techPresident - Ron Paul - Comments

Yep

Fred Gooltz — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:32:59 -0400

I agree. Though, as somebody who is kinda partly responsible for JRE's ubiquitous presence on socnets, I do think that Dodd's use of the Citizen Whip VoIP tool was new and good.

Dodd leveraged the platform of his campaign to raise the profile of his signature governing policy beliefs in a way that suited the issue.

He enabled his supporters as well as a much wider universe of issue activists to advocate WITH him.

I'd like to see more of that from electeds and candidates.

Record for the utterance

the53rdcalypso — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:17:20 -0400

Record for the utterance "panties" on that one: http://www.236.com/news/2008/06/06/quick_quiz_dana_rohrabacher_6985.php

A chunk

Joshua Levy — Wed, 28 May 2008 15:26:14 -0400

You're right - it wasn't "much" of Paul's money, it was more of a "chunk" of his money. As for reporting on Paul's vote totals, there are other good sites that focus on those things. We're more concerned with the effect of the web on politics, and since Paul raised the vast majority of his money online -- which made him very popular on this site for many months -- we felt this item was appropriate.

Ron Paul

marksstc — Wed, 28 May 2008 13:31:52 -0400

You wrote: "Much of the money Ron Paul raised for his campaign via record-breaking money bombs is going to his family members..."

Interesting definition of "much" -- in this case "much" equals less than one-half of one percent of the money Paul raised. Shocking!

How about reporting on Paul's 24% vote total in Idaho and the six delegates he picked up there. You know -- actual news.

nader

paulcanning — Wed, 14 May 2008 17:47:33 -0400

Ralph Nader is an ignoramus - that's a technical term.

He's never heard of Jody Williams [http://tinyurl.com/4we3ns]

www.paulcanning.me.uk
web stuff and other ramblings
~~~~~~~~~~~

Sounds like you are advocating for a neutral observer

KansasNate — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:30:47 -0400

Thankfully, the Democrats already have that option. ActBlue's numbers will always be up-to-date and correct and any fundraising claim made by a campaign using ActBlue is 100% trustworthy.

Sure, I'm biased, but boasting about fundraising number always irks me when it comes from a non-transparent campaign. I'm sure that 99% of campaigns are absolutely truthful, but if you want to brag (nothing wrong with it!) use a neutral party to verify your numbers.

Since the thread was originally about Clinton and her numbers, I might as well say that I know her campaign to be professionally managed and I don't think they would ever exaggerate.

---
Disclosure: I work for ActBlue as their Technology Director.

It might be worthwhile to check out HRC's 2/5 claims

AlchemyToday — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:02:43 -0400

On the night of Super Tuesday and in the day or two after, the Clinton camp made very similar claims of fundraising success. Leading up to 2/5, they were in much the same trouble fiscally as they are now. Did their claims on 2/5 match the results when they filed their 1st quarter numbers? If not, that's good reason to be skeptical here.

I'd bet it wouldn't be too hard to have called a bunch of Hillary supporters (volunteers who hadn't donated, donors who hadn't maxed out) a week before the PA primary and ask for pledges should she prove her mettle in PA. Mass calls/e-mails to those people after the nets call it for her, funneling all donations through the Internet, and, there you go, unprecedented online fundraising. She could also trigger all of her auto-credit-card donations to go through when needed to maximize her perceived success. Also counts as Internet bucks.

You're right that it's all about perceived success; Hillary's camp did a good job feigning desperation ahead of the PA results (everyone on TV had bought into the line that she was broke; prominent donors were feeding them info that it'd dry up without a win there) to lead into her 'turning the tide' story.

The 60,000 donors was true as of noon

Xavier Lopez-Ayala — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:43:36 -0400

I just wanted to offer some corrections to your piece. If you respond to my email, I can get you copies of the original email.

Hillary was on track to raise $10 million within 24 hours. The press release that went out said that by 12pm on the 23rd (yesterday), the campaign had received 60,000 donations w/ 50,000 new donors.

The email you received from Terry was a mass email that started to go out yesterday afternoon, so it is very likely that you got the email after that mark was reached, and with information that was only specific to the number of donors by noon on Wednesday. I'm not sure if the mass email from Terry made specific that this was as of noon yesterday, but here's the update that came from the campaign:

Clinton Campaign on Track to Raise $10 Million Online in the 24 Hrs Since Winning PA Primary

Historic fundraising pace represents campaign’s best day ever

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is on track to raise $10 million online in the 24 hours since she was declared the winner of the Pennsylvania primary last night.

“Senator Clinton’s game-changing victory last night has turned the tide and resulted in an historic outpouring of grassroots support,” said Campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe. “Just like Hillary, our supporters have met every challenge and come through each time. Thanks to them, we will have the resources needed to compete and win as we move ahead to the next contests.”

In addition, the campaign has received support from over 60,000 donors through noon today, of whom approximately 50,000 are new donors.

###

The Red Truck

Austin Walne — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:23:48 -0400

On the Fred Thompson campaign, late in the game we were raising less money than we needed to make a substantial TV buy in Iowa and then South Carolina. The decision was made to deploy the eCampaign's idea of the "Red Truck" flash animation. Todd Zeigler discussed this previously.

http://www.bivingsreport.com/2008/does-good-design-matter-an-anecdote-fr...

Once live, our online fundraising was fully transparent. The flash piece automatically pulled the fundraising numbers directly from our database in almost real time. The only reason it wasn't fully real time was because of our hosting situation. We ran the main site on a 3 server cluster; and we ran into an issue with the animation pulling numbers from different servers. Thus, if you sat and hit the refresh button constantly you might get slightly different numbers for a few seconds.

Bob Barr's Open Data Gambit

wyatthull — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:53:38 -0400

Former Congressman Bob Barr's recent entry into the Libertarian nomination race and live donation feed (http://www.barr08.com/) provide Dan B. and others with a shiny new data set to graph, analyze, and discuss. The transparency revolution marches onward! It should be fascinating to track his exploratory committee's donor engagement from Day 1, with the LP Convention in Denver less than two months away.

Re: Ron Paul Promo

littlebier8 — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:04:04 -0400

I liked it anyway...

Ron Paul

marksstc — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:58:03 -0400

It's easy to be sarcastically dismissive of Ron Paul; sarcasm though, is a poor substitute for debate. Make no mistake -- Ron Paul is not delusional. He admits he's not going to win the GOP nomination. But he's campaigning to continue educating people about the need for constitutional government, individual liberty, sound money, and a sane foreign policy. If you actually listened to his recent video message, he says the campaign is about ideas, not about him.

Must be difficult for most people to accept a politician who's not simply in it for personal power.

Mark Smith

not to mention

Xavier Lopez-Ayala — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:47:07 -0500

the same video posted by PatriotsMaxim
Views: 256,190

Jack and Hill

Xavier Lopez-Ayala — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:45:22 -0500

This is the actual version released by the Clinton campaign (it's the same video - but this is the one it promoted): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mOa3sXjqE4

Views: 1,450,946, which you can add to the almost 500,000 of the one you posted to get near 2M.

Re: Obama Bests Clinton Reaching Last Minute Voters Online

Xavier Lopez-Ayala — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:43:37 -0500

See my post (with pictures) here: http://cerebralpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/03/re-obama-bests-clinton-reac...
Although I did enjoy your post, I wanted to point out that it is based on signing up to the site. When you visit the Hillary Clinton website, it automatically detects your state of residence and adjusts the front-page content to be state specific (something which could not be replicated using your test).
If you are in Ohio the front-page content is specific to this state, including the "Hillary TV" videos that are preloaded (in Ohio, the most recent ad "Partner," is prominently featured, as are ads featuring Gov. Ted Strickland and former Sen. John Glenn).
Obama"s campaign website, conversely, loads into one of those pesky and annoying sign-up screen. When I click "skip" it does not redirect me to an Ohio-specific site, instead to a more general site.
I think that Obama wins with last-minute voters online ONLY if they sign-up as supporters (or at least for information). Hillary"s campaign website makes information specific to voters in the state of Ohio more accessible and readily available than the Obama campaign website, which is the best way I believe to convert undecided and last-minute voters.