tv Google Hosts Post- Election Review CSPAN December 13, 2016 11:28pm-2:10am EST
aid said he's at the lincoln memorial. i thought that's interesting. so, knowing i was going to be seeing you, i wanted to save that question. what were you doing at the lincoln memorial, and is that a place that you go often and what do you take away from it? like i've been there several times. i have actually taken some visiting delegations from china to the lincoln memorial last year. my favorite place is the stone where martin luther king gave i have a dream.
to me, that means a lot. a lot has been written about my father's father who was a sociologist. my mother's family, all postal workers in this town they believe in the federa federal se and it is in my dna so i know we get a bum rap a lot. we still believe in public service in federal service and the magic of the nation's capital. when i go back to new york and the practice i'm sure i'm going to miss it. >> i want to say that after eight years and some of th in st difficult jobs or government
politics. then bob graham will be on too talk about the news of the day in a book he co-authored trying to make government more responsive. michael warren will join us to this gust republican efforts to repeal the affordable care act. be sure to watch "washington journal" beginning live at seven eastern wednesday morning and joined the discussion. >> in the afternoon federal reserve chair speaks at a press conference following this month's open market committee meeting. we will bring that live at 230 eastern on c-span. campaign consultants and tech insiders talk about the digital strategies that work and those that didn't in the 2016 election on a panel hosted by google here in washington.
>> i'm going to kick this off from this good-looking group of republicans that are in the majority of the senate, the house. come on. i'm in a kick us off with a video because most of you heard me say over and over again, and most of you taught me to say this is the year of the video, tell a story. no one taught them better how to tell a story than someone who will be our first guest today. i'm in a kick it off with a two minute closing video. both candidates have two minute closing videos to and the
campaign three or four days before the campaign. i urge you to go on youtube and watch hilary's spirit it's a lot of hillary face the camera and this is a sharp contrast and the closing argument that the trump campaign made to voters. >> i've lived all my years to say this. gavin, roll tape. >> our movement is about replacing a failed failed and corrupt political establishment with the new government controlled by you, the american people. the establishment has trillions of dollars at stake in this election. for those who control the levers of power in washington and for the global special interest, they barter with these people who don't have your good in mind. it's a political establishment that is trying to stop who is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals. massive illegal immigration and economic inform policies that
have bled our country drive. the political establishment has brought about the destruction of our factories and our jobs as they flee to mexico, china and other countries all around the world. it's a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities. the only thing that can stop this corrupt machine is you. the only force strong enough to save our country is us. the only people brave enough to vote out this corrupt establishment is used the american people. i am doing this for the people and for the movement and we will
take back this country for you and we will make america great again. i am donald trump and i approve this message. that video became the sixth fastest trending video on youtube two days before the campaign. it told the story, and motivated people and it motivated voters. i won't steal his thunder, i'll let you know how he came up with that ad and about the ad, but let's dive into 2016 the on the presidential. so, everybody has heard her say say this over and over again, voters spend more time online in 2016 and were more influenced online by what they read and saw
online about candidates than ever before. we are finally at the point where voters are spending more of their time online and they have been persuaded more often by something they saw online by a friend, neighbor, an advertisement and this might actually lead to us in politics catching up to corporate america. in 2016, corporate america corporate america is going to spend more money on digital online advertising than on tv. politics tend to be ten years behind corporate america. our party doesn't have ten years to wait to catch up, but the good news is we did a great job in 2015 because many of you. this graph is going to blow the minds. on average, gop candidates spent earlier and spent more on google products and i would make the assumption on other online products as well. nobody ran a better race online and rob portman and nobody
opened up a wider lead against their opponent sooner on the gop side and rob portman. i will let you make the correlation. so one of the top lessons for 2016 that i think all of us learned is go back online. don't go small. the really big. gop campaigns on which google products spend three times the amount their democratic opponents spent. i would like to credit that to a great sales team, but i honestly think it's because people who are running great senate campaigns heard from ward. everybody heard from that mandate but they also believed in the product and saw the result. what's really striking is that gop candidates outspent their democratic counterparts between april and july. this is not the traditional time where people spend money. it's not post-labor labor day. april through july they outspent their democratic opponents.
that opens up a huge lead for canada and that's important. this wasn't only on the candidate side. we saw this on the super pacs as well. gop super pacs spent 4 - 1 on google products. some campaigns went even bigger. one of the things we learned from the trump campaign, do not make assumptions about voters. you may find voters where you live and too at least expect to do so. where most presidential campaigns, and this one also concentrated their money and nine or ten states, they also didn't forget there were a lot of other americans out there that needed to be motivated to vote and they can usually reach many throughout the entire u.s., motivating them, activating them and the trump for president campaign was the first gop candidate to ever buy. previously it was just obama. not only did they buy one, they bought two.
they bought the one after the first debate where we see a huge surge of online traffic and they bought one election day. the hillary campaign by one. when you think you've gone big, go even bigger. lesson two, go early. a lot of y'all saw the search graph. i had a gop campaign manager tell me the other day he decided how and when to drop but research on their opponent using this graph, because as you know, if you drip drip drip opposition research and news guess where voters are seeing that on google he made sure that every time someone googled the opponent's name there was a new news story up there that was not flattering and he made sure he did it early. 50%% of the interest in election candidates, the gop race, the race for president and senate happen by july. next time you are campaign manager tells you we really want to holder money until after labor day they are being very
foolish. the best thing about going early as you can define yourself as a candidate, but what you should really be doing is defining your opponent. two senate campaigns that define their opponent early and never stopped was the todd young for senate campaign and the rob portman campaign. you can even see here that the opponents don't even have search ads to counter these ads that were being run against them. i'm proud to say in every gop senate campaign, either the candidate more than our fc was up for search ads for the candidate and the opponent. they defined themselves and they defined their opponents and they didn't let anyone to find them. the other really interesting thing about going early is that it really allows you to hopefully save money in the end and pull away. the green grass is the amount of money and win portman spent on google product.
the squiggly gray line is the average senate campaign that's democrat and republican. if you look closely when the spending spiked which, as as you can see is april, may, june, that's when he started to pull away from his opponents. does anyone remember how many points portman pulled away on election day? over 20 points. start early and start big and start often. lesson big, three, go big, go often, go early. we early. we get asked all the time what's the right frequency. corporate america goes seven or eight times the frequency. we saw most campaigns on the political side that they were going three or four times. three times generally showed a two times greater favorability shift and four times greater intent to vote. this was even greater when it was a true view add when someone
opted in. if your content is good enough for the voter to watch the content, you can really win them online. we also found senate races were particularly open to voters to look at advertising. think part of it is because presidential candidates are so defined by the media and they have to get out and defined themselves. 2016 lessons learned, thanks to all of you who ran campaigns, go big, go early, go often and go home to your constituents. thank you all for a really interesting race where we all learned a lot and i want to turn it over to natalie and andrea from the wall street journal. >> everyone come fill the seats. i couldn't get out what that gesture was. natalie, brad, come up.
>> in 2010i was was hired, actually a phone call happened before that i was hired to make a real estate website. it was very basic but i knew it was probably good step to get inside, being from san antonio texas, we don't have a lot of trump fans. but i got a contract making website. i knew that i had to have a very competitive price to compete in the new york market since i had only been too new york once in my entire life and that's how i first started over a six-year or five-year period of time and i got more more contracts with the trump family. throughout the entire organization, i started to get
to know the entire family. when the campaign came i got an initial contract and it was very basic. it was $1500 for splash page for the exploratory committee. we now know about 93 million we were given. >> calling you an outsider would not be a stretch. >> right i had never worked on a campaign before. >> what are some of the biggest things you brought in for the business world. >> think you have to understand the entire process of the campaign. it was like three major stages. if you followed the media that was tied with two major firings or legos those. you have version one point oh which i pretty much call from the day came down the escalator
and that role is probably the smallest. not minuscule but as large as it wasn't 3.0. .oh. you take the three-point oh from the campaign to somewhere in august, august 22 and that's where 3.0 started and that's what i call the general campaign , my role was more of a consultant. i ran most of the entire primary advertising from a laptop in my living room. most of google, facebook, others didn't know existed. i got random phone calls in the night, are you can the guy doing the digital stuff for trump. then i built, i didn't have any
data scientist of the great people that i had later in the campaign, i had a do pretty much home-based marketing efforts to try to maximize our effort across social media platforms. the one point oh version is a much more than the three-point oh version so the needs were different. i think as we progress on the two-point oh, i would say my role is the least. 2.0 turned more into fundraising lesson and then 3.0 turned into the closest of what i've done which is a large advertising media conquest to bring home the
vote. think you have to understand those three things to ask the question appropriately because each time is different. >> you talked a lot about how he didn't need data early on. >> he didn't need it in one point oh. was it you that was doing any of that convincing to say we do need to bring on data and we do need data in this campaign? >> think of you asked him today he would still say he could when it. i think there were other people who, like jared kushner who said he didn't rule it out. he just that make me believe and i think that something that he now does. the 1.0 is different. i think at that time, it was an important role as a 1% thing here and there to win a certain
stage but it wasn't the overarching thing in version one. the significant think of the data operation, the turn key fundraising in just a few days, that partnership came with the relationship at the rnc individuals who made me look really smart and he doesn't get enough credit, these people stepped in because we had to like, in a week, start raising money. i think that was an important step. then in three-point oh, things changed again. you brought a lot of people together in a very short time. how how did so many different mines come together and work well and a lot of people bring different egos, what is best in
such a short time, who brought what to the table? i think all things take different types of leaders. i had a great leader above me and donald trump who doesn't have a lot of room for error and then you had jared kushner and myself and i think all of those leaders are people who let talented people do their work. there was a lot of things i've heard about previous campaigns when i came in because i had no preconceived notion of how things were supposed to operate. there was a why are you doing this and in our campaign there was just one who had to approve it, myself, for most of the content. i could approve content. they had entrusted me to do so.
i didn't need to have every single piece of content if it was within the means of what our campaign goals were. i think simplifying that process is one example of how we streamlined operations so we could move fast. by the end of the campaign, i had said to other people, you, you have the ability to approve this now. just don't mess it up. >> i sat in a forum not quite like this, but similar to this a few months before the campaign. if it was august and they were criticizing the trump campaign. they were worried they were going to lose and there was criticism of the trump campaign. they were worried that targeting was going wrong and a lot that wasn't being done right to have their republican candidate win. how do you, how have you interacted with your. now and how do you see politics, how did things change politics
for the future? >> good question. the good thing is i didn't have any peers so i didn't know that everybody didn't think i was doing a good job until i read it in the newspaper or something. the second thing is, through the entire campaign i made zero initiative to make any of the marketing about myself until the bloomberg article that came out ten or 12 days before. that was the first time i ever officially talk to the press. people didn't know what we had running. it wasn't until the last couple of weeks toward the end where people understood we had a huge operation. there's a lot of things we did significantly different. the entire campaign, for the past couple months ran around digital and data. meaning where he went on the ground, where we bought our
media and how we bought our shows, how we made our tv commercials, the rnc, i was the liaison as well so in august, i had met and became the center point of how the ground team was going to operate. i've tried to explain this a couple times on tv but you only have 90 seconds to explain it. if you look at the campaign previously, it was a flat hierarchy with people above it. this time they ran in a circle that was around the data. by doing so, the universes and people didn't have to double the work. we didn't want to do the same work twice. i would sit there with the political director and say look, we're doing this here in this year, what money do we need to
spend, how are we gonna make these phone calls. i can imagine many campaigns for the they were making the budget decisions so that was a significant difference in gender difference. i knew much money we had and how much we needed. we ended the last day with just a few hundred thousand dollars in the bank and i really maximize our stuff including the two minute commercial we produced, getting that in the right social media spots to try to get the last persuadable targets over. i think you look at that, that was a significant change. the other thing i've stated multiple times as we stuck hundred million dollars in digital and tv. that's a big change. at harvard the dnc was happy to tell me that they didn't think they needed to spend anymore money on digital. if i had done anymore, i would spend more on digital. i think the data shows clearly
that mr. trump had a huge impact with digital social media and advertising. but you can't not not spend on tv. i would've been on every newspaper saying brad spent all the money on newspaper and we lost. you had have a balance. >> it's easy to play the hindsight game, but were were going to play it. when you look back, can you say we won because of data or did we win because of the message. do you balance those things out now and you say two years from now if we look at the midterms, what you advise future campaigns to do? >> what's funny is i didn't have any previous campaign experience which either made me really good or really bad at explaining this question. i got into political
advertising, i don't know how many digital people are here, but one thing that was significantly different is a never looked at media in the way of the content being produced quite away political people looked at it. i was lucky enough to be in the.com boom in the late '90s. i'm i'm older than i look. advertisers for electronics back then, i told the story last week , but you've got two different types of advertising. back then everybody remembered when the ipod came out and you had the zoom or whatever the other thing was from microsoft. they would advertise their product and have line items that you would see them. we have the fastest processor, we are more hard drive space. what did apple do? they showed a picture of a woman and a microphone and a silhouette and said if you buy this, you will feel this way.
it didn't explain what's in it. we all knew i was going to make us feel if we bought it. what i didn't understand about political advertising is you tried to sell candidates by the pros and cons instead of what you will feel like if you voted for them. if you look at all of our advertising it was all based on the emotional feel of what it meant of donald trump would win and how it would change a life because i people in chamblee people vote the way they purchase things, with their emotions. i think that started getting the same bad problems that other industries got where they are starting to sell the pieces. we have these four pieces and you have these worst pieces so four minus three, were positive one, we win. humans don't think that way. think about that ipod commercial. why was it so amazing? it was amazing because we wanted to feel that happy.
if you watch that commercial for the change commercial or the choice commercial, there were very few times where we went to the details. everybody's like tell about the details and more like no let's not tell about the details. mr. trump is going to bring change. he's going to make people feel better about being in america and make the country feel like it's great again. that's how we make consumer decisions, why wouldn't we make our political decisions as they might. that was one of the most significant things. i just didn't understand why it was a line item contest when no other great products sell that way. >> at the very consumer sided view, but you asked me what i brought over. >> in an election where we had a lot about twitter, a lot lot of content on the internet, did you ever wish that donald trump hadn't tweeted about something in particular or that he
distracted from the message. >> no it never distracted from the message. do i wish, was my life ever complicated by things that happen on the campaign? yes. that's a very tough question. let's say it's not my job to solve those communication problems. however, it was perfect and he's a genius because he won. if the goal was too 70 anyone than he won. i never heard anyone say man i only want one that came by one point, i really played bad. >> hindsight again, you do a lot of things in campaigns and there's always things that don't work but you still win. what didn't work. you still want, but what didn't work. >> youtube worked beautifully.
what didn't work? we didn't have enough money. i wish we had more of the. >> what are things that looks like new and shiny toys but aren't maybe the newest and shiny toys. >> i think what doesn't work in politics, and my my personal opinion, i think life calls don't work. i think they're worthless spends of money. i'm not in the political position and it's not my decision to make that but digital money when so much further. i feel like there's this thing where we just have to do everything in spring of money here and there and even it all out and if we have more money just double everything and no one starts a business and says let's double everything because we have endless money. that's kind of a consumer thing so the first thing was like but spend money everywhere and i
thought but only just been money where it works. i pulled from phone budgets is much as i could to other things. i think traditional male still has its place. i think we spent 50 or 60 less million than romney in that area. i think tv and digital and messaging were very important but it's hard for me to say what didn't work because we won and we won almost every state we competed for except for colorado. i'll tell you the mistake we made in colorado. we should've spent more money earlier. i didn't expect so many to mail in their vote early. i thought people were going to be lazier than that, but colorado people really want to vote. that's a big number in the first week and i thought i had more time. it was a couple days after a couple videos came out so it was timing.
>> let's talk about fake news. as it was going throughout the campaign, did take news help or hurt the candidate? was it something you talked about because it was being spread on different sites? >> i have some pretty harsh comments about this. a set it at harvard and i think most everyone at the dnc fell out of the chair. i spent most of my time fighting the largest super pack in the country which was the mainstream media. i think the media bias was horrible. i think i was called a racist and a misogynist and in a few
other things in there. people didn't even know me. oh, and i was a white supremacist because i was born in canada. i didn't know that classify due to an entire genre people. it's pretty sad with the media did. i think take news and what people determine is not a hard line. i think everything in life is a gray line. i think some media has not assents to truth. but i think there's people who write all truth and some people who write for opinion and some people who write to make money. somewhere there is a line in between and that's probably a first amendment thing. i'm not a person who makes those traces, luckily because i'm not a politician, but i think at some point the politician has to make a choice, no different than if i go in and decide whether or not the cvs better than another tv. i have to make that choice. i think you have to recognize not everything you read is true and you should try to get yourself educated. as americans we have a responsibility to believe what we believe and not what other people say, but maybe i just have a different view of that.
i don't think we can expect everyone around us to be perfect. we should just try to do what we think is right. >> i talk about your business experience and politics, what you you think businesses should learn from campaigns. >> what businesses should learn from campaigns? >> there's definitely a set deadline. >> are there any lessons. >> lessons of business to politics, i don't get ever been asked that. i think what i learned in politics, it's different, i feel i can business the media is kind of your friend in business but in politics there are not your friend. the writer doesn't go i want to destroy your small restaurant business or let me take this down because i hate your
enchiladas. if this. it just doesn't happen. were all friends and let me give you free enchiladas and if you don't like my food may be alright a negative story but there's nothing personal. i think the one thing i learned was the media. at first i thought a few reporters were my friend and then they terrorized me and called me names and i was like whoa, i guess you don't like me. that was less than one, but that didn't have anything to do with business because that doesn't exist on the other side. i didn't know that was a thing, but now i do. what else did either? it was really nice to have a really big budget, to show what you can do, the beautiful thing about politics is i've been doing this for nearly 20 years but i never had had the opportunity to have this big to show skill sets and bring people together. i think that was rate with a
little bit of luck and hard work. it's great to be sitting appear after all these years. i think businesses should learn that sometimes you should go send somebody to make it and politicians show that there's no reason to have money on the day after, they're scared to spend it all to make it so they make choices that are a little weaker because they're afraid to spend it because what happens if i don't make it but in politics you don't have a day after after and its other people's money so there are just certain differences of opinion but i think businesses can learn from that. maybe we should spend a thousand dollars on advertising. >> what's next for you. are you moving to d.c. or going back to san antonio? >> i think san antonio would be a unique experience to return to now.
i have an apartment in new york. i plan to spend time in new york. i'm close to the family and i will continue to work with the family. i have great people i learned along this journey. like i said before, matt, garrett, molly, i can't say or last name. i think those people, these new opportunities and experiences available and they did amazing things and there's a lot of room for us to go out and show other people what we did. if anyone can really look and see how we did this, there was was some of those meetings with garrett and me and matt who actually see what we did and how much we did come i think they would be shocked. we got a lot done with a little team. the dnc probably had 100 people for every ten of hours.
i think people felt more connected and more pride in its amazing when you get a group of people that feel so driven to do something that it doesn't take a lot of team to do that. i think i'll take one of those people against ten of those people who it's just a job. i think you saw that the republican group, i think the republican national committee set up a team that was just ready for the summer and trump came along it was a perfect opportunity and we could come together. i'm excited to see what all of them do and what i could do with them. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> brett is going to stick around so i know people have questions for you. next up we will do the silicon valley style so we have some lightning talks.
mr. healy is up next. >> hello. i manage the independent expenditure program. i have a handful of things i wanted to show you, mostly about the mentality about how we approach the advertising cycle and some simple principles that we stuck to that i thought preface very well. none of this is rocket science. they are old problems that are getting worse and the solutions are simple. the devil is in the detail in actually implementing and executing. people always talked about clutter and audiences all over and more ways to buy each of these types of media.
our solutions, we had three basic principles that guided us. targeting the same audience across all screens, layering our media plans in an intelligent way and staying consistent throughout her advertising. the first one, we use the exact same voter file, we found our model target voter audience and it's the same one we sent to facebook and tv and target audiences online and we built up from there. there's two things. one allows you to compare apples to apples to see what's the most efficient way to target the audience and another is to measure message penetration across screen. i think this is one of the more novel pieces and it's difficult to execute once you get into the nitty-gritty of it. efficiency is great, everybody
talked about data inefficiency and being hyper targeted and that's great, but on tv, you're so efficient you're targeted to a very small percentage of the audience because you're not buying wasteful advertising. online, you you might have you left handed lithuanian audience, but at some point you can't penetrate a message with that. i think there's this bias toward efficiency that we need to move away from a little bit. second of all, we talk about a broadcast impression in the digital impression and i think that's the wrong argument. we should be talking about attentiveness of impression. a banner ad on a website is essentially a digital yard sign. no one's looking at it. there's a place for that at a certain place but we should put a premium on advertising that people are actually plate and jim paying attention too. lives part sports on television or digital media streaming.
instead of saying the media budget is ask, this will go to tv, this will go to digital we said let's allocate to what their best at. the price efficiency and ability to scale down to your target audience has the menacing returns. a lot of times would have a situation where we would have 500 broadcast points and we would get approximately five impression store target audience but then we would use cable and targeted digital to that same audience so we are getting closer to 45 or 50 impressions of total message penetration before we would change traffic. that situation didn't play out in every instance. budget realities happened, etc. et cetera but the guiding principle we had was to change our rate of messaging and a
holistic delivery. final, creative consistency. everyone understands this principle, everyone understands the idea of a theme and characters in stories and everyone is probably rolling their eyes a little bit but the reality is we don't do this very often politics. requires front planning and commitment and in order to put through, this is what were competing against on the other side, i think we need to stick to this principle as often as possible. we had two states that i'm really proud of. one was in pennsylvania and we had the spiked messenger who carried all of our spots with a very competent message and he was able to hold people's attention long enough to deliver
a complex message effectively over time. we had another example, i don't have it appear, but the more creative in the example in ohio where we had a fake newscast with an actress who went to several states to show all the places where they had jobs in ohio. this idea of a character creating a consistent demon brand across all digital and television advertising was a good way to deliver a message. our tagline was shady katie mcginty and at a basketball game, saint joe's, week after the election, the student body was trolling the other student body using our tagline because she was an alumni. >> can be as simple at having the colors in the fonts and the look and feel of everything all the way up to here's our geico gecko. takes planning and committing to the idea by the whole team and a tremendous amount of research.
the devil is in the details and committing to the budget upfront is the name of the game. thank you. >> thank you for holding this with republicans. we will get our next panel appear with andrea, betsy, betsy, chase, michael and peter. while they are coming up on stage, this year year was the first year that we saw political ads that the youtube leaderboard political ads are known for being really bad content. youtube leaderboard focuses on the top ten performing ads online. whether they're organic or have advertising behind it. this year, the cycle we had five political ad at the leaderboard. i will show some of them to you today. we kicked off with a closing ad from trump and we will show you another one from another candidate that was on the youtube leaderboard and i'll
show you three ads from the senate campaign and there's a theme that daniel just hit on. >> that annoy see this as an economic issue on immigration but it is a very personal economic issue. i will say the politics of it would be very different of a bunch of lawyers or bankers were crossing the rio grande work a bunch of people whose journalism degree were coming over and driving down the wages in the press. then we would see stories about the economic calamity that is before our nation. if i'm elected president, we will triple border patrol.
we will build the wall that works, we will secure the border. i'm ted cruz and i approve this message. >> she was 21 when she died. we lose 129 kids a day to heroin and the only person i've seen standing up there screaming, almost daily is senator portman. he gives as much time and energy and love to this as any of us parents who have lost. he truly listens and tries to implement plans that make a difference. care is such an important step in what is happening.
i am so thankful that we have senator portman on our side. >> throughout his career john mccain has been a true friend to our hispanic community. he has fought for comprehensive immigration reform, good education for our children and our small businesses. i urge you to vote on november 8 and i urge you to vote for my friend john mccain. >> my name is nicole craig. >> i'm kevin craig. >> we live in green bay wisconsin with grace who just came home from the democratic republican of congo. >> it was a nightmare we couldn't wake up from. twenty-five children children died waiting to come home. there was a reason why they couldn't come home. the adoptions were completed. they were vinyl. we had to go to washington.
he was a father and grandfather and he was gonna do whatever he could to get these kids home. >> dear nicole, thank you for visiting and sharing your story. hopefully we can find a solution so you can bring elizabeth grace home. you and your family are in our thoughts and prayers. >> i can't even tell you how that felt. i don't think i believed it, and then having senator johnson show up, that was just the icing on the cake for us because i knew at that point, it was as important to him for her to come home as it was for us. >> i'm ron johnson and i approved this message. >> each of those ads showed a story and told a story. some of them barely featured the candidate. hopefully we will have everyone on this panel talk about their at. >> this is betsy who managed the wisconsin senate campaign that
took us all by surprise this fall when ron johnson pulled off of wind from the behind. chase campbell, a digital digital advertising specialists whose resume includes two races that may be could've, would've, would've, should've been on the most competitive in retrospect but we don't always think of it that way because of the work behind-the-scenes for rob portman. michael duncan, a digital strategist of cavalry, he works with some alarm on races like indiana senator elect todd young and john mccain's reelection come up but he started working first for ted cruz and frida mark. peter managed another one of the most uphill races which was pat toomey. let's first talked about the ads we saw. >> so the gray sad that you just saw was something that had been
in the works for a long time. we did a lot of research early on identifying the constituents and the stories that we wanted to tell. we knew this was going to be an uphill battle. we knew we were going to be outraised and outspent so we knew we needed to be creative and think outside the box and be scrappy. we also knew that the team was going to try to paint land johnson as a coldhearted millionaire who only cared about special interests and billionaires. we got ahead of it we did our research early and we had someone on our team whose job was too go around to make sure that we captured stories like this one. this was a spot that did ultimately end up on television, but the original intent was to have a just beyond digital.
when we got the footage it was very powerful, as you saw so we decided to run with that. ultimately we had a two minute video, a 62nd video and a thirty second video. we did them on digital and on youtube and then ultimately we ran on tv. we did have ads running toward women on youtube on a lobar from the minute it went up through election day. we saw, those who watched it two times were 16% more likely to vote for ron johnson. was a great story to tell and it served a purpose and it was something that we were really part product. republicans talked talked about a shift in advertising strategy toward the end where people were shifting resources around. is that part of that? >> from the gecko, we knew we were going to be outraised and outspent. we talk about spending early and
we did do a lot of things early in terms of laying the groundwork, but ultimately we knew we were going to be on our own and we knew we were going to be outspent in the long run. while we did do some things early, we really did save a lot of our budget for post- labor day. this was part of that post-labor day day reset that we did once folks in wisconsin for not enjoying the summer time and were back paying attention, we really hit the ground running. we had played a lot of background work early to make sure we were ready to do that. >> about this time in 2014, nrc executive director word baker went for reelection in 2016 and shows a slideshow of technology changes since last time they had run in 2010 and said the successful campaign of 2014 spent five times as more.
they spent about 30% of its budget on digital. michael, you are part of the early conversations including an unlikely early adopter, can you tell us what that means, what aspects of a modern campaign campaign are covered under digital? >> what aspects of a modern campaign? i think if you go back to 2010, people saw digital as part of the department people that took it and posted it on
facebook and twitter and that was it and that was considered a victory. then people started to realize the potential for digital to raise money and so then it became part of the fundraising operation and then people started to be invested in this building and that sort of thing. then people started to realize that the way media consumption trends are shifting that more eyeballs were on digital than all these other platforms so the ability to get reach and frequency was so huge that now is a huge party advertising budget. because it was part of the advertising budget, it could be part of the data and tv and digital went from being on the periphery to being the thing that touches everything. i think successful campaigns, whether it's richard shelby we worked on in his primary or.todd young or mccain or portman or johnson or too me, they recognize that a digital aspect of the campaign needs to be at the ground level. i used to work at harris media with my buddy chase and i
remember portman's campaign, if you want to know how invested rob portman was in the success of his digital operation, he called me and vincent harris on christmas day to hire us because it was that important that he have that part of the campaign locked up two years before his election. there aren't a lot of candidates out there that recognize how critical the digital component of the campaign and starting early gives you that leg up. >> chase, when we talk about paid digital advertising, that something the portman campaign did catatonic credit for. they sliced and diced a look tour in. how did you do that and should other campaigns be doing this in the future?
>> the senator was very concerned and starting as early as they possibly could. we began building his online audience in his e-mail list and began controlling the message on searches as soon as we can spend any money. i think, coming off of 2014 and 14 and the success that mcconnell had in his race and he started early really set the framework for 2016 candidates. senator portman, we were testing video messages for him in the beginning of the summer. the ad we just saw, we began running that in april and may and far before it ever came onto television they had already been
saturated and seeing the video by the time it had made it to tv so as more of a reminder and we did use some cool tools that i hadn't even used before with the team at google. they were talking about display advertising just before this and we did a test because it's a common conception and digital advertising that display advertising is junk and you don't know who sina and i might be another computer and it's not even a person. that that was something we wanted to test with google. we ran a display campaign for a week on the legislation related
back to that video and always that was look at the work that senator portman has done on curbing heroin addiction in ohio. for the two weeks after that, we ran it against a targeted audience of likely republican voters. for two weeks after that, people who are exposed to that, people who saw the ad online went in search for the senator 600 times more often than someone who had never seen the ad. that was a cool tool that we used to help bring some validity back to display advertising that we were running for the senator. >> in particular, that was also matched up on websites that had earned media hits with heroin stories. you matched your ads to the earned media. >> yes, there is a combination of plays in targeted advertising through those who would likely be moved on a heroin issue. >> peter, something that senator jimmy talks about about early on, as a republican running in pennsylvania, did he fund his own race independent of no
matter who it was. we saw some interesting results when you compare his counties to trumps. didn't surprise you that you want different voters and trump and does not speak to the way senate campaigns can run a little more independently than we thought from the presidential race? >> we always knew pennsylvania was going to be an uphill climb no matter who the nominee was so we plans to always have to run ahead of them. i think what's amazing is in pennsylvania you have two statewide republicans win and they're very different from one another. :
i think it is amazing that two different paths. we were surprised when that all kind of came about. >> at the beginning of the cycle all the hurt is the senate races can only run so far and the cycle every race. does that mean with any new technology you are using this time around? >> we invested heavily using data to target people and brand
the senator on a good public servant. ultimately, they would let you know about it and highlight that. there was a number of things from the work on getting them out of classrooms to work to save this little girl's life and we ran an ad on that. we talked about the endorsement and we talked about the senator's really his record in who he was and how the work that he had done a week rand targeted
mail all around the state they worked to save the 9/11 air wing and we sent them to all the surrounding towns and the nondigital we managed all the same universe as for the digital ad would go up on wednesday to share the same messaging. it is all about repetition and piloting the work tha work thatr david and talking about who he was and getting people to vote for the senator and his work as the legislator. the media that you are using without volunteers on the ground gathering information about who
you are delivering it to come is that still a part of the campaign and did you do anything similar wa when that campaign recruited like 500 volunteers? it was a key component to the victory because everyone is working on the famous campaign path. they like to use the e-mail platform and look at different things and that was never the case not looking at digital was just a piece but something the entire campaign can be part of
and including every piece in it is the key to success in today's digital world. >> we have a fantastic to make sure everything we were doing whether it was the door that we knocked on, the clothes they may become of the digital universe as we were targeting, the mail pieces, everything. and it did make a difference and for us, you know, we had a limited budget and we had to be smart and efficient about everything we did. and we were able to track every effort that we had so that we knew where we needed to supplement and it did make a difference at the end of the day.
>> this is kind of an interesting anecdote given the primary john mccain lost by ten points. but the same sort of thing in arizona it's like 80% of the electorate. so we have this permanent early voter list we were targeting online in the 26, 27 days before election day. all of the voter filing to target somebody or match facebook and figure, anything we could do to maximize the permit was absolutely key to meeting the primary and it was then
utilized by the volunteers to call through to the ballots because if we could find somebody online tuesday by the way, that ballot is on tour kitchen table you need to mail it in right now before there is $200,000 to put in the last ten days. so, you know basically using the digital operation was like the number one thing that was useful there. >> i know you worked with the campaign. if it could be used for another campaign down the road [inaudible] >> as a part of this huge effort, thank you.
it just continues to be built upon to get better and be refined. we started by looking at what we call the walker johnson capped posts 2014 as kind of the high water mark back from the air and i think we want to make sure that's available to whoever runs in 2018. they will have that available to them so that is something that continues to be made better with every point of contact that we have and every medium that is made can be used down the road. >> is iisn't always done by the state party -- >> we will see who has the primary in ohio.
all i can tell you is senator portman isn't stopping and is going to continue to keep this file active and that the people that are in the database are being communicated with on a regular basis so that whoever is the nominee for governor and senator and on down the line has a good file from which to work. >> what is particularly interesting to me is the cycle in the primary, the digital advertising not being afraid to raise the iad. >> that's a good point and i think the whole attitude is changed. we are not going to talk about the primary opponent. we don't want to raise the
awareness that what we have seen and having worked on both sides of the coin from the more established incumbent candidat candidates. they are organized against you if you do not go online early months before the primary date and find your opponents before they have the chance to get on tv and someone says pull three weeks before it then you are neck and neck with a 20% you want to get them underwater and early into the way you do that is online. i think what th what we see in e primaries is especially the
digital shows in the verbatim statements you get right back to you from the people that you are calling. if you use it to change how we talk a lot about fake news now and if he works on the republican primary in the last three or four cycles come and you've been dealing with it forever. if you look what people say about the candidate but now that it's affecting the general election is like the liberals carthe liberalscare and the libs care it the media cares and everybody cares but if you work in a senate campaign does not necessarily. they are rating it on facebook or seeing it on twitter.
the number one task of the primary is to change the flow and get people to read your context and not what you deem to be fake news or biased news or whatever a radio host is saying about why you are an awful person because you took a boat for cloture. >> is there anything that surprised you that you want to take forward? [inaudible] >> you said they armed the media with everything they did. the digital ads are treated like tv ads now when you have a
limited budget, treating the digital act like a tv out and making sure you are raising money and making sure you are taking stories on it like it's the greatest thing that ever happened. i think of all the things he said that one was hierarchy and there wasn't a lot of hands in the cookie jar. there were stories about the 100 people that looked at it before it went out and that's an exaggeration but that's a lot. we say that after elections and we joke about it and forget
about it then we go to the next campaign and they come up again. there was a hierarchy that would be better for all campaigns. >> i think -- i like this video and i thought that was unique. i think that is strong and disrupts the feed in a way that draws attention. this isn't just a thing that could exist on facebook. we need to as have a party nott our morals but think about ways like that that could disrupt the other advertising end user of the media platforms to engage with the user not just take the 32nd spot and run.
>> i will do a few things. one is the ability to understand the voice is actually critical to what they were able to get done on the campaign team especially putting out public information that understands how they speak and trying to capture that helps to streamline that process and then the social media following. i will be completely honest i didn't totally buy into it. my job in 2015 i knew there were benefits tha but we were growinr facebook likes and i was asking what's the point. we found that the ability to turn people out was cheap. like $5 cheap he would be able
8 million on the budget and it came up to about 13% of the total media spend the creative production into th and the digil budget increased by 60% compared to 2014 i want to touch briefly on two topics. first strategy and videos and bumpers. starting with the search. so when they search for democratiademocratic candidate e this is what they found. in 2016 a negative ad. if they click on it this is where they landed. scroll down on this page and learn a little bit more about jim mowrer and some of the
things are kind of negative. at the bottom you notice paid for by nrc see. this was the first thing to go live and we spent the summer building. it had information about the content of the republican candidates and the democrats was negative. you also notice appears in the sidebar in this release. we wanted to give it a new fuel and it is an example of the media. they created the sites that didn'depend quite an attack ad. we had over 125,000 visitors and the research adds and what is great about these visitors is these were actively seeking information about the democratic candidates in the district and
we were able to reach them. back to the search results. another ad on the page. when they click on this it would have the spot running on tv and on the internet. at the wronthe wrong for us page directed users to click on display ads and designed to look similar to the video created so every page but with different. you could watch the video and this doesn't do justice but read more about the candidates and videos and sign up for more information. >> back to the search ad. one thing we did differently is into different out some of you
anyway, she was supposed to go to preschool. everybody saw this ad. what we did for almost every ad is break it down to 50 seconds. so we had a 152nd version you wouldn't have seen on your tv but you would have seen it running on youtube and i can't play it but it had the same message. we developed these and into this showed a small clip. we have 15 seconds with the same message it is a multi-channel effort and was a big part of.
joined on stage the director in georgia and the partner at the strategy so thank you for joining me. before we jump into the pan all panel ihave a very exciting toph i know we are very close to so we will go as fast as we can in the digital research effectiveness results. so don't get too excited. in my role i had the job of focusing on the voters. what are voters doing on digital come into the way we understand their intent in this cycle is looking at multiple data points everything from what they are typing in which our very interesting things all the way to partnering with third-party research. so today we will walk through
the evil bit of research and findings on the cycle. at the end of every cycle we seem to be in this position. questioning the effectiveness of advertising at the overall level all the way down to digital. if i had a nickel for every time i was asked in the research industry to show me the effectiveness of digital ads, i might be the next billionaire running for president. this is the number one at the weekend. how we set up a research and his cycle is to focus on three different things. focus on what we are seeing in the consumer world at the time spent on media and as mentioned to every one hour on tv but where it gets interesting is going for the influenza in the rate of digital and finally rounding out the effectiveness.
we went beyond to understand what and for whom the ad is working. so, we took an innovative approach this year and i want to be on the stage with the partnership so we looked across multiple research firms and worked with the leading digital research company working with the national panel but we know they are won and lost at the local level and give us an opportunity to understand more. so, we looked across the 165 ended the 3165 andin the 35 stad if you bet we could work with. we then cut the panel at the state level and screamed in for likely voters but third is tagging the creative so we could
say with a significant left it is digital at work. so we are talking about the strategies and how they've executed the strategies throughout the cycle. but we have some results. we looked across the metrics from awareness, favorability as well as some recalls and we found a significant left in the percentage points across multiple metrics. there is more to come into this is just kind of scratching the surface. but i wanted to start with both chris and amanda. we heard a lot today about what made a successful campaign on
the senate presidential level and i would like to hear from your perspective working on the ballot as the work of the campaign work for some o were se challenges and differences in the strategy? speak to >> it is up to the initiative itself to raise the level of awareness. there were 17 ballot initiatives and if it is just the statewide aca statewideact that doesn't ie local races and initiatives. so we had battle and awareness
of our side and at least one of the benefits of the ballot initiative is in general awareness does need to favorability which isn't the case where the campaigns do have that in our favor. >> [inaudible] [inaudible] we were able to take the data and find our online targeting in the mail and we did some extra work with them.
so all of that is by the fact. >> you came from behind on double digits and ended up meeting and exceeding by 70 points one of the reasons that happened as it wasn't just a well-funded effort. it ended up in the proposition and new york is the most expensive option talking about for outside groups. so it is incredibly expensive and we had and effort early on in the process and we had researched starting back in the may before it was decided.
with the research what did you find surprising and was there any picketing in the research coming in? >> we were in a similar boat. we were down by 29 points and on one certain group, there were people you could only reach with tv over the internet or they didn't like any content whatsoever so that was huge. it wa was do we need to target d to the need to change.
but the thing that surprised me the most, the thing that i enjoyed seeing was as we changed the messaging, the list talked and i was seeing the messages we were running in september were popping and you really didn't see them move then we basically found that the messages we were leading throughout was the message that was goin i was goie campaign so we went the last couple of weeks, tv, digital radio, everything digital. everything had the same imagery,
all across the board and we saw a list of 32 or 35 points and remember the exact number but to see the difference as we were changing the messaging shows that it's working. >> what tools from the digital first did you use to educate the voters if this was different from the awareness levels. >> it was challenging because ours was about casinos in the state you can gamble. we had to do in education component of the campaign so people smarter than me on the team worked closely to figure the best way but it was something we were constantly
dealing with we worked with advertising before we even had a valid number if there is something loosely related to this so it was an important component. another thing was how confusing all of this was in that we had to figure out how to word the strategy appropriately. the initiative was to fund education and everybody thought it needed more funding so we couldn't go at this.
we had to figure out how to work appropriately and that all transferred and for most of the campaigns in early summer it went apart and never came down. >> another is the frequency. it's something that dealing with an education campaign you need to get the frequency up to bring the message effectively when there isn't a face or candidate. we did two things along those lines, such we figured out cross medium with individual voters were likely to see a. making sure the frequency was higher among those because we knew the broadcast was likely to be detectives there and another thing we were able to do is
download through the data transfer 2.0. we could go in and identify folks in the online universe below the frequency that we needed to increase that as we saw fit. >> we have time for one more question. we pushed some boundaries to look at the state level panels. what do you think is next or where were you like to see us go from here. >> it was disappointing they didn't measure the impact with the trend towards global consumption of revenue right now is coming from the mobile devices and we had the components we couldn't measure what the left was so i would
like to see that gets patched to the specifics gets pushed forward. the research end of it has a large amount to go. >> we were concerned about the size as well but i think from a research standpoint, it's hard to say. we found that 20 to 25% were not able to be reached with tv advertising so i'm not sure how many were actually measured because the panel was politically small so everybody
else on the internet could have been potentially getting the ads on top of the digital advertising. >> you are up next for the lightning talk. thank you for dealing with the problem. [inaudible] no slides, just him. >> i don't want the accountability of slides. i want to share something that struck me as i was in the back listening to the panel and the earlier discussions. which of the assembly of people in the room i see digital strategists, eaters, political minds, and people who've been working from the bottom en and e
top making a difference. digital is changing the way campaigns are run whether it's the local initiative for the president of the united states you've all been willing to take the risk to fight for this better way of doing things so i think we kind of get ourselves a round of applause. [applause] it's a great group of people that have stood up and fought when the chips need to go down to make that change and now we have the opportunity to change the country. so, essentially we are seeing the change in the media karate
do the campaigns and marketing and sell products in the news, politics etc.. it's challenging but it's something that our democracy has seen before. if you look back to abraham lincoln, he said once that the speech made him president. he was a photographer in the 50s and 60s and believe it or not that time, still photography was a disruptive new medium and most political leaders thought that was kid itd stuff, entertainment, distraction. matthew brady and abraham lincoln were able to realize this is how you could shape the opinions and he leveraged that. music that had a few decades and see fdr and you realize that this new medium of the time
coulthat the timecould be used e with people and forge a connection. jfk had the audacity to do something weird and unusual and weird stage makeup to be on tv. serious politicians wouldn't necessarily want to do that but he realized that the new medium meant to do something that's maybe a little weird at first but it's at its core and makes it distinctive different from its predecessors so if you look at the digita digital media onee things that strikes me is its interactivity. it's still got to have great sound and audio in a great image but it also has to be fundamentally interactive and strike people as an emotional connection through in so many people did that really while this cycle.
we are at this moment we have an opportunity to run but i think we need to challenge ourselves because the media is continuing to change in the digital will continue to rise and we need to continue to find ways to leverage the disruptive thinking to make it more central to how we run campaigns and ultimately how we govern. one of my favorite economic theories is the sailing ship phenomenon if you look back at the four or five major ship builders they've been dominant for centuries and not a single one of them existed so why when faced with these self-evident truths that would disrupt and
they really were in different respects responsible for the operation and it seems some of the slightly incorrect about the various roles so i am the king to dig into that but one thing everybody will be interested to hear and maybe we will start with the rnc folks can you give us some insight into what it was like to walk into the donald trump operation when you first did how much did it resemble a normal digital operation, was it something completely different? just give us a bit of a flavor of it. >> [inaudible]
said he is a busines has a busis running there, beautiful office but kind of a solo operation. it's something he was running so low. the first meeting was a little rough around the edge i would say. so through that we hung out a couple days, grew a good relationship working together. >> it was pretty sparse when we got down there but we had a good
connection. i think from our perspective we knew coming in but there were 16 or 17 campaigns and none of them was going to be able to have a digital operation that could scale very well. i think there was a operation that could have done it we knew back in june that wasn't going to be the case and w if we wantn operation ready to go at a moments notice when the nominee walked in the door. so it was ironic or maybe perfect but the campaigns came out of the primary and had the smallest digital operation in terms of just manpower but it
ended up being a great match but hwe sewed together over the firt few weeks and the rest is history. >> i want to know to the extent which you think not having the hillary clinton superstructure was an advantage to being smaller, not having as someone said 42 lawyers signed off. do you think there were advantages as well as disadvantages? >> 1.0 was all the money. i think we only spent $2.4 million on the convention and i would say 3 million was probably all it now flies. we built the entire website and all the digital structure and everything at the point when we were in iowa.
it's not very much money. we built the pieces out of everything but again, i did that from the house. i think it's hard to look at version one, two, three. the digital operation by that point i can't say that it was smaller. i don't know how many people they have. we had a pretty big. i had a heck of a primary candidate on the other side of their. it wasn't as much about us then. you look at the general we put pieces together in partnership
to the other partners. my company isn't small. it's 70 people. it's a whole city block so it's not like it's the little building. i just had to pool resources. so we started playing more and more resources and it grew, we had to move to another location in the city and then we got almost a whole floor of the building and then i forced a lot of them to fly here because i didn't like flying into dc. it wasn't a bad place in united states to be stuck. it's sunny and no delays. [laughter] [applause] can we send the microphone down to the other end.
>> one thing a lot of people were curious about with some operatives this morning saying would you be interested to know. people are wondering to what extent with the digital operation was a persuasion and what% is fund raising. you talk about how both of those elements worked. it [inaudible] getting both new e-mail addresses into teaching the marketing and project fundraising to see a tremendous amount of success. but then as we can further down to the cycle to understand that voters actually needed to understand more about the story as well as identify our supporters and their tools to request ballots and understand where to go on voting day. of those became important for us all.
it was a digital universe and that whatever effectiveness of the campaign were whether it was raising money for getting supporters to come out, digital tools for use to accomplish that. money wise, he got the most of it. the gop and the rnc hired all the digital fundraising for the most part in connection with the campaign. we would produce content and they would leave the team and have partners we had come in from third party candidates. that was a majority of the money i think but i would say 70% range. it was mainly run through another portion of the operati
operation. we produce content and then worked with them and had the persuasion budgets which i believe was ten to 15% of? however i do think we ran our fund raising effort anyway to be persuasive as well. so i think that is a big difference in the way they did fund raising. we have the mindset to get three extra terms we are not doing it right because we are leaving money on the table. we have such a short window to operate.
we ramp up the volume and try to push it down to bring in total dollars. in terms of how the operation held in the perspiratio persuasf the content got shared and we were extremely aggressive in pushing the envelope and what messages worked and we found sometimes the video didn't have anything to do with the actual ask it was just to get them to stop and whether that was relevant to why we are asking them to give us $35 doesn't
matter. that's something the typical campaigns would you what to do iand it would stop us and say that doesn't make sense but we're focused on the ultimate goal of getting the donations we are able to push for those other things. additionally, because the ad got so much engagement led to even more reach in the unit reachinge would try to use persuasion style ads. we are able to garner more rea reach.
i will come back to fundraising but before we do that i want to talk about targeting. after 2012 and 2014 the targeting was fetishized by some on the left with the profiling and i just want to understand because we hear about that and then we see a these big emotion and in some cases targeting. we need to stop being efficient and pull back a bit so i want you to talk about how you use the tools you have. >> i don't want to break your heart but he didn't really do any psychographic on the campaign. we did a little individual site
as well. a persuasion budgeting and mostly i just hope you manage to speak to we have to wal had to e we could run on the campaign similar to the stories first week of june with no data structure. we are getting all this district data organized that it was a few weeks or a month before we could pull the model into the emphasis wais always on fund raising. it was fueled by the low dollar
fundraising. mitt romney had an obligation to fuel the campaign. every dollar that came and went to every other department so it's robbing peter to pay paul to get stuff to it on the targeting piece you're talking about working with the alamo database which you may have heard about and leveraging those three things together we are building partisan models, the basic building blocks on the campaign. we were working on a facebook bought that we had to scale it
fast and it requires a faster ramp time. >> the other thing that cambridge actually provided is if i were to make budgeting decisions every day which i was making lots of them, i thought two sets of data on what i thought was happening. it started helping us with the polling internally. they would provide the data sets and i could start to say there is a difference what's going on. then i had a third set and was
able to bring the data in pretty better picture of what i thought was happening and they provided an employee that could sit next to me all day and put it in the visualization standpoint. sometimes it was going back and they were able to to visualize it and make better decisions. >> one benefit he had over the research data is kind of a dream if you are someone with a ton of leverage to make the holistic physician siding with the digital team an is pretty operational control over those.
we can go into the surveys each week on the battleground states and next method. it gets new audiences and provides data at the same time and we are going back and testing the digital performance off the back with google and facebook. the campaign was consistently learning from itself. it's much more run like a business than most campaigns have been a part of. >> i think you raised a quarter billion or something in that range which is phenomenal.
i want you to give me an idea of a ratio between e-mail. give us an idea of how you raise all that money. >> the general breakdown was about 60 to 65% e-mail and then the rest basically advertising some of that would outperform the expectations. e-mail i was happy to say i expected it to be more like 75%.
i think gary and that cambridge team brought in so many extra donors originally and then so many campaigns burning in the summer of 15 we knew we had to have an e-mail list because the time value which means the only way to build the giant list when you need one if you don't have one is to spend a ton of money and catch up really fast to spend ten or 20 more about the time machine and go back from scratch. we built it up much larger so having the assets writing this incredibly important. i think going forward in the next cycle it'll be more like
ten to 15%. >> they ended up running a lot of that, but people are signing up and you had those banners on the podium all through the primary. i said there's no way we are going to raise money on it but we ended up giving several hundred million. >> there were messages where we raised, rather absurd. it helped spur a lot of growth
and also stamped out a lot of protesters. it also gave us active files we raised a lot of money off of. >> this is why they are so valuable. i would be going to the political director and finance director to say you should be arguing for it to persuade voters and i'm not sure what is a more valuable asset. >> the reason why they raised so much money is that donald trump is a good candidate to raise money from a.
>> how much of this is because of donald trump and -- [inaudible] >> if her campaign what things can you take and learn and what do you think for unique. >> my life before was doing fundraising for that and i would have died to be able to say half the stuff mr. trump would see at fund raising. a lot of typical candidates and others that worked for rubio would love to stay and have the
same kind of message because that message matters. even a subtle word choices mean the difference between ten or 20% on the e-mail deliverability. i think that he was a vehicle thathe vehiclethat they were abs it very quickly. >> can you give some insight into what ar were some of the things that popped. >> august 31 was the day he went down to mexico totally dominated the media. it's dominating the television news because it is very relevant
and 8:31 he is also talking about an issue that does really well for us. when i talked about earlier using the persuasion act to raise money we had an ad from early on. i start going to new york and find the scripts. we had one eric trump was talking about the wall and it's been for months we just keep running it. they were pretty aggressive with pushing it. we could be asking for money.
saw the other day that showing the victory. people were trying to vote with their wallet. outside groups can you give us some insight into what's going to happen here? argue going to be the chief digital? >> break now i am enjoying dinner with my folks across the street. >> thank you, i really appreciate it. [applause] >> we are going to show a few
videos for the last panel. why i got 50 points ahead i might ask. >> last time i drove a car myself was 1996. she's under fbi investigation. >> people should and do trust me. >> y. m.i. 50 points ahead you might ask. >> one thing is certain with me with william bennett you get higher taxes. hasn't the government taken enough already meanwhile
criticizing the opponent for fighting the largest tax increase in virginia history that would affect families you can count on luann bennett. my home, my family and my marriage. i have a lot of things to worry about besides some politicians future. empty promises of special treatment o are the last thing i need. i need a leader that will fight for me and my family for my home, my job is a lot depending on me. i know i can build a better life if you can get the economy on the right track and there is no limit to what i can do with my family, job, security and priorities. he knows i deserve equal pay for equal work and understands when
i succeed, my family succeeds in america succeeds. >> what's at stake in the election it's not just who votes here but who rules here in the supreme court. you're right to own a gun is gone. now the next choice for supreme court justices support your right to self-defense and for justices to take away the right. >> the second amendment is outdated. having a gun is not a fundamental right. >> it's the right of an individual to keep his gun next to his bed. >> we have too many times. >> she's made her choice and now you get to make words.
the institute for legislative action. >> a woman's life, christians persecuted. people are stoned, beaten and hanged for what they believe, how they were born and who they love. when giving billions to that regime without human rights violation when we have leverage, ted strickland doesn't stand up for the vulnerable and that's why we can't trust him to stand up for us. [inaudible]
future 45 doesn't start running ads until later in the race when there are hundreds of millions spent against hillary clinton. who decides to get involved in that point and how did you decide what kind of messaging to use, who you wanted to target and run your ads? >> is this on and hundreds of millions is probably an overstatement there. i think at that point future 45 we were formed but he didn't spend the bulk of the resources until after labor day of 2016. at the time we got them both i think something like 150 million had been spent against trump by secretary clinton and her allies into eight or 9 million had been spent supporting trump mostly by
the nra. the playing field was wide open in terms of the issues you could talk about. from our point of view we always start with research so we undertook the project wa through from the subject matter but also on what voters cared about. we had the ads aimed at millennialist that were aimed at folks that cared about the women's issues and that were aimed at people who might engage with politics on a humorous basis and then we had a lot aimed at the issues like the supreme court and the economy and so forth to try to match those opportunities with the right audience. >> was like running the ads for a candidate that is so well-known in the media and is
that the reason you decided to just go after clinton rather than promoting trump? >> we did both. they liked should talk about the anti-clinton effort but there were a lot of opportunities to talk about the president-elect and vice president-elect. in fact those aimed at economic opportunity and the economic plans i think were the bulk of the advertising we did especially in september and in pennsylvania some of these sound familiar michigan, wisconsin, ohio, iowa. so we definitely focused on that. at a certain point, everybody understands the role of an outside group versus a campaign. at a certain point the campaign itself put up some high quality positive ads talking about the economic message and when it
became clear that they were carrying a very effective and positive message, we altered our strategy to go more negative. there was a group that had several high-quality accessible so then we focused more on defining secretary clinton. >> a lot of the states had a very competitive races. >> i believe whoever won the presidency but also carry the senate. one of the targeting opportunities there was a member of the voters who were trump voters but not necessarily for the republican senate nominee. there was another that is for the senate nominee but not candidate trumps a wee trip to end the messaging on air and
through digital means to a lesser extent mail and phones to marry up those audiences so if you could persuade a rubio voter to also vote for trump and vice versa we felt the rising tide lifts all boats. hillary's slogan was stronger together but our view was the better together and if we can be better together and get folks to turn out for the entire ticket to the presidential candidate, senate candidate and house candidate than i would say finally that is the reason why we spend double the resources by a national advertising so we were up on i think it was the team different cable and broadcast networks nationally including 30 million in the last week a bonus people wer of bonug their game day decisions. >> to open it up a little bit
this is obviously an unusual year with less spending on tv advertising but more congressional races. can you talk about how you work to make the ads break through the noise? >> the concept for the ads you saw was me looking over the shoulder of my son who watches a lot of youtube content. thinking through how you have websites that are different.
now what does this look like in my opinion and taking a television ad and throwing it online as we get to a different version of research at the same audience we are trying t they at on television but they will recognize it's not like a political ad you can't see and what do people pay attention to so that's how we came up with the idea.
we said you manage customers and create these personalities if we want to create a personal observation is there a spokesperson talking to the audiences to build a audience is to build a relationship with them in the same way the stars do that and the personalities. the digital director was here and then they executed all this stuff and made it happen and they could tell you a little bit more but in terms of people watching the whole video and the feedback for us our approach was created this is king. buying online there is now a point we can hire the firm to do that well but i'm not seeing much of this people paying attention to these online creative so that's what we focused on more.
one of the ads we made the 12 different versions. you decide what works online and what works on tv we think all these things work together and we don't platform versus platform, we persuaded the people with everything. it was the old-fashioned paper mail this week, the old-fashioned approach. i don't know that i would argue. we thought they did a great job helping us on these events and this was with two national stars and we were ready to go.
>> we are running much larger organizations and we have our own budget over the last couple of cycles. they had a focused message on helping those with lgbt freedom. we can also play in those races. it's a good problem to have but we had people like john mccain running in arizona and in ohio, kelly ayotte in new hampshire so as you look at the contest, a lot of people running in those races were either incumbent
senators or in the case of joe the challenger to be excited about looking at that at the outset we knew we didn't have the budget but we knew we could take on some part of the mission knowing if we were going to break through with our message we needed to understand what was going to motivate the voters. it is interesting because if you look at the issue advocacy organization at this point about 93% of the advertising dollars haven't mentioned these issues
most of them running ads on tax cuts or corruption were just being lousy or supporters of the government. we wanted to play with the issue a little bit and find an effective way to do that. we told ourselves we can't really do that unless we can prove that it's effective and inject these issues on the half of the republican candidates in the general election and be successful in doing so. we worked with a group called the winner's initiative. they have the motivations and the opinions in the research program. you should subscribe to it if you haven't already. but we learned in that process independent women voters were hawks and that there was a
foreign-policy message. that's what we developed out of the research process was that we could talk about the deal in a different way and instead of focusing on the nukes, focus on the human rights abuses and the things the regime is doing to women and in a testing process it's amazing impacts with women which is a prime group then by working with google is able to put serious money behind that in ohio in the first wave to do some survey advertising and actually understand where wa ths is being effective and that was driving huge search traffic and again if we thought that it was worn out by the advertising to prove to be true young women really responded to this message and the independence baby boomers responded to the