The Presidential Candidates Who Are Really Making a Mark on Twitter

Having a ton of followers isn’t enough.

Twitter probably won't be crashing during the State of the Union this year.
National Journal
Zach Montellaro
Add to Briefcase
Zach Montellaro
June 25, 2015, 4 p.m.

What pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate wouldn’t want a mass Twit­ter fol­low­ing? For a group that thrives per­son­ally and pro­fes­sion­ally on pub­lic at­ten­tion, the pro­spect of reach­ing hun­dreds of thou­sands without hav­ing to spend a dime (or say a word to re­port­ers) is ma­gic.

Of course, that as­sumes these Twit­ter users are ac­tu­al people who are ac­tu­ally pay­ing at­ten­tion to the tweets filling their feeds. And in the Twit­ter­verse, that’s far from a guar­an­tee.

After all, many Twit­ter users are in­act­ive, “fol­low­ing” oth­er users in the Twit­ter defin­i­tion but not ac­tu­ally pay­ing at­ten­tion to them at all. For politi­cians hop­ing to use Twit­ter to spread their mes­sage, such ac­counts are of little use. Even worse for politi­cians are dummy ac­counts, those that are pro­grammed to run auto­mat­ic­ally and have no hu­man op­er­at­ing them.

And so, giv­en that, from a can­did­ate’s per­spect­ive, not all Twit­ter users are cre­ated equal, fig­ur­ing out which can­did­ates are ac­tu­ally mak­ing their mark through Twit­ter re­quires a cal­cu­la­tion more soph­ist­ic­ated than simply count­ing fol­low­ers.

For­tu­nately, there’s a dif­fer­ent met­ric to meas­ure the per­form­ance of cam­paigns on Twit­ter: en­gage­ment rate. En­gage­ment rate moves past the ques­tion of how many fol­low­ers a Twit­ter ac­count has to ana­lyze how of­ten those fol­low­ers in­ter­act with that ac­count through ac­tions such as retweet­ing, click­ing on a link, or reply­ing to the ac­count.

“A pure van­ity met­ric is how many fol­low­ers you have,” said John Ran­dall, a vice pres­id­ent at di­git­al con­sultancy firm CRAFT Me­dia/Di­git­al. “Just say­ing, ‘I have X mil­lion of fol­low­ers on Twit­ter’ — there is a value to that. But the great­er value is, ‘I have X mil­lion num­ber of fol­low­ers and on any giv­en post I have a large en­gage­ment rate.’ “

En­gage­ment on Twit­ter can be meas­ured through sev­er­al met­rics. There are the most pub­lic-fa­cing ones, like a fol­low­er retweet­ing or fa­vor­it­ing a par­tic­u­lar tweet, which is dis­played un­der every tweet on the plat­form; or the num­ber of views a video gath­ers. Cam­paigns also look at the click-through rate of links they post to so­cial me­dia to see how many clicks (or dona­tions) a par­tic­u­lar tweet gen­er­ates.

A high level of en­gage­ment for one tweet, however, isn’t enough: “Trend over time is really im­port­ant, not just a snap­shot of one day or even one month,” said Ju­lia Smekalina, who heads polit­ic­al di­git­al strategy at IMGE, a right-of-cen­ter di­git­al-me­dia con­sult­ing firm. “How is that en­gage­ment grow­ing or sus­tain­ing?”

Get­ting the highest amount of fa­vor­ites on Twit­ter is not the en­dgame for a cam­paign — there’s no ex­change rate between retweets and votes in the New Hamp­shire primary. Ul­ti­mately, the goal is to con­vert so­cial-me­dia in­ter­ac­tions in­to something more tan­gible.

“In a sense, [so­cial me­dia] is a town square. It is you stand­ing at your fence talk­ing to your neigh­bor about a spe­cif­ic is­sue,” said Ran­dall. “It is that abil­ity to make con­nec­tions with voters and ad­voc­ates to get them to donate, to share your mes­sage, and evan­gel­ize on your be­half…. Ul­ti­mately you can en­gage with them and hope­fully turn a non-sup­port­er in­to a sup­port­er who will go out and vote for you on Elec­tion Day.”

Des­pite the fo­cus shift­ing from van­ity num­bers like fol­low­er count or num­ber of tweets to more ad­vanced met­rics, cam­paigns still aren’t look­ing at all of the en­gage­ment met­rics. One area where most of the cam­paigns are lack­ing in en­gage­ment is reply­ing dir­ectly to po­ten­tial voters and sup­port­ers on Twit­ter.

“I was fly­ing and we had a crazy three-hour delay, and you could im­me­di­ately go on Twit­ter and fol­low com­plaints from people sit­ting on the plane with me to the air­line, and the air­line was re­spond­ing back,” Smekalina said. “How can cam­paigns rep­lic­ate that? I don’t know how well they’re do­ing that yet.”

But by the met­rics the cam­paigns are fo­cus­ing on, which 2016 can­did­ates are really get­ting their mes­sage out on Twit­ter, and which ones are talk­ing mostly to dead air? Here are their en­gage­ment scores, based on data from Tweetch­up.com, a ser­vice that tracks sev­er­al pub­licly ac­cess­ible Twit­ter met­rics, like the num­ber of retweets, fol­low­er count, and tweets per day.

Av­er­age # of retweets (June 1-June 22)

Source: //tweetch­up.com/

1. Ben Car­son - 229.96
2. Rand Paul - 209.05
3. Ted Cruz* - 194.32
4. Marco Ru­bio - 179.56
5. Jeb Bush - 179.42
6. Rick Perry - 160.74
7. Don­ald Trump - 130.01
8. Scott Walk­er* - 68.19
9. Carly Fior­ina - 47.45
10. Mike Hucka­bee - 43.54
11. Rick San­tor­um - 39.25
12. Bobby Jin­dal - 38.63
13. Lind­sey Gra­ham* - 20.72
14. John Kasich - 19.00
15. Chris Christie* - 15.47
16. George Pa­taki - 15.13
*In­dic­ates two ac­counts

Av­er­age # of fa­vor­ites (June 1 - June 22)

Source: //tweetch­up.com/

1. Car­son - 416.15
2. Paul - 292.194
3. Trump - 243.27
4. Perry - 194.55
5. Bush - 190.16
6. Cruz* ““ 165.90
7. Ru­bio - 160.5
8. Fior­ina - 67.87
9 Walk­er* - 63.78
10. Hucka­bee - 61.88
11. Jin­dal - 49.94
12. San­tor­um -34.38
13. Kasich - 27.29
14. Gra­ham* - 26.78
15. Christie* - 24.84
16. Pa­taki - 16.33
*In­dic­ates two ac­counts

What We're Following See More »
WILL FOCUS ON FUNDRAISING
Katie Walsh Leaving White House for Political Role
4 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"President Trump's deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh is leaving her current position to work with political groups whose help the White House is seeking as it plows ahead with an ambitious agenda, two sources familiar with the move told the Washington Examiner." On the one hand, Walsh is said to be a master fundraiser. On the other, she's butted heads with many of her colleagues in the White House.

Source:
MODELED ON “GANG OF 14” DEAL
McCain Aims to Deal with Dems on Gorsuch
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

Sen. John McCain is looking to strike a deal with Senate Democrats that would confirm Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, while preserving the right of the minority party to filibuster some nominations. McCain is trying to reprise the "Gang of 14" deal, which temporarily preserved the 60-vote threshold for lower-court nominees. This time around, "a deal would require eight Democrats to vote to advance the nomination in return for a promise that in the future they would be able to block a nominee in extraordinary circumstances." But McCain admitted he's not optimistic.

Source:
WOULD LET STATES DENY FUNDING
Pence Breaks Tie on Planned Parenthood Vote
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The GOP held open for more than an hour a vote on a measure that would "allow states to block federal family-planning funds to Planned Parenthood." Sen. Johnny Isakson, who is recovering from back surgery, was summoned to the floor to make the vote 50-50, after which Vice President Pence broke the tie in favor of the measure. Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski were the lone Republicans to vote against it.

Source:
CONTRADICTS PRESIDENT
Ryan: I Won’t Work with Dems on Healthcare
5 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) in an interview to be broadcast early Thursday said he does not want to work with Democrats on healthcare legislation, breaking with President Trump's recent comments."

Source:
WILL HE TRY TO PRIMARY THEM?
Trump Puts the Freedom Caucus in His Crosshairs
8 hours ago
THE DETAILS
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login