Keeping Watch

Yesterday the AP ran a story on how employers are using GPS technology to keep an eye on what workers are doing.
In a related matter, the federal government is developing a Personal Identity Verification system (unified ID card) for Federal employees and contractors.
“What” you say, “the two aren’t related”?
Well, they aren’t related yet. But if the government and employers can use this technology to keep track of workers, why can’t it be made available for everyone? And why not combine the two technologies, so that the eye in the sky can monitor where the cards (and their bearers) are?
It sure would be easier for the government to do certain things if it could keep track of where everyone is located. I bet we’ll soon be needing this kind of thing to keep us safe from terror.

Campaign Analysis

The Washington Post has an interesting analysis of the meager $2.2 billion spent by the campaigns in this year’s presidential election.
Although the Democrats (and allied groups) spent nearly as much as the Republicans ($1.08 billion vs. $1.14 billion), the Post article points out factors which lead the GOP to get “more bang” for its buck:

  • Swift Boat Veteran ads: an initial $546,000 ad generated a huge amount of media publicity and painted Kerry in a negative light, nearly wiping out whatever positive momentum the Senator obtained during the Democratic convention

  • Research and strategic planning: because Bush faced no primary challenge, his campaign was able to focus on which voters it would target. In particular, research by consulting firms helped the GOP identify where the votes were:

    Republican firms, including TargetPoint Consultants and National Media Inc., delved into commercial databases that pinpointed consumer buying patterns and television-watching habits to unearth such information as Coors beer and bourbon drinkers skewing Republican, brandy and cognac drinkers tilting Democratic; college football TV viewers were more Republican than those who watch professional football; viewers of Fox News were overwhelmingly committed to vote for Bush; homes with telephone caller ID tended to be Republican; people interested in gambling, fashion and theater tended to be Democratic.
    Surveys of people on these consumer data lists were then used to determine “anger points” (late-term abortion, trial lawyer fees, estate taxes) that coincided with the Bush agenda for as many as 32 categories of voters, each identifiable by income, magazine subscriptions, favorite television shows and other “flags.” Merging this data, in turn, enabled those running direct mail, precinct walking and phone bank programs to target each voter with a tailored message.
    . . .
    Dowd estimated that, in part through the work of TargetPoint and other research, the Bush campaign and the RNC were able to “quadruple the number” of Republican voters who could be targeted through direct mail, phone banks and knocking on doors.

    This level of precision helped the GOP win the “ground war”

  • Campaign Coordination: The Democrats were dependent on outside advertising expenditures of 527 organizations. The Kerry campaign only controlled 62% of advertising spending, whereas the Bush campaign controlled 83% of pro-Bush ads. Since federal campaign election law prohibits 527s from communicating with political campaigns, this posed a huge obstacle in Kerry/Edwards’ ability to offer a coordinated message. Whereas GOP ads featured a simple, constant theme (Kerry is a weak flip flopper), Democratic ads were all over the place on disparate issues. This handicap severely limited Kerry’s ability to present a simple campaign narrative which would enable him to gain traction.

These three factors help explain what went wrong. During the campaign, the Swift Boat ad factor and the political “ground game” received a good amount of media discussion. But I think the significance of the coordination problem was underestimated.

Pentagon Cuts

Weak on defense:

The Pentagon plans to retire one of the U.S. Navy’s 12 aircraft carriers and buy fewer amphibious landing ships for the Marine Corps as part of $60 billion in proposed cuts over the next six years, The New York Times reported on Thursday, citing Congressional and military officials.
The proposed reductions, the details of which are still being fine-tuned and would require Congressional approval, result from White House orders to all federal agencies to cut their spending requests for the 2006 fiscal year budgets, which will be submitted to lawmakers early next year.

Imagine all the howls if Senator Kerry had propsed such cuts three months ago.
We’re at war!
Terror, terror, terror!
Yada, yada, yada.

New Blue State

Montana?
Strategists running the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign probably aren’t going to tally Big Sky Country in the safe category, but this does show that people running with the (D) can win where “liberals” aren’t cool. The DNC should be taking notes.