Volunteering for a campaign

If you have been following my blog, one of the themes I have been writing about is how fund raising and money has become more and more important, particularly with PAC's being involved, and the general disconnect between the average American voter and these large, fund raising machines that campaigns have become.

 

However, there remains one area of campaigns where people can still make a difference, and people can get involved and have a real impact; volunteering.

I've put together a how to list below on how to get involved and what duties may be in store for you should you pursue the volunteer path.

A few notes before we begin.  Campaigns are always eager to find people willing to work hard, for a cause they believe in, and most importantly, for free.  Think of volunteering as an unpaid internship (in most cases).  Also, as you are reading this how to list, think of what you would want to do and how your skills would fit the list.  Finally, be prepared to smart small and know how many hours you are willing to volunteer per week.  As in most jobs, you will most likely start at the bottom, but opportunities exist to move up fast, particularly for those that can spend more time on the trail.

In general terms, most people volunteer for one of the following reasons:

1. They are related to the candidate
2. They are friends of the candidate
3. They get some personal benefit out of it
4. It is social, and gets them out of their houses
5. They are interested in policy
6. They want to meet like-minded people
7. They are looking for a job
8. They are party loyalists, and will work for the nominee
9. They are looking for recognition

You can very easily sign up for local, state level, or national campaigns by simply contacting the office.  Almost all campaigns have a website and volunteer section, along with how to contact information and phone numbers.

Once you begin, what are some of the duties they may have you perform:

1. Register to vote - still the single most important act anyone can make to a campaign/election is your vote.  Register before you volunteer.
2. Phone banks - be prepared to make upwards of 200 phone calls per day lobbying for your candidate, registering people to vote, and gathering data.
3. Canvassing - knocking on doors to lobby for your candidate, registering people to vote, and gathering data.
4. Fundraising - mostly by phone, but some could be in person at fund raisers.
5. Social media - spreading the message.
6. Research - every publication, web page and voting records to gather background information on your candidate, and opponent.
7. Recruiting others - not just your relatives and friends, but any and all.
8. Distribute anywhere from one hundred to hundreds of thousands of pieces of literature.

 

 Campaigns are looking for high energy, highly motivated individuals.  In addition to doing important work, you will meet some incredible individuals.  I encourage each of you to volunteer at least once!

Does our money matter: Wikipedia Update

As you may recall, I recently made some changes to the presidential election campaign fund checkoff  Wikipedia page on the diminishing value of personal contributions to campaigns.  Below, I am including my contribution once again for your reference:

The first crack in the public financing system began in 1999-2000, when then candidate,
George W Bush opted out of public financing in the primaries. That crack was shattered
when Barrack Obama opted out of both primary and general election public financing in
2008.

Why are these candidates opting out? Simply because there is more money to be made (and matched) by opting out. With the current limits/caps in public financing, it simply makes no sense to apply for matching funds when you can raise much, much more on their own.

In the Citizens United case, the Supreme Court allowed unions, corporations, and nonprofit organizations to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of, or opposition to a candidate. Groups were thus freed to pretty much say whatever they want, whenever they want about candidates, and to do so with unlimited sums of money bankrolling their expenditures.

Thus, if you can raise unlimited funds, why bother with public financing

Much to my disappointment, there were no additions/edits to my Wikipedia post from a few weeks ago. 

You can, however, hear this topic come up again and again as the election cycle heats up, and candidates now put out press releases detailing how much money each has respectively raised
each month and quarter.  It's almost a requirement to boast of your fund raising prowess.

Some of the lesser candidates who are not having success raising private (and public) funds are forced to watch in horror as their opponents raise millions of dollars.  In most instances, candidates will drop out due to lack of funds.

Until this issue is addressed again by the courts (or Congress), it's a dash for cash, and the general public's funds don't count for much any longer.

 

 



Book sales figures disputed

While reading one of my favorite presidential campaign blogs, Politico, I stumbled upon a post that led to half a laugh and half a sigh.

If you have been following this story, Ted Cruz, the Republican Senator from Texas who is running for President, has a new book out.

Cruz's book, "A Time for Truth", was released on June 30th.  As most of us are aware, the NY Times posts book bestsellers lists, and this list is considered very prestigious for authors, as it often leads to more books being sold and more exposure.

Cruz, however, is not listed on the NY Times bestseller list, despite racking up impressive sales figures during the books first week since release.

So what happened here?  Dylan Byers of Politico wrote an interesting article on this controversy titled ""Amazon: 'No evidence' of bulk sales for Ted Cruz book".

In this post, Byers provides some compelling evidence backing up Cruz and his argument that the book indeed qualifies to be included in the NY Times best seller list. 

Cruz's book sold 11,854 copies in its first week -- more than 18 of the 20 titles on the Times best-seller list for the week ending July 4, according to Nielsen bookscan. On raw numbers, Cruz's book would have finished at #3 on the Times' influential list of hardcover nonfiction. However, the Times informed HarperCollins last week that Cruz's book would not be on the list.

Both Amazon and Harper Collins (publishers) both back up Cruz and agree the book qualifies, so what's the issue?

The NY Times claims that there has been suspicious activity regarding the book sales, notably that some have been purchased through what is called bulk sales.  In essence, this means that large quantities of the book were purchased by a single (or multiple parties), with the express intent to drive up sales/volume figures, and presumably up the bestseller list.

Cruz, as a fierce conservation Republican is accusing the NY Times of having a political bias.  Many Republicans accuse the NY Times of having a liberal slant, thus, being anti-Republican.

While I am not a huge Ted Cruz fan, it seems to me that the facts are on his side here, and we will have to wait and see if the NY Times revisits their position here.

The lesson in politics, as always, there is always an agenda to pursue.  Cruz, wisely, has been pushing the story in an attempt to shine light on what He perceives as the NY Times agenda and bias.  So far, the Times has been quiet. 

Stay tuned.......................

Does Bernie Sanders have a chance?

Despite the craziness and large field of candidates in the upcoming presidential election, only one candidate was a sure thing.  Hillary Clinton would surely win the Democratic nomination and go on to face the Republican candidate in the general election.

Yes, there are other candidates in the Democratic field, but none with Her name recognition, war chest, and popularity of being the Former First Lady, Senator from New York, and Secretary of State.  Clinton, after all, has been pointing to this election as perhaps Her last chance to win the Presidency most assumed She would ascend to.

That is, until Bernie Sanders emerged.



Who is Bernie Sanders?  Sanders is a 2-term Senator for Vermont, where He served in the House for 16 years prior to his Senate service.  Sanders is listed as a Democrat, but labels himself as a democratic socialist.

Why is Bernie Sanders message resonating with voters, at least in this early election cycle?   Sanders main message has been around a topic that is increasingly striking a chord with voters, that of income inequality.  This has been a topic Sanders had been pushing for some time, so it's not a new issue for him (as it is for others, including Clinton).  Sanders simply believes the gap between the highest and lowest earners in America is too large and growing.  He seeks relief through taxes and other income related programs.

Sanders pushed hard against the bank bailout in 2008-2009, and has generally been a friend of the shrinking middle class.  Sanders has also announced (at least for now), that He will not be seeking any campaign money from PAC's.  These are  positions much different than his competitors, from both parties, thus, they are unique positions.

So, back to the original topic, does Sanders have a chance? 

It will be a long shot for sure, but with portions of America growing increasingly concerned with the issues listed above, and feelings that Clinton is more of an establishment candidate, there is a narrow path for Sanders. 

It certainly makes life more interesting when He is around, whether you agree with him or not!

The Donald Trump impact.

No matter if you are a political junkie or not, you can't escape the daily news about Donald Trump during the past few weeks. 

Most of the discussions surrounding Trump prior to these recent controversies revolved around whether people viewed him as a real candidate, or was this just him looking for publicity.



Well, whichever side you fall on that spectrum, you can't deny He is getting plenty of publicity.  Now, however, one must ask, is this more than He bargained for.

While I don't doubt that Trump doesn't care that his political rivals have, almost in unison, come out against his recent comments regarding Mexico and immigrants.

However, I am not sure He is happy about the rash of business interests that have been impacted.  From Univision, Macy's, and now ESPN and Nascar, this list of companies distancing themselves from Trump continues to grow.

While Trump continues to downplay the overall impact of these recent hits to his bottom line, one has to wonder if He believed his words would have this deep an impact.

Where does Trump go from here?  Does He continue rattling cages and throwing darts, or does He sit back a bit and speak a bit more tame.

Whether you like him or not, it's hard not to watch.

Too many candidates?

Lindsay Graham, current Senator of South Carolina and one of twenty (yes, up to 20) Presidential candidates, was recently asked about the high number of candidates.

Graham had a humorous take; "I do bar mitzvahs, birthday parties, weddings, funerals -- call me, I'll come," Graham told a crowd in New Hampshire last month. He said voters should ignore Hillary Clinton and "look to the 35 people running for president on the Republican side. And just shoot up among us until you get one of us out of the tree."

While this was a witty rejoinder from Graham, it points to an underlying truth, and potentially huge hurdle for these candidates.

Very real and deep challenges lie ahead for Graham and the other candidates as the field continues to expand.  In the Republican field alone, there are sixteen (16) candidates, and in New Hampshire, one of the early primary states, this is creating a vexing issue for voters.

As this recent NY Times article notes voters in New Hampshire are feeling overwhelmed by the sheer volume of candidates, and often have trouble discerning one from the other.

With the recent decision that only the top ten (10) candidates (based upon polling at the time of the debate) will be nominated to participate in the debates, it has pushed up the calendars for all of the candidates, and overwhelmed many of the voting public.

As this article shows, many of New Hampshire voters are already fatigued by the volume and keeping track of the candidates.

How do you differentiate one from the other?  Are the candidates simply posturing to get attention, or distinguish themselves from others.

It will be most interesting in the days ahead to see if the field narrows...........stay tuned.

Did this clip sink Mitt Romney?

Although we are looking ahead to the 2016 Presidential campaign on this blog, as social media continues to explode, let's take a look back to the 2012 race.

Many political pundits believe Mitt Romney was an overwhelming favorite to defeat Obama.  If you recall, unemployment remained very high, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were still raging, and many people blamed Obama for the perceived poor overall state of America.

Romney was an incredibly successful businessman, former governor of Massachusetts, and ran the 2002 Olympics in Utah.  His resume spoke for itself.

So what happened? 

Many point to the following speech as the beginning of Romney's downfall:

Indeed, after this video was leaked, Romney's campaign numbers did begin to fall, and of course He went on to lose the election by a wide margin.

This clip, however, is part of a larger challenge faced by candidates today.  In prior years, candidates could feel comfortable speaking to private groups without fear of their comments being leaked to the general public. 

Candidates often tailor their respective message to particular groups.  In this case, it's a group of high net worth individuals in favor of lowering taxes.  Every candidate since the history of time has played this game of tailored messaging.

However, it's different today.  Everyone has a smart phone, and individuals are constantly monitoring (and snapping) each and every word.  Candidates have to be much more careful about their messages and tone, regardless of the audience.

All in all, this is a good thing as we move forward.  Yes, candidates have less privacy, but shouldn't we all hear each and every message they have.  Running for President is hard, as it should be, but let's have sunlight into all the words they speak!