Active Users:172 Time:17/05/2024 11:52:02 AM
There's also the fake or exaggeration aspect that might be in play but I can't judge that Isaac Send a noteboard - 11/11/2012 06:44:16 PM
No, the newsies can report stuff but the campaigns actually track their voter contact, to the best of my knowledge - and I could be wrong about theirs but I know ours for Ohio - we had more of it, and certainly my specific area did and I can go into that in detail if you like but preferably by NB.

I was going on the media reports of the campaigns' reports of their voter contact - everything I saw seemed to be Romney campaign telling a journalist or tweeting that they'd had X many contacts at a set point and the Obama campaign saying they'd had 3 (or 4) X at the same point. Of course there are always issues as to what two different organisations mean when supposedly reporting on the same thing, and I wasn't actually keeping track of the reports in any scientific way but just noted it seemed a consistent trend.


Campaigns lie, certainly to reporters and often to their own people, but I'd wager it tends to balance out evenly. But here I think it's journalists lying unwittingly. Dems focus on urban areas, it's vote dense and easy to knock doors at, plus it's Dem favorable. The GOP needs to focus in less dense areas, but what matters here is the usual, journalists may be biased but mostly they're just lazy. A reporter is going to look at contact at a spot near their facility which is usually right in the middle of town, so to speak. Anecdotal reports then probably will be true in a 3 or 4x capacity. But both parties use the same core model, the RNC and DNC have HQs, a dozen to a hundred in a given state, who run the ground game, by getting volunteers to go hammer on doors, usually selected doors generated off some model of optimization, and have paper sheets or phone apps to report the results. Those get reported up each day as a number and God Alone knows how much and who fudges those to look good and if it balances out but State keeps track and usually competes with their fellow state's figures (same party) while trying to compete with their opponents in-state. We just know our reported figures exceeded the Dems figures in 2008 and that all our intel said they weren't managing to get those 2008 totals. Anecdotally I know the local Dem apparatus held the DNC operation in contempt for laziness compared to 2008 because we chat with our local counterparts, its something of a game and all local Dem or GOP groups (in NE Ohio anyway) - whether they benefit from it or not - kinda loathe presidential years because they screw up the downticket races. You can run a drooling moron or convicted rapist and get them elected if the tide breaks your way and a strategist can't not but dislike the taste of that. Plus we spy on each other a lot.

In any event I doubt GOP volunteers are lazy and more dishonest then Dem volunteers, generally speaking, as you know I'm sure, volunteers of any group tend to be pretty damn reliable sorts who are very dedicated to the cause.

Concept here being that X and Y might go out and bang on some targeted doors, say X hits 20 and Y hits 15, in theory X gets more voters but in practice it may be that Y had an easier time of it. As an example, it's probably easier to convince 15 slightly apathetic Obama voters from 2008 to vote again and for him then it is to convince 20 Ron Paul supporters to vote for Romney. This could go either way with different targets but that looks to be what happened overall.

that makes sense. The Obama campaign might bang on 10,000 doors and the result is they speak to 4,000 Democrats who will vote for Obama as a result of the contact but the Romney campaign might have banged on 8,000 doors and spoken to 5,000 Republicans but only 2,5000 of them would be convinced to vote for Romney with the same level of persuasion as it took the Obama campaign.


I think that is it, mind I am doubtless biased and the data is still coming in and I haven't had the energy to really give it a good going over. We got the shit kicked out of us in my zone on all the partisan races though but all my non-partisans kicked butt and took names so I have to believe we had our act together and just got rolled by turnout.
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein

King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
Reply to message
What next for Romney and the Republican party? - 07/11/2012 03:51:50 PM 888 Views
In my view, more moderation is needed. - 07/11/2012 04:17:05 PM 401 Views
Libertarian is the way to go IMO. - 07/11/2012 05:19:29 PM 365 Views
Not yet. - 07/11/2012 06:55:19 PM 515 Views
I am no expert, but I think Romney is done. - 07/11/2012 07:00:33 PM 487 Views
I'd say they're pretty much done - 07/11/2012 07:54:44 PM 371 Views
I'm not sure about that. - 07/11/2012 08:04:33 PM 502 Views
Again, the numbers you cited will continue to shrink every year. - 07/11/2012 08:25:21 PM 716 Views
Well Romney is retiring but no the GOP is hardly 'done' - 08/11/2012 12:51:44 AM 340 Views
I do hope the Republican party have the same lax attitude, I love seeing them lose *NM* - 08/11/2012 12:46:32 PM 176 Views
I imagine lots of idiots feel the same way on both sides about both parties *NM* - 08/11/2012 11:05:29 PM 195 Views
If you're relying on the democrats crashing and burning - 09/11/2012 02:45:41 PM 379 Views
the dems played the "wait for the repubs to crash and burn" strategy and it worked out ok this year - 09/11/2012 05:01:53 PM 460 Views
Off topic, but is your Shift key broken? - 09/11/2012 05:47:12 PM 352 Views
I don't think I've ever seen him use capitalization. *NM* - 09/11/2012 07:00:26 PM 339 Views
do you have similar problems when talking to people with weird hair color or clothes IRL? - 09/11/2012 07:09:24 PM 327 Views
I think he was asking why you do it *NM* - 09/11/2012 07:15:27 PM 183 Views
The Dems learned their lesson from the Gore campaign - 09/11/2012 06:25:23 PM 436 Views
i beg to differ - 09/11/2012 07:22:40 PM 307 Views
The facts speak for themselves - 09/11/2012 07:46:20 PM 456 Views
Re: The facts speak for themselves - 11/11/2012 01:13:05 AM 415 Views
I've also got a question for you - 11/11/2012 02:16:07 PM 334 Views
Re: I've also got a question for you - 11/11/2012 04:51:55 PM 372 Views
Re: I've also got a question for you - 11/11/2012 05:48:52 PM 482 Views
There's also the fake or exaggeration aspect that might be in play but I can't judge that - 11/11/2012 06:44:16 PM 831 Views
I think you were taking that statement rather literally - 11/11/2012 07:36:14 PM 374 Views
Oh, I can absolutely count on them crahsing and burning, that's a given, happens to both regularly *NM* - 09/11/2012 06:28:51 PM 234 Views
You can't count on exploiting that - 09/11/2012 06:39:47 PM 489 Views
'Mistakes' is subjective, sometimes you have to play your hand - 11/11/2012 01:09:31 AM 350 Views
i think you've hit on a major point here - 11/11/2012 02:08:50 PM 403 Views
It's a matter of perspective - 11/11/2012 05:19:13 PM 514 Views
how are 300+ EVs "the skin of his teeth"? - 08/11/2012 05:46:51 PM 358 Views
Because he barely won them? *NM* - 08/11/2012 11:06:14 PM 166 Views
only OH, NC and FL are within 2% margin, i'd hardly call that "barely won" - 08/11/2012 11:25:54 PM 368 Views
Which is less than Bush 2, Clinton, Reagan, or Nixon? - 09/11/2012 12:26:51 AM 332 Views
i never claimed a death knell for the GOP - 09/11/2012 12:32:00 AM 424 Views
What makes you think Hillary won't be running? - 08/11/2012 06:07:38 PM 351 Views
I won't totally rule it out but I don't see it in the cards - 08/11/2012 11:08:12 PM 340 Views

Reply to Message