One of the best strategies to building an online audience lies in celebrating and promoting that audience. Instapundit and Google and Daily Kos are big for the same reason - they push traffic out, and thus gain the trust of readers to come back (in the Kos example, those diaries are a primary souce of outgoing links, so the traffic is caught in a loop).
When we look at the example of the left building communities, we marvel at the energy, the traffic stats, and the small donor giving, but getting the endorsements of those communities bears a heavy price - a rabid dog is a great way to scare off intruders, but the dog is just as likely to turn on you. In the netroots case, celebrating the audience involves going into an politically unfeasible world.
An example is a letter from a blogger to Emmanuel Cleaver, a Dem House Rep in Kansas City. The blogger demands action on the funding bill, and threatens a bloodbath in '08 if she doesn't get her way. She's very passionate, but the Dems had to back down or truly face a 2008 electoral setback. How can you engage with a crazy person?
The right hasn't had these problems, mainly because there are less of us, and though we have strong editorial voices represented by the blogroll of Conservative Generals, most Republicans would pay little price for ignoring us, and they know it.
But there is a way that Republican candidates can tap into the energy, the community building aspects, and the strength of the right side of the blogosphere. If you believe as I do, that our strength is in our reasoned approach to issues - mainly that in winning the arguments, we'll win the elections, than the strategy is simple.
Use the blogs, the portals, and the comment sections to debate and convey strong conservative messages.
Most great ideas aren't new - they're just an example of someone saying, why isn't anyone doing that? So here's the question - what conservative politician is using the internet to get out a message that is well thought out, backed up with facts and statistics, and easily linked and shared?
Reagan did a pre-Internet version of this in the years leading up to his election wins. He talked about what he believed, and that gave conservatives a reason to trust him. Candidates today deliver highly packaged speeches to set audiences with the hope of generating enough base support to win the primary, and then tack to the center for the election. That's okay for television and soundbites, but where is the original thought? Eventually, we get stuck with pseudo-conservatives that we hope are conservative, and then are disappointed (Medicare, No Child Left Behind, Immigration, Spending).
Is anyone else insulted by that strategy? Where are our conservative thought leaders, proudly carrying copies of National Review, citing stories in the Wall Street Journal, and working with intellectual heavyweights to draft arguments?
No one expects this to occur in the speeches or debates. There is no time, and it's not the right message. But a well crafted online campaign to win, truly win, the war of ideas would energize the base, alleviate misgivings about how conservative a candidate is, and actually focus on the issues, instead of on the campaign. And what better time to do it then now, when the actual voting is still eight months out?
The reasoned argument on the left is outweighed by emotion. On the right, reasoned argument is actually our strength. If a candidate really wants the backing of the online community, it begins with actively working with that community to lay out the arguments.
Are there any politicians linking to sites and getting in discussions with people they agree with? What better way to energize bloggers than to give them free links? The first candidate to treat the online audience as one of many valued advisors is going to have a big advantage. How do you channel the energy of the masses without being controlled by it? You engage with it.
I'd write more of the how down if this were a closed site, but will be happy to share information on how to build communities with internet strategists for Republican candidates. Just e-mail me.












Comments
Also
I too admire what just a few of you are doing for the Party and the cause. It looks like every year we're making the candidates more and more aware of the need for strong "netroots."
I too hope to usher our Party and Conservatives into the next age.
You're a guiding light.
Ali A. Akbar
myspace.com/alitalks
econservative.org
Blogs4McCain.com
Emotion is important
Good points, but I have to disagree with your comments on emotion.
People are not reasonable beings. We're emotional. We respond to emotional hooks. The right is failing by dogmatically relying on reason.
While the left emphasizes emotion too much, the right emphasizes reason too much. We're only going to appeal to a minority as long as we stick to this belief that reason is the best way to campaign.
We need to insert some heart into our messages. We don't have to be touchy-feely, but people are relational, they like to know that candidates care. This might not fit with the ideals of capitalistic-driven conservativism, but it's how humans operate. We're not machines.
The vast majority of people don't remember the best talking points made during a debate. They remember images, moments, visceral impacts. Where do you think kissing babies came from? This is what sticks with a voter when staring at a ballot.
Jim, I am a little confused
Jim,
I am a little confused by this:
The Reasoned Debate
Occurred from 2001-2003, prior to entering the war. The Senate approved the war, and Bush invaded.
That there have been missteps and mistakes in a wartime environment was to be expected.
That you lack both the courage to put your name out and the wisdom to understand the decision or even the experience to understand how decisions are reached is not something that can be cured in a comment section.
Pretty much all comment sections are good for is swatting down fools.
bdsm
bdsm
bdsm story
ebony
ebony
ebony sex
XzweAq
hypbdk icrmxsn
qoav ktadln fdng edmvn maitzsv sidqyvh dkpenol
Post new comment