Posted on 02/10/2016 5:57:23 AM PST by Kaslin
Politicians tailor their messages to different audiences. Facing New Hampshire's primary, Ted Cruz talked more about "free-market principles" and a "commitment to the Constitution" and said "no one personality can right the wrongs done by Washington." Politico ran the headline "Ted Cruz, born-again libertarian."
I'm skeptical. Campaigning in Iowa, Cruz had emphasized religion and social conservatism.
But politicians no longer just target voters state-by-state -- they target by person.
Last election, President Obama beat Mitt Romney partly by doing just that. Obama had 50 people working in data analytics. Romney had four.
"The campaign manager for the Obama campaign said the biggest institutional advantage they had was its use of data," observes Cato Institute fellow Emily Ekins.
Conservatives had data too, she says, but "Republican insiders tended to be a little bit closed-minded when it came to new methodologies."
Not Cruz. He told my producers recently, "I bought a copy of David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager's book, 'The Audacity to Win,' gave it to our senior team (and told them) we are going to nakedly and shamelessly emulate this."
The Obama campaigns kept detailed computer records on individuals likely to vote for Obama. On Election Day, volunteers concentrated on getting just those voters to vote.
Likewise, this year the Cruz campaign didn't send volunteers to every single door to ask people for their vote. They saved precious time by knocking only on doors of likely Cruz voters who might need a nudge to go to the polls.
Cruz technology manager Chris Wilson told us that the campaign will then do "whatever it takes. We go to their house. We'll bug them until they either turn out to vote or get a restraining order against us."
"Restraining order" is a joke, but his volunteers do carry phone apps that even tell them what questions to ask occupants depending on whether a man or a woman answers the door.
Today, all campaigns buy data from marketers. Ekins explains that "companies amass enormous amounts of data based on transactions that you and I make -- whether we opened a store loyalty card, whether we subscribed to a magazine."
That data tells them something about how you think. Wilson told me, "Someone who buys arugula, we've found that they tend to be a little bit more Democratic -- someone who buys iceberg lettuce tends to be more Republican."
There is truth in data. Outside Minneapolis, according to The New York Times, a manager of a Target store fielded an angry call from a father who was furious because Target sent his teenage daughter ads for baby products. You're encouraging my daughter to get pregnant, he complained.
The manager apologized and later called back to apologize again. But this time the father apologized, saying she is pregnant! Target knew before Dad did.
Now politicians use similar data. Wilsn says he can track where individual voters stand "on moral issues, immigration, national security, on gun rights."
Ted Cruz adds that they then go beyond "where" people stand to target voters based on "why."
"If you're a single mom, if you're carrying a revolver in your purse 'cause you don't want to get mugged, a duck-hunting ad is not going to do a thing to connect with you," Cruz told us. "Just on the Second Amendment, we have a dozen different messages."
This offended some people who watched my recent TV special about this. pathgirl888 tweeted: "Watching @JohnStossel re Tech Revolution. #Orwellian manipulation of IA voters ... creepy." Others complained, "Cruz Camp is monitoring everything" and "INVASION OF PRIVACY!"
But it's not just Cruz who does this. The Obama campaign reached into its supporters' Facebook accounts and asked them to persuade their friends to support Obama. Facebook then changed its policies to give "friends" more privacy protection, but it's safe to assume all future presidents will be elected with help from this sort of technology.
We asked an Iowa voter if he minded being targeted by Cruz. He said, "No, I think it's excellent. Use every tool we can, because we have to defeat those people. They're using them."
The tech revolution is changing almost everything.
I see Cruz spent less than everyone in NH. Do you think it’s because the analytics told him it would be a complete waste of money to compete there?
Cruz spent his money smartly in NH and got a great return on it.
Finishing third in a state not tailor-made for him is an impressive achievement.
He’s realized the old way of doing politics, throwing everything and the kitchen sink to win is no longer working.
I would say he did a very good job beating Bush for the coveted third place.
I have deprived myself of many material things that I might otherwise have bought in the past ten years or so for the simple reason that such advertising and “stalking” makes me angry. I’m looking for quality. If a product can’t support itself without this kind of strategy, then quality must be missing. That goes for political candidates too.
When I’m subjected to this kind of subterfuge, it also insults my intelligence. The idea that I might be unaware of the subterfuge and comply like a sheep is degrading.
Trump barely changes his message, he may throw in some corn in and a church visit in Iowa, but his core message never changes. He has a few advisers but he doesn’t rehearse anything and nobody tells him what to say. Everything that he says, he owns.
A lot of people like Trump because he’s not a shape shifting politician. Hillary even changes her accent when she’s talking to blacks or southerners.
I’m a database and analytics guy. I’ll have to see if I can help.
I am sure he’ll appreciate that.
Click the pic to watch about 7 minutes long...
Wow.
Jeb, on the other hand spend $34 million in NH alone, and what did it get him? Nothing
Yeah and Chris Christie ridiculed Rubio because he kept repeating that 0bama knows exactly what he is doing; which is true, and what did that give Chris Christie in NH? A single digit and he was forced to return to NJ.
I believe that aired on Saturday. I didn’t watch it though, because I watched the debate
Obama never should have won in 2012. His tech system kept track of every single registered voter and whether they voted. I believe that at the end of the day, Obama had volunteers vote these names. Your only hope is to vote early.
It insults my intelligence and it makes me very angry.
I wonder what data told Cruz to produce that odd campaign ad showing the children playing with Donald and Hillary dolls?
Many thanks for that link! If watching that video doesn’t absolutely terrify the general public, not to mention incense them, then there is something wrong with the perception of the general public. This is shameless and overriding manipulation on a grand scale. I get itinerary e-mails from Trump and sometimes a thank you note for my support. I got a Christmas card from him. If I had been subjected to any of this nonsense, I probably would be supporting no one aside from “Republican” and that with no excitement. I had to spend a lot of time in the first days of this nomination period getting the insipid, transparently manipulative e-mails from Cruz stopped. That was the first inkling I had that he wasn’t to my liking as a candidate.
This should also be a wake up call to all those who put their entire lives and that of their families on the likes of Facebook. Not much good can come of it and a lot of potential damage from unprincipled criminals is possible not to mention invasive and privacy killing maneuvers like that shown in the video.
This gives an insight to the followers of “the prince of the power of the air” doesn’t it? May the Almighty help us and this world we live in. Perhaps it’s time for a do over. I suppose even the Trump campaign uses some of this manipulative data but I will now have no hesitation in telling anyone who knocks on my door where they might go next.
Do you like horses?
I would say he did a very good job beating Bush for the coveted third place.Don't fool yourself. Kasich bitch slapped Cruz by getting 2nd and it stung.
When I’m subjected to this kind of subterfuge, it also insults my intelligence.
I'm fine with targeted information, so long as it's on target, because then it doesn't waste my time. I'm far more annoyed with the constant barrage of flyers, emails, and supposed freebies when it's stuff I'm not interested in.
That said, I rarely put up money for anything I haven't researched on my own, meaning even if they rightly figure out what I'm interested in, the info they give me is where I start researching, not where I stop.
I think it's a mistake to judge products by their ads the way you are doing. In most corporations, the advertising department is a totally different division from the production people. How one is managed doesn't tell much about how the other is managed.
They do NOT care about a few of you folks with smarts; they are targeting them without braincells: those who FEEL instead of THINK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.