The Biggest Mistakes in Online Campaigning
Welcome to the Running for Office as an Online Candidate podcast.
In this series, we cover the tips, tricks and ideas for local political candidates who want to leverage the internet to help win their election.
I'm Shane Daley, partner of Daley Professional Web Solutions and Online Candidate.
In this episode, I’m doing to discuss a few online campaigning mistakes that we see all too often. If you are a listener to this podcast, these probably won’t apply to you.
So, let’s begin in no particular order …
Mistake Number 1: Limiting your online campaigning to Facebook
“Everybody’s on Facebook. I can just run my online campaign through my Facebook Page.”
We’ve heard that idea before. But as online strategies go, it’s not a good one.
These days, social media is important for political campaigns in creating an online presence and building support. Facebook provides plenty of tools for candidates to target and promote themselves to voters, such as Facebook Live. The advertising system – when political ads are allowed – let you target segments of users quickly and easily.
However, a social networking profile is not a substitute for a real home on the web. Social media does not provide the features that a campaign website provides. For example, websites convert better for important tasks such as email signups and accepting online donations.
If that’s not enough, here are a few other reasons why Facebook alone should not be hub of your online campaign.
Not everyone is on Facebook
Believe it or not, there are people who do not use Facebook, and there are others who refuse to use Facebook due to privacy concerns. If you operate your campaign entirely within Facebook, then you are placing your campaign behind a wall. If someone comes to your page and wants to interact, they will need a Facebook account to do so.
If it’s a potential donor you turned away, that can cost you money. If it’s a potential supporter, that could cost you a vote.
Speaking of donations, there are a lot of people who don’t trust Facebook, and certainly won’t spend or donate money through the platform.
Let’s face it: Facebook is a ‘pay to play’ platform
These days, a regular post may only reach 2-3% of your followers. Because of the Facebook post algorithm, most of your fans won’t see any of your posts after they ‘Like’ your page. If your campaign page has a 1000 fans, perhaps 30 of them will see your update. That is, unless you pay to promote your post. In that case, your update will reach many more people.
Of course, if you want to reach more people the next time you post, you will need to pay again … and again … and again.
Mistake Number 2: Slate websites
We see this sometimes where several candidates running for similar open positions try to cram their online efforts into a single website. Often this is because one or more candidates do not want to spend money on a website, or they think that piggybacking on the efforts of a group will make their efforts easier.
Multiple-candidate website works better as an issue-based or grassroots campaign website. It can be used as a hub to introduce the candidates and lead voters to related websites and other online material.
Rather than three or four websites promoting a single cause, there is efficiency in promoting a single website. It can be a focal point for advertising and online fund raising.
Obviously, it costs less to build a single site than to have each candidate build their own.
BUT-
It may be difficult for voters to square the candidate’s differing views on certain issues. This assumes, of course, that the candidates have more than just a simple bio and ‘share’ all the issue pages. In our experience, it’s unlikely that everyone will agree entirely on a single set of issue positions.
Also, if candidates are each fundraising separately, collecting donations through a shared site can be tricky. Does every candidate have their own fundraising page? Do donors have to give multiple times if they want to support the entire slate?
What happens when one popular candidate overshadows the others?
On a practical level, it can be extremely difficult to get content or updates on the website. Even a single campaign can have a hard time updating a website. If every candidate requires their approval before change to the website can be made, nothing will get updated. That’s why in either case, we recommend recruiting a web coordinator to handle updates.
Finally, sharing a site limits the freedom of the candidates to each ‘do their own thing’. Even if one or two decide to really work their part of the website, they may end up overshadowing the other candidates who have posted less material on the site.
Keep in mind that running a slate of candidates does not mean that all or none will win. I’ve seen instances where half a slate has won, and half did not. Similar candidates, similar positions. Particularly in local elections, success often comes down to how well particular candidates are known and liked (or disliked).
My recommendation for candidates is to have your own website where you control your messaging and donor experience. It’s fine if you want to be part of a separate slate website, but just make sure that you link out to your own site from your bio link.
Mistake Number 3: Waiting until after the primary to start online campaigning.
It’s funny, but we often get a higher level of campaign website orders AFTER major primary election dates.
The reason why this happens is that candidates often save their major outreach resources until the general election season.
So that means the candidate is missing a website, a donation platform, and likely even a social media presence.
Perhaps they knew they would win, perhaps as a single candidate. It doesn’t make much sense to campaign heavily if your name is the only one on the ballot.
Bur for the others? They were looking to see if they somehow won their primary before putting in the serious effort to win the general election.
Here’s the problem with this logic – what if you didn’t win your primary? And what if you didn’t win because you held off on serious campaigning?
If you are not in the race to win it from the start, then what is the point?
Studies show that campaigning significantly increases support for primary candidates and ballot measures. And while a partisan identity informs a large percentage of voters in general elections, this doesn’t help with primary elections – as all the candidates are from the same party.
It’s easy to get partisan votes in a general election. But in a primary, you need to convince your own party voters why you are the best candidate to represent them.
That takes effort. The awareness and momentum generated in a primary can carry over to the general election.
Your online fundraising mechanisms should be in place before the general election season. Weak fundraising efforts early on mean that you likely won’t have enough money to support your campaign goals later on.
That means you need to start your online campaigning efforts as soon as you can. Want to raise seed money for your candidacy? You may get some relatives who will still cut you a check or two, but most people will be looking to donate online.
And as a candidate, you will want influence over what people see, hear and read about you online. To do that, you need to create a personal brand for yourself.
Serious candidates start this process early.
Of course, there are other pitfalls to online campaigning. But these are a few of the big ones. If you are running for local office, consider how you can leverage the web for donations and voter outreach.
Thanks for listening. Make sure to visit our website at OnlineCandidate.com, where you'll find articles, resources and information about our online campaign services. If you liked this podcast, you might want to check out our book, Running for Office as an Online Candidate, available at OnlineCandidate.com and Amazon.com.
