How do you solve a problem like Ohio Part 1: Technology

(feel free to sing along)

Ohio always turns out for the president

But all other elections she is absent

Ohio attracts all the talent

Except in non summer Olympic years

I hate that I have to say it

But I feel very strongly

Ohio may not be an asset to her citizens

How do you solve a problem like Ohio.

Last week I presented my case for why Ohio voted for President Obama twice, yet has a conservative republican state government.  We know the why, let's figure out how to change this duality in Ohio's voting behaviors.

The primary obstacle that needs to be dealt with is the ineptness of the county parties.  When you have the same people in charge after years of failure, staff replacement is not an option. These party bosses are in their position because they played the right political game a decade ago. These bosses think things like knocking on doors, bowing to the local unions, and swearing fidelity to the national party are the ways to run political elections.  Technology has changed the process over the last ten years.  The rise of social networking has made the idea of door knocking antiquated and wasteful.  

Let's talk about technology.  The first iPhone debuted in 2007, and the public started to enter the world of smartphones.  Twitter came on line in 2006, Facebook allowed non-college students to join in 2006, Instagram started sharing photos in 2010.  The party bosses running the local elections were in charge when the rise of social networking and the ability to share information started to take hold.  There was a new wave of political strategists that understood the power of social media.  These strategists did not respect, or were respected, by the established local political bosses.  The future of political outreach rested in social media, and nobody was taking advantage of this incredible tool.

The rise of the internet allowed political candidates a new, and usually less expensive, portal to voter outreach.  All that was needed for a candidate was a simple website that showed the public what the candidate believed in, and how you could contribute money.  Today we see very few local candidates use the benefit of the internet.  Many local parties refuse to invest the low cost / high reward resources on websites and social media.   They would still rather rely on high resource / low benefit activities like door knocking for voter outreach.  The average dedicated voter would rather spend time on the internet than answering an unknown doorbell pusher.  In 2015 if your doorbell rings it is usually a solicitor, unexpected family member, or a political candidate.  In today's world, none are a welcome presence.

How do we reach the dedicated voter in the twenty-first century?  The smart candidate will first use the free tools available, i.e. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.  The minimal time spent to set up a profile for the social networking sites will pay large dividends in the end.  Instead of knocking on 100 doors on a Saturday, use the time to post and respond to 1000 potential donors.  Do not be bullied into canvasing by other "establishment" candidates.  Build your online profile and watch the support (and money) pour in.  The most fertile voter base for local candidates is the millennial generation.  They are going to be much more excited by a candidate's online presence than they will be impressed by a one sheet paper handed to them on a sunny summer day.

Embracing the idea of online voter outreach will also attract a new, dynamic, type of candidate.  Many people interested in running for local office are new to the political process. Telling them that they have to spreed their spring / summer / fall days knocking on doors is usually a hard sell.  Many winnable candidates will turn down the offer to run for office when the local party bosses start talking about canvasing.  Let's use these candidates greatest assets to get them elected.  Walking door to door is nobody's greatest asset.  We want great ideas and voices to be our leaders.  Social networking gives these ideas and voices a megaphone to needed voters.

The days of mapping out neighborhoods and going door to door is over.  In order to get a truly people elected government you have to find out how to get the people to vote for your ideas.  We do not like to answer unknown front door visitors.  We do get excited by leaders who understand the twenty-first century.  If you want to start to solve the Ohio problem, do not talk to 100 potential voters on a Saturday in September.  Connect with thousands of potential voters every day equipped only with your passion and ideas.

The establishment has lost the way.  You are your own political boss.

RD Kulik

RD Kulik is the creator and Head Editor for Seed Sing.  He wants your ideas to run the country, not the ideas of an antiquated party system.  Contact seedsing.rdk@gmail.com for support on launching your political career.

The Ohio Problem

As goes Ohio, so goes the nation.

That is where the problem begins for people trying to run for office in Ohio.  I have worked as a campaign consultant for nearly ten years to a number of candidates and causes in Ohio, I have always encountered the same problems. The Ohio Problem (as I have decided to call it) consists of the state gaining outside media influence and money every presidential election due to its perceived electoral importance.  This extra attention every four years causes the most talented, and professional campaign experts to migrate towards the high profile state and federal races.  This leaves mostly inexperienced campaign workers and volunteers to work on the local races. The existence of the Ohio Problem causes political amateurism and laughable local governance for a state that seems to always be front and center during a presidential election year.

What makes Ohio so attractive to the national political establishment?  It begins with basic demographics.  Ohio ranks as the seventh most populous state, and it is overwhelmingly white (over 82%). The median income in Ohio sits below the national average.  The unemployment rate sits slightly above the national rate.  This all shows that the residents of Ohio are usually the target of national political platform messaging.  There is no major demographic swing to alienate the residents on national politics.  The voters of Ohio turn out in record numbers for the presidential election, and their turnout in other years is usually a record low.

Why do Ohioans care so little for the local elections?  This begins with the local political parties.  Many of the same people have been in charge of their local county parties for almost a decade.  In Hamilton County (Cincinnati), the local democratic party has engaged in such amateurism as in endorsing ten candidates for a nine member city council, having their endorsed congressional candidate lose the primary to an unknown person who was not running an active campaign, and running candidates over and over again who have no ability to win the race.  These actions would get most party bosses tossed after one election cycle (I have seen this happen in Missouri, Wisconsin, and Illinois). These party leaders keep their jobs in spite of their failures. The response to the parties failures is to remind critics that Obama carried the county the last two elections. There is no interest or fidelity to the local governance of the people they are supposed to serve.  The strong republican area of Butler County, where the Speaker of the House John Boehner calls home, does not fare much better.  The local Democratic party has on occasion attempted to try new things and bring in new people. In 2012 there were some new candidates with broader appeal to the strong conservative voters of the area.  Before the end of May the party had lost any momentum because candidates were not fundraising, people in the party were looking for signs and t-shirts(again this was in May, nowhere near election time), and most of the resources were being hoarded by a small group of candidates. During strategy meetings the top priorities were knocking on doors, and getting people to vote for President Obama and Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown (both Obama and Brown received around 37% of the vote).  This showed a lack of interest in the local races in service to the national party.

Once the 2012 election had passed, many of the campaign consultants had moved on to other jobs.  A large percentage leave the political campaign world.  The ones left over are usually underpaid (if they get paid at all) and lose any loyalty towards the local party bosses.  While all campaign workers divest themselves from the system, all the county party leaders stay put to repeat the same mistakes in the next election cycle.  The next mistake turned out to be the colossal failure of the Ohio Democratic party during the 2014 state elections. Little known, and barely vetted, Cuyahoga County executive Ed Fitzgerald was tapped as the Democratic nominee for governor. Fitzgerald was going against incumbent Republican Governor John Kasich.  The poll numbers for Governor Kasich were trending below 50%.  The state Democratic Party brought in out of state consultants to run Fitzgerald's campaign.  There seemed to be no local campaign experts, because none were groomed during the 2012 elections.  By the end of August 2014, Fitzgerald's campaign imploded (go see for yourself,  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_FitzGerald).  The entire state ticket went down with Fitzgerald's failed candidacy.   Since the local parties went all in with the Fitzgerald campaign, their backyard races all suffered.  Once the dust settled on the disaster of the 2014 campaign, the head of the state Democratic party stepped down, and that was the only high profile resignation.  The local party leaders were once again in charge of the next election cycle.  The 2016 election looks to be run the exact same way, all the resources moving to secure the state for the presidential candidate at the expense of local officials. 

Ohio has twice gone to President Obama, yet the state is overwhelmingly controlled by the Republican party.  Every day the citizens of Ohio watch women's health freedom get stripped away, LGBT rights sit well behind the rest of the nation, and local tax dollars being sent to the state capital so the richest can get more tax breaks.  The Ohio Problem is what causes residents below the median national income and above the national unemployment rate to .vote against their own interests.

Ohio is not alone in this issue.  The same could be said about Pennsylvania, Florida, and to a lesser extent Michigan.

The Ohio Problem must be solved.

RD Kulik

Head Editor