The political pundits and media
commentators have found a new conventional wisdom to share. They are decrying the fact that Donald Trump
doesn’t appear to have a solid ground game which they have decided is necessary
for him to win in November. And, Democrats especially in states where the Trump
campaign seems less organized structurally, may be adding this ground game
factor into their already naive “Trump can’t win therefore we can’t lose”
belief.
Since most of these commentators,
especially those just out of college, have little or no campaign experience it
is a wonder that they even know what a ground game is. Before deciding if a candidate needs one we
should ask what exactly constitutes a ground game.
In my experience a ground game, or
field campaign, is the organizing of volunteers and paid staff to do a number
of campaign actions. First and foremost
to canvass door to door spreading information about the candidate and
identifying the candidates supporters. This is particularly important in
contests that do not attract media attention and massive television /radio
advertising that can spread the message. In today's age, when few voters are
interested in reading more than a bumper sticker, literature has lost its value
and certainly when your platform is “Make America Great Again” you don’t need
to distribute a slogan.
It is also critical to identify
supporters if one plans a major pull operation on Election Day to get a maximum
turnout. Trump’s apparent plan to win is
to get the angry, the disaffected, the disgruntled, and the disappointed to
come out as never before and protest all that they don’t like by voting for
him. He has no identifiable bloc of voters he can safely blind pull. And, those
secret Trump voters are not going to identify themselves to canvassers or phone
callers. Trump’s GOTV plan will be to bombard people with TV ads to generate
turnout.
Clinton on the other hand, with an
enthusiasm problem, and in a way appealing to those satisfied with the status
quo but who would like to see some changes needs a sophisticated ground
game. She needs to “blind pull” minority
voters: African-Americans, Latinos, and Asian-American’s to get a maximum
turnout from those groups which polls show will vote overwhelmingly for
her. She needs to focus on key states
that fit the demographics of her supporters and because of the Electoral
College system she needs selective state strategies.
Trump is basing his campaign on a
national homogeneity. Not one of ideology but one of similarity. He is appealing to the masses that become
fans of a particular television show and cut across the age and gender and race
demographic lines. These are the very TV
shows he has produced and made a name for himself in -- the reality shows. The 21st century version of the silver screen
or the living room tube.
For some time it has been evident that
the Presidential contest gets the greatest voter turnout in our country. If it were not for the Electoral College,
which makes some votes worth more than others and leads to a focus on states
that polls show are very close, there would be no need to pull out voters for
President. A ground game involves covering polling places - inside to prevent
abuses; outside to greet voters and at the doors and on the phones pulling out
voters. I have already explained why you
don’t need to pull voters in a Presidential election unless there is clear
evidence of closeness of the expected vote.
As for poll overage - few of our precinct officials today know how, if
it is possible to alter or affect the results, and our volunteer watchers
usually have little knowledge of how to prevent it if they do. As for poll greeters since the Presidential
race is driving the turnout most voters are interested in sample ballot cards
for down ballot candidates since their Presidential choice is the reason they
are coming out to vote.
Before the electoral debacle of 2000
and Obama’s close wins in North Carolina and Omaha in 2008 the political
punditry had been talking more and more about the homogeneity of the American
electorate especially when it came to voting for President. In fact if we look at our recent Presidents,
more have won by carrying most of the states, e.g. FDR, Eisenhower, LBJ, Nixon,
Ronald Reagan and Clinton in ‘96. In fact what has often been the case was a
tendency for a national consensus to develop behind one candidate. The new use of social media and the
predominance of 24/7 cable news may have made the ground game much less crucial
to victory in a Presidential general election.
12 July 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment