Is social media ranking becoming a useful science to measure political influence?

Social media ranking is a significant question for marketing according to Jeff John Roberts, GigaOM.com.  READ MORE: “Social media rankings: perceptive or pointless?” LINK: http://gigaom.com/2012/12/04/social-media-rankings-perceptive-or-pointless/

The science of social media ranking may signal a trend in the game of political influence.

Conservative GOP Senator Jim DeMint’s resignation to head the Heritage Foundation is attributable, in part, by Eric Ueland, a lobbyist with the Duberstein Group, to the use of social media and other “new tools to move an agenda.” READ MORE: “What Jim DeMint’s resignation says about him, the Senate and the conservative movement,” LINK: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/12/06/what-jim-demints-resignation-says-about-him-the-senate-and-the-conservative-movement/

Could we be witnessing the emergence of a revolutionary phenomenon of measuring the political influence of a politician, think tank, talk host, commentator or Super PAC ad by Facebook posts, Tweets, YouTube views and mobile apps?

What’s then in store for the future influence of mainstream media in politics?

Related articles

• What next for the conservative movement? (charlotteobserver.com)
• Social media rankings: perceptive or pointless? [GigaOM] (gigaom.com)
• What Jim DeMint’s resignation says about him, the Senate and the conservative movement (washingtonpost.com)

 

Is the attack on Susan Rice masking a larger and more strident GOP political agenda?

Is the ferocious Republican political attack on Susan Rice as a potential nominee for Secretary of State really about mistaken or incomplete remarks about Benghazi; or, is there another larger and more strident GOP political agenda afoot which is being masked by the very public attack?

WHAT’S THE GOP’s REAL POLITICAL AGENDA

Whatever may have been the GOP’s motives for questioning Rice’s remarks, considering that the remarks were based upon sanitized talking points from the CIA, and that she had no policy or operational role with respect to Benghazi, we are now well beyond the query stage.

Right or wrong, Rice did not originate, compose or edit the talking points.

Looking for answers through GOOGLE search is not much help in answering the question because there is a proliferation of theories all over the charts as probably could be expected.

So beyond the partisan rhetoric, are there coherent and rational explanations for the political fallout?

Let’s try a few.

SETTING THE STAGE FOR GOP CONFIRMATION BATTLES

After President Barack Obama was elected President in 2008, the stated goal of the GOP was to defeat him for reelection in 2012.

Perhaps the new goal is to use confirmation battles to delay, derail or even defeat the nominations he makes for key cabinet positions.

If that is the goal, then the political flap over the nomination of Rice as Secretary of State is just the opening salvo. More of the same may be coming when other key cabinet nominations are made.

STIRING PARTISAN FIREFIGHTS TO INFLUENCE 2014 ELECTIONS

Voters made a clear choice reelecting President Obama. They favored the Democratic President’s policies for the future of the nation over those advanced by Republican nominee Governor Mitt Romney.

There probably are some GOP operatives who not satisfied that the election settled the nation’s policy agenda for the next four years.

So their thinking could be that with several strategic confirmation battles and other strategic firefights, they can stoke the partisan divide and influence the outcomes of the various Senatorial, Congressional and gubernatorial elections slated for 2014 favorably for the GOP.

INFLUENCING ELECTION 2016

This thought is out-of-the-box. But, at least it’s a thought.

If for some reason Rice is not nominated, or if nominated she is not confirmed, who is next in line for the appointment? Probably Senator John Kerry.

Kerry as Secretary of State is a better target for the GOP long term than Rice.

The GOP could pump the notion that Kerry was using to office to position himself for another Presidential bid in 2016, and also exploit that framework to attack most of the Obama Administration’s foreign policy initiatives until Election 2016.

The thinking could be that the strategy may create enough strife among competing factions within the Democratic Party that a battle for the Democratic nomination would ensue which would weaken the Democratic nominee for President in 2016.

LOOKING FORWARD

The attack on Susan Rice could be part of a larger GOP political strategy.

If that is the case, the next four years may be as politically strident and divisive, or even more so, than in the past as Democrats can be expected to respond in-kind.

That could pose serious challenges to the implementation of Obama Administration policies.

That also would portend very contentious elections for 2014 and 2016

 

RELATED ONLINE ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB

• Obama Rice rant good for senator – Boston Herald (bostonherald.com)

 

• House Republicans Can’t Block A Susan Rice Nomination So They’re Writing A Sternly Worded Letter (huffingtonpost.com)

• Petraeus tells Congress that Susan Rice was unaware of al-Qaida ties to Benghazi (rawstory.com)

 

• Obama Defends Susan Rice Against ‘Outrageous’ McCain, Graham Attack (kaystreet.wordpress.com)

• Post-Election Partisanship Heats Up Around Obama’s Next Secretary of State (usnews.com)

 

• U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice defends Benghazi remarks (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)

• GOP’s Sexist Hazing of Susan Rice (realclearpolitics.com)

 

Romney still matters for 2014 and 2016

Republican insiders and GOP strategists, as well as a host of writers, pundits and commentators of various persuasions who seem to be talking in an echo chamber, could be making a grave mistake writing off Mitt Romney as a significant player going forward in national politics.

There’s the chance that he may be not only a major influence in the 2014 mid-term elections and the 2016 Presidential Election, but also a major factor.

ROMNEY’S INFLUENCE

Romney’s sphere of influence for now is considerable.

In the 2012 Presidential Election, he “attracted $1 billion in funding and 59 million votes in his bid to unseat President [Barack] Obama.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-sinks-quickly-in-republicans-esteem/2012/11/16/f1941ed0-2ffe-11e2-a30e-5ca76eeec857_story.html

That was 48 percent, or nearly half, of the votes in the nation which by any measurements  or metrics is a sizeable base of influence.

So if Romney decides that he will influence that base with respect to policy and politics over the next several years, and even through 2016, who can stop him?

THE ROMNEY FACTOR

Mitt Romney only needs to reach two percent of the people who voted for President Obama to break even, and three present of them to hold a majority of voters who he can influence.

That may not be the insurmountable task a lot commentators surmise it to be.

He has several ways of doing it.

FIRST: he could do the talk show circuit.

What’s more likely is that he will donate to several prestigious think tanks, craft his messages and use the non profits as the vehicles to get his messages out.

He would fine tune and tweak those messages to reach and influence his base and the three percent.

SECOND: he could support a slate of Republican candidates for the Senate and the House races in the 2014 mid-term elections.

That can be done easily with direct donations, the funding of SUPER PACS and campaign appearances.

AMERICA’S FUTURE WITH ROMNEY?

By the end of 2014, Romney will know whether his influence is making a difference, and whether he has momentum to be a factor in national politics.

He could then decide whether to support a GOP Presidential ticket, or even perhaps run again himself!

We need to wait for Mitt Romney to decide for himself whether he will continue to influence his base on policy, expand that base, and be a factor in the politics of the 2014 and 2016 elections.

Related articles

• Mitt Romney Remains Clueless and His Rep. Governor Bobby Jindal Knows It!!! (urbanmommies.net)
• Should Mitt Romney exit stage left? (politico.com)
• Why Mitt Romney will regret blaming his loss on Obama’s ‘gifts’ to minorities (kaystreet.wordpress.com)
• Jindal Quickly Rejects Romney’s Claim Obama Won because of Free Stuff “Gifts” to Key Constituencies (UPDATE) (themoderatevoice.com)
• Bobby Jindal Wants You To Know That He’s Running For President In 2016, Guys (huffingtonpost.com)
• As GOP governors gather, prescriptions for 2016 (mysanantonio.com)
• Dear Republican Establishment: a letter from the conservative grassroots (legalinsurrection.com)
• GOP leaders already jockeying for 2016 (newsvine.com)

 

Blacks Should Vote GOP Because Lincoln Freed Slaves?

VOTE

Because Lincoln Freed Slaves

WHAT??

So says a GOP campaign ad in Ohio.

LINK: http://politic365.com/2012/11/02/stop-now-ohio-ad-says-blacks-should-vote-gop-because-lincoln-freed-slaves/

Makes no sense to us!

Does it make sense to you ?

Related articles

• Exciting New Ohio Ad: Republicans Are The Ones Who Love You, Black Dummies! (wonkette.com)
• Conservative Super PAC says vote Republican because Abraham Lincoln (dailykos.com)
• Ohio Polls Drive GOP to Use ‘Slavery Ad’ to Target African-Americans For Romney (atlantablackstar.com)
• Ohio ad: Black people should vote GOP because Lincoln freed the slaves (nalert.blogspot.com)
• Super PAC Ad Tells African-Americans To Vote Republican Because Abraham Lincoln Freed The Slaves (smd12364.newsvine.com)
• Ohio Ad Says Black Americans Should Vote Romney Because Lincoln Freed The Slaves (businessinsider.com)
• Ad urges African Americans to vote GOP because Lincoln freed the slaves (news.yahoo.com)
• Ohio ad: Black people should vote GOP because Lincoln freed the slaves (salon.com)
• Super PAC Ad Tells African-Americans To Vote Republican Because Abraham Lincoln Freed The Slaves (addictinginfo.org)

 

ELECTION 2012: Hurricane Sandy torpedoes Mitt Romney’s momentum

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg opening the 2008 Tribeca Film Festival. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

NATE SILVER

Political Momentum

According to Nate Silver, political momentum implies that “a candidate is gaining ground in the race and, furthermore, is likely to continue to gain ground.” READ MORE: LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/us/politics/momentum-misused-in-political-coverage.html

By that measure, Hurricane Sandy has torpedoed Mitt Romney’s supposed momentum.

JAMES MCPHERSON

Media & Politics Blog

James McPherson observed (quote):

The facts that Obama has been endorsed by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, largely endorsed by GOP favorite Chris Christie, and that Hurricane Sandy has allowed Obama to look presidential while Romney avoided and then struggled with questions about whether he would fund FEMA, makes me more confident in my prediction [that Obama should win].

READ MORE: LINK: http://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/2012/11/01/sandy-bloomberg-christie-should-help-obama-win-re-election/#comments

McPherson is correct.

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG

Obama Endorsement

Citing how Sandy reshaped his thinking, Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire businessman turned Mayor of New York, in his endorsement of President Barack Obama said (quote):

“The devastation that Hurricane Sandy brought to New York City and much of the Northeast — in lost lives, lost homes and lost business — brought the stakes of next Tuesday’s presidential election into sharp relief,” Mr. Bloomberg wrote in an editorial for Bloomberg View.

“Our climate is changing,” he wrote. “And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it may be — given the devastation it is wreaking — should be enough to compel all elected leaders to take immediate action.”

READ MORE: LINK: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/nyregion/bloomberg-endorses-obama-saying-hurricane-sandy-affected-decision.html?pagewanted=all

CHRIS CHRISTIE

Obama’s Response to Sandy

Praising President Obama’s response to the devastation wrought by Sandy in his state, Chris Christie, New Jersey’s GOP Governor “may be putting a nail in the coffin of one of Mitt Romney’s last, best campaign message: .  .  . I’m the guy who can bring Democrats and Republicans together and end the gridlock in Washington.” READ MORE: LINK: http://redgreenandblue.org/2012/11/01/hurricane-sandy-christies-praise-of-obama-torpedoes-romneys-election-argument/

HURRICANE SANDY

20 Million Tweets

Sandy also dominated the news coverage during the past week, and flooded social media chatter, “More than 20 million tweets sent as Sandy struck,” READ MORE: LINK: http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/more-20-million-tweets-sent-sandy-struck-1C6838178  effectively drowning Romney’s message.

“What a difference a storm makes,” from song: LINK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIw1g3UShSY ; to the realities of Presidential politics: LINK: http://www.rtcc.org/policy/what-a-difference-a-storm-makes/

SANDY TORPEDO

Political Impact

Sandy has torpedoed Romney’s momentum, derailed his presidential campaign and may have deprived him of the win.

Related Web Articles

• Climate Change Influence on Superstorm Sandy Drives Bloomberg to Endorse Obama (scientificamerican.com)
• Bloomberg endorses Obama, citing Sandy and climate change (firstread.nbcnews.com)
• Michael Bloomberg Endorses Obama: Hurricane Sandy Changed His Mind (forbes.com)
• Is Romney Unraveling? (nytimes.com)
• Hurricane Sandy helped Obama politically, Karl Rove says (washingtonpost.com)
• After Hurricane Sandy, Bloomberg Endorses Obama (newsfeed.time.com)
• Today’s Buzz: Did Chris Christie betray Mitt Romney? (orlandosentinel.com)
• Michael Bloomberg draws a line in the Sandy with climate endorsement (guardian.co.uk)
• Rupert Murdoch: Chris Christie Must ‘Re-Declare’ For Mitt Romney ‘Or Take Blame’ (kaystreet.wordpress.com)

 

ELECTION 2012: Stacey’s dash to endorse Mitt Romney-politics or astute marketing?

Stacey Dash

I knew very little about “Mo’ Money” actress Stacey Dash: LINK: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104897/ and the controversial endorsement she made for Mitt Romney on Twitter which went viral, “Stacey Dash supports Mitt Romney, gets racial backlash on Twitter: Not all blacks must be Democrats,”

 

 

 

 

 

 

LINK: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/therootdc/post/stacey-dash-supports-mitt-romney-gets-racial-backlash-on-twitter-not-all-blacks-must-be-democrats/2012/10/09/22f792b6-1229-11e2-be82-c3411b7680a9_blog.html  until the topic came up in casual conversation with some folks who followed it closely.

For whatever reason, I decided to poke around the Web this weekend to see if I could make some sense of it.

I take my lede from Allison Samuels and her post in thedailybeast.com entitled: “Why Stacey Dash’s Looks—Not Her Race—Matter in Her Romney Endorsement,” READ MORE: LINK: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/11/why-stacey-dash-s-looks-not-her-race-matter-in-her-romney-endorsement.html#comments

Folks, Dash’s endorsement of Romney was about marketing, not politics. It certainly had little to do with race or racial pride, and hardly anything to do with free speech and First Amendment freedoms.

Are you aware that Ms. Dash is quite adept at marketing her good looks, her entertainment experiences and her high media profile?

Check out her website, “Stay Dashing.” She’s blunt about it. READ MORE: LINK: http://staydashing.wordpress.com/about/

Samuels makes the point as well as it could be made (quote):

Who cares what a D-list actress has to say about politics? If she’s drop dead gorgeous, people will pay attention—and lash out, as Dash found out. But let’s not pretend her race has an impact on her Romney support.

A quick look at the metrics on Ms. Dash’s Twitter site suggests that a lot of people were indeed paying attention. READ MORE: LINK: https://twitter.com/REALStaceyDash/lists

I know nothing about Ms. Dash’s politics.

But, it’s obvious she knows something about the business of new media and marketing.

Apparently, she is astute enough to leverage her looks and media profile, which apparently are still strong enough to land her a guest appearance on Piers Morgan’s show, a lot of talk about the endorsement on TV and radio shows, thousands of pages on GOOGLE and a torrent of social media traffic both good and bad.

All of that chatter and all of those views for a one sentence political endorsement on Twitter which most people forgot about after the splash and the first news cycle?

As Samuels noted in her post: “Many prominent women of color routinely share fascinating and controversial comments on Twitter each day, to absolutely no fanfare.” No fanfare is not good for business.

Folks, whether you agree or disagree with the endorsement, Ms. Dash timed it well.

The endorsement generated thousands of views and clicks online; a lot of mainstream media coverage; and, a ton of social media traffic.

And, that’s the way of the world in the business of new media.

 

Related articles

• Stacey Dash casts vote for Romney; Vicious Left says ‘Die bitch,’ ‘hope you get shot Uncle Tom’ (twitchy.com)
• Why We Don’t Care That Stacey Dash Supports Mitt Romney (giantlife.com)
• Actress Stacey Dash Target Of Racial Backlash On Twitter After Endorsing Mitt Romney (losangeles.cbslocal.com)
• Clueless: Stacey Dash Says Money Mitt Is ‘The Only Choice’ For President (bossip.com)
• Vivica A. Fox slams Stacey Dash’s endorsement of Mitt Romney (thegrio.com)
• VIDEO: Vivica A. Fox Responds to Stacey Dash’s Romney Endorsement (rodonline.typepad.com)
• Shots Fired: Vivica Fox Calls Out Stacey Dash For Attention Sloring Endorsement Of Romney (bossip.com)
• Vivica A. Fox Throws Major Shade at Stacey Dash for Romney Endorsement (jezebel.com)
• Actress Stacey Dash announces support for Romney; Disgruntled Dems attack (twitchy.com)
• Stacey Dash Comes Out In Support Of Mitt Romney (mymajicdc.com)

 

FOREIGN POLICY: A debate about what-Libya, Syria, Iran, China, Israel or elswhere;? this is bound to be a debate to nowhere!

It’s hard to imagine that there will be much interest in the Third Presidential Debate concerning foreign policy.

Indeed, there is a respectable argument that as a practical matter, Election 2012 is over.

Americans are split; nearly 40% of them already have cast their ballots in early voting; the supposed 6% of undecided voters has shrunk to less than 2%; and, everyone has grown tired of the political rhetoric.

For those who think they may be swayed by the debate, read the NPR post entitled: “Foreign Policy Debate: Rhetoric Vs. Reality,” LINK: http://www.npr.org/2012/10/21/163356016/foreign-policy-at-debate-rhetoric-vs-reality , which surveys the issues which are likely to be debated.

For those who have made their selections, read Larry Sabato’s analysis of the likely outcomes for electoral votes (quote):

Republicans therefore are a lock or lead in 24 states for 206 electoral votes,
and Democrats have or lead in 19 states for 247 electoral votes. That’s why
seven super-swing states with 85 electors will determine which party gets to the
magic number of 270 electoral votes: Colorado (9), Florida (29), Iowa (6),
Nevada (6), New Hampshire (4), Ohio (18) and Virginia (13).

READ MORE: LINK: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903918104576504520213848188.html

And, with respect to the foreign policy debate: get a good night’s sleep because it will not matter!