Posted on 09/29/2015 11:49:05 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
A billion dollars will be spent by major political campaigns online this cycle. The technology is... well, it's quite amazing what campaigns could do online if they were creative enough, but they remain somewhat captive to the safer instincts of conventional strategists.
When Donald Trump's campaign started to look more professional and less like an extension of his quest to stay relevant, I and others noticed that his social media presence was remarkable in one very tangible way: When his Twitter account uploaded a new tweet to the world, it was quite clear that his fingers had punched it out. The filter between Trump's brain and the thoughts he shared was tissue-thin.
I dare say that virtually none of the other candidates actually tweeted at the time. Tweets had to be run by someone, or many people, first. Not Trump's, for better or for worse. Turns out, mostly, for the better.
I wondered whether Trump would co-opt other social media, too. A new study by the folks at EPIServer, a digital content and marketing company, suggests that Trump has turned out to be proficient across the omnichannel more so than any other campaign. The company cites his "[h]ighly effective use of Twitter and Facebook; most tweets, second most followers and page likes of any candidate; noteworthy tweets clearly visible on website." Though Trump's website is comparatively barren, that's fine. No one supports Trump because of his website. He's adapted the social media formats that are best for him. EPIServer gave him its highest Digital Campaign Score a 75.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
If you still doubt the impact of this, read a book called "Obama Zombies" by Jason Mattera (a good guy). He was of that generation and noted how Obama got the whole youth vote to actually vote---as opposed to "support him" by virtue of constant reminders via Twitter, Facebook (bigger then among kids than today), youtube, and so on. The differences between Zero and McCain were galactic.
As a prof, I can tell you kids don't read. If you want to reach them, you pretty much have to do it through video of some sort, and if that grabs them, THEN they will read. That's why, despite publishing 25 or so books, I'm entirely now about movie and film production.
Thx Sam, Larry.
With due respect, you contradicted yourself. Kids do read per your examples above. They just don't read about geo-political issues. They are about the Karcrapians and any mindless reality show they watch, not to mention inane celebrities. Actually, that probably is NOT reading. I correct myself.
After 2008 Jason Mattera did a book called "Obama Zobies" where he was the first one to show where Zero had a massive and overwhelming edge in reaching 18-30 year olds---YouTube, web, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace. People who track this stuff say it does matter.
That 50% of the country is already paying payroll, sales, state, excise, gas, property taxes, etc.
As it is, we’re subsidizing them with EITC and other government goodies from housing assistance to student loans. Far better to take away any further (beyond payroll) tax on working and lower or eliminate subsidies elsewhere.
Yeah, a flat tax might be ideal, but even flat tax advocates seem to include large personal exemptions, at least—and they’re nowhere near actually getting their plans enacted.
Trump IMO is far more electable, and 80-90% of Trump’s tax plan could actually get passed and enacted.
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.