Chair Melendez Cancels December SCC Meeting; The Importance Of Being Heard

Pretty sure the December meeting was cancelled in August... (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Joe Bodell @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 17:33:43 PM UTC

Interesting. (0.00 / 0)

I say interesting because I'm pretty sure it was on the DFL.org calendar just last week.

"Those that forget the lessons of history, tend to vote GOP"

---

by: TwoPuttTommy @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 17:55:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That doesn't mean it wasn't previously cancelled (0.00 / 0)

It simply means the event was still on the calendar.

---

by: Joe Bodell @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 18:01:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

maintenance (0.00 / 0)

Good calendar maintenance hasn't always been a priority in the DFL, whether the state party or the local party units.  Some are more diligent, but often something gets dumped on a calendar and never thought about again.

There's nothing nefarious going on here.  Whether it was a smart decision, YMMV.

---

by: JML @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 18:39:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sticking my head in the Lion's mouth again... (0.00 / 0)

I understand the need for social media, but I'm going to press you for more detail.  More detail because if I am understanding your proposal(s), the DFL should be intimately involved in the social networking of nearly all DFL endorsed candidates.  My feeling is that even acting as a adviser for 200+ candidates would require hiring several additional communications staffers at the State Level for several months.

If that is a worthwhile expenditure, then we should certainly do it, and do it now.  But I feel like volunteers, and sometimes candidates, are looking for the few staffers at Plato to do so much more than they do, without spending more.

In my opinion, the solution lies in building local units (so each will have supervols capable of assisting candidates with all aspects of campaigning, including social media), and working with the SCC and the DFL Communications Team to strengthen the importance of social media at the top as well.  

We should work to find the very best candidates and train them mercilessly.  They should get this training from the State DFL AND the local party units.  Each party unit should be prepared to put their candidates' best foot forward, while the State Party works with statewide candidates to craft a message to help all candidates.

I posted before citing that the DFL does use social media better than the GOP, at the state level.  I didn't mean to say we should be satisfied with those efforts, only to say that the Communications Team did use FB and Twitter while completing a great number of things during the election cycle.  It is up to us to find them more followers/fans, it is up to us to work with a candidate to increase their social media presence.

---

by: arronolson @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 18:55:26 PM UTC

+1 to correctness for Arron (0.00 / 0)

You should be leading a piece of the Party....wait a minute ;)

---

by: Joe Bodell @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 19:32:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Arron, by what basis do you consider... (0.00 / 0)

... that the DFL used social media better than the GOP?

I'm curious, because I don't see that.

But, hey - I've been wrong before!

"Those that forget the lessons of history, tend to vote GOP"

---

by: TwoPuttTommy @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 19:54:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Only one piece of evidence (0.00 / 0)

I really couldn't say either side uses social media more effectively, I'm just citing the reach of the State Parties on FB and Twitter. The DFL has more followers/fans by healthy margins, and it is my perception that the posts/tweets were regular and on point.

I could be wrong because I really don't follow as many GOP'ers as DFL'ers. My original point really was, "the DFL does use social media, be more specific on how we should use it more."

---

by: arronolson @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 20:12:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

As someone that followed the GOP last cycle very closely.... (0.00 / 0)

...it was obvious they were taking social media to a new level.

As to your "how we should use it more" -- let's take a look at three YouTubes, for example.

I put one together, rippin' Emmer:

Veterans To Emmer - it has 1,438 views.

There was a YouTube put together rippin' Target:

Target Mom - it has 337,469 views

Then there's the grand-daaddy of 'em all, ripi' Target:

Target Ain't People - 1,328,769 views

Why the difference, between li'l ol' me, at 1,438 views, and the other two YouTubes, at over 300,00 and 1,300,000 views?

The LGBT people know how to push a message much better than your average DFLers do.  Those two Target YouTubes went viral because LGBTers hit the "like" and "rec" and "digg it" and "forward" and "RT" buttons.

The DFL needs to learn from them, and every other media savvy group. Then the DFL needs to train DFLers in how to use social media.  If not, we're gonna get buried under CitizensUnited - fueled GOPer media campaigns in 2012.   And remember - the GOP pro-actively trained their followers in social media.

Now, keep in mind that Wellstone won after being outspent by around $7 to $1.  We can win in 2012 - even being overspent.  But we're going to have a real hard time winning if we're overspent AND we're ignoring a media segment we can - and should - dominate.

"Those that forget the lessons of history, tend to vote GOP"

---

by: TwoPuttTommy @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 20:52:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Perhaps Workshops? (0.00 / 0)

Creating workshops that cater specifically to, or highlight social media sounds like a good idea.  We need to convince the top (Plato), the middle (CD/SD/CU), and the grassroots (individuals), that social media training should happen and give them suggestions on whom should run them.

Let's start a conversation on the content of the material at these trainings, see if existing material or social media trainings already exist to prevent re-inventing the wheel, and then move to putting them on.

What it seems like you are proposing is a small culture change.  We need to condition DFL'ers to use social media to drive the message home to their peers.  We train the few, they convince the many others, and all of us pester (with political goodness) the masses!

---

by: arronolson @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 21:26:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm all over that, Arron! (0.00 / 0)

In fact, I've suggested that the DFL HQ ("Plato", if you will) do in 2011 what they did in 2007 (but, not in 2009): hold a series of statewide listening sessions AND add to the breakouts they did in 2007, social media training breakouts in 2009.

Hey, the GOPers did that kind of training last cycle:

We should be doing it this cycle.

If we don't, we're essentially ceding the battle for one link in the chain.

"Those that forget the lessons of history, tend to vote GOP"

---

by: TwoPuttTommy @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 21:40:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We were on our own. (0.00 / 0)

The PIM story about republican message discipline http://politicsinminnesota.com... shows the difference between the approaches of the two parties.

Having worked with several candidates I can tell you that the republican candidates all said the same thing without elaborating.  "No taxes, No abortions, No gay marriage."

What this also means is that it's easier for the republicans to use social media and twitter because all republicans are basically saying the same thing because they unlike us use message discipline.

They have this discipline because they unlike us actually have meetings and involve every one of their candidates.

They unlike us, share their polling data with every one of their candidates targeted or not.  They unlike us don't make up their mind in April which races are worth it and stick to those chosen few no matter what happens.

While none of the races I worked with were "targeted" by either party I know that the republican candidates had regular meetings or sessions with their caucus while the democratic candidates were for the most part on their own.

I collected the lit pieces from candidates from Anoka, Sherburne, Wright, Meeker, McLeod and Stearns counties. All of the republican pieces were basically the same with the same 3 thymes in each of them.  The Democrats were all over the board.

You develop a message based on polling. And while the Senate, house and presumably the DFL did a lot of polling none of that was shared with any campaign outside of the targeted races that I know of.

 Not one of the 5 house candidates or 3 senate candidates I talked to ever had a single message meeting with the caucus. They were all told to use mass mailings, radio and door knocking  but never told what to say.

The result was that the republican message was echoed in ever house and senate race in the state while the democratic message was left up to each district and could and did vary widely from district to district Even within a Senate district you could see 2 house candidates, a senate candidate, the congressional and Governor all on different pages while the republicans were all saying the same thing.

So how do you have a simple, unified message when the vast majority of your candidates are left on their own with no polling data to come up with a message?  The answer is that you can't.

The folks on Plato often treat candidates has either or. 20 candidates will get everything they need and the rest are lucky to get a return phone call within a few days.

Hosting a few message meetings and sharing some data would cost the DFL little, but the dividends of having 200 candidates echoing the same basic message in mailings, media and hundreds of thousands of door knocks  would be priceless and make social media that much more effective.

Let's try running in every district next election.

---

by: taxpayingliberal @ Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 22:12:08 PM UTC