Archive for Organizing

Political Bookshelf: Get Out the Vote; How to increase voter turnout

Close followers of my twitter feed may recall that I have been participating in webinars from the super-awesome New Organizing Institute. Several weeks ago, they had a series of classes dedicated to GOTV (Get-Out-The-Vote for those not in the know) and highlighted this book, which I’ve owned for the last couple years.

So I figured since I enjoyed it and its NOI approved, I should share it…

Get Out the Vote; How to increase voter turnout, by Donald P. Green and Alan S. Gerber, 2nd ed. (2008)

Actual experiments in Political Science are somewhat rare, and field experiments are even more so, making generalizations difficult because we can never know all the variables that are causing an observed event. For a political scientist that means it is hard to confirm if a specific action caused the observed outcome and make definitive general theories. For a campaigner that means it is hard to know if what worked in one situation will work in another or if there were other factors at play.

This book is different because it is based on actual field experiments with voter turnout.

Donald P. Green and Alan S. Gerber are two Yale University Professors who conducted experiments in the US at different levels of government. Often the experiments were non-partisan but sometimes the experiments involved teaming up with political campaigns. Their experiments involved creating groups of voters who were exposed to different stimuli or were set as a control group and then checking official voter records to see what worked in increasing turnout and what didn’t.

Phonebanking?

Canvassing?

Direct Mail?

Reminders on the Election Day?

Robocalls?

… done by volunteers or by professionals?

… what specific language makes a difference?

… do different images on fliers have an impact?

The authors conducted almost a decade of experiments, in vary large scales, to evaluated the effectiveness of all of these strategies and just as important to cash strapped campaigned, they standardized the effectiveness in increasing turnout compared to the cost of each strategy.

As a campaigner, I found this book is incredibly fascinating.

However, for a book by academics based on experimental research, it is more accessible and easier to read than you might think. It’s written to aid actual campaigners or researchers not as a academic paper (although it does have citations and it’s statistical details included if you’re into that type of thing).

While it won’t replace having E-Day training from a party, it might add you in planning GOTV efforts and I learned a couple new ideas from the book … however, that’s a topic for another day.

 

Title: Get Out the Vote – How to increase voter turnout

Authors: Donald P. Green and Alan S. Gerber

Price: $19.95 US from the Brookings Institute

Link to Buy

Why creating the Nouveau parti democratique du Quebec is a strategic move

(Background: This weekend it was announced that there will be a provincial NDP in Quebec before the next election – presumably in 2016)

Greg Fingas argues this morning that creation of the Quebec NDP is about completing the Canada-wide puzzle and having a branch in every province for party building and to influence the public discourse.

Greg is right in his analysis and those who say it is also about providing a left option for Federalists in Quebec are also correct. But there is another reason why this is a brilliant tactical move for Mulcair: it allows him to define his past experience and the NDP, in advance of conservative attacks.

I’ve always thought those who criticize Mulcair’s involvement in the Charest government, had a very narrow view of Quebec politics. Mulcair was involved with the only federalist party in Quebec and while it wasn’t perfectly progressive (and has gotten less so since) that can’t be blamed on Tom. However, the topic kept coming up – often by people who would point out Charest was a Conservative or who opposed the Charest government on tuition fees. Now Tom and the NDP can say that Tom was involved in the only federalist party and there was no left wing alternative but “now there is a better option”. Tom’s effectively distanced himself from any criticism of the current Charest government while not shying away from his experience in government. (Something which would not have been an easy thing to do otherwise).

Secondly, this should settle once and for all the question of the NDP’s position on federalism. The new Quebec NDP will be a centre-left FEDERALIST party, just like the federal NDP is federalist. Does the NDP have some positions in common with non-federalists? Sure, but being federalist doesn’t require you disagree with separatists on every issue, every time. Being federalist requires that you believe Quebec should remain within a united Canada. The Conservatives and Liberals like to argue that the NDP took soft-separatists positions in the last election, I think that’s BS because regardless of the NDP’s position on the constitution or the principle of self-determination of peoples we think Quebec should remain in Canada and no one would campaign harder against a referendum than Mulcair. Now, we can explicitly say the provincial NDP is on the federalist side as well. It adds to the lists of ways the NDP is federalist and helps defuse any future attacks against NDP.

Any success the party enjoys will be great. Any party building it helps with will be appreicated. Any effect a Quebec NDP can have on shaping the media discourse, will sure be helpful. … but regardless of all that, it was still a brilliant move by Mulcair and the NDP.

 

 

 

Rules for Radicals – The organizers handbook

 

Every political organizer should know Saul Alinsky.

He was an organizer, leftie and self-proclaimed radical in the early to mid-20th century and wrote what should be considered the definitive handbook for anyone trying to organize political action. A legitimate criticism of Alinsky is that he’s world is a little black-and-white (those who have power and those who don’t, those who are rich and the have-nots, etc.) and his model for organizing doesn’t leave much space for consensus approaches. However, that being said, when it comes to pressure tactics or using conflict in social justice, Saul Alinsky literally wrote the book.

Rules for Radicals is Alinsky’s second book and focuses on 1) what it is to be a radical or community organizer, 2) ethics for organizers and, most importantly, 3) rules or tactics for political action.

A couple of my mentors referenced and taught me about Alinsky. And so informative and guiding is Rules for Radicals that I`ve given it out at least a half dozen times to young activists I was mentoring. I’ve reread or referenced this book every couple years or so, whenever I know I’m be working on a prolonged political struggle or need to think about strategy.

While I have some problems with some of Alinsky’s thoughts on ethics in a political struggle, his thoughts about tactics and strategies for organizing are extremely helpful. It has been suggested that the Tea Party used Alinsky-like strategies in their rise, Obama said that Alinsky was a contributing influence in his early days as a community organizer and Hilary Rodham (Clinton) wrote her senior thesis on Alinsky’s organizing methods.

This is a must have on any political bookshelf.

 

 

Title: Rules for Radicals (1971)

Author: Saul Alinsky

Price: Less than $15

Political Bookshelf: The fundraising book every organizer should have!

Political Bookshelf: The fundraising book every organizer should have!

I feel that fundraising is an important skill for an organizer and I feel so strongly that it`s a useful tool to have in politics that I dedicated one of my first posts to the topic of the topic.

But in arguing that organizers should learn the art of effectively fundraising, I was trying to make it clear that I feel fundraising is a highly specialized skill, just like volunteer management or communications. Fundraising is something that should be studied and taught, it`s not something you just start doing and expect to do it well (although some people and groups try).

I have had a fairly high degree of success in my fundraising experience and I have a lot of people to thank for that, people who mentored me, taught me or showed me tips along the way and I took two crash courses in fundraising (one from the NDP, the other from the United Way) … but above and beyond all that, I have to thank Kim Klein for making me the fundraiser I am.

Her book ‘Fundraising for Social Change’ has helped me out a lot and I highly recommend it. It’s an all-out manual for progressives or non-profits covering everything from who donates in a society (hint: it’s mostly individuals), why people donate, how to ask for money, how to write a letter, how to plan events to budgeting best practices and long-term strategic fundraising planning.

I am going to try to write about many of these things with this blog over time (and link to other people doing the same), if you really want to know about fundraising and have the depth of knowledge to be an authority on the subject … get this book!

 

Book: Fundraising for Social Change

Author: Kim Klein

Price: I have the fifth edition (shown here) which can be bought online fairly cheaply. The sixth edition has just come out and can be bought on amazon for $45 US.

 

 

 

So what makes Kim Klein so qualified to speak on this topic? Well, 31 years ago she founded the bimonthy ‘Grassroots Fundraising Journal’ to talk about fundraising for social cause. That has since morphed into the Grassroots Institute for Fundraising Training, which you should check out, although they still publish the journal. And she has raised more money for more causes using grassroots tactics than I could even start to dream about….

 

In fact, it’s so awesome a book that its actually used in some college courses for students getting a degree in fundraising (see, I told you it was a specialized skill, there are even degrees in it).

Using FourSquare, Gowalla and Facebook Places in Political Campaigns

Hey Everyone, Look Where I Am! Using FourSquare, Gowalla and Facebook Places in Your Political Campaigns

By Kayle Hatt

<Note: This was first published as an article on ePolitics.com on Feb 15th>

At this point the classic real estate saying “Location, Location, Location” has transitioned into the catagory of cliché, but politicos know that location matters. Political battlegrounds are drawn along the lines of wards, districts and, in parliamentary traditions, ridings. Targeting can be broken down into census tracks or demographic clusters. We colour our geographic zones by their red-to-blue leanings and view them accordingly (or in Canada, blue-to-red-to-orange leanings). And, of course, voters care profoundly about their small corner of the world.

I think it’s fair to say that politics and location are completely interconnected. So wouldn’t it be great if you could integrate this concept of location into your social media campaign?

Well, I have good news for you… You can!

Meet the Location-Based Social Media Networks

Do you have a smart phone?

Of course, you do, right? About two-thirds of new cellphones sold in North America these days are smartphones and just under half of cellphone users have a smartphone. In urban areas, among younger demographics or professionals, that percentage is much higher. (Of course, if you’re running a small rural campaign, keep in mind that the reverse is also true.)

The location-based social media tools are built upon this proliferation of smart phones — most of which have mobile GPS features built-in to them. These location-based tools allow participants to ‘check-in’ at their physical location and share that information with their friends and social media networks online.

On these social media networks, FourSquare, Gowalla and Facebook Places, users and businesses have created these specific locations (Joe’s Pizzeria, the Anywhereville Library, etc) that are recognizable by the GPS on your smartphone and, using the network, users can see people who have ‘checked-in’ at the same spot as you or were their friends have checked-in. (If you want more of a primer on these services and how they work, read this article by Total Politics, a UK-focused elections magazine; however the following will assume some basic knowledge and will build from there.)

So how can you use these tools in you campaign? Well, I have three strategy suggestions for you.

The Campaign Office

In my opinion, volunteers are the most important resource that a campaign can have. I draw that opinion from my ‘field’ background and, while some may disagree (those from a mass communications background often argue that money is more important), the fact remains that most campaigns are constantly looking for more volunteers. Even campaigns that have a lot of volunteers still don’t have enough — you can never have too many!

One of the best ways to get new volunteers is to encourage your existing volunteers to talk to their friends about volunteering and social media is great for this. If you aren’t asking your volunteers to tweet or post Facebook updates about volunteering, then you should be.

Creating a location for your campaign office on FourSquare or Facebook Places is simply taking this to the next level. Volunteers can check-in to your office when they arrive, essentially telling their social media friends “Hey everyone, look where I am! I’m volunteering for candidate XYZ, why don’t you come join me.”

Many good field organizers and ground-focused campaigns have already started to do this … and so should you.

The Local Candidate

As I said above, voters care about neighbourhoods and their small corner of the world. Voters love to know that candidates are visiting their area and are therefore, in some small way, connected to their lives.

How many candidate tweets have you seen tweeting their location or updating their Facebook feed with items from their schedule? This is good (in moderation. Please, god, please don’t let the entire social media feed for your campaign be a carbon copy of your schedule) but the great thing about using these location-based tools is that people can see them after the fact. Someone who uses FourSquare, for example, in their daily life might see that your candidate visited the same coffee shop as them.

This strategy is great for highly localized campaigns or municipal elections.

Bonus points go to campaigns that leave “tips” or comments on the discussion boards at various locations; but don’t spam. For a coffee shop, I’d suggest something along the line of “Thanks for supporting local businesses. I had the fair trade dark-roast coffee blend and it was really good. I highly recommend it. — Joe Smith, Candidate for State Senate in District 4″

Also, an important note: You can use social media to make notes of where you’re personally canvassing but mention neighbourhoods not specific streets. I’ve worked on/with more than one campaign where our opponents would post the street they canvassed on. Each time we made sure to saturate that area with our message afterwards.

The Regional, State(Provincial) or National Campaign

So you have a larger campaign spread over a significant geographical area, your campaign probably has more than one office and a dedicated team working on the tour operations of your candidate … you can do the things mentioned above but why not also play ‘follow-the-leader’.

Using location-based services will allow your campaign to highlight your candidates travels to supporters, reporters and voters. Perhaps a specific feature on your website can allow visitors to follow the movements of your candidate “on the road to The White House/Congress/The State Legislature/The House of Commons/etc.”

For donors, the subtle message would be ‘look at all that travel, you donation is helping our campaign reach voters in all these areas.’ For reporters, it would be ‘see how credible our campaign is’ (especially during primaries). For voters, you could have a feature to ‘find an event near me’ which could highlight previous events near them, show a listing of any future events and give people a chance to sign-up for emails to keep them informed for future events.

Or…

Or play around with these services. Try new and innovative things.

1996 was the first presidential election campaigns where candidates actually had websites and those were mostly just online pamphlets. Ten years ago, email had almost no impact on campaigning. Online engagement, social media campaigning, online ads, text messaging and every other form of ePolitics-style campaigning are all somewhat recent developments and products of on-going innovations.

… and of course, when you try new and innovative things, let the good folks at Epolitics.com <Me> know about it.

For more on location-based services and politics, see Geo-Social Street Wars in Election 2010? and Get in the Game: Political Advocacy and Foursquare.

Six Questions a Candidate Should Ask before Tweeting, Blogging or Posting a Status Update

Six Questions a Candidate Should Ask before Tweeting, Blogging or Posting a Status Update

By Kayle Hatt

<Note: This article was first posted on ePolitics back in the summer of 2010 before Rob Ford became Toronto’s mayor. Despite the date, I think it holds up well.>

Social media is a great campaign tool and you shouldn’t shy away from it (In fact, if you neglect social media it could hurt your chances of getting elected), but you should be careful when using social media for campaign purposes. Here are six questions to ask yourself before posting something:

1. Would I say this to a reporter?

Your social media updates don’t just go to your ‘friends’ or your ‘supporters’. These are public statements and will be seen by the media as surely as if you had put them in a press release — in fact, they may be more likely to be seen because in recent elections most newspapers have started having newsroom staff follow candidates on social media. Mess up and they will know!

Would you want to see this tweet on the front page of tomorrow’s paper? Enough said.

 

2. Would I say this to an opponent?

Even if your social media updates aren’t being watched by the media you can bet your opponents will be watching. If you post something inappropriate your opponents will be more than happy to pass it on to reporters. Or use your comments in a radio ad attacking you. Or a flyer delivered to every house in the ward/riding. Or have someone ask you about it at a debate.

 

3. Is this an emotionally-motivated tweet/post?

Campaigns are tough. You will get upset. You will get frustrated. You will get annoyed, sad and at times, disappointed. Those feelings are normal and you are allowed to have them, just don’t tweet or post updates when you feel that way.

Anyone who has ever worked on a campaign will sympathize with your feelings about being attacked at a debate or having a door slammed on your face while canvassing. Unfortunately, most voters haven’t worked on a campaign and won’t sympathize — to them you will just look unparliamentary.

Don’t post on a whim.

 

4. Does this violate the TMI rule?

T.M.I., as any teenager or their parents can tell you, stands for Too Much Information. Personal posts are fine. Family stuff is good. Attending a local hockey game, great! Doing non-campaign community work, awesome (where do you find the time). Hobbies? Maybe.

BUT stay away from anything too personal, which includes anything about relationships, about drinking with friends or anything even remotely sexual….

Here are some sub-questions in this category to ask yourself:

4.a) Does this personal post portray me in a bad light in anyway?

4.b) Do voters really need to know this about me?

4.c) Is this a G-rated post?

Bottom line is, if you wouldn’t tell your elderly grandmother or your ten-year-old daughter, don’t tell your social media network.

 

5. Is this post on-message?

You’ve worked hard (hopefully) to develop your campaign themes, spent months researching your main issues, and agonized over word choice in your communications. In short, you’ve carefully crafted and polished your campaign’s message. Why then would you want to tweet about something different?

You are allowed to go off topic from time to time, but always be mindful of when you are doing it (for instance to address something raised by an opponent or some emerging issue of interest to voters), and be conservative about how often you go off topic.

And never go off topic on a whim (see #3).

 

6. Can this be misinterpreted? Am I communicating what I want to communicate?

Many social networking posts are space limited (Twitter is 140 characters. Facebook is 365) and because of space limitations there is a tendency to cut posts. Beware of misinterpretations. Read and re-read your message looking for possible misunderstandings or double entendres.

Also you many want to consider if you can actually make a nuanced argument or statement on some issues in 140 characters. Perhaps it might be better to make a 300 word blog post on taxes, for example, and then tweet about the blog post including a link rather than making a space limited post that could be misinterpreted.

 

Final Thought: The internet is forever and your comments are, too.

What you put on the internet can’t be undone. Yes sure, most social media websites give you the option of deleting posts or removing tweets after the fact, but most also give users the ability to get notifications of your new statements to their emails or even their cell phones.

Rest assured that opponents, and any good reporters following you, will have that post long after you’ve deleted it — if you want proof, just read a newspaper from any day during the 2008 Federal election.

ePolitics has featured my blog :)

 

Just a quite note to thank ePolitics for featuring my blog.

ePolitics is a blog/website that features articles and information about online campaigning. It’s super awesome and if you’ve never checked it out, you should!

Visit at: www.epolitics.com/

I’ve written a couple articles for ePolitics over the last couple years, mostly about social media in elections, and I’ll be posting those here soon.

 

Want to change the world? Learn to fundraise!

Want to change the world? Learn to fundraise!

 

<Note: This post is adapted from an article I wrote for the magazine of the Ontario NDP youth in 2009>

 

One of my favorite Beatles songs is Revolution and I like to think that it’s true what they said, “we all want to change the world” (or at least I assume that it is true for anyone reading this).

The question that has trouble many people, young and old, New Democrat or otherwise, for years is ‘How’?

How do we change the world, promote social justice, fight for the environment or do any of the other things that we want to do?

While I intend this blog to discuss various models of organizing and different tools for activists, with this post I would like to discuss a slightly different answer to the question of how. In my opinion if you want to change the world, learn how to fundraise.

 

Yes, you read that right. More important than knowing how to create a Facebook group or start a twitter protest or even how to recruit volunteers or write a press release, being able to effectively fundraise will make you a powerful force for change.

It’s a truism that money has a profound effect on politics.

One could argue that Stephen Harper’s political success can be attributed to the CPC’s effective fundraising which allowed them to run so many attack ads against Dion and Ignatieff. Likewise, the ‘historic’ election of Obama as President of the United States had as much to do with his impressive ability to raise campaign funds as it did his specific policy positions. Tommy Douglas himself attributed his election as Premier to Clarence Fines, who managed the CCFs fundraising during the 1944 campaign and later became Treasurer of Saskatchewan.

The same is true even if you are not working directly for the benefit of a political party. NGOs need funds to operate and if you are looking at starting a campaign on any issue you will need money. Maybe at first you can pay to photocopy the flyers yourself but eventually, if you’re serious, you will need to do some fundraising.

Of course there are roles in a campaign other than that of ‘fundraiser’ but consider: Without fundraising volunteers would have no pamphlets to handout or signs to put up, we couldn’t employ field organizers and communications staff couldn’t afford ads.

I helped with NDP fundraising before the last few elections and on a good night an individual fundraiser could raise enough to cover an organizer’s salary for couple weeks or pay for an ad reaching thousands of people. Such fundraising is not necessarily counter to the idea of a grassroots movement; working on a membership drive may not raise as much but it brings people into the party who will likely contribute more later and, just as importantly, grows our activist base.

Despite its importance, there is a tendency to overlook the role of fundraising in social movements in part because our society has placed a taboo on many things money related. I had a professor who claimed that this taboo is simply yet another system of ‘capitalist control over workers’; if workers are uncomfortable talking to each other about money, they don’t learn about pay inequity between different positions or between genders and different racial groups. In this way, he argued, the taboo holds back the progress of working people.

Likewise, if we don’t place fundraising as a priority, if we find ourselves restricted by our own taboos, we will always face an uphill battle in challenging the established forces in our society.

There are a lot of people who strictly focus on outreach or communications but if you really want to make an impact spend some time fundraising.

Your activism doesn’t have to be all fundraising all the time, but your fundraising efforts will make you, and others in your organization, more effective in everything else you do.

If you want to change the world, then fundraise!

 

(In future posts, I’ll be discussing some elements of fundraising and reviewing my favourite Fundraising book: Kim Klein’s Fundraising for Social Change.)