The Burgumania That Could Have Been
Doomscroll 12.10.2023
Hello and welcome to another Sunday evening with Doomscroll! I’ll be honest, folks: The latter half of this week I was stricken. Stricken with the flu. As a result, tonight’s newsletter is going to be on the shorter side and a little less peppy. But, as they say, the show must go on! So it may not be the fullest, most expansive Doomscroll you’ve ever read, but I hope you’ll continue reading nonetheless and PASS IT ON. Get your friends to subscribe, yo.
A lot did happen this week, but before we get down to some business I want to start off with a small-ish personal note. Some of you may be aware that I’ve been a consultant for the Doug Burgum for President campaign for the last 6-ish months. (Who’s counting, really). I wasn’t necessarily seeking out a job on a presidential campaign this year. I launched my small little firm in May and thought FOR SURE a presidential would be biting off more than I could chew. Fast forward a few weeks…and the Doug Burgum team came calling. I couldn’t say no, and after talking with them, I didn’t WANT to say no. Yes, I have a soft spot for governors (You don’t spend 5 years at the RGA and come away without one), but it was more than that. The team was small, it was scrappy, it was idealistic in the best way possible. What’s more, they were incredibly smart. Some of the best people I’ve ever worked with, I can confidently say now, are Burgum people. I’m disappointed he didn’t break through in the polls. It goes without saying that I believe he should have - and that he would have made an exceptional president. But playing a small role on his campaign was the honor of a lifetime and I’ll be forever grateful for the experience.
One Question
Anywho, thanks to everyone who answered last week’s One Question about the social influencer model for candidates. A full 60% of you said yes, candidates should embrace the world of influencer content. We’re all digital folks here, so I can’t say I’m that surprised. And to a certain degree, I completely agree, but - and here’s THAT buzzword again - authenticity is so crucial here. “Incluencer’-style content simply doesn’t work for every candidate or on every campaign. So my word of caution is this: let’s not create a campaign status quo that says the politicians posting reels 24/7 win races and those who don’t…lose. I’d hate to see that become the new norm. To what extent we, as consultants, even have over that - I don’t necessarily know. But it’s something I’m going to be mindful of. As per usual I got some really interesting comments. Here are some of them:
If it’s about transparency and giving people more access to the electeds who will govern them, I’m all for it. I also think the “influencer” model can help grassroots candidates without a ton of resources get in the game, which helps our representative democracy! I will say my fear, however, is that candidates will do more gimmicky stunts (as many influencers do) — and I’m not sure that’s healthy for or helpful to our process of figuring out who to actually vote for.
Most candidates wouldn't be natural influences, so forcing it would look like, well, forced.
Building relationships with donors/voters is more important than EVER as folks get wise to the scammy matching/shaming/shady fundraising tactics. Presenting our donors/voters with familiar faces would go a long way to restore trust. Plus -- Democrats are doing it in droves. Why should we cede the floor ONCE AGAIN?
I am 100% sympathetic to all of these points.
This week’s One Question is super simple. Yes, I do believe it’s time for another Doomscroll straw poll. We just witness the fourth GOP primary debate, so I want to know where all of you stand at the moment. I know a bunch of you are working for candidates still in the race and that’s fine - vote for your guy (or gal). But I’m curious to see what the breakdown is at this point: Who do you want to be the 2024 nominee? But also, who do you THINK will ultimately be the nominee? Two very different questions.
2024 Roundup
Things got pretty spicy during the GOP Debate. And there ends my commentary about that.
As previously noted, Doug Burgum suspended his presidential campaign. See the announcement here.
Nikki Halery is taking the knives pointed at her and trying to turn them into a mech opportunity with her “Bring It” shirts. See them - and get yours - here.
Haley also has a new ad out highlighting her husband’s military experience. Watch it here.
Vivek filmed a face-to-camera video (as he is wont to do) to push back on rumors that he’s in talks with the Libertarian Party in Iowa to be their nominee. See it here.
Chris Christie spent the immediate days post-debate doing a “Christie on Campaus” tour in New Hampshire. He live streamed town halls on twitter (Example) and ran ads on Facebook promoting the events (Example). P.S. Does anyone else find it interesting that he uses WinRed to collect RSVP’s to these events and not a platform like Eventbrite?
Ron DeSantis is fundraising off the debate moment in which he responded to Christie’s parental rights argument of legislation banning transgender treatment for minors. See the ad here.
Did I miss anything good? If so, drop me a line: itsthedoomscroll@gmail.com
Who’s Spending Where
From November 30 - December 6, The Daily Wire was the top conservative spender on Facebook ads. The company spent more than $1.7 million, mostly to promote its new film “Lady Balers.” Americans for Prosperity spent $167,000 on ads, and PragerU spent about $118,000. AFP Action spent a little over $96,000 mostly on pro-Nikki Haley ads and something called Liberty Defender Group spent $93,000 on some weird pro-Trump ads that promise a “free gift” if you take their poll. I don’t know what the free gift is, but I’m 100% not taking this poll just to find out. There’s a lot I do for my Doomscroll audience - this just ain’t one of them! #Sorrynotsorry.
On Google during that same time period, AFP Action was the top spender, with about $105,000. Someone named Nicholas Perhai spent $104,000 on an ad promoting Donald Trump gold bars (face to palm). SFA Inc. came in a distant third with about $36,000 on a mix of pro-Nikki Haley ads. More Jobs Less Government spent $23,000 on ads for Tim Sheehy in Montana, and Trump Save America Joint Fundraising Committee spent $22,000 on fundraising ads.
P2P
Industry Watch
I thought this was an interesting piece in Pluribus News about how TikTok has stepped up its state lobbying presence. Here’s a snippet:
Between 2021 and 2022, TikTok doubled its state lobbying presence from four to eight states and 20 to 43 lobbyists, according to OpenSecrets. Google registered 194 lobbyists in 39 states in 2022.
Complete data for 2023 is not yet available, but a scan of available state lobbying databases revealed TikTok added lobbyists this year in at least two more states, Ohio and in Massachusetts, where the company has an office.
TikTok, which has also dramatically increased its federal lobbying, declined to share details of its growing state lobbying footprint.
In an emailed statement, a TikTok spokesperson said, “Our goal is to educate policymakers about the impact of legislation on the people who use TikTok to earn a living, express themselves, and find community.”
On the state level, the company is clearly worried. On the federal level, it doesn’t seem like there’s much need for concern. Reuters reported this week that Congress will not take up TikTok-related legislation before the end of the year, and something tells me that won’t change either in 2024.
The Grapevine
Tim Scott’s former Campaign Manager, Jennifer DeCasper, joined Targeted Victory.
The Allbritton Journalism Institute is launching a news site called NOTUS. This one promises to be different from all the rest. For real!
Remy Hart was promoted to VP of Digital Marketing at Convergence. Congrats!
Got a tip for The Grapevine? Job announcement? Job opening? Tips for getting over the flu? Email ‘em to me at itsthedoomscroll@gmail.com
Last But Not Least
From the other side of the aisle:
You know I’m a sucker for anything merch-related, so I very much enjoyed this piece in Politico Magazine about “Why nobody wants your RBG candle anymore.” A snippet:
At least Yellen is still alive and on the job, which is more than you can say for a lot of the other souvenir stars. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is dead — and, in some circles, discredited. Anthony Fauci, who for a time generated almost as much impulse-purchase buzz, is retired. Nancy Pelosi is a backbencher again. Abrams was convincingly defeated in her second Georgia gubernatorial run. The Obamas have been out of the White House for seven years. But they’re all still big merch subjects. Resistance has given way to retro.
Yes, the collection of political sock on display on Black Friday included folks like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, both of whom still draw a federal paycheck, even if their prospects of becoming the future of the American left have dimmed. There were some goods depicting Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sonia Sotomayor. And even though Ketanji Brown Jackson has only been on the Supreme Court for about a year, she was already on a tote bag. Nonetheless, it’s hard to sustain the past decade’s liberal memorabilia craze with this cast of characters.
I’m genuinely amused at the idea that someone thought creating Janet Yellen merch was a good idea. LMAO.
From the other side of the tracks:
Has everyone seen the logo that was commissioned by the US Semiquincentennial Commission to celebrate America turning 250 years old? If not, feast your eyes:
I don’t hold back when it comes to my opinion on logos (see last week, DGA), but this has me torn. I don’t hate it, but it does feel a little disjointed. I don’t know…I feel like this cannot possibly be the best corporate America’s design firms can come up with!
That’s all for this week. Thanks for reading! Did you like it? Consider forwarding to your friends!