experience is also a valuable commodity. A person's character is always well considered by the voting public. In the last several months, McCain has demonstrated both his character and experience in adversity.

Still, McCain's road to winning the Republican Presidential nomination has many obstacles. He does not have the money in his campaign war chest to properly compete for primary voters nationwide. It is essential that he win the primary election in New Hampshire for his campaign to remain viable. McCain also needs to somehow reclaim some of the support from conservative voters that he lost in the last six months. The truth is that he should have stayed away from the illegal immigration issue and gone on vacation last summer.

The good news for McCain is that it is a volatile election year and all the candidates are still very close in the public opinion polls. As a result, the 2008 Republican primary election could turn out to be an extended war of attrition. If that is the case, we should never underestimate this former American hero and POW. In any war, based on his courage, discipline, integrity and character, John McCain could well be the last man standing.

James William Smith has worked in Senior management positions for some of the largest Financial Services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. He has always been interested in writing and listening to different viewpoints on interesting topics.

Visit his website at http://www.eworldvu.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=James_W_Smith

Mike Huckabee - Prospective 2008 Presidential Candidate:

2008-01-01T02:06:00.000-05:00

Republican Mike Huckabee is now in his final year as Governor of Arkansas. He hails from Hope, Arkansas - the same home town as former President and Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton. The ordained Baptist minister and former televangelist made his political debut by winning a special election for lieutenant governor in 1993. He was subsequently elected to a full four-year term as lieutenant governor in 1994. He was elevated to governor in 1996 when Democratic Governor Jim Guy Tucker resigned in a plea deal connected with the Whitewater scandal. In 1998, Huckabee was elected to his first full term as governor and then re-elected in 2002. He was elected to a one-year term as chairman of the National Governors Association last July.

Unlike some of his potential rivals for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, Huckabee is both a fiscal conservative and a social conservative. This, combined with the fact that he is a fellow southerner, could make him an attractive choice for southern primary voters. That is, of course, if he can survive Iowa and New Hampshire. Survival for him will probably mean finishing in the top three in Iowa and the top two in New Hampshire. Coming out of those two states as the only surviving southerner in the nomination fight would be a major plus.

Formerly obese, Huckabee has waged a public battle with weight problems over the past several years, during which he has managed to lose a whopping 110 pounds. If he decides to run for president in 2008, one of his campaign slogans will likely be " I [heart symbol] Huckabee!"

Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, and blogger from Hopewell, VA. On his blog - http://commenterry.blogs.com - he posts commentaries on various subjects such as politics, technology, religion, health and well-being, personal finance, and sports. His commentaries offer a unique point of view that is not often found in mainstream media.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Terry__Mitchell

The Web Users’ Campaign

2007-12-11T01:22:00.000-05:00

Before they chartered planes and opened teeming offices in Des Moines or Manchester, even before they announced their lofty ambitions to the world, the current field of presidential candidates set about absorbing the lessons of Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign. Dean lost, of course, and in a fairly ignominious way, but his campaign was the first to harness the fund-raising and organizing power of the Internet, and both parties’ 2008 hopefuls had visions of replicating his model — minus the meltdown. One of the first things they did was to sign on a new class of online organizers and fund-raisers. The Web was the new frontier of American politics, and the candidates intended to exploit it.

Now, as we come to the end of a tumultuous political year, it seems clear that the candidates and their advisers absorbed the wrong lessons from Dean’s moment, or at least they failed to grasp an essential truth of it, which is that these things can’t really be orchestrated. Dean’s campaign didn’t explode online because he somehow figured out a way to channel online politics; he managed this feat because his campaign, almost by accident, became channeled by people he had never met. Dean for America was branded from its core antiwar message down to the design of some of its bumper stickers and buttons by laptop-laden volunteers, and these strangers, it could be argued, both made and unmade the candidate. In the new and evolving online world, the greatest momentum goes not to the candidate with the most detailed plan for conquering the Web but to the candidate who surrenders his own image to the clicking masses, the same way a rock guitarist might fall backward off the stage into the hands of an adoring crowd.

How else to explain the notable online surge of support for Ron Paul, the onetime standard-bearer of the Libertarian Party? Unlike his main opponents, Paul himself didn’t have the resources to build a sophisticated Web campaign, but antiwar and antispending Republicans were happy to do it for him. Last month, Paul supporters who had nothing to do with the campaign organized an online fund-raiser on Guy Fawkes Day, a British holiday named for the rebel who tried to assassinate King James I. Paul’s stunned campaign brought in more than $4 million and 21,000 new contributors in a single day — the largest 24-hour haul of any Republican candidate to date.

Meanwhile, those candidates who have amassed roomfuls of well-paid online experts have frequently found themselves buffeted or embarrassed (or sometimes both at once) by mysterious forces outside their grasp. Take, for instance, the much-forwarded “Obama Girl” music video, written by a 21-year-old undergraduate at Temple University. (“Universal healthcare reform/It makes me warm,” mouths the model in the video.) Fairly or not, that video probably had more to do with shaping Obama’s complicated public image — young and exciting but maybe a bit shallow — than any Internet appeal devised by the candidate’s own aides.

Such developments probably came as no surprise to many in the business world, who understood years ago that the Web represented not simply another mass medium to be gamed but also a fundamental shift in the once static relationship between producer and consumer. It is by nature a participatory medium, in which customers demand a more personal stake in the products they consume. This is why Ford asked online drivers to help decide which options should appear on last year’s Fusion, and how much it should cost, and why Mountain Dew has a Web site that invites consumers to invent the next great soft drink. Companies have realized that since they can no longer expect to unilaterally define the market the way they once did, they might as well let the market have some control over designing and branding the product.

Perhaps only in Washington, where so few people have dominated so much for so long, is this trend viewed as inherently negative. That’s because, for decades, presidential campaigns have been the exclusive province of a small bevy of ad makers and strategists who profited from the illusion that they, and only they, could foresee the electorate’s every reaction to everything. The results of that period are now in: a marked decline in voter participation, an uptick in cynicism toward public service and a heap of critical policy challenges that have gone unaddressed. So why should we fear a new day when ordinary voters, through their own creativity and passion, can suddenly influence the direction of a campaign with a Web site or a video? These are, after all, our campaigns, for too long dominated by the professionals who made of them a gray and tepid industry. And if “Obama Girl” didn’t deepen anyone’s understanding of employer mandates or carbon caps, then at least she enticed a lot of ordinary people — more than four million, at last count — to laugh and sing about a would-be president the way a less-jaded generation of voters sang “I’m Just Wild About Harry.”

Of course, the leading candidates still aren’t ready to entrust their message to the masses. (Look no further than Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which has apparently planted questions in public forums in an effort to control the dialogue.) Whichever candidates get their parties’ nominations next year, they will probably try valiantly to insulate their campaigns from the kind of Internet entrepreneurs and amateur videographers who would distract voters from their predetermined message. But this is a losing proposition; about the only thing we can reasonably know for sure about the general election campaign is that it will be profoundly affected by outside actors we can’t yet conjure, voters sitting in basements and coffee shops dreaming up their own kind of self-expression. Neither party’s candidate will escape the impulses, best or worst, of a newly empowered citizenry. The best they can do is to fall backward and hope to be carried aloft.

Matt Bai, who covers politics for the magazine, is the author of “The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics.”

I Got a Crush...On Obama" By Obama Girl

2007-12-11T01:20:00.000-05:00

The Immigration War Against America

2007-11-28T16:16:00.001-05:00

America has the strongest and most high tech military the world has ever seen. There is no current military threat religious or otherwise in the entire world that is able to match it. As a result, the United States faces a different kind of war which has been waged at it's borders for many years now and it's called; "Massive Illegal Immigration". Listen to what the troops are saying who are in favor of massive illegal immigration...

In LA on April 8, 2007, Carrying signs saying "Amnesty Now!" and "Love Thy Neighbor, Don't Deport Him," about 15,000 people danced to Mexican ranchera music, chanted "Si, se puede!" or "It can be done!"

In Denver, Colorado, protesters waved Mexican flags and brandished signs saying: “Uncle Sam Stole Our Land!” and: “If you think I’m illegal because I’m a Mexican, learn the true history, because I’m in my homeland.”

“Today we march, tomorrow we vote”

In Dallas, Texas, on April 9, 2006 half a million people marched, again waving Mexican flags with “Our Lady of Guadalupe” (an immensely popular “apparition” of the “Virgin Mary” in Mexico).

The Main Force Behind Massive Illegal Immigration

“Prayer books and guides to social and religious services should be provided along the way and at the points of arrival. The migrants should be reminded of their role as evangelizers". U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

There has been little dispute about the vast majority of illegals being Roman Catholics coming from Mexico and other Latin countries. There has been however, various theories on the main force behind the massive illegal immigration army which is constantly crossing the US border. Talk show hosts in mainstream conservatism and liberalism on various media outlets say its merely poverty that drives them across. While others say illegals want to make money so they can go back to their own country and retire the rest of their lives while living a rich life. However, and this is not something you will hear on Fox News or CNN, or in the mainstream in general, but the Vatican has for years been the main force behind the invasion. Yes, the Vatican! Why? Like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have declared the role of the illegals is be "evangelizers". Not only that, but it's main focus is to basically populate America with more Catholics. A Roman Catholic priest, Paul Marx, back in 1987, was pretty clear and open about the Vatican's role in supporting and encouraging illegal mass immigration of Latin Americans into the United States he states:

“America is a dying nation. I tell the Mexicans when I am down in Mexico to keep on having children, and then to take back what we took from them: California, Texas, Arizona, and then to take the rest of the country [the United States] as well.”

Also the late pope, John Paul II stated...

“They [immigrants] often bring with them a cultural and religious heritage which is rich in Christian [read “Roman Catholic’] elements. The Church... is committed to spare no effort in developing her own pastoral strategy among these immigrant people, in order to help them settle in their new land and to foster a welcoming attitude among the local population”

There was a study released in June by the California Catholic Conference, and entitled “Planning for the Future of the California Catholic Church. In that study contained interesting stats. By 2025, Roman Catholics are expected to comprise about 36% of California’s population, compared to about 30 percent now. In 2005, 11.1 million of California’s 36.6 million were Roman Catholics. By 2025, it is expected that 16.7 million of California’s expected 45.9 million people will be Roman Catholics. This is an increase of 5.6 million Roman Catholics. Of these, 3.5 million will be the result of new births, and 2.1 million will be new immigrants. “Church” membership will grow by 129%.

The Latino portion of the increased population of California in the period 1990-2005 was 79% of all new Californian residents. Between 2005 and 2025 it is expected to amount to 81% of new residents. By 2025, 4.3 million new Roman Catholic baptisms would have occurred, over 3.1 million children will receive their “first communion” in the Roman Catholic institution, and the average parish will have expanded by over 1800 families.

“They [the immigrants]... come with the values that are so needed in the United States today.... This is a special moment in the history of the Catholic Church and the history of migration”. Roman Catholic cardinal, Theodore McCarrick, of Washington, D.C.

The Vatican Using "Forgiveness" to promote illegal immigration

A local radio host in my local area who is a devote Catholic and has conservative political viewpoints informs the listening audience that he gets slightly annoyed by visiting Priests or his local Priest in general when political issues are brought up. He just doesn't like politics mixed in with preaching he said. Mainly because he disagrees what the Priests are saying politically not doctrinally. Cast in point, a visiting Priest in a loud voice told Roman Catholics they must forgive illegal immigrants, sex abusers, and so on. Since we are focusing in on massive illegal immigration, we will leave the sex abuse scandals for another time. But in the eyes of this Priest who was at odds with this devote Catholic radio talk show host, forgiveness of illegal immigrants is allowing them to cross the US border at will which is in line with the Vatican. And it's not only him, but other Priests around the country are using "forgiveness" in the wrong sense to promote massive illegal immigration.

Mexico and The Vatican

Without question, there is also a push for expansion of Mexico which suites the Vatican just fine because Mexico has been mainly Roman Catholic for many hundreds of years.

“This is our land, and our continent, this is not property of the Europeans or their descendants. Not one inch of this continent belongs to Europeans, no matter what lies or distortions of ownership they may present.... Remember that we have only temporarily (and illegally) been deprived of the rights to our continent and our heritage. This occupation of our continent is not a permanent condition.”Olin Tezcatilpoca

It's not shocking to know that almost 60 percent of Mexicans believe they should be able to cross into the United States whenever they please. A woman on one of the most popular programs on the Fox News cable network was asked by the host, "Do you believe in the United States having the right to control it's own borders". She replied, "Back in the 1600's people were free to travel anywhere in the United States". The host looked puzzled for a moment and said with a stern voice, "I'm not asking you what happened in the past before America became a country, I mean now the present. I'm asking you again if you believe that the United States has a right to control it's own border". She then finally responded, "Yes of course, I believe the United States has that right to control their own border". If you look closely to what she said, she indeed does not believe in the United States controlling it's own border. For how can one believe that a country can control it's own border but yet believe that people have the right to travel into another country as they please.

Elvira Arellano an illegal immigrant activist who was on a mission to try and change what she and others have called; "a broken immigration policy" in the United States. She was originally caught using fraudulent credentials and deported back to Mexico only to cross the borders again illegally. In 2002, she went to a Methodist 'church' building in Chicago to seek a safe haven in order to block attempts in sending her back to Mexico once again. She tried having a kid and using the kid's health in order to argue she has to stay in the US. Finally it was revealed she was captured in August 2007, and sent back to Mexico while choosing to leave her son behind even though she could have taken him with her. The debate over massive illegal immigration began to take hold again nationally as tv and radio talk shows were talking about Miss Arellano's situation.

Before I conclude this part on Mexico and the Vatican, the issue of how the US treats illegal immigrants with their US born kids came up after the Elvira Arellano situation...When it comes to illegal immigrants filtering into Mexico from other countries, the Mexican government requires them to pay a fee in order to cross their borders into the United States. Often times the illegals who cross into Mexico are treated very badly and spit upon by Mexican authorities or Mexican civilians.

Other Forces Behind Massive Illegal Immigration

While discussing the main force behind the push for massive illegal immigration. We cannot forget about the Communists and Socialists who are also a major force behind illegal immigration. Since 9/11 and even before then, we can also include terrorist support for illegal immigration. When it comes to pushing illegal immigration, socialists love the concept and practice especially from third world countries because it enhances their power as these illegal immigrates being poor they require such needs from the government like free education, free health care, and so on.

The (Communist) Workers World Party, and the International Socialist Organization, brought printed placards and signs to the demonstration, and handed out copies of their newspapers in Spanish and English. Socialist literature was displayed on tables. The Workers World Party distributed placards with pictures of Che Guevara. They also carried placards with the words: “Workers’ Struggles Have No Borders!” True Communist propaganda: that nation-states are irrelevant, that borders should come down. Shaun Willcock (A Christian Pastor who runs Bible Based Ministries)

What about big business or businesses in general? Many would ask and argue over as the main force behind illegal immigration...Indeed this is another force behind illegal immigration, no doubt about it but it's not the main force. Many businesses who hired illegals for cheap labor has seen their profits increased more than with legal citizens. Many countries like China who have become an industrial powerhouse and take advantage of their cheap labor in their own country have made it difficult for America companies to compete for business. Thus, the illegals become more profitable for these America companies to hire. In some cases profit doesn't matter at all, we find some rich people hiring illegals to be nannies, cooks, maids, and so on even though they can afford legal citizens to do the job.

On September 11, 2001 is when the world saw illegals for the first time attack the America in a massive way as many innocent people were killed in the name of the Islamic religion. For years terrorists have been in the United States either raising money, or training or even both. Certainly terrorists promote illegal immigration as a way not only to attack other countries with their distorted beliefs for world conquest for their god, but also attack America too.

What about poverty? No one can deny, it's one of the major reasons which motivates people to come to the America. And who can blame them? After all, their country is so poor with little opportunities to have any measure of success in life. Thus, people tend to want to cross the borders to come to the US to obtain great wealth beyond their wildest dreams of what they wouldn't have obtained in their own country. Sadly, they are used by their so-called 'church', and other groups which includes socialists and communists. What cannot look a the various forces behind illegal immigration without mentioning criminal activity. Criminals who sell drugs for example, make huge profits from their criminal actions by smuggling illegal drugs into the US by various means such as underground tunnels, or various transportation. And lastly, media bias which is in step with the Vatican and all other forces or people who are in favor of illegal immigration. The liberal media in the United States and even some in other countries like the BBC have been on a re-education campaign to attempt to try and sway public opinion. In this media blitz, they use labels such as "undocumented immigrants" which in a way is misleading because many do use "documents" but it's used in a fraudulent manner or even stolen. However, there is some truth to this label. It does mean the government has no document of that person or persons who enter into the United States. So there is accurate count or estimate on how many are actually in the US from other countries who came here illegally. More than likely there are more illegals than what they are currently aware of.

Progress or Lack Thereof on Restricting Massive Illegal Immigration

Despite all the tough talk on illegal immigration since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, it's been reported that only 2 percent of those illegals captured are actually prosecuted. The rest of the illegals captured are safely returned to Mexico. The United States government has basically with the influence of the Vatican and other special interest groups have sold it's people out. On June 26, 2007 in Hazleton, Pa. A Judge ruled in a 206 page document that the "Illegal Immigration Relief Act" which punishes landlords and businesses who rent or are employing illegal immigrants by their respected business is not unconstitutional. This is not the first time a court has done this. It's a pattern of rulings by the courts around the country. So the courts want to give illegal immigrants the same rights as legal citizens in the United States. This is unheard of in any other country which would deny rights to those who cross their borders illegally...

Recently as of August 10, 2007, President Bush is trying make a push for his plan to raise the fines on employers who hire illegal immigrants as part of a broader plan said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Also a quicker deployment of an under staff boarder patrol. It's unknown as this time how much the fine will be for employers who break the law to hire illegals or how many more boarder patrol agents will be deployed more rapidly. This part of the plan has the farming industry worried and suggested it would put them out of business. About 75 percent of the farmer's workforce are illegals. More than one million. I believe it's around 2-5 million illegals in the farming workforce...Without no documentation it's hard to really tell how many are in the country so most estimates in the media are on the low side. The farming industry does have to worry more but if we look at the history of illegal immigration, the enforcement of laws are weak at best. The rest of the President's plan wants most of the illegals who are working to stay while sending back the head of household to their particular countries for about a year before returning again, and have to pay a 5,000 dollar fine over ten years.

In Conclusion

Before I conclude this news item lets make one thing clear...There is basically nothing wrong with legal immigration. America is a nation of immigrants who came here for a better life, adapted into the society well, and so on... In fact, the United States takes in more lawful immigrants than any other country in the world! But what we are seeing today on immigration is a emphasis on massive illegal immigration that should be considered as a war waged against the United States for religious, business, and political reasons.

Former Public Access Producer, a student of the bible, history, current events, for many years... For more information... http://www.thebibleistheotherside.org

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Mike_Deubig

First Woman, First Black, First Latino, or First Honest President

2007-11-28T16:13:00.000-05:00

The phrase honest politician has become an oxymoron. We should not be impressed by the prospect of having the first woman, first black or first Latino president. What would be far more radical would be to have the first honest president, if not ever, certainly in a very long time.

Presidents in recent memory have been excellent liars, contributing mightily to our culture of dishonesty. Bill Clinton had the audacity to look right into the TV camera and blatantly lie to the American public. George W. Bush has probably set a record for official lying, though it might take many decades to fully document them. Carl M. Cannon saw the bigger truth: "posterity will judge [George W. Bush] not so much by whether he told the truth but whether he recognized what the truth actually was."

Things have gotten so bad that hardly anyone can even imagine an honest president. But if we don't expect an honest president, how can we expect to trust government?

Don Nash made these insightful observations, "If America was ever faced with a politician who spoke truth to the people, no-one would know what to make of the oddity. This politician could probably not get elected to office. Sadly, Americans can't handle the truth. ...Lies, then, are the consequential destruction of American democracy. Little by very little, the lies and lying politicians have chipped away at America's Constitution and the American form of government."

Rampant lying by politicians is a major reason why so many Americans have stopped paying attention to politics, stopped hoping for political reforms, and stopped voting

Lying politicians probably tell themselves that the public cannot take the truth. Many convince themselves (lie to themselves) that lies of omission are not really serious like lies of commission.

Just how bad things have become is shown by the recent decision by the Supreme Court of the state of Washington that lying politicians are protected by the 1st Amendment. They are free to lie as much as they can get away with. Free speech apparently is a green light for lying, even though it leads to rotten, dishonest government.

During this primary season it is worthwhile to look at Republican and Democratic candidates from this honest-president perspective. A truly honest president would have the greatest loyalty to honoring the rule of law, the Constitution and the needs of the public, rather than what we have grown used to: greatest loyalty to their party and the moneyed interests funding it. If the nation really wants a change president, honesty should be a requirement.

On the Republican side, Ron Paul looks like the most honest candidate. Straight-talk John McCain still seems to have better than average honesty, and Mike Huckabee seems relatively honest, except when he talks about his record on taxes as governor. On the Democratic side, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel look the most honest, with Bill Richardson running close. Among third party presidential candidates in recent history, Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan stand out for their honesty, which clearly was not sufficient to prevail against liars.

Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney are pretty comparable big-time, gold-medal Republican liars. And with Romney we might get the first Mormon president, but not an honest one. If Hillary Clinton wins the nomination, then the most dishonest Democratic candidate will have prevailed. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that only 34 percent of Americans view Senator Clinton as honest. As to Barack Obama, viewed as 50 percent more honest than Clinton in some polls, his statements about his upbringing, universal health care, and campaign funding cast doubt on his honesty. Still, he seems successful in selling himself as honest. Liars are bad, but liars claiming to be honest are worse. Odds are that there will be no honest Republican or Democratic presidential candidate to vote for in 2008.

An honest president would threaten the corrupt, dishonest and rigged two-party political system, so one getting a presidential nomination is improbable. How could an honest person obtain financing for their campaign? How could they get diverse groups to support their candidacy? Candidates tell different groups what pleases them, and eventually contradict themselves. Flip-flopping sounds bad, but is even worse when the new position is a lie.

Some may suggest that a candidate does not have to be honest during campaigning, but only be honest once elected president. But can someone with real character find it easy to lie repeatedly during campaigning and then have the ability to stop lying once elected? I think not. Besides, how can citizens detect the potential honest president if that person is behaving like all normal lying candidates during campaigns? A truly honest person must stand out and be seen as exceptional by the public because of their habitual honesty. Much of the appeal of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich is their perceived honesty. But the candidates most likely to succeed attract supporters for their policy positions, promises or ability to win, despite not being seen as honest. That makes their supporters delusional. They lie to themselves to justify their support.

This means that most people reject choosing a candidate on the basis of their perceived honesty. They knowingly choose dishonest politicians. Why?

Lies entertain. Honesty disturbs. Honesty produces painful truths about the nation, government, and failed public policies. Truth-telling politicians usually say things that people would rather not hear and or think about.

Meanwhile the mainstream media and pundits, promoting confrontation and horse races to entertain and keep their audiences, are reluctant to call lying politicians liars. Instead, they use oblique language and euphemisms to conceal the truth about lying. They are as dishonest as the politicians they talk about. How interesting it would be to have media people ask candidates something like: Are you being the most honest person you can be in this campaign? I don't think the majority of dishonest ones would not say "yes." Instead, they would dance and blabber.

Tragically, Americans have become used to lying politicians. Can our democracy survive when most people believe that an honest president is both impossible and unnecessary?

Of course, honesty by itself is no guarantee that someone will be a great president. Nor is it by itself sufficient reason to vote for someone. But imagine if we insisted that it be a necessary, minimum requirement for supporting politicians.

In the end, without honesty, every reason we use to vote for someone is a joke. Delusional thinking about candidates has produced our delusional democracy. Time to stop voting for liars. Better to not vote at all. Voting for liars only encourages more lies.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Joel_Hirschhorn

The Politics Of Illegal Immigration

2007-11-28T16:11:00.000-05:00

The problem of illegal immigration exists today in large measure because the last two Presidential administrations have not enforced the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which provided for penalties against companies that hire undocumented workers. In 1999, under the Clinton Administration, the U.S. government collected a meager $3.69 million from 890 companies in fines. In 2004, under George Bush, the amount collected in fines from companies hiring undocumented workers was zero.

It is estimated that, in 2004, three million illegal immigrants entered the United States. In addition, the border with Mexico has never been properly secured, with only 9500 border agents trying to police an eight thousand mile border until 2005.

These factors have lead to an illegal immigrant population that has grown by at least 37% since the last United States census in the year 2000. This increase in illegal immigration will provide a political firestorm in Washington D.C. in the next few years since illegal immigrants are still included in the congressional apportionment calculation for 2010.

Congressional apportionment is the distribution of the 435 seats in the United States House Of Representatives among the 50 states. The calculation is done every decade and is based on the census of a state's total population. The calculation includes citizens and non citizens including illegal aliens. The last calculation was done by Congress in the year 2000 and the next calculation of apportionment will be done in 2010. In addition this once in a decade population tally is used as the basis to distribute more than $200 billion in federal aid to the states each year.

When examining the last congressional apportionment in the year 2000, several interesting things become apparent. Seven million illegal aliens were counted in the 2000 United States census. In total the census counted 18.5 million non-citizens. These illegal aliens and non-citizens tend to live in several states in a concentrated fashion. Since apportionment considers non-citizens and illegal aliens in its formula, the result in 2000 was a redistribution of nine congressional seats. The result was that low immigration states that seem unaffected by immigration experienced a loss of their political influence. This loss of political influence occurred through the loss of congressional seats in the House of Representatives. The presence of non citizens in the census and apportionment calculations had some dramatic political consequences. Due to the fact that non-citizens were factored into the 2000 calculation, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi lost one seat each. The states of Montana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Kentucky, and Utah each failed to gain a seat they should have had. The states with a high number of illegal aliens and non citizens gained the seats. California gained six seats and Florida, New York, and Texas gained one seat each.

Now consider the recent report by the University of Connecticut State Data Center . The report is an early projection on how the nation's growing population of illegal immigrants would amplify the movement of Congressional seats to the South and West when seats in the House of Representatives are next divided up in 2010. The Connecticut report predicts that "Arizona, Texas and Florida will all hold additional seats in Congress after the next census, in part because of their illegal immigrant populations. California and New Jersey would keep their current amount of seats in the House under the current system. Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Montana and Ohio will each have one fewer seat than they would otherwise have because they have relatively few undocumented immigrants. New York, which would lose two seats under the current system, would lose only one if illegal immigrants were excluded." Two of California's projected fifty three House seats would be the result of its undocumented population.

The report makes this conclusion, "Illegal immigration is concentrating the power of voters in states such as California, Texas and Arizona, which have more seats in Congress per legal resident than many states where the number of illegal immigrants is much smaller". Orlando Rodriguez, the demographer of the report adds: "If you look at it, if the undocumented population is included, then you get a real shift in seats from the Northeast to the South and the Southwest, and it's a disproportionate shift because the people who are included in the count, not all of them vote".

Future Presidential elections will also be impacted by the 2010 Congressional apportionment. Illegal immigration will not only redistribute seats in the House of Representatives, but will impact the Electoral College as well because it is based on the size of congressional delegations. This influence comes from a population of people who are not citizens and who are by law not allowed to vote. These people are residing in this country illegally.

However, they live here illegally because they are allowed to by local, state and federal governments. They are used in census figures by their state of residence which receive monetary benefits and more congressional power. They are exploited by the politician pandering for the Hispanic vote. They are exploited by their employers who pay them in many cases a low wage with poor working conditions. They are here because existing immigration laws were not enforced by the two previous administrations and by many state and local governments. They are here because the country has not secured its border in an age of terrorism.

Non-citizens and illegal aliens will be counted in the April 2010 United States census which will be the basis for congressional apportionment. The resulting movement of congressional seats will in effect dilute the principle that every citizen voter has an equal voice in this nation's political life. The result of the 2010 congressional apportionment will be yet another unfortunate example of the politics of illegal immigration.

James William Smith has worked in Senior management positions for some of the largest Financial Services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. He has always been interested in writing and listening to different viewpoints on interesting topics.

Visit his website at http://www.eworldvu.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=James_W_Smith

4 Key Reasons Why Barack Obama Will Be The Next President

2007-11-09T10:46:00.000-05:00

Early February I wrote a blog on Barack Obama, the new presidential hopeful. Then I was in awe of the 'audacity' of this man from nowhere, much inspired by him and his dreams and I wondered whether his hopeful dash had anything to teach the UK. However, I concluded my blog with these words: "Much as I would like Barack Obama to become the next President, I do not think that he will, on this round. I think he should be Hillary Clinton's running mate and what an unstoppable team they would be - his charisma with her experience, not to mention the differing gender, race and personal ethos which would add extra appeal. He would at least dent her conservatism while gaining the necessary training to succeed after her.

Well, two months down the line, I take it ALL back! In my humble opinion Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States of America for the following reasons:

1. Grassroots Support: Barack is intent on being the People's President in a very clever move to distance himself from the big lobbyists and sectional interests which usually drain White House incumbents of their power. The fewer factions he has to answer to, both White and Black, when he gets into office the more his hands will be freed to carry out the kind of policies he wishes to introduce to change America and unite it, as he is promising. If his hands are not tied with great expectations from those with the power, he can embrace the masses more sincerely with more room for action.

He is quietly involving as many people as he can so that when he actually stands on those White House steps, the ordinary man in the street who donated his $5 can actually beam with pride and say, "I helped to get him there." And that's a powerful sense of inclusion Mrs Clinton hasn't yet realised, or learnt, in our YouTube and blogger age. People want to feel significant and valued and, with his website, of which I am a member, Barack Obama is doing just that, with regular information and encouragement to be part of his circle as well as a pioneer in the dramatic change afoot in America. It would be exciting times for those who have never been involved in the political process or got near a potential president. To know that their effort and involvement can actually make a difference would be a tremendous boost for their feeling of worth and value!

Big business and big money can help to get you into any public office in the USA, but it is the people who will keep you there. By encouraging his supporters to hold meetings in their houses and communicate with one another as much as possible – in essence, to be mini-campaign managers for spreading the word on his behalf to attract even more local attention – he is building a formidable base of public support because nothing succeeds like word of mouth. Soon this 100,000 flock, and the money he is likely to receive, will both dramatically expand as people realise he is now a very serious contender.

Shrewd Move
2. New Style. It is clear that Barack and his team are determined to do things very differently. Notice how they deliberately waited to announce their first quarter figures, well after the hullaballoo of the Clinton camp. They were in no rush to boast. That was a shrewd move because Clinton's aides completely underestimated him, believing that their money was so high as to overwhelm her rivals. But, not for the first time, has Barack snatched the initiative and the media attention in a dignified way, demonstrating that he is his own man, who is determined to do things his way, and a new way, and can take care of himself very well. Notice too that he has refrained from cosying up to people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, though he has praised their role in making it all possible for him with their pioneering days. He is trying not align himself with specific factions in order to encourage a broader appeal. And that can only be good for both the country and his support base.

3. Time For a Big Change. The negative antics of President Bush has ensured that America has lost a lot of its power, credibility and respect, and is now ready for change. Not just a cosmetic one, but a dramatic change. In fact, watch the world's response to America once Barack is installed, at least in the first couple of years as he proves himself. His manner will be far less adversarial because he is a conciliator who speaks from love, not hate, and that is why people find it easy to warm to him. I knew I would see a Black president in my lifetime because the signs were always there. But I never believed one without too much experience and so young would be taking centre stage, which shows his maturity, sincerity and great competence at dealing with what he has to do.

4. Blind Spot. America has had a blind spot ever since Hillary has been campaigning. There was such a foregone conclusion about her ability to fundraise and fit the role of president that they left little room for any alternatives. No one could have predicted Barack Obama's presence and enormous success so far. Like the Google juggernaut, no one saw him coming. Being so preoccupied with all the other old contenders, they left little room for the new. Those who did spot him in the distance were perhaps ready to dismiss his chances because of his relative inexperience. But Google came out of nowhere to dominate the world with their new way of thinking, amazing innovations and fearless way of acting. Barack Obama, whom the rest of the world had barely heard of 6 months ago, seems to have begun his own journey towards global domination.

It is no longer a question of whether he will get into the White House. It is simply a matter of when, and the sooner the better. Anyone who can have such an impact on a huge country in such a short time has tremendous talent for leadership, which his supporters obviously desire. The only place for such a talent to do itself justice is right at the top, in America's historical White House, its main seat of power, from which it can lead and inspire.

ELAINE SIHERA (Ms Cyprah -http://www.ecademy.com/user/elainesihera and http://www.myspace.com/elaineone) is an expert author, public speaker, media contributor and lifestyle columnist. The first Black graduate of the OU and a post-graduate of Cambridge University. Elaine is a CONFIDENCE guru and a Personal Empowerment, Relationships and Diversity Consultant. Author of: 10 Easy Steps to Growing Older Disgracefully; 10 Easy Steps to Finding Your Ideal Soulmate!; Money, Sex & Compromise and Managing the Diversity Maze, among others (available on http://www.amazon.co.uk as well as her personal website). Also the founder of the British Diversity Awards and the Windrush Men and Women of the Year Achievement Awards. She describes herself as, "Fit, Fabulous, Over-fifty and Ready to Fly!"

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Elaine_Sihera

Where Is Candidate Rudy Paul or Ron Giuliani

2007-11-09T10:44:00.000-05:00

The 2008 GOP presidential nominees seem to be not inspiring much support among conservatives. Oh sure, among the center-right Republicans candidates like Mitt “Damn I Look Good” Romney, Rudy “I’m The Anti-pro-anti-abortion Candidate” Giuliani and John “Say Good-bye To Your First Amendment” McCain look great. But for the conservatives? We basically grimace every time we look at the crowd of hopefuls.

The truth be told, there is only one candidate in the crowd that appeals to conservatives. The problem is that the same candidate causes us to avert our eyes in shame and bow our heads in frustration. That candidate is none other than Ron Paul.

Every now and again someone will bring up the name Ron Paul to me and I know that my face must certainly look as though I have just been struck in the gut. That reaction stems from the realization that while Ron Paul is exactly the candidate conservatives have sought on almost every issue, the man has gone off the deep end with regard to Iraq and global terrorism.

When he says things like we never declared war on Iraq despite a clear resolution authorizing military force (that’s “war” by the way) and how we’re basically at fault for 9/11 because we dared to defend a country that Saddam invaded unlawfully and held him to the terms of the cease-fire he signed, clear thinking conservatives wonder who the heck crossed the wires. We wonder what would make an otherwise intelligent man start raving like a moonbat on Kool Aid.

To be honest it wouldn’t surprise me if tomorrow Ron Paul ran to the microphone to talk about how the World Trade Center was brought down by a clandestine plot and concealed explosives.

I know, I know, it’s insulting to all you fringe libertarian “non-interventionist” (i.e. isolationist) Ron Paul supporters out there to hear me say that. And I’m sure you’ll come up with all sorts of talking points to back up your candidate’s half baked ideas. But to be honest I do get tired of pointing out that using al Qaeda’s propaganda about how we are the reason they attacked us because we are defending allies in the Middle East (imperfect as they are) is about as sane as citing rants by Hitler and the NAZIs against the Jews as proof positive that they were the reason Germany had problems and justification for the Holocaust.

It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to go back and research history and find comments by radical Muslims from the very first clashes between a new America and Islam. During the Barbary Wars they made their intentions known to us without the spin because there were no television cameras in their face and no PR battle to wage. When Adams and Jefferson asked what the justification was for attacking American interests the response by Ambassador Abdrahaman, Tripoli’s representative in London at the time, told us then all that was needed in order to understand their reasons:

“The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners.”

So you’ll just have to get over it. Radical Muslims hate us because we are not radical Muslims. They do not care where we are. Whether we are in Saudi Arabia or cowering inside our own borders they will attack us. Their ideology and interpretation of their faith is not new. It did not start with America putting up bases in the Middle East and forming alliances with countries that supply us with oil.

It took a while, but eventually even the founders figured it out; you defeat these folks by killing them and breaking their stuff until they relent. When the founders did that the problem didn’t go away, but it lessened greatly.

And all your little rants about how it’s the “neo-cons” which have infested the GOP and which will prevent Congressman Paul from winning the nomination can also hit the circular file where they belong. Because I hate to break it to you but it isn’t the neo-cons that are against Paul; it’s the core, small government conservatives who just cannot bring themselves to vote for a man so divested from the reality of why Islamic terrorists attack. That reality is that they attack people because they are “infidels” or unbelievers in their brand of radical Islam.

I even ran a poll on American Conservative Daily asking this question:

“If Ron Paul was more supportive of the War in Iraq would you be more or less inclined to vote for him?”

The results? Certainly NOT anything the Paulites are going to want to hear: More inclined (67%), About the same (24%) & Less inclined (9%).

Like I said, it ain’t the soft socialist, big government neo-cons that are against Mr. Paul boys and girls.

The fact is that what conservatives are looking for is someone like Ron Paul who is willing to accept that not only was the Iraq War justified, but that it must be fought and won. Conservative voters would like to take someone like Rudy Giuliani who is strong on the on terrorism, willing to go to where the terrorists are and fight them and mesh it with someone like Ron Paul who is willing to reign in government spending and power grabs that exceed the powers vested to it by the Constitution.

What they are looking for is someone like a Ron Giuliani or a Rudy Paul. And it is a shame that we do not have someone like that. Because that is what conservatives, except for the fringe “not my problem”, head in the sand libertarians crave.

J.J. Jackson is the owner and Lead Editor of American Conservative Politics - The Land of the Free and American Infidel T-shirts. His weekly articles can be read at Liberty Reborn

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=J.J._Jackson

Ron Paul 2008

2007-11-05T23:11:00.000-05:00

What Exactly Does a Political Activist Do

2007-10-11T11:30:00.000-04:00

As a seasoned political campaigner for the British Conservative Party I am often fielding questions about what exactly this involves. The description below is just that: the idiot's guide to politics, so to speak.

Let us start with the basics. The Conservative party is currently the main party of opposition in the United Kingdom. We are also the oldest and most successful political party in Great Britain. Yet we have been out of power since 1997.

We lost in 1997 because we were seen as out of touch with the public. We had been in power since 1979 and, as with any government, the public had grown bored. They wanted something new and were swept away with the promises of New Labour. Promises that have now seen to be based on spin, but that were believed by many in 1997. Since then we have suffered two more election defeats, although we have cut down Labour's majority and become the largest party in local government and in the European parliament.

With a few legal exceptions, almost anyone can be a member of a political party. But there is a huge difference between being a member (like 300,000 people are) and being an activist.

Members do not have to do anything. By paying £15 a year (£3 for under 22's) they are already contributing to the party, providing much needed funds towards the winning of elections. But many chose to do more. They join the party because they want it to win. For the very same reason many go out and help it in a number of other ways:

Leafletting.

Canvassing (asking how people will vote, either at their door, over the phone, or using surveys).

Putting up a poster at election time.

Holding house meetings, where neighbours are invited to meet a candidate.

Fundraising by helping to organise social events and appeals to raise money.

Standing themselves (usually for council, but also for other positions of responsibility such as school governors).

Joining letter writing circles, getting mentions in the media.

Assisting on photo shoots and celebrity visits as part of the crowd.

Those are most of the obvious ones. But why do we do these things? Surely the national policies dictate a result, not to mention the media coverage?

Wrong!

People vote for the person who they think will do the most for them. That's human nature after all. So, if the Conservative candidate, at whatever level, is the one who organised the litterpick next to your house, helped sort out your daughter's problems at school or just spent 20 minutes on your doorstep listening to all of your problems, you are more likely to vote for them. It works. I've seen rock solid opposition wards go Conservative because of a hard fought, pro-active local issue campaign and vice-versa.

Politics is about listening to people. Politics is about being seen to campaign on the issues that matter to them in their local area. And don't forget, it's usually our local area as well: we do have some self interest in going about doing this! In general, people get involved in politics because in their own way they want to make the world a better place. That might mean stopping a by-pass, protesting against a war or just getting the drains in the neighbourhood cleaned. It doesn't have to be big things that annoy us, after all.

We campaign ourselves into the ground. We stuff envelopes for hours on end, that most people only glance at on the way to the bin when they arrive through their doors. We try and make things as personal as possible: hand written envelopes (and on occasion letters), personal telephone calls from the candidate, house visits, single issue leaflets to cover just one or two streets.

Why do we do this? We work for change. Positive change. We don't always succeed, but at least we try.

Andrea is an author on http://www.Writing.Com/ which is a site for Writers. She is actively involved in British politics and her online writing portfolio can be found at http://astephenson.writing.com .

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Andrea_Stephenson

Four Months To Go And Hillary Clinton Is The Show

2007-09-12T03:46:00.000-04:00

There are about four months until the first votes are cast in the Democratic primaries for the 2008 Presidential election. Four months is a very long time in politics. Anything can happen in four months in election campaigns. However, at this point in the process, Hillary Clinton has a commanding lead in the latest polls and looks like she is about to make the actual primary process her personal coronation for the Democratic Party nomination.

Consider the latest NBC News, Wall Street Journal poll (8/1/2007) for a moment. Hillary Clinton leads her closest rival Barack Obama by a 43% to 21% margin nationally. The latest Gallop survey also has similar findings This is a huge increase from her small 36% to 31% advantage over Obama in April of this year.

Also, Clinton leads Obama by 49 to19 percent (30 point advantage) in delegate rich California in a poll released on August 17, 2007, for the Sacramento Bee newspaper.

Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers have shown a dramatic gain since the recent CNN/Youtube debate with Barack Obama. Barack responded in the affirmative to a question about meeting American- bashing dictators by giving them an audience as President. This exposed the question of his lack of experience for Hillary to exploit and she did so very well.

Her reflection that Barack was “naïve” and would be used for propaganda purposes, underscores what most Americans believe; that Obama is a very charismatic, intelligent man who is also very inexperienced in managing domestic and foreign government affairs. Barack may well be a politician with a huge future, but he has a very limited resume of government experience in the present.

Hillary still has challenges to overcome over the next several months before she can claim the nomination from Democratic primary voters, despite her healthy lead in recent public opinion polls. Her challenges are as follows:

Barack Obama still has resources. You can never underestimate the candidate that raises the most money in any election and Barack Obama has raised more money than anyone else. He has a huge campaign war chest to use and is a new fresh face which may regain appeal to a public tired of the same old politics in Washington D.C.

Hillary Clinton has high unfavorable ratings. Despite her lead in the polls, Hillary Clinton continues to score high unfavorable numbers with Democrat voters (around 40%) and she remains a polarizing figure nationally with an unfavorable rating of forty nine percent . If she begins to trail leading Republican candidates in Presidential trial polls, Democrat voters may see her as a loser on top of their ticket.

Barack Obama leads in early primary voting states. Obama currently leads in the polls in the early primary states of Iowa and South Carolina and early victories in these primaries could give him momentum and favorable press coverage in other states.

Clinton/Bush fatigue. The country has had twenty straight years of a Bush or Clinton in the White House and may be looking at four or eight more. It’s possible at some point to begin to see fatigue with America’s two Presidential families and the voters may turn on Hillary Clinton.
Democratic Party primary voters: Recent polls show that Democratic primary voters disagree with Hillary Clinton on several of the issues. She is still defending her Senate vote to authorize an Iraq War that is very unpopular to most Democratic primary voters. Also, her belief that America is safer than prior to the 9/11 attacks is a position only twenty seven percent of Democratic primary voters agree with.

Hillary Clinton has run a very well managed campaign during the last seven months. She has raised nearly forty million dollars for her (primary election) campaign war chest during the first half of 2007, and has adroitly exploited every political opportunity while making few mistakes. She has presented herself as an able campaigner and an experienced politician. Her increased standing in every major public opinion poll reflects her campaign’s competence.

Polls can be volatile and can dramatically change before the voting in the Presidential primaries begin in January 2008. However, despite the volatility of the polls and the political challenges to come, the current view of the field of Democratic party candidates is that there are four months to go and Hillary Clinton is the show.

James William Smith has worked in Senior management positions for some of the largest Financial Services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. He has always been interested in writing and listening to different viewpoints on interesting topics.

Visit his website at http://www.eworldvu.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=James_W_Smith

Private Labeled Bottled Water and Political Campaigns - Pure Water for Memorable Campaign Events

2007-09-03T01:12:00.001-04:00

Political campaigning is a very competitive business and events are an important part of political life and political campaigns. A well planned event can forcefully convey a clear political message and create political support for the candidate.

Political candidates hold many events like political rallies and fund raising as a means to reach out to voters. One of the basics of campaigning is that the candidate must develop a clear message and address it to their target audience. Events play an important part of this process. These meetings require detailed planning and resources and many organizations elect to utilize specialists in managing events.

Political campaigning is a complex undertaking with the development of a clear message, coordination of event schedules and maintaining critical timeline requirements of paramount importance. In addition to the logistics involved in planning the campaign forceful and consistent communication of the campaign message is a critical factor.

The Value of the Message

Political campaigning is all about the message.

A common message brings participants together and allows the candidate the ability to convey a strong reason why voters should show their support.

Management of the message also shows the voter how the candidate is different from the opponent and convinces voters to support the candidate. Effective communication of the message is critical therefore to the success of the campaign.

Promotional Items and Quality Communication

One aspect of communication is the use of personalized promotional items, effective banners and unique giveaways.

These items can be designed to impart an effective message and the use of high quality personalized giveaways creates a lasting impression and reinforces the campaign theme and message.

Private Label Drinking Water as an Effective Communication of the Message

Private label drinking water is an ideal and powerful way to promote a campaign message.

Essentially, private labeling allows campaigns to design and develop a label with a custom message and theme and attach that label to a bottle of healthy drinking water. A result of this process is the creation and promotion of a clear message that is tailored to the campaign and campaign events

Because of the immediate and permanent nature of the bottled water product, consumable advertising is created that leaves a lasting message in the mind of the audience.

One powerful feature of private label drinking water is the ability of a select few vendors to add the candidate’s picture to the message on the bottle.

Some of the benefits of private labeled water include:

• A high-quality, effective and custom message.

• Pictures can be added to the label to better identify the message with the candidate.

• Messages can be modified to reflect events like political meetings and rallies and fund raising events. This is important as candidates go on the road to promote their campaigns.

• Individual users often carry the water with them and the message is further extended and promoted.

• Pure water is popular and universally accepted as contributing to good health. The message of the private label effectively reaches more prospects as use grows.

• Effective cost is low and response to the event message is immediate.

• Consumable, portable advertising creates a lasting message and impression.

What to Look for in a Private Label Water Supplier

There are a number of private label water suppliers but they vary widely in the quality of their product offerings. There are three areas to investigate when choosing a supplier:

Quality of Water

Events with a large number of participants require proper hydration with water of the highest quality. High quality water in terms of health and taste is also critical for the acceptance of the theme and event message.

If the water is low quality or tastes bad then the message will fail.

The best quality water on the market today is purified using a distillation/ filtration/ oxygenation process that removes all impurities, including all bacteria, and creates a light, refreshing taste.

Quality of Label Design and Production

The label is the message part of the product and poor-quality labels send a poor-quality message. Production of a poor-quality label is a waste of money and adversely affects the message and theme. For political candidates it is important to use a professional designer to impart a message of quality and add a high quality photo image of the candidate.

It is very important to know that the vast majority (almost all) of the private label opportunities in this country come from water resellers (not bottlers) with desktop-model “thermal” (or “thermal wax”) printing devices with a quality level that cannot compare well to even consumer-grade inkjet printing devices widely available for less than $200 at your local electronics store. These label printers are very cheap in both quality and cost, typically ranging from $10-20k depending on configuration, and are widely used throughout the private label water industry because of their low cost.

In sharp contrast, a quality label, i.e., one that looks like a top-shelf brand that you might find in your local gourmet grocery store, needs to be produced with professional-quality equipment using professional-grade printing equipment. There are three types of printing equipment that can produce a high-quality label.

1. Rotary offset lithography;
2. Flexography; and
3. High-quality digital presses.

For most smaller runs (under about 10,000 units), digital equipment offered by Heidelberg or HP is the most cost effective solution, but instead of $10-20k, the minimum equipment costs for these professional solutions range from $750k to $1.25M per station.

These facts are very important to understand when choosing a private label bottler — because those who sell low-quality labels would have you believe that nothing better is available because of the short runs required by private label customers. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In order to succeed, your label must be professionally designed and produced with high-quality materials using a printing process that renders a high-quality result. Waterproof lamination is also required for long lasting labels. This is easily achieved for an affordable unit cost using the right equipment for the job.

Quality of Customer Service

The design and production of private labeled drinking water is complex and requires intense interaction between the customer and supplier. Communication and a culture of customer service excellence is a prerequisite to the creation of an effective theme message and a successful event. Without a significant commitment to customer service on the part of the supplier, the impact of the theme message will fail.

Choose a quality supplier to help develop and communicate your message and to create success for the political campaign event.

Jon M. Stout is Chairman of the Board of Element H2O an Ultra Pure bottled water company located in Chantilly, Virginia. For more information about bottled water, private label bottled water and bottled water delivery go to the Element H2O website.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Jon_M._Stout

Politics: Let's Stop Family Presidential Dynasties

2007-08-25T15:25:00.000-04:00

The law restricting presidential term limits was good for the Republican Party and probably good for the country. President Roosevelt served three terms and part of a fourth term before he died during World War II. (Roosevelt was too ill during part of his last term to govern the everyday activities of the war. Fortunately General George Marshall was there to handle those chores.) When the president died, President Truman took the reins of government continuing Democratic control.

I can see the Republican’s dilemma. When would they get their turn?
My father, a democrat, became independent over time. Part of the catalyst was the Kennedy Family that came into Utah with their money and what my dad thought were improper and manipulative tactics. Joseph Kennedy had decided to use his wealth and power to create a family presidential dynastic.

I have decided to call such a dynasty a FPD (not to be confused with Adobe® PDF files or any other files for that matter).

Joseph Kennedy, Jr., the oldest of Joseph and Rose Kennedy’s children, was to become the first Kennedy president in the Kennedy FPD. The World War II hero was killed when the drone aircraft he was flying exploded before his scheduled bailout. Some say it was actually bombed by our own planes flying above it on their return from raids in Europe as they dropped their surplus bombs before landing.

The drone was heavily laden with explosive and was to be guided to a V-2 rocket site. The V-2 was killing many British people and destroying their property. It was a threat to our armies in Europe and we had no defense against the weapon. Read about Joseph Kennedy, Jr. at http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Joseph_P._Kennedy%2C_Jr.

What would it have been like if the Kennedy Family took over our government for four 8-year segments? Joe, John, Robert, and then Teddy?

We would have a royal family, something that our forefathers frowned upon.
The tragic deaths of three Kennedy sons and the circumstances of the accident at Chappaquiddick ended the Kennedy FPD. Read about the Kennedy “family curse” at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennedy_Curse

Now we have the threat of two other families controlling our government, the Bush family and the Clinton Family, the first being more of a threat than the second..

If the elder President Bush had won his second term, we would have had 16 years of Bush government. We still have the threat of Jeb Bush. Despite some questionable past activities of the Bush family, Jeb is well liked, seems to be somewhat smarter than his brother, and has a strong political base. For negative press go to http://www.campaignwatch.org/details.htm
Hillary Clinton would extend the Clinton Presidency.

Despite Bill Clinton’s personal shenanigans, he left the country with a surplus and there was no major war raging during his campaign. Hillary is well-liked and a tough campaigner. Even though she foolishly supported the second war in Iraq, she carries little baggage that could get her defeated. (But you know what happened to John Kerry so how would anyone be sure on that point. Politics is right below rape and murder on the ethics scale. It reminds me of what happened to Goldwater.)

We Americans should think twice before we vote repeatedly for candidates from the same family.

A corollary to this is we should think twice before we vote continually for candidates from wealthy families. We need a few more Harry Truman types.
John Edwards will like that last statement. Did you know his father was a mill worker?

John T. Jones, Ph.D. (tjbooks@hotmail.com, a retired VP of R&D for Lenox China, is author of detective & western novels, nonfiction (business, scientific, engineering, humor), poetry, etc. Former editor of Ceramic Industry Magazine. He is Executive Representative of IWS sellers of Tyler Hicks wealth-success books and kits. He also sells TopFlight flagpoles. He calls himself "Taylor Jones, the hack writer."

More info: http://www.tjbooks.com/
Business web site: http://www.tjbooks.com/
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=John_T_Jones,_Ph.D.

The CNN YouTube Debate

2007-08-18T02:02:00.001-04:00

So since I am addicted to the Internet I read all the hype about the big upcoming online debate. So the day of the big show I decided to log in on my laptop. Have to watch the online debate online right?! It starts up and didn't take me long to realize this was a format that worked.

I loved the pointedness of the questions that you never get in a typical debate. Direct questions from people directly effected by the topic they are asking a question about. It's a very powerful thing and it separates the man from the boys (and wherever Hillary fits into that old adage.) It forces the candidates to see a human who is suffering from something or feeling discriminated against in some way. It makes America human again. Some of the candidates still gave canned responses that they give everyday at every event. Others though I thought rose to the challenge and were a little more forthright. This is how I think each performed:

**Disclaimer--These are my opinions, not influencing by any big lobby money or promise of cabinet position. I have also decided to go from left to right in the interest of fairness. I have also used a rating system of 1-5 for your entertainment ratings are on overall performance not how I felt about thier particular statements.

Mike Gravel--4--This guy always shoots from the hip so he performed as usual, which is still far more candid than most of the other candidates. Although I don't see him as a serious candidate in this race I do like to have him around to spice things up. He constantly calls his competiters liars. His signature line is "follow the money" his take on what the other candidates will give you. His theory see who gave them the largest contributions and that should tell you how policy will be set. It's probably a very good guideline.

Christopher Dodd--1--This is one of the candidates who gave very canned responses. We didnt get to know anything about anything, just random campaign lines. Probably the reason he doesn't have any money and scores in single digits in polls. BORING!

John Edwards--3--There is just something about him I can't put my finger on it. He's southern I am southern that usually goes far with me. Most of the time I think he says all the right things but I just don't trust him. His answers in the debate last night gave me that same feeling.

Hillary Clinton--3--I had the same problem with Hillary last night that I usually do. I like her, I wouldn't even be disappointed if she was President but she seems to sit in the middle. I think people should be what they are she is a democrat and should start acting like one. I thought although she was not particularly comfortable it seemed with this format, she still did well I think.

Barack Obama--5--I thought Barack did the best overall he seemed comfortable with the format and answering the average joes questions. And each time asked a question he answered the question. In fact the last question asked each person to say something positive and something negative about the person to the left. He was the only person to fully answer the question with a negative. I think they should be trying more to distinguish themselves from each other. That is kind of the whole point of the debate. Without that it just comes down to who collects the most money. Sorry back to Barack he was definitely my winner of the night.

Bill Richardson--4--I thought Bill did OK. I think he often bring good ideas to the table and last night was no exception. I also thought he seemed very comfortable with the format.

Joe Biden--2--I would say second only to Dodd he was least comfortable with the format. He seemed outdated and even at one point called a video blogger crazy. Seems like he might need some anger management. The guy was a gun nut. I personally don't like guns and don't want anything to do with him but it is that guys America same as mine and he is entitled to ask his question and not be called names by a Presidential candidate.

Dennis Kucinich--4--Let me start by saying I really like this guy. He means well I just think he is somewhat naive. I like a lot of his ideas but they seem like a radical jump in most cases and that is not always good either. Kinda like Biden he can't represent enough of America to be a good President.

So anyway, that's my opinion. No Hate Speech Please. If you want to post your rating of each candidate do it on my blog at http://clisdown.blogspot.com/ Would love to hear more takes.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Elizabeth_Murphy

Debating Politics on Forums and Blogs Can Get Ugly

2007-08-13T19:40:00.000-04:00

Everyone has an opinion of course and many folks say that they are much the same as our rear ends. Indeed, in observation that comment seems to be quite evident. On the Internet when participating in online forums and Blogs you can easily find yourself debating politics and next thing you know they are calling you every name in the book?

If you decide to damn the torpedoes and go full speed ahead then realize that; Debating politics on Forums and Blogs can get ugly! One technique to use when things get out of hand is to make a statement such as;

"Dear Sir, just for the record please believe me when I do not approve of your attacks on my personal character, it shows me a real problematic side of your personality, which can hurt your social standing, I worry about you, so you must work on this. Please accept this expert advice without need for payment. I find it so very telling of your true intentions."

Then you have flipped the conversation and taken the moral high ground. You see the real problem is that the Radical Democrats are not a small group and I have traveled this nation and listened to them embolden each other with hate, it is a very bad thing for our nation.

Their selective reading and political correctness has turned into a badge of honor and tool of socialization, it is a hate-group. A hate for America, Capitalism and all we stand for in this great nation. The so-called Radical Democrat group is not small at all. Sometimes these groups simply make themselves look foolish and perhaps do not realize that they are actually hurting their own cause and proving you right.

So, with this knowledge you can win the debate of hate and discuss politics with a radical Democrat if you have too. I certainly hope this article is of interest and that is has propelled thought. The goal is simple; to help you in your quest to be the best in 2007. I thank you for reading my many articles on diverse subjects, which interest you.

"Lance Winslow" - If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Lance_Winslow

Election 2008 - Real Leadership versus Conventional Thinking

2007-08-08T20:45:00.000-04:00

Obama, Clinton and Black America

2007-08-07T15:15:00.000-04:00

Most of the folks I grew up with didn’t give a rat’s ass about politics. I remember my mother once saying that “John F. Kennedy tried to do a good job”. I don’t recall my stepfather endorsing or dissing any politician. Being to work on time is all the politics my stepfather is concerned with. The politics of getting your butt up and going to work!

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

I’m pretty sure neither of my parents has ever voted. My parents probably feel like many other Black Americans, simply put - what difference does it make?'' I’m not sure if it was intentional or not, but I’ve always felt that I’d be better off focusing on surviving the system rather than changing it. As I’ve matured, I’ve come to the conclusion that voting is an exercise, not in democracy, but an actual exercise; something you do to burn calories, to fit in, to say you did it so you can go back to eating more McDonald's burgers -especially Big Macs. I like Big Macs.

I’ll admit, I voted for Gore the Bore and for Kerry-Never-Had-A-Shot.

Kerry always said the wrong thing; Gore never had anything to say.

I felt like a hypocrite when I voted for Gore, because he was as interesting as a thick hunk of sawed off overcooked left over Thanksgiving turkey breast shoved between two thick pieces of four-week-old wheat bread. The only saving grace for Gore voters was that he was vice president to Clinton. Black folks loved Clinton. Black folks still love Clinton.

Ahh, the Clinton years….

Clinton played the sax, ate Big Macs like they were going out of style and he was a smooth talker. I read somewhere that Clinton really "gets in there" and connects with you. It takes skills to connect with people. Nowadays it’s hard connecting with people unless you have a nice Myspace page. Clinton was Myspace. Gore needed a Myspace page.

I’m not going to say much about George Bush. Seriously, what could I possibly say about Bush that hasn’t been said 219382929832 times or more? I will say this: It amazes me that so many Americans voted for Bush. Maybe it’s because they thought he was a good ole regular Texas guy. It's true Bush had the humungous cowboy buckle, the 10 gallon cowboy hat, the smirk only a daddy could love and then there’s his natural ability to ice pick the English language at every turn. Heck, Bush doesn’t waste time horsing around trying to pretty up his command of the English language, he has more WMD’s not to find.

Too many folks actually thought President Bush was a regular guy. George Bush isn’t a regular guy. He’s a privileged brat who's spent his whole life ducking responsibility and living off his daddy. Bush isn’t a maverick he’s a spoiled rich kid with an attitude. That’s right he’s a SRKWA. For the politically correct you can call him a SRKVS. A Spoiled Rich Kid With a Violent Streak. The difference between a Maverick and a Spoiled Rich Kid with a Violent Streak is wider than three football fields. I’m just sorry it took so long and so many kids dead in Iraq for folks to figure that out.

…which brings me to Obama.

Black folks haven’t made their minds up about Obama yet. Obama looks black, his name sounds Middle Eastern, he speaks eloquently, he writes exceedingly well, and doggone it he just might have a shot at getting the Democratic nomination. The only problem is Obama’s going up against a Clinton. Hillary isn’t Bill and she’s a woman, but she’s still a Clinton. The Clinton’s have this thing. I’ll call it the "Clinton Mojo". Will the "Clinton Mojo" make Hillary the first woman in American history with the nomination or will Obama become the first black man to do the same? Either way, it sets America up for a cliffhanger. Will America make history on the grounds of gender or race? This political race could galvanize the black community. Some of us who haven’t voted since Kennedy was in office might return to the polls and pull the lever, eehh, sign the ballot..errr…touch the screen for Barack Obama. I mean it’s going to be hard not giving a rat’s ass about politics during this election. If the possibility of a female or a black president doesn’t interest us enough to hit the polls what will it take, a Dead Kennedy?

Timothy Crawford is DC, MD and VA's Top Up and Coming Motivational Speaker. (http://www.timothycrawford.com)

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Timothy_Crawford

Politics and Internet - Debating Politics on Forums and Blogs Can Get Ugly

2007-08-01T23:59:00.000-04:00

"Lance Winslow" - If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Lance_Winslow

How To Prepare For A Fundraising Event

2007-07-28T16:34:00.001-04:00

Well, that time of the year is upon us once again. People from all walks of life start to band together in pursuit of one common goal, to get their favorite candidate elected come November. Yes, election season is just about to arrive, meaning that we can now start flooding our candidates with enough wads of money to ensure that their campaign will stay afloat all the way up to the day we vote in these midterm elections. One of the most important aspects of any respectable campaign is the need to raise enough money to pay for advertisements, mudslinging jabs at an opponent, and all of the supplies and wages that are ultimately necessary to keep any campaign running at full steam. A lack of funding can easily mean that a candidate who should have otherwise easily swept the votes at the poles could end up simply treading water in a feeble attempt to save his political life.

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

No campaign can run without the need for fundraising. The act of raising funds for your favorite candidate is totally necessary even if the that candidate has an amazing track record, supports all kinds of initiatives that the average person is rooting for, and has enough charisma to be able to put a smile on even the most aggressive opponents. Unfortunately, most of the highly qualified candidates who should have won find themselves coming in last place in a two man race simply because not enough time was devoted to fundraising efforts. Without the money which acts as the lifeblood for any successful political campaign, a candidate will never be able to take any office in this country. No how, no way.

So, if you are highly supportive of a candidate and you want to help him or her win this coming election, what can you do to help? Without a doubt, a fundraising event is the best way to go about helping your favorite candidate. Since money is involved, you will have no problem getting the potential political winner to come to your fundraising event, so you already have the keynote speaker all lined up. All you really have to do is figure out what type of fundraising event you want to host and how much you should charge your attendees. While there are many different choices for a great fundraising event, many people simply choose to host a fundraising dinner because they are an excellent way for attendees to meet the politician and socialize amongst themselves. A successful fundraising dinner should have a wide selection of meals and a price tag per person that is not astronomically high considering the location and the event. Even though people will show up no matter how much the dinner at your fundraising event costs, it may be a better idea to have a lower priced meal and encourage that all of those in attendance contribute a bit of extra money on the side.
http://www.articlesbase.com/marketing-articles/how-to-prepare-for-a-fundraising-event-57764.html

What is EverdayWeekender.com ? Well, it a fun blog that talks
about everything from cottage
life, games to weekend
food. Write a review and he'll help increase
your page rank!

Don't forget to check out his Top 10 Beers article.

Blog Marketing Miracles: How To Bring Sales To Your Business Through A Weblog

2007-07-28T16:33:00.002-04:00

An increasing number of business entities are actively using blogs as part of their marketing strategy. Why? Blogging is providing them the ability to connect with their audience thus encouraging goodwill which in turn helps bring sales.

Marketing through Blogging

It is nothing you have not heard for quite some time now. Blogging has caused quite a stir. It has, in fact, continued to proliferate rapidly. In early days, a blog is just a personal online diary. It is a place to publish one's thoughts, to collect and share things that one finds interesting. It is a venue to express one's rants, raves and musings. Today, professional and amateur journalists, political pundits, business honchos, entertainers, everybody seems to be blogging. Blogs are now being used to promote a business, run a political campaign, elicit publicity, among others.

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

A blog or weblog is an online diary of events arranged in reverse chronological order. The author of a blog is known as a blogger and writing or maintaining a blog is referred to as blogging. An individual entry or article is called a post and is available in the form of a blog page for the public to read. A blog may have a commentary box for readers to leave comments or opinions. These comments act as stimulus for further conversations. A business or corporate blog is simply a blog about a specific business. It is an effective medium for communicating with current and potential customers to share knowledge and expertise and foster relationships.

A company that employs a well-planned blogging strategy can spur significant market gains and sales earnings. Marketing is not just promoting a product or service. More importantly, it is about understanding the needs and wants of customers and developing products or services that satisfy these needs and wants effectively.

A blog enables a company to reach out to current and potential customers, in a more personal way. A blog builds connection and links between the company and its key audience which helps the company use this network over time to improve overall business. A business blog especially if regularly updated can inform readers about a company product or service, information, industry news, tips, tutorials or company developments. Links to industry-related stories can also be found in a blog. The way the targeted audience responds to these information or content is important to any company.

A blog is a good venue for customers to air issues, concerns and give comments. Through a blog, customers can give their own inputs. A company can hear directly from customers and understand what they desire to get from a product or service. Sometimes, the most well-intentioned product under perform because of lack of customer feedback. With blogging, a company can ask for feedbacks, albeit not the whole world, but at least the blogging community. Once a company has insights into what a large community thinks of the product or service, the company can then further improve the product or service to meet customer requirements. After all, customer satisfaction is of utmost importance.

A company who listens and responds to customer feedbacks conveys the message that there is somebody who listens behind an otherwise faceless company. Because a blog is conversational, it gives the company a human voice.

This assures customers that there is a "real" person who will take care of their needs. Customers will feel an affinity with the company. Regular visits brought about by regular updates thru fresh blog entries will familiarize the customers with the company and make them feel that they personally know the company. In due time, trust and loyalty is built and relationships fostered. As we all know people generally buy products or avail the services of people they know and trust. Rest assure that return visits to the blog, maybe for more information will transpire even after a purchase has been made. As they say, customer loyalty is the end-all-be-all of marketing.

A company that utilizes customer ideas, feedbacks, and opinions can further satisfy customer needs and wants and thus facilitates goodwill in the blogging community. It is standard practice in blogging to provide a link to a thought originator which is important because backlinks are a method for search engines to rank a blog. Search engine ranking is very important. Google and Yahoo are two of the most popular search engines.

A blog is typically written daily thus the blog post is new. The search engines index the new post more often than the regular website. The result is a high rank compared to a website. If a company has a product to promote and publishes blog posts about the product regularly, chances are one of the blog posts will be found by readers who may be looking for information about the product. Hopefully, after reading the blog post, the potential customer will visit the company website and make a purchase online or buy the product in a "brick and mortar" store. Marketers acknowledge that potential customers can be customers once they find the information they want about a product from the company's blog.

Another feature of a blog why search engines love it is a blog's high number of incoming links. Bloggers link to other blogs, articles and websites. The reading audience is exposed to a plethora of information. Bloggers, thus, create and retain a loyal following of readers. PageRanks for blogs are usually very strong too. As you and I know, high search engine ranking translates to high traffic and more sales leads.

Generating Sales from Blogging

The way to get the most from blogging is by building a strong brand. A brand is simply value for the customer. It is good customer service and products or services that will satisfy customer needs and wants. A blog can help a company demonstrates its expertise in its industry or field. Blogs do create buzz about a company's authority in its niche. A blog connects a company to its target audience and peers and starts a more dynamic conversation with the marketplace. A blog helps to show a company's value, its online brand on the web. Once a company has built a strong brand, sales will just follow.

Publishing a blog will not automatically generate higher sales. However, it is an efficient way to communicate with customers and prospects. A blog in itself is an excellent tool to support a business, provide value, build relationships and establish brand and image. The ultimate purpose of a blog is to brand, to communicate and to connect. Increased sales should only be viewed as a positive indirect effect of a successful blog.
http://www.articlesbase.com/communication-articles/blog-marketing-miracles-how-to-bring-sales-to-your-business-through-a-weblog-61278.html

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Fundraisers

2007-07-28T16:33:00.001-04:00

Fundraising is the term used for solicitation and gathering of monetary funds by requesting from individuals, businesses, charitable foundations or government agencies. This is the primary method used by non-profit organizations to maintain operations. Usually organizations use this method to raise money for religious causes, to fund independent research, to help veterans or injured military personnel, or to fund academic scholarship for students, human rights advocacy, or disaster relief projects.

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

One method of fundraising is to organize a special event. This is referred to as a fund drive or fund pledge. If the event is broadcast on television, it is usually called a telethon. An alternative source of the fund is an endowment, in which an individual or group pledges to support an organization on a yearly basis.

Some non-profit organizations employ the services of professional fundraisers. These professionals are either paid with non-monetary compensation or a percentage of the funds raised. The latter method of compensation is not preferred, in fact, it is forbidden by a regulatory board in the United States.

Although fundraising is usually the territory of non-profit organizations, it is also a method used by politicians during political campaigns. Campaign fundraising has been condemned for the corruption it often breeds after the candidate is elected. Nevertheless, campaigns cost money, and politicians who aren’t independently wealthy (and even those who are) view fundraising as a necessary evil in a bid for election.

Though fundraising usually entails solicitation, there are other organizations that sell products for profit for the purpose of donating the proceeds to support the organization. Churches usually have food fairs or cook-offs to raise funds for church activities. [http://www.i-fundraisers.com]Fundraisers provides detailed information on Candle Fundraisers, Candy Fundraisers, Cheerleading Fundraisers, Church Fundraisers and more. Fundraisers is affiliated with [http://www.z-Charity.com]Catholic Charities.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Max_Bellamy http://EzineArticles.com/?Everything-You-Ever-Wanted-To-Know-About-Fundraisers&id=275531

political campaign internet strategy - July 20, 2007

2007-07-20T16:10:00.000-04:00

Welcome to the July 20, 2007 edition of political campaign internet strategy.

Doug Ragan presents href="http://thenewpundit.com/2007/07/19/what-everyone-missed-in-the-immigration-debate/"
>What Everyone Missed in the Immigration Debate> posted at href="http://thenewpundit.com"
>I'm A Pundit Too>, saying, "Are we missing the big picture in the debate over immigration reform? I’m not just talking about the misguided politicians who tried to shove a ridiculous amnesty bill down our throats. Have we the people allowed what really happened to go over our heads?"

2008 election

E.P. Wintergreen presents href="http://www.absolutelyserious.com/2007/06/20/ron-paul-selects-tom-from-myspace-as-running-mate/"
>Ron Paul Selects Tom from MySpace as Running Mate> posted at href="http://www.absolutelyserious.com"
>Absolutely Serious>, saying, "Satire."

Steven Silvers presents href="http://www.stevensilvers.com/2007/07/wakeupwalmart-l.html"
>WakeUpWalMart defections might mean union-backed activist groups have done all they can do.> posted at href="http://www.stevensilvers.com/"
>Scatterbox at stevensilvers.com>, saying, "Departing leaders of a prominent political-style anti-Wal-Mart group perhaps think they’ll accomplish more through a well-coiffed multimillionaire populist presidential candidate."

DWSUWF presents href="http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/2007/07/curing-libertarian-political-impotence.html"
>Curing libertarian political impotence - a prescription for Electile Dysfunction> posted at href="http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/"
>Divided We Stand United We Fall>, saying, "Shaping an election outcome one time can be dismissed as a rogue political wave. Shaping two consecutive federal elections is a sea change that cannot be ignored. If the libertarian "divided government vote" is shown to swing the 2008 presidential election as it did the Congressional outcome in 2006, then libertarians will no longer be inchoate, their message no longer diffused, and their political clout no longer flaccid."

Jeremy Hitchcock presents href="http://wttf.org/2007/07/19/harry-potter-as-a-running-mate/"
>Harry Potter as a Running Mate> posted at href="http://wttf.org"
>WTTF: Welcome to the Future>, saying, "When politics and pop culture collide."

campaigns

Riversider presents href="http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/2007/06/richard-runs-for-ribble.html"
>Richard Runs for the Ribble> posted at href="http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/"
>Save The Ribble>, saying, "Our whole blog is an example of how to use the internet to advance a political cause - in this case defending the ecology of our local river from greedy developers and their friends on the council."

Riversider presents href="http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/2007/07/preston-vision-board-split-over-ribble.html"
>Preston Vision Board Split Over Ribble Barrage?> posted at href="http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/"
>Save The Ribble>, saying, "Save The Ribble has used blogging to highlight a plan by the local council to build a barrage across our river. Our strategy has brought great success, with over 74% of local people opposing the barrage in a recent newspaper poll, and now even members of the very Vision Board that originated the idea rushing to distance themselves from the proposals."

That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of
political campaign internet strategy
using our
title="Submit an entry to “political campaign internet strategy”"
href="http://blogcarnival.com/bc/submit_1880.html"
>carnival submission form.
Past posts and future hosts can be found on our
title="Blog Carnival index for “political campaign internet strategy”"
href="http://blogcarnival.com/bc/cprof_1880.html">
blog carnival index page.

Technorati tags:

political campaign internet strategy, blog carnival.

How Politicians are Being Taught to Engage Online

2007-07-17T14:13:00.000-04:00

The political world seems to be in a similar predicament to that of advertising. People have been bombarded with so much spin and deliberately ambiguous language that they have simply stopped listening to political messages. Less people now vote in the UK elections than they do for TV talent show contestants. People have simply lost interest in responding to political campaigns that appear little more than contests between marketing and PR departments.

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

But over the last year we have witnessed the impact of the connected internet world on politics. Political bloggers have been able to set the agenda, by pushing stories onto the traditional media, and we have recently seen an unprecedented 2 million votes being cast in a government e-petition. The time is ripe for the political world to start understanding the changing mindsets that the internet is creating, and to be aware of the possible repercussions of failing to engage with their voters online.

The Digital Dialogue study was launched last year to assess how the internet could be used to improve and promote communication between politicians and the public.

The study observed various government departments as they got to grips with blogs, forums and webchats. The aim is to assess how they could be incorporated into the political process and assist politicians to become more responsive and more in touch with public opinion.

The study is being carried out over two phases of six months. The results of the first phase were released last December. These were some of its key findings:

• Government departments found they were able to interact more closely with the public, rather than maintain the ‘stand-back and watch’ approach of traditional communication channels.

• Senior managers were keen to push the projects forward recognising that “the public has been a silent partner in the development, delivery and evaluation of policy and services for too long.”

• Learning how to most effectively utilise the new communication tools at their disposal would take time with the need to assess the budget requirements, time management and how to incorporate with the existing channels.

• The response of the public had been “enthusiasm tempered with a healthy scepticism.” People were keen to have the opportunity to be able to engage with policy makers, but had serious doubts as to how genuine the invitation for their input was or what influence their opinions would actually have.

• The government policy teams felt that the input of the public had been valuable and incisive. It will, however, take time to quantify what impact their input has had on policy decisions.

• Overall the exercise “benefited government to explore alternative routes, develop new skills and send out a statement about its commitment to better engagement and more transparent decision-making processes.”

The second phase of the study is now in operation and due to be completed by the end of spring. The study’s organisers will be aiming to further develop the practices explored in phase one, and expand them into using wikis, podcasting and audio-visual blogs.

It remains to be seen how seriously senior politicians would absorb the input of the general public. The complexity behind many government decisions would make it irresponsible to decide policy simply based on the public clamour.

The Digital Dialogue study does, however, demonstrate how more businesses and institutions are learning to get to grips with the new mindsets being created by the connected online world. One way communication is dated and dying. Two way engagement, transparency and responsiveness are on the rise. Now anybody in a democratic society with an internet connection can have their own soap box to say what they think. And now more politicians are learning that they have to be able to listen, as well as to dictate.

Matt Ambrose is a freelance writer from the UK. You can find out more about Matt on his website, http://thewritewords.me.uk or his blog, 'The Copywriter's Crucible' http://thewritewords.me.uk/blog

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Matt_Ambrose

Internet, Politics and Advocacy Campaign

2007-07-17T14:09:00.000-04:00

Online political advocacy campaign has transformed electoral politics. By lowering the financial barriers setting aside traditional grassroots tactics and community strategies to enter into the national political election debate, the Internet has energized activists and given rise to new voices and new forms of news and commentary. While the Internet has become an integral part of campaign infrastructure, it has also spawned the rise of bloggers and other alternative media, empowering thousands of new political actors and providing an important antidote to years of declining civic participation. In the last election, there was also a record number of small online donors to political campaigns, diluting but not eliminating the influence of big money in politics.

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

Unlike a highly centralized "one to many" traditional media platform namely grassroots tactics and community strategies - which limited political speech to those who could afford expensive television and newspaper ads - the Internet's decentralized "many to many" platform permits anyone to communicate with millions at little or no cost through free web hosting and blogging services and hundreds of online forums. According to a Pew/Internet report, 75 million Americans used the Internet during the 2004 election to get news, discuss issues and candidates, and participate through volunteering for or donating to campaigns, a significant increase from 2002. There is every reason to believe that these numbers will continue to grow dramatically.

The success of online political advocacy campaign the as a tool for political engagement brought scrutiny from Washington policymakers about whether and how federal campaign finance reform laws should be applied to the medium. Bloggers and free speech advocates fought against applying the complex regulations to the Internet activities of ordinary citizens, and they were successful in convincing the Federal Election Commission to build into the regulations substantial protections for individuals' online political activities.

The new campaign finance rules for the Internet leave the vast majority of uncompensated citizen-initiated election activities on the Internet free from any regulation. With few exceptions, you may develop websites, blog, e-mail campaign material, raise money, and collaborate with your friends on election related activities online without worrying about running afoul of the rules. Campaign finance obligations kick in only in very limited circumstances - primarily where payments are made to place advertisements and other communications on third party blogs and websites.

Developer/Link builder for optimumresponse.com, csgrassroots.com and supportthismessage.com. With this experience in grassroots lobbying and the combination of long-term strategic perspective and hands-on project management, Davis has been able to plan, implement and analyze grassroots campaigns of all types-educational and marketing, regulatory and legislative, local and national, high-volume and highly selective - incorporating a range of grassroots tactics.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Paul_Travis

End The Iraq War In One Month

2007-07-17T14:06:00.001-04:00

This plan is a workable if not probable way to rid the United States of a war that, though begun as an honorable, just endeavor, it is now apparent is not worth another drop of blood from any American. It has become clear the Iraqis are not willing to do what is necessary to save their country and it is not our place to do it for them... The War In Iraq Was Initially Begun With the Noblest of Intentions:

FREE Down Load - How To Make $5,000 A Month Blogging In 2 Hours or Less
Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

1. The destruction of weapons of mass destruction - of which we had evidence and intelligence as almost everyone, Republican and Democrat alike, agreed! (at the time)

2. The removal of a horrible and bloody dictator - Saddam Hussein, and the freeing of the Iraqi people.

3. Last and not least - The enforcement of United Nations resolutions and our own peace settlement requirements from the Gulf War.

What We Didn't Know!

1. The weapons of mass destruction had been moved,mostly to Syria just before the invasion.

2. The extent that Iran and Syria would become involved in destabilizing Iraq - especially Iran.

3. The FACT that the Iraqis CAN NOT be depended on to stand up for themselves and Freedom - too long under the yoke I guess.

4. The FACT that the Iraqis are NOT one people but a hodgepodge of Shiites, Sunnis, Seiks, Kurdish, and God knows what else who only want to kill each other and take over the power vacuum left by Saddam.

5. Muslims - of all varieties - just LOVE to kill themselves with bombs as long as they can kill enough innocent people and advance their cause. They believe they are going to heaven to be with a bunch of virgins, Satan must love that one.

After reviewing the above points I have come up with an answer - one that all the "factions" will understand... Here is a step by step plan to end the war. It may sound simple but I believe this is the only type solution our Muslim enemies and friends will understand.

THE PLAN

1. Announce to all parties that it is the intention of the United States to remove itself from Iraq within 30 days, conditioned upon a cease fire with the "enemy" factions and no interference with our withdrawal.

2. The Iraqi borders will be sealed with electronic mine stations under U.S. and Iraqi control - these stations we already have and are automatic and robotic in nature with remote sensors to avoid being tampered with or disarmed, the same type being used in Afghanistan.

3. The United States will extract oil in the amount to cover all expenses incurred in Iraq to date and all equipment left behind.

4. The United States will NEVER get involved in any regional, mid-eastern, Muslim Majority country again, this being just the first in a general U.S. realignment of it's GLOBAL commitments and withdrawal of assets from ALL Muslim Majority countries.

5. The United States will respect any future change of government democratically voted upon by the Iraqi people as long as the process is fair and not coerced.

6. The United States will use its satellite and other intelligence gathering means to monitor compliance of this agreement.

7. The United States will IMMEDIATELY and with no further warning use Tactical, air delivered Nuclear Weapons against ANY country or group that is found to breach the border containment or in any way attacks the country of Iraq without provocation.

8. The United States, after the recouping of all expenses incurred will phase out any further oil purchases from Iraq or any other Muslim Majority country over a five year national restructuring period as the United States reduces to ZERO any oil import deficit. The five year period is not negotiable and all imports will cease from ALL MUSLIM MAJORITY COUNTRIES within 60 months regardless.

It is hoped the Iraqi people and all Muslim counties and peoples will see this restructuring as a positive outcome and cease all violence and hostilities against U.S. concerns while we endeavor to withdraw from all Muslim Majority Countries in the next five years.

Visit us at http://www.southernparadiseportal.com/ and take a look at one of the Webs most Unique Information Portals with a Southern Style

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Steve_Ingram

FREE Online Fundraising Handbook

2007-07-10T18:00:00.000-04:00

Groundspring.org's Online Fundraising Handbook (complete document)

Chapter 1: Internet Strategies for Success

Chapter 2: Acquiring and Cultivating Donors Online

Chapter 3: Email Messaging Matters

Chapter 4: Catching Donors in Your Web (Site)

Chapter 5: Driving Traffic to Your Site

Chapter 6: Picking Your Partners and Promotions

Chapter 7: Organizing Online Advocacy Campaigns

Chapter 8: Prioritizing and Allocating Resources Online Fundraising

Appendix http://www.groundspring.org/learningcenter/groundspring-ofh-a.pdf

New Writers Needed

2007-07-04T02:54:00.000-04:00

We’re looking for more new writers for our Blogging Network. If you love writing or blogging, I’d like to chat with you.

A couple notes:
• Please send me a writing sample.
• Experience blogging isn’t required, I will train you.
• Some positions are paid, and some aren’t. Please specify in your email whether or not you’ll work for free.

Send an email to williamcoit@yahoo.com .

Political Campaign Strategy - Obama can't take blacks for granted

2007-07-01T19:46:00.000-04:00

Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

Obama can't take blacks for granted
Missed chance to tell what he'd do for African Americans

July 1, 2007
BY MARY MITCHELL Sun-Times Columnist
It's time for Sen. Barack Obama to define his message to African Americans if he hopes to tighten his grip on the black vote.
And trust me, he needs to tighten it.

When a powerful family like the Jacksons is split -- with some of them publicly throwing their support to Obama while other members of this political clan host fund-raisers and show up at events for Hillary Clinton -- Obama still has a lot of work to do.

And when a heavyweight like U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel vows to use his muscle to lift Clinton, and a beloved activist like actor Danny Glover uses his celebrity status to back Sen. John Edwards, a candidate who's running a distant third to the front-runners, there's trouble afoot.

Debate exposes glaring flaw
Last week's historic televised presidential debate, which brought the eight Democratic presidential candidates to Howard University's campus in Washington, D.C., exposed a glaring flaw in Obama's campaign.
Besides being a call to order of the black elite, Tavis Smiley's "All-American Presidential Forum" gave black America an opportunity to judge the two favored candidates up close on issues directly affecting their lives. And, for the first time, the panel of Democrats was questioned by a distinguished panel of national black journalists.

The historic moment played out against the backdrop of a startling U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the court had ruled hours earlier that race could not be used by school districts as a factor in determining where children attend public schools.

Obama should have latched on to this issue -- clearly one that strikes at the heart of the civil rights movement -- at the outset. He should have delivered a clear message that the Supreme Court ruling undermines the very intent of Brown vs. Board of Education, the crown jewel of the civil rights movement, which struck down segregation in America's schools.

He started out all right, pointing out that he was standing on the stage at Howard University, the place where a lawyer named "Thurgood Marshall and his team crafted their legal strategy" to successfully overturn school segregation.

"It it hadn't been for them, I would not be standing here today," Obama said. He went on to say that it was "their fundamental recognition that for us to achieve racial equality was not simply good for African Americans, but it was good for America as a whole, that we could not be what we might be as a nation unless we healed the brutal wounds of slavery and Jim Crow."

But the black people who came to hear the debate and those who were tuned in to PBS have already heard what is "good for America."

The question is what will the next president do to improve the quality of life for African Americans who are still affected by discrimination and racial bias in this country?

Hillary nailed it.

"For anyone to assert that race is not a problem in America is to deny the reality in front of our very eyes," she said. "You can look at the thousands of African Americans left behind by their government with Katrina. You can look at this decision today which turned the clock back on the promise of Brown vs. Board of Education. ... The march is not finished."

Clinton's critics will accuse her of pandering to a black crowd, but that's politics. When politicians speak before a predominantly Jewish crowd, they tailor their message to include solutions to the ongoing unrest in the Middle East. When politicians speak to labor, they tailor their message to appeal to unions. Every candidate who participated in Tavis' forum ought to have been prepared to give remarks specifically addressing the concerns of black people.

No reason to keep his distance
It is understandable that Obama doesn't want to be pigeonholed as the so-called black candidate, but he can't be so afraid of that label that he alienates the very base that could lift him in the primary election.
Frankly, his universalist strategy might work for white voters, but black voters have been taken for granted long enough. If Obama's handlers don't understand this, then he ought to be looking for some new strategists.

More important, Obama was in the perfect position to show that being pro-black doesn't mean someone has to be anti-white. I'm disappointed that he doesn't appear to know that real progress on the racial front ought to mean that political candidates who are embraced by white voters don't have to keep their distance from black ones.

Political Campaign - Campaign dollars can get dirty

2007-07-01T19:35:00.000-04:00

'08 Web Gurus Chase Money, Support Online Internet-Savvy Campaign Strategists Aim for Political 'Movement' Online

2007-06-27T10:52:00.000-04:00

political campaign internet strategy - June 22, 2007

2007-06-22T17:26:00.000-04:00

Welcome to the June 22, 2007 edition of political campaign internet strategy.

Jon Swift presents Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Ann Althouse* posted at Jon Swift, saying, "Let's subject Ann Althouse's blog to Freudian analysis, since it seems only fair after she put Hillary's new campaign video on the couch."

politics

J.C. Wilmore presents The legacy of "Macaca" is alive and well posted at The Richmond Democrat.

Tracee Sioux presents Shut Up John Mayer, Stop Waiting On the World to Change posted at So Sioux Me, saying, "An argument that voting down the gender lines rather than the party lines is a vote for all girls in America."

That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of
political campaign internet strategy using our carnival submission form.

Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.

Technorati tags:

political campaign internet strategy, blog carnival.

Political Campaign Internet Strategy

2007-06-15T16:42:00.000-04:00

YouTube Fuels -- and Foils -- Campaigns

2007-06-12T03:09:00.000-04:00

Thompson and $

2007-06-05T14:45:00.000-04:00

Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

Step By Step Guide For Raffle Fundraising Success!
Click Here!

Let's Raise Money. An Inside Look From Author's Two Decades Of Observing Outstanding Ideas And Practices Of America's Great Fundraising Volunteers
Click Here!

Secrets to successful Fundraising
Click Here!

By Michael van der Galien

The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article up about Fred Thompson. Christopher Cooper writes:

As a late entry into the crowded, expensive, presidential campaign, Fred Thompson’s first big test of viability will be his ability to raise money quickly.

A major part of the former Tennessee senator’s strategy is a heavy reliance on the Internet to get his message out and to raise funds. He is also trying to tap into the large number of well-heeled Republican financiers who have yet to commit to a 2008 hopeful, amid widespread disaffection among party loyalists with the current field.

Yet a late start and signs that Mr. Thompson may adopt an unconventional campaign style — limiting in-person appearances by making extensive use of blogging and online video — could crimp the television actor’s ability to raise money over the long haul. He has suggested he isn’t enamored of leaving his family for long stretches of campaign travel. The question is whether an Internet campaign will help him raise money quickly or leave big donors cold.

Signs suggest that he won’t have trouble in the early going. In a conference call Tuesday with more than 100 supporters, Mr. Thompson flogged each to raise a quick $46,000 by early this week to become “First Day Founders,” participants said. Each can presumably meet his or her goal by tapping 20 friends to make a maximum $2,300 individual donation. If they do, Mr. Thompson will start his campaign with a quick display of fund-raising prowess and about $5 million on hand.

In other words, Thompson will be off to a great start. The question, however, is whether he will be able to keep the momentum going. My guess is, that if he wants to solely, or even mostly, rely on the Internet, he will have a big problem further on in the campaign. In the end, campaigning is hard work. You have to go out there, you have to personally talk to people. They have to see you walking through their city / state; they have to shake your hand and look you in the eye.

The Internet is useful, but can never replace personal, real life, interaction.

Besides that, some major Tennessee fundraisers have already committed themselves to other candidates. Two examples:
- Chip Saltsman raised more than $100,000 for President Bush’s 2004 race. He is now raising money for Mike Huckabee
- Ted Welch raised more than $200,000 for President Bush’s last campaign. He is now raising money for Mitt Romney

Same goes for “Los Angeles investment banker and Bush Ranger” (big fundraiser) Brad Freeman. He too supports Romney.

About Thompson Freeman said: “I think he’ll find it tough sledding — a lot of ships have sailed.”

The good news, however, is that “numerous former Bush mega-fund-raisers remain uncommitted and could be tapped. In Florida, for example, Gov. Charlie Crist has a massive fund-raising apparatus and has notably avoided formally endorsing anyone. And former Gov. Jeb Bush has yet to back anyone.”

Besides that, there are still states to tap: the Republican candidates have thusfar mostly ignored Florida, Ohio, Illinois and Michigan. If Thompson focuses on those States, he might still be able to raise a lot of $.
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/2008-elections/13239/thompson-and/

YouTube and MySpace campaign for political positions

2007-05-24T19:39:00.000-04:00

Click here to download the Blog Profits Blueprint

The popular websites are branching out for '08, joining a growing online trend.
By Scott Martelle, Times Staff WriterMay 20, 2007

NEW YORK — The Internet battle over the presidential campaign is ratcheting up following announcements by social-networking site MySpace and video-sharing hub YouTube that they plan live webcasts of town hall meetings and candidate debates leading up to the primaries.Both said they seek to draw more voters into the political process, but the sites also are engaged in what is shaping up as an old-style media fight over online information consumers — and the ad revenues they bring."It's almost like the 'browser battle' — which site is the new e-mail? Which is the new standard for how people communicate?" said Eli Pariser, executive director of the liberal activist group MoveOn.org.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-web20may20,1,6120411.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo

How to bridge the political Web gap

2007-05-24T19:33:00.000-04:00

The Republican Party is traditionally disciplined, which isn't such an asset in chaotic cyberspace. That could be one reason Democrats far outpace Republicans when it comes to using the Internet to win support.

By Jose Antonio Vargas, Washington Post
Last update: May 22, 2007 – 10:26 PM

WASHINGTON - When David All, a former Republican congressional aide, launched a blog recently that he hopes will spur his fellow Republicans to bridge the digital divide, he did his best to sound upbeat. "Today our Revolution begins," he wrote. "Tomorrow we fight."
But implicit in his cheerleading was the acknowledgment that there is a widening gap between Democrats and Republicans on the Internet, and that his party will have to scramble to catch up. "For the most part Republicans are stuck in Internet circa 2000," he said in an interview.

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1200634.html

Internet technology uprooting campaign stump

2007-05-11T13:23:00.000-04:00

By Joyce Howard Price
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Mailing lists and fliers have become part of the campaign stone age. Envelope-stuffers have given way to tech-savvy bloggers, and volunteers are just as likely to make their own candidate videos as they are to canvass neighborhoods for voters. Welcome to the brave new world of campaigning, but don't get used to it. It can change at the click of a mouse, thanks to the ever-increasing use of online tools and other electronic gadgetry. "More and more, people are getting their news from a variety of outlets, including the Internet," said Stacie Paxton, press secretary for the Democratic National Committee. "And whether it's YouTube, blogs or Web sites, the Internet is transforming the way we do politics.

It's given the average person a much louder voice in the political process and created an opportunity to have more of a two-way conversation with voters," she said. "The two-way conversation is critical because it invests people in the process." In recent years, candidates have been turning more and more to Web technology -- blogging and other online communications platforms, such as instant messaging, e-mailing, text messaging and social networking -- to organize campaigns, build support and let the public know where they stand.
http://washingtontimes.com/specialreport/20070506-121718-9635r.htm

Power in 2008 campaign is at voters' fingertips

2007-05-11T13:19:00.000-04:00

by Etan Horowitz
The Orlando Sentinel (MCT)

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla.—Nearly a year out from Florida’s presidential primary, a handful of strangers are sitting in Marcy Haydt’s living room sipping red wine and listening to the voices booming through her computer’s speakers.

The voices belong to seven of the Democratic presidential candidates. And with every remark about troop surges, funding vetoes or suicide bombings, Haydt’s guests nod in agreement or roll their eyes in disbelief.

These “virtual town hall” guests are part of the “netroots”—an online breed of grass-roots activists who use the Internet to organize around issues and candidates.
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/news/article/38866/power-in-2008-campaign-is-at-voters-fingertips/

Internet and politics an uneasy fit

2007-05-11T13:13:00.000-04:00

By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff May 10, 2007

WASHINGTON -- In 2004, a Californian named Joseph Anthony became one of the first online activists to successfully promote the idea of a Barack Obama presidential bid in 2008. He created a page on a popular website, MySpace.com, devoted to Obama, and signed up 160,000 "friends," far more than any other candidate has attracted.

After Obama announced his candidacy earlier this year, however, his campaign decided Anthony's page was too valuable to leave to an outsider and got MySpace to hand over the Web address. After initially suggesting it would pay him for his work, Anthony said, the campaign withdrew the offer, and the dispute became so heated that Obama called him last week. The Illinois senator expressed appreciation for the work, Anthony said, but explained that he had to stand by the decision of his aides.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/10/internet_and_politics_an_uneasy_fit/

Attack ads go online and underground

2007-01-29T08:10:00.000-05:00

In a dim Culver City editing room, two video snippets of Republican presidential hopeful John McCain fill the monitors. In the first, he says same-sex marriage should be allowed. In the second, he says it should be illegal.

The clips are part of the payoff of a weeks-long hunt by filmmaker Robert Greenwald and his production team for damaging Internet video of the Arizona senator.

Greenwald, the producerdirector of scathing documentaries about Fox News and Wal-Mart, hopes to shatter McCain's image as a straight-talking maverick. But instead of creating a full-length film, he is assembling clips of McCain for a series of two-minute Web videos. The idea is to turn McCain's own words against him, spreading the videos through e-mail, blogs and websites.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-internet29jan29,0,4114166.story?coll=la-home-headlines

John Edward's The E-candidate

2007-01-23T01:25:00.000-05:00

John Edwards' 2008 Presidential ambitions weren't much of a secret. He's been campaigning one way or another since losing his Vice-Presidential bid as John Kerry's running mate in 2004. Yet his official announcement managed to turn heads. The surprise was not that he announced, but how he did it.

Edwards' ambitions were unveiled on a video broadcast on Google's (GOOG) YouTube and in an e-mail to supporters. In the clip, the former senator from North Carolina looked into the camera and delivered a pitch that appeared unedited, unscripted, and short on rhetoric. He plugged his Web site and asked supporters to get involved by sending text messages from their cell phones.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16753164/

Sen. Obama Uses Brightcove To Launch Presidential Campaign On Internet Video

2007-01-19T00:17:00.000-05:00

By Mitch Wagner
InformationWeek

Jan 17, 2007 04:32 PM

Barack Obama, a U.S. senator and potential 2008 presidential candidate, inked a deal recently to coordinate his Internet video campaign through Brightcove.

Obama posted a video Tuesday announcing he's forming an exploratory committee for the 2008 election. Brightcove will provide ongoing publication of campaign videos, creation of an Obama channel, and a syndication function that will allow bloggers and Web sites to publish campaign clips.

Brightcove looks, on the surface, similar to YouTube. But it's very different, in that YouTube is designed for consumers to share videos with each other, while Brightcove is designed to allow businesses to publish videos to the Web, says Adam Berrey, VP of marketing and strategy for the company.

Brightcove provides tools for organizing video assets, integrating them into video titles, programming them into lineups, and providing a branded, Flash-based player. Brightcove also provides tools for reporting, controlling who has access to the video, and monetiziation, allowing companies to put ads into videos. The campaign is paying for the service, says Berrey, although he declined to disclose specifics.

The deal is the latest indication that Internet video will be an important factor in the election, just as blogs were important in 2004 and 2006.

"You will see Internet video becoming a very important part of political campaigns. It's a way of having dialogue, it's a way of communicating with voters and having voters communicate back with the campaign and with each other," Berrey says.

Obama isn't the first 2008 candidate to launch an Internet video campaign. Former vice presidential candidate and senator John Edwards launched his campaign on YouTube last month and has his own YouTube channel, as did Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack.

Brightcove announced Tuesday that it received private financing from investors including Maverick Capital, Brookside Capital, AllianceBernstein, as well as two strategic investors, The New York Times Co. and Japanese online media and technology company Transcosmos.

Obama's campaign offices did not respond to requests for comment.

http://www.informationweek.com/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=196901594&subSection=E-Business

Portrait of the Blogger as a Young Candidate

2007-01-06T00:22:00.000-05:00

Mark Harris is like a lot of 22-year-olds. He designs websites. He surfs Facebook. He has a blog. But it's a pretty powerful blog. Last May in Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania, Harris came out of nowhere to beat a five-term Republican state House incumbent for the party nomination. The local paper called the defeat "stunning." But for Harris, it wasn't such a surprise. A lifelong geek and a technology consultant, he'd grown up believing in the grassroots potential of the web; in college he'd launched a site, savethegop.com, to advance young, true-blue conservatives in the Reagan mold.

Of course, everyone in politics—from netroots pioneers Howard Dean and Ned Lamont to Hillary Clinton—is trying to harness the power of the web. There's just one sticking point: It hasn't paid off at the ballot box. The Dean presidential campaign crashed and burned despite the "DeanSpace" innovation; liberal blogosphere darling Lamont also flamed out in the general election. But as the first politician hatched from the web, Harris suggests a different future. While other politicians were plotting their journey to the web, Harris was doing the reverse, becoming a candidate in meatspace almost as an afterthought to his online advocacy.

Still, in the face of blogosphere hyperventilation, Harris takes a pragmatic view of cyberpolitics: "What's often misunderstood is that people view it as a whole new world," he says. "But really it's just a tool." Getting campaign videos on YouTube? Hiring a designer to craft a slick website? Nice extras, he says, but not a big deal for most run-of-the-mill campaigns. With only two staffers, Harris' campaign took a utilitarian approach to the web. Volunteers communicated online via instant messenger and Facebook, the social networking site. The team also used free, web-based calendars and spreadsheets, as well as a custom database, to plot door-knocking and keep track of potential supporters. "It's not as sexy as Howard Dean raising tons of money online," Harris says, "but these are behind-the-scenes things that revolutionize how smaller campaigns are run." The cost of the online effort: about $525 per month.

Such DIY empowerment comes at a time when old-school campaigners are fumbling awkwardly into cyberspace. In August, former Virginia governor and then-presidential hopeful Mark Warner materialized in avatar form for an online schmooze hosted by Second Life, the popular virtual community. Warner's alter ego, in pixelated khakis and a crisp blue blazer, flew to the stage in video-game fashion and fielded questions as a green-skinned alien looked on. "It's a little different than the small kaffeeklatsch in Iowa," Warner admits. But for the seasoned technologist (Warner cofounded Nextel before launching his political career), the Second Life event was more than an excuse to play digital house—it was a way to reach a generation of voters where they live. "There are a lot of people getting political information and forming communities online," Warner says. "They don't listen to your 30-second TV ad."

The Second Life foray came on the advice of an Internet strategy team headed up by Jerome Armstrong of the political blog MyDD. Armstrong, who worked on Howard Dean's online campaign, thinks social networks such as Second Life, MySpace, and Facebook will be key players in the 2008 campaign. "What we learned with the Dean campaign is that the Internet is vital in connecting with supporters," he says. And not just that: MyDD also originated the Google-bombing strategy that pushed negative news stories high up in the search results for various 2006 Republican candidates.

Everywhere, net-politics gimmicks abound. Texas spoofist and gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman has more than 35,000 MySpace friends. Political vérité clips on YouTube, such as Montana Republican senator Conrad Burns snoozing through a hearing, were instant campaign-trail hits last fall. Bloggers are becoming the go-to political consultants: In addition to Dean and Warner, Armstrong has worked with New Jersey governor Jon Corzine and Ohio senator-elect Sherrod Brown; he says he's "not committed to anyone" for '08. Senator Hillary Clinton has procured bloggers Jesse Berney and Salon's Peter Daou. Lamont hired no fewer than four bloggers in his campaign against Joe Lieberman.

Going digital has its risks, though. During his Second Life appearance, Warner needed a staffer at the keyboard to maneuver his avatar; even so, he notes, at one point "I dematerialized into a gray blob and rematerialized as a naked woman."

Harris, too, has felt the Net's sting. During the campaign against Democrat Matt Smith, his detractors dug up an old blog post in which the young conservative questioned whether Americans should look to the government for Social Security. "It should be a message to bloggers who have an interest in being in politics to watch what they write," Harris says. His bid for the Pennsylvania House won the endorsement of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, but he was trounced in November by 17 points. "No matter how good an Internet operation is," Harris admits, "it's never going to replace a good candidate."
http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2007/01/portrait_of_the_blogger_as.html

John Edwards In Reno, Nevada And The Importance Of Blogging In Political Campaigns

2006-12-31T01:30:00.000-05:00

John Edwards In Reno, Nevada And The Importance Of Blogging In Political Campaigns

It looks like a couple of thousand Reno citizens attended tonight’s John Edwards’ town hall at the Grand Sierra. His plane was a little late so our operative, Welder, did not get as much Q & A time with Edwards as originally discussed, however, they were still able to meet with Edwards “mano y mano” for about six minutes and ask a few questions right after the town hall and before local media got their hands on him.

Edwards is already the top choice among Iowa Democrats likely to attend the 2008 presidential caucuses with 36% of the vote in a poll released on December 14th, 2006, beating Obama (13%) and Clinton (16%) handily. And he is expected to do well in South Carolina because of its proximity to his home state of North Carolina and the fact that he won the primary there in 2004. With a strong presence in two of the four caucus states, Edwards is doing his best to build a strong presence in Nevada as well. He has visited Nevada six times in the last year, clearly a sign of the state’s rising importance in the upcoming 2008 presidential caucus.

http://www.renodiscontent.com/2006/12/30/john-edwards-in-reno-nevada-and-the-importance-of-blogging-in-political-campaigns/

Year In Review: E-Campaigns and Political Technology

2006-12-28T23:18:00.000-05:00

Dec 28, 2006 -- 12:50 PM CST
Joe Bodell

In 2004, technology and its users made a mark on the presidential race - Howard Dean innovated in his campaign's use of the Internet for fundraising and grassroots outreach, and several storylines emerged from the blogosphere and made their way into the mainstream media. This trend has not abated in 2006 - indeed, the Internet has had a deeper effect on the midterm elections than ever before.

Perhaps the most widely-known tech-effect has been the advent of YouTube in political campaigning. Far beyond videos of George W. Bush saying something nonsensical or a Virginia Senator getting caught on video using a derogatory name, YouTube has allowed candidates, political parties, and activists to create and distribute commercials, analysis, and even political humor to the widest audience available - the entire Internet. Google's acquisition of YouTube earlier this year for a mind-boggling $1.65 billion calls YouTube's future into some question, but 2006 has witnessed the birth of not just citizen-journalism, but true citizen-produced media.
Joe Bodell :: Year In Review: E-Campaigns and Political Technology
Advances in technology also had a somewhat indirect impact on the U.S. Senate race in Connecticut. The liberal blog community is widely credited with calling attention to, supporting, and ultimately driving the victory of Ned Lamont's quixotic race against entrenched incumbent Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary. The Lamont campaign used several innovative technology solutions, such as their Friends and Family initiative, to help drive a strong, coordinated grassroots operation. Although the Lamont effort was ultimately unsuccessful in the general election, it proved that strong buzz, smart marketing, and meticulous attention to technology at one's fingertips can force even 18-year incumbents to sit up and pay attention.

2006 saw Dean's 50-State Strategy, in which the DNC focused on supporting candidates and state party organizations across the country instead of focusing solely on battleground states, put into action. This reorganization meant not just funding and staff contributions - it meant access to voter file technology, which allowed campaigns and parties to more accurately target swing voters for outreach.

Looking forward from here, the effect of these technological changes is already evident. Two Democratic candidates, Tom Vilsack and John Edwards, have various means of connecting to the campaign through the Internet - Vilsack through various social networking sites, Edwards through what appears to be an intensive blogging effort. What else is coming for e-campaigns and political technology in the next election cycle? You'll just have to wait for the next piece.

The Most Important Component of The Modern Political Campaign Strategy

2006-12-20T18:18:00.000-05:00

We are often asked, What is the most important component of the modern political campaign?

Many will say, having an ”elect able” candidate. Many will answer successful fundraising. Many will answer GOTV or get out the vote. The reasons for these choices may be obvious.

However, we believe that the most important aspect of the modern campaign is ”targeting.” You see, any candidate can be ”elect able,” if you are able to target those who will support that specific candidate. And, every fundraising effort will be more successful if you are able to ”target” those who have been identified as supporters… even more importantly, those who have contributed to similar political campaigns in the past. As for the GOTV effort, no campaign can be successful, if you do not ”target” your support and get that support out to the polls on Election Day.

Not only are the results of targeting important, targeting is a key ingredient to successful resource management. Consider, for example, involvement in a campaign where voter interest may be low and fundraising difficult. If the general population of the district is 100,000, there are likely only 55-65,000 registered voters. This is the first level of targeting – if you don’t secure a list of registered voters in your district, your resources will be wasted on the many thousands of individuals who are not even eligible to vote.

Targeting levels go much deeper than registration alone. If the election is a partisan one, do you really think that you can get a registered Republican to support a Democrat candidate? Resources should not be wasted on converting voters – target the registered voters of your party affiliation. What about voting history? Do you think that you can interest a voter who has not voted in the last 5 years to get out and vote for you or your candidate? Not very likely, is it? Do you expect greater support from men or women? Is there a racial component to your campaign? These aspects are all part of the makeup of the voters that you must reach out to in order to secure their support and get them to the polls on Election Day. Targeting will enable you to reduce the 100,000 residents down to the more meaningful and financially manageable number – the target group that you need to get out to the polls in order to win your election.

As for managing resources, you do the math. If you spend $30,000 on 100,000 voters, you can spend only .30 on each contact (not even a single stamp). If you identify (by analyzing voter history associated with your voter file) that the likely turnout in your election will be 38% of the 60,000 registered voters (22,800), you will be able to spend $2.60 on each of the 11,500 targeted voters that you need to support you for victory on Election Day.

What is the most important component of the modern political campaign? Targeting!

The best way for an organization to target voters is to secure a qualified voter file. Many states provide a list of registered voters through the Secretary of States office and many State Parties can provide similar information. Voter lists can also be acquired from some voter data and software vendors. In addition to registration information, a qualified list will include change of address cleansing, phone numbers, voting history, ethnicity, and census information such as income, education levels, home ownership, etc.

These lists must be secured in order to determine who your campaign should contact and which voters you need to get out to vote.

Art Murray http://www.completecampaigns.com/article.asp?articleid=53

The Internet’s Role in Political Campaigns

2006-12-16T14:20:00.000-05:00

We recently completed a study that assesses the utilization of the Internet as a tool for 2006 political campaigns. The study, a follow-up of the 2002 version, examined how 2006 senatorial candidates used the Web to publicize information about their campaign platforms, personal backgrounds, and volunteer opportunities. We looked at a number of Web campaign tools and made comparisons based on party affiliations, importance of particular races, and whether candidates were incumbents or challengers.
http://www.bivingsreport.com/2006/the-internets-role-in-political-campaigns/

Bloggers proliferate on campaign payrolls

2006-12-16T14:13:00.000-05:00

Bloggers paid by campaigns were a rarity two years ago -- so rare that their work and their ethics, whether for Republicans or Democrats, became fodder for controversy. Bloggers on the campaign dime (and off) have been even more controversial this year, but that is at least in part because there are so many more of them.

With increasing frequency, candidates across the country are paying bloggers to write, develop Web sites, connect with energetic allies on the Internet, respond to online critics, and advise their employers about how to behave in the blogosphere. Others are paid to do more traditional campaign work like communications consulting and opposition research.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15498843/

FEC Rules Exempt Blogs From Internet Political Limits

2006-12-10T20:30:00.000-05:00

In a unanimous vote yesterday, the Federal Election Commission left unregulated almost all political activity on the Internet except for paid political advertisements. Campaigns buying such ads will have to use money raised under the limits of current federal campaign law.

Perhaps most important, the commission effectively granted media exemptions to bloggers and other activists using the Web to allow them to praise and criticize politicians, just as newspapers can, without fear of federal interference.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/27/AR2006032701474.html

CAMPAIGN 2006 Internet rewrites political playbook

2006-12-05T13:21:00.000-05:00

Dan Wood describes himself as being "politically inactive, other than voting'' until 2004. That's the year Howard Dean, the Democratic former governor of Vermont, ran for president and revolutionized a Web-based campaign strategy that raised money and organized volunteers.

"I guess I got sucked in,'' said Wood, a 41-year-old computer programmer from Alameda.

That may be an understatement. Today, he runs his own political blog, "A Progressive Alamedan,'' served as a delegate to this year's state Democratic convention and keeps politically informed through a dizzying number of Web sites and e-mails.

He is one of millions of voters across the nation touched by the expansion of tech-savvy political campaigns that increasingly are relying on computers and cell phones to engage voters. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/19/TECHCAMPAIGN.TMP

Campaign '08 Preview: Podcasting Politicians

2006-07-23T23:50:00.000-04:00

In 2004 it was blogging. What will be the next techie breakthrough for getting in touch with voters? Strategists won't let it surprise them.

By Mark Z. Barabak, Times Staff WriterJuly 21, 2006

Donnie Fowler has seen the future of American politics. Pull out your cellphone and you can see it as well. As people increasingly tailor their leisure time to suit their lifestyles — through blogs, MySpace, iPods, video on demand — politicians and their promoters are facing the same problem as Hollywood and the makers of toothpaste: How do you sell your product to an increasingly fragmented audience?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-fragment21jul21,0,3796661.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

Writing Basics for Local Campaign Websites

2006-07-23T02:36:00.000-04:00

As the fastest-growing resource in politics, the Internet provides a cost-effective method to reach supporters and potential supporters. However, writing for your local campaign website is different than writing for print. Simply copying your local campaign print material onto your website limits the potential of online campaigning. Click to continue

http://ezinearticles.com/?Writing-Basics-for-Local-Campaign-Websites&id=120915

From the Internet to the White House

2006-07-06T12:57:00.000-04:00

Political Veterans Work to Organize Bipartisan 2008 Ticket With Online Balloting

PLASMA FLAT SCREEN TELEVISIONS

2006-07-06T11:43:00.000-04:00

CHECK OUT http://www.williamcoit.com for deals on plasma flat screen televisions.

Luxury Watches, Rings, and Accessories http://mensluxurywatches.blogspot.com/

Plasma Flat Screen Televisions http://webuysellplasmatv.blogspot.com/

Electronic Gifts, Ipods, PS3,XBOX 360, Cameras, Cell Phones, and more http://ebayamazonbestbuy.blogspot.com/

Internet, Polarized Politics Create an Opening for a Third Party

2005-06-07T19:25:00.000-04:00

The Internet is a leveling force. It diffuses power and empowers new competitors to challenge old arrangements.Elite newspapers and magazines, for instance, dominate their markets partly because it costs so much to build conventional hard-copy competitors. But the Internet has allowed thousands of new voices to find audiences at little cost for a panoramic assortment of news and opinions in Web logs and online magazines.

Some of the same effect is already evident in politics. Once it took years of heavy spending on direct mail and other recruitment methods to build a national membership organization; MoveOn.org, the online liberal advocacy group, acquired half a million names — with virtually no investment — just months after posting an Internet petition opposing President Clinton's impeachment in 1998. MoveOn, and groups like it on the left and right, chisel at the power of the major political parties by providing an alternative source of campaign funds and volunteers. But otherwise, the two parties that have defined American political life since the 1850s have been largely immune from the centrifugal current of the Internet era.

Joe Trippi, a principal architect of Howard Dean's breakthrough Internet strategy in the 2004 Democratic presidential campaign, is one of many analysts who believe that may soon change. The Internet, he says, could ignite a serious third-party presidential bid in 2008. "This is a very disruptive technology," says Trippi. "And it is going to be very destabilizing to the political establishment of both parties."

The Internet could allow an independent candidate to more easily identify an audience and financial base, just as it has allowed blogs like the liberal Daily Kos or conservative InstaPundit to find a community of like-minded readers. More precisely, the Internet has allowed readers to find those blogs. And because the audience mostly finds the product, rather than the other way around, the cost of entering the market is radically reduced.Trippi believes an independent presidential candidate who struck a chord could organize support through the Internet just as inexpensively. "Somebody could come along and raise $200 million and have 600,000 people on the streets working for them without any party structure in the blink of an eye," he says.It might not be quite that simple. But the two parties are pursuing strategies that create an opening in the center of the electorate, even as the Internet makes it easier for a new competitor to fill it.

Influenced partly by Ross Perot's strong showing in the 1992 presidential race, Clinton argued that capturing the middle was the key to electoral success. After an initial lurch left, Clinton doggedly pursued centrist voters by breaking from liberal orthodoxy on welfare, trade, a balanced budget and other issues. President Bush, by contrast, has been much more willing to risk alienating voters in the center to advance ideas that energize his base. Exit polls showed that Bush lost moderate and independent voters in November's election. But he won reelection largely by vastly increasing turnout among Republicans and conservatives.More and more Democrats see their future in Bush's model, not Clinton's.

Trippi says Clinton's conviction that elections are won mostly by converting swing voters "is obsolete." Democrats, Trippi argues, are more likely to win back the White House by increasing turnout among their own supporters with a pointedly partisan message, as Bush did. It's not entirely surprising for Trippi, who's identified with the party's left, to reach such a conclusion. But even centrist voices like Simon Rosenberg, founder of the New Democrat Network, are talking in similar terms. Democratic centrists believe that "if you win independents and moderates, you win the presidential election," Rosenberg says. But with Bush's success in 2004, he says, "that has been rejected for all time."This argument among Democrats is far from settled. But a tilt in Trippi's direction is evident in the surprisingly unified Democratic congressional opposition to Bush's priorities.

The result is that both parties are offering policies and messages aimed primarily at their core supporters.Even strategists such as Trippi who support that approach acknowledge it could have a cost. By ceding the center, it might leave both parties vulnerable to a new force."We are now moving toward a very dangerous place for both parties," he says. "It is becoming much more possible for an independent or third party to emerge because they are leaving so much space in the middle."The hurdles for an independent presidential candidate remain formidable. Even one that attracted a competitive share of the popular vote might have trouble winning many electoral college votes; the strongest candidate could still face the syndrome of finishing second almost everywhere, trailing Republicans in the red states and Democrats in the blue. To have any chance, an independent would need to nearly run the table in battleground states — like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — that don't tilt decisively to either side.

Yet if the two parties continue on their current trajectories, the backdrop for the 2008 election could be massive federal budget deficits, gridlock on problems like controlling healthcare costs, furious fights over ethics and poisonous clashes over social issues and Supreme Court appointments. A lackluster economy that's squeezing the middle-class seems a reasonable possibility too.In such an environment, imagine the options available to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) if he doesn't win the 2008 Republican nomination, and former Democratic Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, now that he's dropped his flirtation with running for mayor of New York. If the two Vietnam veterans joined for an all-maverick independent ticket, they might inspire a gold rush of online support — and make the two national parties the latest example of the Internet's ability to threaten seemingly impregnable institutions.

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Political Campaigns Are Missing the Boat on Paid Search

2005-03-04T19:56:00.000-05:00

Both presidential campaigns are neglecting a huge opportunity to win voters. No, not a secret new debate bot or an innovative canvassing technology. I am talking about encouraging millions of prospective voters to come directly to the campaign websites through paid ads on search engines like Google (GOOG) and Yahoo (YHOO). Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have caught on to this marketing tool. But if one of them does, it could help clinch the election.

Call it the Google factor. Any junior marketing executive can tell you that one of the best and cheapest ways to connect with people looking for information online is paid search, in which you simply buy ads on a search engine. You can purchase a phrase like "Iraq quagmire" or "tax relief" from Google or another search company, and every time someone searches for that term, an advertising link will pop up at the top or along the side of the results page. The idea is that you target your message to people who are already looking for exactly what you're trying to sell them. This should work as well in politics as it does in business.

As with most of the Web innovations that have been applied to this year's election, paid search was first used by the Howard Dean campaign. "For every dollar we invested in Google ads, we generated returns that were orders of magnitude higher," says Clay Johnson, the lead programmer for the Dean campaign, who now helps run online strategy consultancy Blue State Digital. "I think online search is one of the undiscovered gems from the Dean campaign." The Deaniacs also placed ads on news and other content websites through Google's AdSense program, which displays ads on participating sites when a paid search term appears in the text. "We found we were getting traffic from news sites that also mentioned our opponents," Johnson reports. (Some of those ads were even pulled by Google because Dean's website contained negative information about those opponents, which raises some interesting regulatory and censorship issues if Google continues to pull such political ads.) Johnson thinks there's still time for the presidential campaigns to take advantage of paid search, and that for as little as $50,000 they could quickly launch a comprehensive search marketing campaign. Click Below to continue reading.
http://www.business2.com/b2/web/articles/0,17863,703981,00.html

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Email Newsletters During Last Week of Presidential Campaign

2005-02-10T16:09:00.000-05:00

Once again, the candidate who scored highest on usability guidelines won the U.S. presidential election. (I did a similar comparison when Clinton defeated Dole; he also followed more usability guidelines on his website during the later parts of that campaign.)

Although I don't actually claim that Bush won purely because of usability, I do think that wise use of email newsletters contributed to his victory. I analyzed the email newsletters sent out by both candidates in the week prior to the election. The predominant theme of each message was distributed as follows:

Give Money
8% Bush
57% Kerry

Get Out the Vote
38% Bush
29% Kerry

Issues/Events
54% Bush
14% Kerry

(I didn't count the message each candidate sent on or just before Election Day asking recipients for their vote.)

As this analysis shows, Kerry supporters were bombarded by repeated fundraising requests, to the extent that many of them probably tuned out the newsletter in the final critical days. Although the Internet is great for collecting money from the masses, there is a limit. Kerry exceeded it.

Bush sent more messages than Kerry asking supporters to get other voters to go to the polls and vote for him. This is a more appropriate use of the newsletter medium because it connects emotionally with subscribers. Being treated as an active participant in the civics process is more motivating than being regarded as an open wallet.

Bush also repeatedly sent out information that promoted himself and attacked his opponent in relation to current events (such as Osama bin Laden's video). This is a good strategy: offering newsworthy content makes subscribers more likely to continue opening newsletters. Up-to-the-minute arguments are a classic use of email and gave Bush's supporters fodder in their get-out-the-vote efforts, thus reinforcing the newsletter's value in getting voters to the polls.
A post-election newsletter from the Bush campaign estimated that their subscribers contacted 15 million other voters in person or by phone in the 72 hours before the polls closed.

In summary, Kerry used his newsletter to collect money during the final week. Bush used his to increase voter turnout, and he won because he was better at turning out his base. Understanding the strength of email newsletters thus directly contributed to Bush's victory, so his Internet team can claim some credit for the outcome.

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Blogs Pump Bucks Into Campaigns

2005-01-28T20:59:00.000-05:00

Not even his own staff would call Democratic congressional candidate Ben Chandler a nethead.

"He uses the Internet almost exclusively for fantasy baseball," said campaign spokesman Jason Sauer, who added that he wasn't sure whether, until recently, Chandler even knew what a blog was.

But that was before Chandler's campaign turned a $2,000 investment in blog advertising into over $80,000 in donations in only two weeks. Chandler -- who won a seat in the House of Representatives Tuesday evening -- definitely knows what a blog is now, Sauer said. "It's that thing that brings in money."

Political blog advertising represents the latest twist on the Internet fund-raising strategy pioneered by the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean, which raised millions of grass-roots dollars from its Blog for America website. Chandler's campaign is the first of several that have started advertising on political blogs as a cost-effective way to reach a national audience. Click Below to Continue.

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,62325,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1
0,1283,62325,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

The internet and elections

2005-01-26T19:48:00.000-05:00

The internet may have been an important factor in the recent US presidential elections but it was e-mail - and not political websites - that made the biggest impact.

That was the message from two leading internet gurus, who addressed MPs and political webloggers in Westminster on Tuesday.

American internet pioneer Phil Noble cited Howard Dean - who missed out on the Democratic nomination but raised millions in funds on the back of an e-mail campaign - as an example of what was possible.

Mr Dean may have fallen at the final hurdle - brought low by the "rancid politics" of the old media, according to Mr Noble - but the internet had transformed him from a no-hoper to a frontrunner for the Democratic nomination.

Mr Noble said advocacy sites, such as MoveOn, which started as a campaign against the impeachment of Bill Clinton but became a rallying point for anti war campaigners and Dean supporters, were changing the political landscape.

And the internet meant politics could no longer be purely local.

He cited the Guardian newspaper's ill-fated Operation Clark County, which sought to persuade US voters to back the Kerry campaign but led to an upswing in Bush support, as an example of political campaigns crossing international borders.

The internet was also a major fundraising force, helping John Kerry to rescue his campaign and raise a grand total of $220m. Click Below To Continue

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4077105.stm

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Republicans Wield Internet Powerfully

2005-01-22T04:06:00.000-05:00

Think the Republicans got lost somewhere in cyberspace? Think again. The GOP's underreported e-campaign may lack the media razzle-dazzle of the Deaniac phenomenon, but it promises to leave no less a mark on the annals of political campaign history.

It all comes down to a difference in style and strategy. For Howard Dean, the Internet was a way for the people to take back the Democratic Party. His e-campaign had all the creative fervor and chaos of Woodstock on servers, but it failed in the end to maintain its candidate's early momentum. For George W. Bush, the Internet is a potent tactical weapon and his aides intend to wield it with party discipline and order to November 2 and beyond.

That means online organizing of in-house "block parties" rather than relying on the all-familiar Meetup.com, a privately run Web site heavily favored by Democratic presidential campaigns. "We are building up one Bush organization," a key Republican strategist says in describing why the party shuns Internet events it doesn't orchestrate itself. Click Below to Continue Reading.

http://www.thetyee.ca/CitizenToolkit/current/Republicans+Wield+Internet+Powerfully.htm

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

The Fifth Network

2005-01-21T20:17:00.000-05:00

Politicians need to appeal to the Internet audience, which is bigger than any audience CBS, NBC, ABC and FOX can deliver.

The key to successful online campaigning is to acknowledge some basic truths about the Internet. The first is that broadband use is growing at an extraordinary rate and this high-speed experience is offering a more engaging experience to end-users. Broadband allows the Internet user to become informed, entertained and feel like part of the system -- not used by it.

Other Internet truths are:

The Internet audience is bigger than what any of the four TV networks can deliver on a day-to-day basis.
Fundraising and messaging on the Internet is becoming mainstream to politicians and advocacy groups, as witnessed by the fundraising success of Howard Dean and John Kerry.
The Internet provides unparalleled access to narrowly focused vertical markets, such as politics.
Creative streaming techniques and formats will continue to improve and enhance user awareness -- and financial contribution potential.
Budgets for rich media ad formats, such as streaming video and audio, are increasing incrementally.
Advertisers are learning to think of the Internet as "The Fifth Network" -- politicians must, too. Click Below To Continue Reading.

http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/3411.asp

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

30,000,000+ Legally Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

About 8 million voters read blogs in 2004

2005-01-20T18:39:00.000-05:00

So, there's all this talk about blogs among the chattering classes of journalists and politicos. But, are real Americans actually reading and writing blogs?

Turns out, they are. According to the most-excellent Pew project on Internet & American Life, 27% of internet users read blogs. A third of blog readers read political blogs during the 2004 campaign.

That 9% readership of political blogs translates to 10.8 million people. If you assume that, say, 80% of those folks actually voted... well, that's 8.64 million voters --- almost 8% of the electorate. No hard data, but the Pew folks say "Kerry voters were a bit more likely than Bush voters to be political blog readers."

Just less than half of blog readers have also posted a comment on a blog (12% of all net users, 14.4 million) and about 7% of all internet users (8 million) have actually created their own blog.

One final astonishing thought: 62% of internet users say they don't know what "blog" means. In other words, of the 38% who do know the meaning, roughly 7 of 10 read blogs. Now, I don't expect that percentage to hold up, but as the number of folks who know "blog" approaches the number who know "google" expect actual readership to skyrocket. Even if blogs top out at 50% readership, that'll be 60 million Americans getting their news from, well, somewhere besides the local paper and the local TV airheads.

Dig into the Pew study here.

Click The Vote In the age of Internet politics, the Web can make or break a candidate

2005-01-14T19:57:00.000-05:00

Chris Lilik is a one-man political action committee. Powered by a high-speed computer he assembled himself, the 24-year-old law student at Pittsburgh's Duquesne University is working madly to build grassroots support for the Senate candidacy of Representative Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.). Lilik regularly blasts e-mails to 500 conservative allies on his mailing list, mobilizing them to unseat four-term moderate Arlen Specter for the Republican nomination.

The law student and his friends have led more than 800 people to sign up online for the latest rage in political get-togethers, known as Meetups. That's more Meetup volunteers than any non-Presidential candidate in the entire country. "It's all because of that law student in Pittsburgh," says Toomey's press secretary, Joe Sterns. "We had almost nothing to do with it."

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_13/b3876125.htm

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Campaigns Online: The Profound Impact of the Internet, Blogs, and E-Technologies in Presidential Political Campaigning

2005-01-13T12:51:00.000-05:00

January 2004
Report examines the phenomenon of online campaigning and studies the trends evolving in the 2004 Presidential election.
http://www.campaignsonline.org/reports/online.pdf

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

What Happened to Bush and Kerry's Campaign Blogs

2005-01-13T12:42:00.000-05:00

Now that the election is history it seems that Bush's Blog is gone, but links you to Ed Gillespie Chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC) Blog located on gop.com. Kerry's blog is still there as an archive, with the last post being his concession speech.

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Massachusetts Republicans Launch Web Strike

2005-01-13T01:04:00.000-05:00

"Massachusetts Republicans have launched a pre-emptive strike against Democratic Attorney General Tom Reilly by snapping up online Internet addresses that would have been obvious picks for him if he decides to run for governor in 2006," Reuters reports.Among the sites taken: reillyforgovernor.com, tomreillyforgovernor.com, reillyforgovernor2006.com and reillyforgovernor06.com.

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

Internet Campaign Ads Are Working

2005-01-13T00:40:00.000-05:00

Biz Report says political ads on the Internet are working:
"Internet consultants outside the presidential campaigns said candidates have slowly but steadily become sold on the ads. More have realized that while millions of people are online every day, relatively few visit the campaign sites or sign up for their e-mails. The ads not only reach those people but are also particularly effective at reaching them at work, experts said. The ads have become cheaper and more sophisticated -- incorporating video and animation -- and can be targeted to ever more narrow segments of the public."

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

Instantly STOP Spam Now!
http://tinyurl.com/6kkxr

What Are Blogs and How Can Your Political Campaign Internet Strategy Use It?

2005-01-11T00:15:00.000-05:00

The second tool of a successful political Internet strategy is a blog http://www.blogger.com/

According to a new study by the Pew Foundation, blog creation and readership grew sharply in the United States last year, primarily as a result of the hotly contested presidential race. Some of the highlights of the study include:

Twenty-seven percent of online adults in the United States said in November 2004 they read blogs, compared with 17 percent in a February 2004 survey.
7% of the 120 million U.S. adults who use the internet say they have created a
blog or web-based diary. That represents more than 8 million people.
Blog creators are more likely to be:
Men: 57% are male
Young: 48% are under age 30
Broadband users: 70% have broadband at home
Internet veterans: 82% have been online for six years or more
Relatively well off financially: 42% live in households earning over $50,000
Well educated: 39% have college or graduate degrees

http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_blogging_data.pdf

What’s A Blog?

A blog is a frequent, chronological publication of personal thoughts and Web links. Blogs are diary-like in appearance but run in reverse chronological order, with the most recent post first. Similar to a diary or journal, posts are made on a regular basis and accompanied by the date and time. Editorial control, including the subject matter, length and tone of each posting, is at the discretion of the blogger. Most posts contain links to other websites or blogs that are of interest or relevance to the blogger. The success or visibility of a blog rests on the extent to which the blogger links and engages with other bloggers.

How can your political campaign use a Blog?

The energy for a campaign blog must come from the top - the candidate - but the blog should equally be the voice of the whole campaign and the people working for it. If politicians run a blog, they must write their entries themselves. If they do not, people will know, and they will not be interested. Blogs are interesting to the extent that their author is actively involved.

Some uses of Blogs include:

http://tinyurl.com/3n3pj

1. Communications. Blogs are a great way for a voter to keep track of a
candidate on a daily basis, and to let that candidate, his staff, other supporters, or potential supporters know exactly how they feel on various issues.

2. Run a real weblog. Embrace the key feature of the Web, linking -- which means you must link to all articles about your candidate, not just favorable ones. You should also link to articles about your opponents. When deciding what to link to ask yourself this question: "Would an informed person want to consider this information or point of view?" If the answer is yes, link to it. This way you attract informed people and can help shape their opinion, even if they don't support your candidate. That's how you're going to win the election, btw, by converting the other guys' voters. You don't get anywhere by preaching only to the choir (but you have to do that too).

3. Get a pied piper. A pied piper is someone who your advocates can learn from by example. Don't delay. Get an experienced blogger with a large community to write your main weblog. You don't have time to learn. Enlist as many of these bloggers as you can. Any of them could turn out to be the killer app for the other guy.

4. Publish your schedule. Make sure your candidate's schedule is on your website and it's current. Also, keep track of where your competition is, and consider publishing that as well.Your interest (as with linking) should be aligned with an informed electorate. The more people know, the more likely they'll vote for your guy. Candidates should compete to be the authoritative source of information about the campaign.

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, TV Shows & Music http://tinyurl.com/622zl

BECOME A SUPPORTING MEMBER OF WILLIAMCOIT.BLOGSPOT.COM

2005-01-08T21:04:00.000-05:00

WilliamCoit.Blogspot.com needs your support more than ever. Reader contributions are still our most important source of income. If you like williamcoit.blogspot.com and want to help us keep this site on the web, please consider assisting us by becoming a supporting subscriber with a contribution of $20 or more.

As thanks for your membership contribution you'll receive INSIDE POLITICAL ZONE, William’s private weekly newsletter, containing special content and features not available on the website. How much should you contribute? Your call entirely. A basic supporting membership is only $20 per year, and contributions both large and small are welcome. If you're an occasional reader, consider the basic membership of $20. If you're a daily reader, why not give $50? That's less than a buck a week. If you're a real fan, feel free to give more via check or credit card.

Donation options are listed at right. (Note: Donors are automatically subscribed to INSIDE POLITICAL ZONE. If you DO NOT want to receive William’s newsletter, please send an email to williamcoit@yahoo.com with UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT field.)

How To Successfully Use MeetUp In Your Political Campaign?

2005-01-07T16:55:00.000-05:00

In the next several postings, I will go into detail explaining the six successful tools of a Political Campaign Internet Strategy. The first one is Meet-up http://www.meetup.com/ . Meet-ups exploded unto the scene in the 2004 elections with Howard Dean’s presidential campaign signing agreements with MeetUp to post links and advertisements to his site.

Dorie Clark, a press secretary for the Dean campaign, summed up the benefits.

"MeetUp gets people invested in the campaign. They're not just passive supporters; they're active participants," she said. "The more connected people feel to a Dean community, the more likely they will volunteer, and the less likely they will be to change allegiance to another candidate."

What Is MeetUp?

MeetUp.com helps people find the others who share their interest or cause, and form lasting, influential, local community groups that regularly meet face-to-face. MeetUp groups help people:

find the others
get involved locally
learn, teach, and share things
make friends and have fun
rise up, stand up, unite, and make a difference
be a part of something bigger—both locally and globally

How does Meet-Up work?

Meetup Groups usually get together at least once a month. These real-world, face-to-face gatherings are called 'Meetups.' Meetups are usually informal, and are open to anyone who's curious—bring friends if you like. Most Meetups happen at public places like restaurants, cafés, or public parks, though sometimes they take place in private homes or offices.

How can your political campaign use Meet-up?

1. Direct volunteer tasks. Writing letters to voters or urging officeholders to endorse your candidate. Your campaign supplies names, paper, envelopes and stamps.

2. Volunteer signups. Meetups are great places for signing up volunteers who can organize house events, door-to-door canvassing, small donations, and sign distribution.

3. Increase Awareness. Local political Web sites could direct viewers to their upcoming local Meetups, which would increase attendance and thereby increase support for your candidate.

4. Information-seeking. Learn more about the candidate and to see who else is interested in him. Also to learn what else they could do to get involved locally. Meetup hosts should provide information about the candidate's background, and make campaign materials readily available.

Meetup hosting is a relatively small investment with a potentially large return if properly used in a political campaign. I expect to see more campaigns in the future using this tool to organize their supporters and to gain grass-roots support for their candidate.

William Coit can be reached at williamcoit@yahoo.com

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, TV Shows & Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

Plasma Flat Screen Televisions http://webuysellplasmatv.blogspot.com/

Electronic Gifts, Ipods, PS3,XBOX 360, Cameras, Cell Phones, and more http://ebayamazonbestbuy.blogspot.com/

Why Political Campaign's Internet Strategy Failed?

2005-01-05T19:20:00.000-05:00

Traditional political campaigns rely on advertising mediums that attempt to capture the vast majority of voters irrespective to political ideology. Huge sums of money are poured into television, radio, billboards, and direct mailings to motivate individuals to vote.

In 2004, the Internet played a major role in changing the political paradigm as candidates for the Presidency, U.S. Congress, and the U.S.Senate used the Internet to reach prospective voters. The majority of these campaigns failed miserably. They lacked a clearly defined Internet strategy that seamlessly integrated into the overall campaign objectives.

The big problem according to Mathew Gross, the Director of Internet Communications for Howard Dean's failed presidential campaign, said it’s not a technological one: it's a problem of attitude. “What the Dean campaign was most effective at was letting go of control. It won't help you to build a website that enables people to canvass if you don't trust people to go out and represent your candidate in their own words.”

A successful Political Campaign Internet strategy can be accomplished with the following SIX tools:

1. Meetup - A web tool for forming social groups. Meetup can be used to organize thousands of volunteers who go door-to-door, write personal letters to likely voters, host meetings, register voters, and distribute flyers.

2. Blogs - A frequent, chronological publication of personal thoughts and Web links.

3. Blog Advertising – Strategically bought advertising catering to left or right-leaning blogs.

4. Opt-In Email Newsletter - Opt-in email marketing is used to gain explicit permission from your subscribers to send them your email newsletter. It’s critically important to build a subscriber list which can be used for a multitude of purposes.

5. On-line Donations – Electronic transfers of campaign funds via a computer network.

6. Email Video Advertising – Thirty-second ads attacking a candidate or promoting positive imagery sent by email.

The challenge for political campaigns in the future is to embrace the Internet and the tools of this medium like political candidates of the past. Here are some examples of successful campaigns over the Internet.

In 1998, Jesse Ventura's innovative use of the Internet garnered him an additional two to four percent of the vote, which was also his margin of victory.
In 2002, John McCain raised $2.2 million in a few weeks, but by the end of the campaign they had signed up more than 100,000 e-mail subscribers who received campaign updates, requests for volunteer help and money.
In 2004, Howard Dean raised a record $50.3 million with most of it coming from small contributions of $100 or less over the Internet.
In 2004, Ben Chandler won a special election in Kentucky for the House of Representatives when he turned a $2,000 investment in blog advertising into over $80,000 in donations in only two weeks.

For comments, you can reach William Coit at williamcoit@yahoo.com

FREE Demo Video To Add Your VOICE or AUDIO To Your Website
http://tinyurl.com/6zzbc

Create Hundreds of Killer HEADLINES In 17 seconds Flat
http://tinyurl.com/4o5ks

30,000,000+ Downloading MP3s, Movies, Games, Software, Music
http://tinyurl.com/622zl

Plasma Flat Screen Televisions http://webuysellplasmatv.blogspot.com/

Electronic Gifts, Ipods, PS3,XBOX 360, Cameras, Cell Phones, and more http://ebayamazonbestbuy.blogspot.com/