The Online War the Democrats Are Losing: Where's the Strategy?

The Internet's had some great successes on behalf of Barack Obama. But net-savvy Democrats are being beaten by the simplest of all online technologies, and nobody to my knowledge is designing a response.

Building on models like MoveOn to Facebook, the Obama campaign and its supporters have raised huge sums of money and built impressive virtual organizations in support of his candidacy. Groups like ActBlue have created fundraising clearinghouses, which bloggers like Howie Klein, Jane Hamsher, Digby and Crooks and Liars have in turn used to create effective fundraising tools for Congressional Democrats.

With all this expertise, digital campaigning should be asymmetrical warfare. After all, these forces are lined up against a candidate who seems to resent newfangled contraptions like computers. If God didn't want us to write with feather pens he wouldn't have made birds.

But the Right's winning one war: the email war. That could prove decisive. It would be ironic if, after all these innovations, Democrats were beaten by a tool that's so crude yet effective. Nothing to join, no links to follow: just read the email, hit "forward," and enter all your friends' names.

Case in point: I received the "Captain Jeffrey Porter" email yesterday -- the one that says Obama snubbed the troops in Afghanistan -- even though its been discredited by the Army Times. Capt. Porter has admitted he was wrong and apologized. Still, emails like this one keep getting distributed anyway. Most recipients -- and many senders -- don't know these emails are false. They probably never will.

Emails have the added impact of appearing intimate, friendly, and truly "social." For example, read the header on this one, with its informality (complete with reassuringly casual errors):

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:09:34 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Fro my ex-soldier's wife

From: XXX XXX
Subject: ok, rare to get a fwd from me...so read it :)
To: 'XXXX XXXX'
Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008, 9:16 AM

Hi all FYI--for what freedom is worth.

T------- and Jeff Porter are our friends who were in our ward when we
lived in Provo. They now live in Virginia.

I don't know each of your personal political convictions, and appologize
if anyone finds this offensive. I thought it was important enough to
share. This is Jeff's first hand view of Senator Obama.

A copy of the now-discredited email then follows. I've received quite a few others, too. Several are blatantly racist "jokes" that have Obama speaking in an Amos-and-Andy dialect. A few others have been targeted toward Jewish recipients, sent by people who know my Jewish background. These emails include "guilt by association" articles by right-wing smear artist Debbie Schlussel -- "Obama knows a guy who knows a guy who met Louis Farrakhan's mother," that sort of thing -- as well as the usual "he really is a Muslim but won't tell you" stuff.

There's an organizational lesson to be learned here -- one that should be studied by political researchers, consultants, and campaign managers.

The Jewish-targeted emails I've received are an especially interesting lesson. Without any social networking technology, these emails are successfully being custom-designed for a specific demographic group. Then they're delivered to that group in a targeted way, using only the pre-digital power of existing social relationships. After the Debbie Schlussels of the world write the content, members of any number of social networks (Jewish, Christian, business-oriented, etc.) go to work on an all-volunteer basis. And it only takes a minute to do your part ....

Email: It's a digital pyramid scheme, with words instead of money as the currency. it's hard to beat the logarithmic power of multiplying the number of all your friends by the number of all their friends, and all their friends' friends ... ad infinitum. And so easy to do! Why, even John McCain could learn. (He could get one of those pre-recorded courses they sell on late-night TV. You know ... "How to Use a PC" by The Computer Professor, that sort of thing ...)

How should Democrats and the Left respond? They can hit "reply all" and send a debunking note, as I do. But that's a defensive play, a tiny holding action. There's no overall email strategy, or even a counter-strategy to what's being done now. There are only questions: Is the right response for Democrats to send their own emails? Shouldn't they show a greater dedication to the truth than these right-wing emailers do? But if they do that, won't they be much less effective?

Ethical Democrats wouldn't feel very good about being part of an email army that floods the nation with tales of Vicki Iseman or the Keating Five. But if not that, then what? Maybe someone can kick-start some discussions about the political email wars: what's happening, who's losing, and what can be done to turn it around. There should be a way to use the power of emails more effectively without compromising basic ethical principles.

RJ Eskow blogs at:

A Night Light
The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog
Future-While-U-Wait
RJ Eskow at the Huffington Post

Follow RJ Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow

Comments

[anticonformist911]

The anti Obama Jewish targeted emails worked on my parents and I consider them very smart and open minded. Although I was able to convince them not vote for Hillary Clinton either, it was disappointing to see them persuaded. I've talked to my dad numerous times since the Ohio primary, and he asserts that the reason he didn't vote for Obama was because of his pastor's anti Semitic views. But I believe that the emails were what made him more easily persuaded. I should also point out that I send my parents multiple articles about Obama's strong support for Israel yet they still had doubts.

[CitizenE]

Identity politics is what it is. Over the past few years I have had an e correspondence with a colleague, someone who is not only educated, but actually a Professor and department chair at the college where I work. Before I demanded he cease, I recieved endlessly inflammatory jokes, even some for whom the punchline was not only death to particular Democrats, Hillary Clinton was high on the list, but that was before Obama's star had risen, but death to all Democrats--it was, as John Mc Cain is wont to say--all a joke, no offense intended. The all a joke meme, of course, is designed to let the writer or passer on get away with outlandishly fallacious thinking. Logical responses backed by detailed evidence was considered intellectual elitism--can't you take a joke? I believe it would be good if Obama's ad committee started hitting McCain back on his real pecadillos--at least one ad showing his continuous lapses of fact, bumbling around, and then reminding people of the powers of the Presidency. Yes, let's play the senility card.

[ihavenobias]

You're right R.J., we could be doing far more with email. To that end I created something several weeks ago, The 3 Facts That Could This Election (if we share them):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6430781

That post has over 13,000 views and that's not counting people who copy and pasted the content in an email and fired it off to various people across the country. Hopefully people use this and create their own fact sheets (short, simple and sourced arguments on relevant topics) to email out.

PS---Here is a nice, cleaner looking version to share: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/8/131714/9990/928/548246

[UNCLEJOE]

There is, I believe, a very effective way to destroy the Republican smear strategy; in Real Estate there are three ways of judging a home for sale, 'THE VIEW, THE VIEW, AND THE VIEW'.
In judging McCain there are three ways in judging a man for sale, 'THE WAR, THE WAR, AND THE WAR.

The purpose which the Republican smears is to take the focus away from the Iraq War which has devastated the American polity in every way and destabilized the Middle-East to the brink of WW III.

The history of the Republican party since Eisenhower has been preemptory invasions of Vietnam and Iraq, deregulation's and wasteful deficit spending by six Trillion dollars since Reagan to W. Bush. And the gradual decline of the middle-class at the rate of one million per annually.

All these Republican smears should be countered by the FOCUS on the death, destruction and destabilization of the Middle-East that the Republican Administration has deceptively led our country into and McCain is nothing more or less than a Judas goat being prodded b y W. BUSH.

The focus in blogs and in FWD Emails for winning in November should be 'THE WAR, THE WAR, AND THE WAR. And how it has affected our economy, oil prices, the debacle of the home owner's dreams,
and the genocide of innocent Arabs and the wasteful sacrifice of American soldiers to steal Arab oil fr the one percent Elite.

[provgrays]

Bullies don't win because they are clever or sophisticated. Bullies win by finding targets who don't hit back. The Democrats should learn this simple lesson before they are Swiftboated out of the White House.

[paixa3]

You are correct. The democrats just seem to lie down all of the time.

[lthuedk 1]

An email data base can be contributed to so that a rapid response-like a virus update-could be assembled and maintained. If data could be sent to a network in the form of an alert or advisement, a heads up daily dirt report on the latest right wing propaganda email blitz could be fashioned to fit into an existing popular show without hogging too much air time.

[raymurt]

I get these things once a week. The people who send them do not care if they are lies.
I usually reply with a snopes link debunking the lies. Today, I added my own message, BTW McCain is gay, then I pasted the picture of McCain bear hugging (and where is that left hand?) Bush.
Keeps 'em quite for a couple of days.
Tough road to hoe folks, there is resistance out there, but let 'em know you're for Obama, and let 'em know they're wrong. I used to ignore these with Hillary (for years), now I'm goin' on defense.

[doofmann02]

Same here, ray. And I usually get them from relatives new to the internet and over 65. I reply with the Scopes debunking sites, but I agree that they are going to believe what they want to believe, which is basically bigoted and tunnel vision ideology/dogma. Plenty of that to go around unfortunately. These are the kind of folks who never travel more than 30 miles from their hometown if they have to, don't read books, watch Fake News, and try to bring their church with them wherever they go. Kind of sad, but you almost have to put email filters up.

[TommyMcCarthy]

A supporter of Sen. Clinton in the late Dem. primary,.....I was very skeptical regarding these "Obama is a Muslim" E-mails.

Well, apologia and mea culpa.....I have since that time recieved THREE said missives, which brings me to my point, and perhaps that of my fellow former Utican, Mr. Eskow:

Anyone so,.... shall we say,.... "low information" to BELIEVE such transparent lies, much less base their vote on them has likely:
A:) Already heard and repeated such and worse down at Tiny's Grill.....and
B:) Is already not so much FOR McCain,....as solidly, inalterably AGAINST Obama, most probably based purely on bigotry.

Need we concern ourselves with such voters? I suggest that we who would like to see Sen. O inaugurated in Jan. need not, and can instead take heart that there are fewer of them All the time, if only through natural selection.­(or.....if you prefer ....intelligent design.......ahem)

R.J. Makes a good point that Democrats will not easily sign off on a negative response-in-kind, and I'm coming to believe (grudgingly) that we may just be able to win this thing by STAYING on the high road....per Sen. Obama's own example. I vaguely remember this being known as "leadership".

Additionally,..... no one knows like we former Clintonites that, should a genuine "brick-fight" be what's required..­........wh­y, fear not.......­..........­.......... Sen. O has a pretty good arm in this regard as well!!!
Regards
tm

[xenofile]

Have you seen Idiocracy?

[TommyMcCarthy]

Don't know what that is.......
tm

[BlueOnBlue]

"tales of Vicki Iseman or the Keating Five. "

And why should we ignore these?

McCain's involvement as one of the Keating Five was the impetus for his "maverick" idea of campaign finance reform. In other words, it was PR ploy to polish his own image. This is a story worth telling, because it goes to character.

Again, on Iseman, the core problem was a murky, troubling relationship with a lobbyist who seemed to get favors for her client after courting McCain. Again, it's about character and about how McCain kowtows to lobbyists. If it also turns out he had an amorous relationship with her, so much the better, because again, it's a character story.

McCain gets a bye on character analysis. Since the media isn't doing anything about this, and Obama won't, an email campaign with nothing but the troubling facts would seem in order.

[paixa3]

But how many people just delete ALL political ads? I do.

[Hoelder]

Every now and then I get email from Nigeria stating that I inherited $$$ millions from a relative and if I pay for that lawyers paper work, I would get it. This is like Republicans and mass email. Or chain letters. When has any of these people ever followed rules and laws if it did not serve them? I consider this another one of these tactics like at the Justice Department and the White House affairs with total disrespect for Democracy and for this matter: us.

[NABNYC]

One of the problems the Democrats have is that they don't stand for anything. The Republicans do. The Republicans stand for a return to the 1950s, in which the U.S. was the unquestioned leader of the world, non-whites were servants, women stayed home, bred, and baked cookies, and nobody questioned that arrangement.

The Democrats promised us in 2006 that if we supported them, they would help us, and would stop this war. They did nothing. Except ask for more money. They've done nothing to raise taxes on the rich. Schumer sold out even the meager effort to make the hedge fund criminals pay taxes just like working people do. They did not bother trying to regulate the banks to prevent this real estate disaster. They have done nothing to help Americans keep their jobs, or get new ones.

Democrats vote to pack the courts with reactionary white men who hate women and minorities almost as much as they hate the Constitution. They take money from the people they are supposed to hold accountable. If the cops took money from the gangs, no one would have a problem understanding that they were corrupt. Well, so are the Democrats in Congress. Corrupt, useless. And they have no message for the voter because they stand for nothing except more corruption. More money for them.

[kroses98]

THIS is precisely the problem!!! The above lying comment cannot be allowed, without immediate respons, just as racist and other lying commercials!!! Just because the attack is thrown out (like the above comment), does not mean there is any merit to it!!! They are merely "words!"

[TommyMcCarthy]

Clearly, you've missed "NABNYC"'s point.....­..........

If you have a plausible defense of the Democratic congress we all invested so much time, money, and efffort to elect in 2006,...I'd love to hear it.

As it stands, while "nabnyc"'s scathing indictment may be somewhat harsh....there isn't much of substance that I, or most committed Dems I know can take issue with in it.
tm

[Bettysdad]

Which part of NABs post is "lying?"

[DurangoDave]

One of my favorite quotes, one that I use as an email signature, is this (actual) one by Thomas Jefferson:
"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their government"
(Source, www.monticello.org/library/reference/quotes.html)

[Bettysdad]

"Ethical Democrats wouldn't feel very good about being part of an email army that floods the nation with tales of Vicki Iseman or the Keating Five."

Says who? Says "lily, livered, Liberals" such as Eskow. People who'd rather lose than get their hands dirty. The kind of Progressives that changed America in the first half of the 20th century would puke.

I'd have absolutely no problem participating in a totally dishonest campaign against any and all Republicans, much less an honest one.

Democrats lose because we don't comprehend what vile, despicable excuses for humans they are, and don't hate them as much as they hate us.

We're way the heck too nice.

[ProudNeoCon]

"I'd have absolutely no problem participating in a totally dishonest campaign against any and all Republicans, "

great reason to vote for Democrats

[RedKnuckles]

Mr. neocon....you conveniently ignore the issue of all the smear emails the right is sending out. Let's get your opinion on those and why you would find that a great reason to vote for republicans.

[Bettysdad]

My point is that the object is to destroy Republicans, not sit down and chat.

No one is expecting you to vote Democratic for that reason.

You're the problem, Mr. NeoCon. And just like you, I'll do WHATEVER it takes.

[milo9]

I agree with Bettysdad. There's too much water under the bridge to be civil with Republicans, as much as I'd like to be. The best I can do is not use the Republican Branded tactic of lying.

I'm just as angry as Bettysdad, I'm sure there are others. ProudNeoCon, you people steal this election and I predict there will be hell to pay.

[LawrenceL]

If it wasn't illegal, it would be tempting to spam certain voters who are more likely to open an anti-Democratic mailer with a provocative Subject and include a "payload" in the email.

If you know what I mean, please don't do this.

If you don't know what I mean, nevermind.

[DurangoDave]

In addition to responding with facts and sources like www.snopes.com and www.factcheck.org whenever you receive one of these emails, which I have found to be effective, you can also take a proactive approach. I've sent emails to all my "family and friends" email list, regardless of their political orientation, with tips on recognizing propaganda from whatever source. I always include my "permission" to forward these comments to anyone they deem appropriate. People don't want to be lectured or treated like children, but they do appreciate a clear peer-to-peer sharing of useful information. Everyone from my 90-year-old parents to 20-something cousins has responded positively, though I'm sure I haven't converted too many at a fundamental level. At least they're looking at these things skeptically, which is one of the goals of people who value reason.

[slamkitty2]

The email du jour from the dark side is one by a JB Williams which seeks to discredit both snopes and factcheck.