It’s a complaint we’ve heard, mostly from next-generation GOP consultant types: Campaigns spend all this money on television and traditional advertising without any real data to inform their spending. That’s the subject of a new Campaigns & Elections op-ed submission from Vincent Harris, a GOP new-media consultant: “The Gut: Running GOP campaigns since 1854.”
— “Gut instinct continues to be the primary form of decision making within Republican campaigns,” Harris writes, “some of which spend millions of dollars on inefficient media buys based on campaign methods passed down through decades of political lore.” We’ve heard the same thing. “TV’s the biggest line item in the budget but the least data-driven,” GOP data guru Alex Lundry told us last year, in response to the news that the NRCC would be using polls to better inform its TV-ad spending.
— But Harris, who headed up now-Sen. Ted Cruz‘s (R-TX) digital ops in 2012, sees little evidence this is happening thus far during the 2014 cycle. Too much money is going into TV and direct mail, he writes, and not enough is going into digital.
— The FL-13 Special is an interesting test case; the NRCC has already spent $725,000 on TV ads (through Feb. 10) and $100,000 on web ads. FL-13 is an older district, and special elections usually attract an older electorate, anyway. But the NRCC ultimately intends to use FL-13 to test the effectiveness of both TV and digital to reach persuadables and turn out their voters — even if that spending level is “in contrast to undeniable research concerning rising digital usage,” as Harris writes.
Digital spending by corporations has moved to nearly a quarter of their overall advertising budget, and politics (particularly on the Republican side) hasn’t kept up with that. The demographics of midterm-election voters don’t necessarily match up with the the overall consumer base, and 2014 won’t necessarily be won or lost online. But, as Harris and others argue, spending smarter will boost the GOP’s chances of capturing the Senate this year and the White House in 2016.
What We're Following See More »
"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."
Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."