Patrick Ruffini, Jon Henke and Soren Dayton have joined forces to give to Republicans The Next Right:

This site is the product of literally hundreds of offline conversations with some of the brightest young minds in the conservative movement. It grows out of a recognition that the road back can’t be about a series of disjointed technologies, blogs, and pundits. It begins with telling a story about why we should lead. With advancing majoritarian ideas with real buy-in from the grassroots, not diktats from Washington policy shops. With revitalizing the Republican Party with real participation from the bottom up. The right needed a place online where these discussions could flourish, where a narrative about revitalizing the movement could congeal, and where smart new voices could assert a leadership role in a party at a crossroads. We hope The Next Right can be a small part of this ongoing dialogue.

I’ve described the thinking behind this in further detail here, as have Soren and Jon.

It looks good and it’s something a lot of folks would like to see do very well. The question is, can the Right pull it off?  Here’s hoping…

RedStormPAC has created donation widgets for all Republican candidates who have announced for statewide office in Virginia for 2009.

Bob McDonnell For Governor:
http://contribute.redstormpac.org/campaigns/36

Bill Bolling for Lt. Gov.:
http://contribute.redstormpac.org/campaigns/37

Ken Cuccinelli for AG:
http://contribute.redstormpac.org/campaigns/38

John Brownlee for AG:
http://contribute.redstormpac.org/campaigns/40

And we’ll be sure to add others if they announce.

Let’s start helping Virginia Republicans sweep statewide in ‘09!

Politico and Compete.com analyzed how political interested individuals used the Internet for political information:

The study, performed for Politico, is simply a snapshot of online activity; it followed only those readers projected to have visited an official candidate website at least once in September.

But the results reveal interesting online habits among the politically attuned. A significant number get their news from mainstream media versus political blogs. YouTube, meanwhile, is one of the most reliable ways for candidates to communicate directly to voters. But the candidates’ official Meetup, Facebook and MySpace pages appear less effective at that.

Despite their seemingly small numbers, these social networking sites still offer candidates big potential audiences. “There are roughly 80 different Facebook groups” dedicated to Romney, said his online communications director, Stephen Smith. “They have dozens or hundreds or tens of thousands of members alone. They’re not even necessarily touching [former Massachusetts] Gov. Romney’s official Facebook page.”

Readers like social networking websites in general. Half of those tracked by Compete visited MySpace in September, and 54 percent visited YouTube. Nearly two-thirds went to Wikipedia, a quarter logged on to Facebook and 7 percent visited Meetup.

But candidates’ specific pages on social networking sites were considerably less popular. Meetup, the darling of the 2004 election cycle, barely registers with any candidate other than Internet phenom Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). Overall, only 1 percent of readers who visited an official campaign website last month also visited a candidate’s Meetup page. Two percent checked out the candidates’ MySpace pages, and 1 percent hit his or her Facebook page.

While only one to two percent of respondents checked out candidates MySpace or Facebook pages, this doesn’t necessarily make them useless.

Though the number of people visiting the candidates’ social networking sites may be small by percentage, campaigns still see value even in low numbers. “Even if you’re reaching 1 or 2 percent — and I think it’s more than that — it’s a no-brainer,” Finn said. “When you’re reaching someone who has 500 friends on Facebook, they have a lot of influence. Maybe through that 1 or 2 percent you’re reaching 20 percent.”

The notion that (presumed) voters who check the candidates’ social networking sites are more active is supported by the data. There’s the obvious example of Paul, who enjoys an enormous amount of online buzz. But it’s also true that the more popular a candidate is in general, the smaller proportion of his followers — if indeed they can be called that — visited the personalized sites.

Traditionally the candidate’s website has been the hub for their online activities.  Such sites work for traditional voters, who were the target of this study.  But for nontraditional (ie - younger or new) voters, social networking sites may be the first or only way they find out about some candidates.  The no cost set up and easy upkeep make these sites very worthwhile to a campaign, not just as a gateway but as a source of viral campaigning.

Justin Hart at TechRepublican writes about the Lighted Candle Society’s e-mail campaign in response to a recent Oprah episode.  The story shows an effective method of soliciting activist response and building a sense of community.

E-mail is just one of many areas where Republicans still lag behind the Democrats in fully harnessing.  A lot of attention has been focused on Web 2.0 but we can’t ignore the Web 1.0 battle.  Organizations like MoveOn.org works in a large part due to e-mail networking to keep their activists informed and energized.  Republicans have yet to respond despite mailing lists being fairly standard with any hosting package or as easy to set up as an e-mail account at Yahoo or GMail.

Bloggers would gain more rights under a bill approved by the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday:

Anyone regularly engaged in “journalism,” which would seem to include some bloggers, wouldn’t generally be forced to divulge confidential sources in federal cases under a bill approved Thursday by a U.S. Senate committee.

By a 15-2 vote, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee backed an amended version of the so-called Free Flow of Information Act. Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) cast the “no” votes.

Some form of “reporter’s privilege,” either through laws or court decisions, already exists in 49 states and the District of Columbia. This bill would extend that protection to federal cases, shielding anyone engaged in the practice of “journalism”–with a number of exceptions, naturally–from being forced to give up confidential information or provide testimony.

Now there is a Facebook group where individuals can commit to contributing what they can to help Jeff Evans take the 20th Senate District for Virginia.  You can even add a Facebook widget to help spread the word.

Admittedly, the idea is not original to RedStormPAC.  This morning I discovered At Least $25 (Rudy’s Small Donors)on Facebook and I was hooked.  It’s a brilliant way to engage folks and not only start harnessing the long tail donations but create a community of folks who get it and are willing to sign on for what they can.

So please do what you can for Jeff Evans down in Virginia’s 20th Senate District.  He’s running a great campaign down there against a strong incumbant and anything you can do to help will go a long way to keeping Virginia in the right hands.

Allen Fuller at TechRepublican notes a couple recent Conservative Web 2.0 developments, including RedStormPAC:

Tomorrow, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will host a series of seminars dubbed Solutions Day. While the actual events will take place in Atlanta, Gingrich and his organization have pulled together an impressive network of companion events across the country. The grassroots nature of these events is impressive in and of itself, and the content of the presentations is sure to be thought provoking, but what is most revolutionary about Solutions Day is that it will also take place in Second Life.

Second Life is a virtual world that has been the focus of much debate in corporate marketing. While many people invest countless hours working, living, and playing in Second Life, it has not caught on in the mainstream the way other social media platforms such as Facebook have.

…

In addition to Gingrich’s foray into the virtual world, a conservative PAC is reaching out to the Facebook world. RedStormPAC has developed a Facebook application that will allow small donors to contribute to conservative candidates utilizing “the ‘long tail’ of online fundraising.”

I’ve written in the past about why Republicans need Facebook, and actually wrote a “bonus tip” urging conservative web gurus to develop Facebook applications. Facebook is the platform today to connect with and motivate online political activists. In addition to posting links, starting groups, and advertising on Facebook, creating an actual application can bring measurable ROI to a campaign’s online efforts.

The use of sites like Facebook allowed campaigns quick and easy access to party activists both locally and nationally.  It’s a great way to spread word of mouth and keep supporters up to date on any events and issues.  Applications like the RedStormPAC widget can help pull donations to your campaign.  The ability to create applications with the Facebook API really gives a campaign or organization limitless options as to how to utilize the medium.

We are happy to announce that you can now add widgets to your Facebook to let your visitors contribute to RedStormPAC or the targeted Virginia Senate races:

Contribute to Targeted Virginia Senate:
http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=18117459904

Contribute to RedStormPAC:
http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=5093763919

RedStormPAC is continuing to expand and we’re always open to new ideas on how to help Virginia’s conservative candidates.  If you have any suggestions, please feel free to contact us at info@redstormpac.org or with our handy contact form.

In 1972, computers and campaigns were just getting acquainted. Fundraising appeals using direct mail lists were considered revolutionary - and helpful to a young Karl Rove working on the Nixon re-election campaign.”Young people have got to reach other young people,” Rove told CBS News at the time, “and that is what we are seeking to do.”The merger of politics and technology was so new the Nixon campaign felt its use of computers should be shielded from the public.

How things have changed.

In 2007, candidates announce that they are running for president, raise money and even hold debates on the Internet. Earlier this month, the Democrats held the first candidate “mashup” - their responses to questions were posted online for internet users to edit any way they choose.

Still, a recent poll showed that 72 percent of those surveyed get their political information from newspapers. Analysts say that means campaigns have to keep both old and new media in mind when trying to connect with voters.

Read more…

Back in August, Time Magazine wrote about “the extraordinary appeal of Facebook“:

Facebook’s appeal is both obvious and rather subtle. It’s a website, but in a sense, it’s another version of the Internet itself: a Net within the Net, one that’s everything the larger Net is not. Facebook is cleanly designed and has a classy, upmarket feel to it–a whiff of the Ivy League still clings. People tend to use their real names on Facebook. They also declare their sex, age, whereabouts, romantic status and institutional affiliations. Identity is not a performance or a toy on Facebook; it is a fixed and orderly fact. Nobody does anything secretly: a news feed constantly updates your friends on your activities. On Facebook, everybody knows you’re a dog.

Maybe that’s why Facebook’s fastest-growing demographic consists of people 35 or older: they’re refugees from the uncouth wider Web.Every community must negotiate the imperatives of individual freedom and collective social order, and Facebook constitutes a critical rebalancing of the Internet’s founding vision of unfettered electronic liberty. Of course, it is possible to misbehave on Facebook–it’s just self-defeating. Unlike the Internet, Facebook is structured around an opt-in philosophy; people have to consent to have contact with or even see others on the network. If you’re annoying folks, you’ll essentially cease to exist, as those you annoy drop you off the grid.

Emphasis mine and for a reason.  Many view the web as a current generation thing, a way to engage teens and twenty-somethings, while aiming for anything beyond that has proven all but impossible.  Facebook is slowly but surely pulling it off, broadening its market into demographics that matter most to politicos and campaigns focused on using new means to target traditional voters.

The question then becomes how to best utilize Facebook for political purposes.  Does having a group with 300,000 members really lead to more votes or money?  Does someone friending you mean they’re going to do more than simply list you on their profile?  Does it mean that people will learn more about the candidates and become better informed participants in the democratic system?

It’s the answer to these questions that’ll determine whether or not Web 2.0 and social networking can really work as a political tool and force in 2008 and beyond.

And while we’re on the topic of Facebook, have you joined the RedStormPAC Facebook group yet?

First, a thanks out to “Gopher Broke” for bringing RedStormPAC to the attention of Free Republic readers.  He does mention one thing we here at RSPAC would like to address: our current Virginia-only format.  This is something a few people have asked us about in the last week so let’s just come out and say it.

Virginia is only the beginning.

Virginia has the luxury of every year being an election year which makes it a ripe place for political activity and evolution.  What better way to introduce the RedStormPAC system than to simply apply it to current elections.  This gives us an cycle under our belt and a way to battle-test things so when November 6th comes and goes, we’re ready for 2008.

Federal elections are coming.  But first things first.  Let’s keep Virginia in the right hands and go into 2008 ready for battle.

We here at RedStormPAC would like to take a moment to thank the early adopters of the candidate widgets.

Candidates Jeff Evans running in the 20th Senate District and Chris Yakabouski running in the 17th Sente District have both adopted RedStormPAC as their means for generating online contributions.  Help Save Manassas now uses RedStormPAC on their site as well.

And where would we be without the blogs?  The following is just the start of what’s to come as RedStormPAC widens its coverage and slate of candidates.

• Black Velvet Bruce Lee
• Cathouse Chat
• I’m Not Emeril
• Leslie Carbone
• Scott’s Morning Brew
• Spark It Up!
• Virginia Virtucon

If you use RedStorm widges on your site let us know so we can add you to the roll.  We’re always looking to say thanks to those that make RedStormPAC happen.

 Julie at the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet blog shares Kevin Betram’s Top Ten Lessons for running a mobile campaign for political candidates:

1. A dedicated short code is imperative. You don’t want your supporters to accidentally receive messages from companies who might be assigned the same shortcode. Splurge on the extra cost ($1,000 vs. $500) for your own shortcode.
2. Timelines and relevance are key. When the Obama campaign used text messaging to remind its supporters about a debate at Howard University, some of the recipients told the campaign that even though they attended Howard, they didn’t know that there was debate.
3. People like to feel empowered, so use mobile technology in a way that allows them to talk back to you and take action. One example Kevin cited was asking your volunteers to text you about their experiences canvassing.
4. People like free stuff, like ring tones, bumper stickers, and wallpaper. And when you ask them where to send their loot – like bumper stickers – you can collect their mailing addresses as well.
5. Segment your lists by zipcode/area code, events, and issues. People should only receive text messages about events in their area and issues they care about.
6. Stay away from complicated.
7. Tests your assumptions. Sometimes what you believe about mobile technology, such as the myth that only young people use text messaging, is proven inaccurate.
8. Dedicated customer service is important. Make sure work with a company that has a dedicated staff ready and able to answer your supporters’ questions.
9. Knowing and following the Mobile Marketing Association’s rules is imperative. Check out the MMA website.
10. Don’t ask for money. Early gratification equals retention, and mobile is still a tricky medium when it comes to fundraising.

Kevin Betram’s Distributive Networks runs the mobile operations for the Barack Obama campaign.  Currently mobile campaigning has only been heavily harnessed by four Democratic candidates while the Republicans are still trying to figure out the best approach.  Mobile campaigning is all about interacting with the volunteer and providing incentives for motivation, and the cost of a text message compared to any number of other methods is remarkably low.

The “long tail”, as coined by Chris Anderson, is the concept of “selling less of more”.  Typically applied to business models like that of Amazon or Netflix, the concept is that businesses can sell a greater amount of more things at small volumes than popular things at large volumes.

The same can be true for fundraising methods.  Traditionally fundraising has aimed at pulling as much money as possible from donors, appealing more to the “big head”, the few people who can give more (shown in the graph as the green area).  Yet missed by such efforts is the long tail (shown in yellow), which often holds a majority of the market.  The cost of appealing to such a broad end of the market has been cost prohibitive in the past, usually not worth the small yield of returns.

This is where RedStorm comes into play.

By offering a no-cost method of receiving online donations, RedStorm is aimed directly at this long tail portion of the market.  While the PAC can certainly handle high dollar donations, it is specifically the low dollar donors that this system best appeals to.  Donations as low as $5 that would otherwise have cost about as much to solicit are now reachable with a free and easy to use widget that can be put on any website, whether it be a candidate or organization or simply a blogger that wants to help a cause.  This system enables campaigns and supporters to cast a wider net when seeking donations (and no fish is so small to be thrown back).

It’s a system of getting more of less, though that doesn’t make any of it less valuable.  It may even prove easier to convince 50 people to donate $50 each than two people to give $1000.  Not only have you raised funds, but you’ve also invigorated that many more supporters and developed a solid foundation for future grassroots action.  It’s the politics of engagement, inviting more people to participate in ways that they may have been hesitant to do so in the past.

It’s the future of politics and it’s happening right now.

New Voters Project, in cooperation with Working Assets and researchers at the University of Michigan and Princeton University, has released a study that shows text messages increased an individual young voter’s likelihood to turnout by 4.2 percent in the November 2006 elections.  The fact sheet is available here and the full report is available here in PDF format.

This report presents one of the first bits of real data to show the effectiveness of text messaging in getting out the vote.  A short, to the point message proved most effective and the cost per vote generated was an extremely low $1.56 per vote compared to $20 for phone calls or $67 for direct mail.

One bit of hesitation on the part of Republicans may come in the demographics of this report.  57% of all respondents labeled themselves as Democrats compared to only 13% calling themselves Republicans.  This could just be the result of national sentiment in 2006 or how the researchers went about retrieving their sample pool, but it does show some limitations of the report.

Another figure to pay attention to is that while 43% of the respondents reported a positive reaction and 25% said they felt the message was a helpful reminder to vote, 21% were confused or surprised and another 10% were outright annoyed by the message.

As a GOTV move in general, the method seems to work well.  Whether texting can be applied as a way to get out a candidate’s message and sway a voter as opposed to simply “preaching to the choir” is still up for debate.

See CNet’s News.com’s coverage here.
See e.politics’s coverage here.