Playbook A
crucial first step for every political cam- paign is deciding on the consultants that will help guide their candidate to victory. From the media and mail experts who will help get your candidate’s name and
message to the voters, to the pollsters who will de- termine the best approach and target audiences for the campaign, each consultant is a vital component to any winning team. Many factors can influence this hiring process: Does this firm have experience in this area of the country? Do they have a track record of working with our type of candidate? Does this consultant’s personality fit in with our current team? The list goes on and on. When it comes to mail and me- dia firms, these factors, coupled with other more aesthetic considerations such as style and product feel, are largely determinant in a campaign’s hiring decisions.
Finding the right pollster requires a more nuanced consideration since there is little ability to look at a polling shop’s finished product or anything comparable to a media reel.
the difference between a well-oiled machine and a dysfunctional unit that would make a few reality television families blush. While past results, expertise in a specific area
and personality are all valid criteria for deciding which pollster to hire, there is one other factor that is often mistakenly ignored: the size of the polling firm. Having worked at large, medium and small firms, I have heard the argument for why each is the best fit for a campaign. There are valid arguments for each, but should a campaign make a decision on who to hire based (at least partially) on an extensive client list? Or should a campaign look to a smaller boutique firm who focuses on a small list of clients? As is often the case in politics, the answer is that it depends; the decision is unique for each campaign. However, as the founder of a small polling firm based out of Washington, D.C., I would encourage all cam- paigns to keep an open mind when it comes to smaller polling firms.
A common misconception about small firms
is that they work exclusively on small races. The Obama campaign from 2008 is a prime example of how smaller firms can deliver in very large ways. The Obama camp used six polling firms: three small firms and three firms that are best described as medium sized. From presidential races to state- wide races, campaigns are starting to use smaller firms more frequently.
Another common misconception about small polling firms is that their smaller client list is a result of their not offering the same level of services as larger firms. This simply could not be farther from the truth. For many well qualified polling firms, a smaller client list is a conscious decision. Fewer clients means a smaller number in the total billed column at the end of the year, but it also provides smaller shops the ability to be more intimately en- gaged with each client and their respective race. Pollsters are an odd breed. We live for data. We
Choosing the right pollster, however, is more difficult. Finding the right pollster requires a more nuanced consideration since there is little ability to look at a polling shop’s finished product or anything comparable to a media reel. Past ex- perience is clearly a factor that many campaigns look at, as is a pollster’s success rate in prior elec- tions. Many campaigns will also focus on the per- sonality and personal reputation of their pollster since a firm who works well with others can be
66 Campaigns & Elections | Canadian Edition
love working with spreadsheets, and we wake up in the middle of the night thinking of a new way to slice and dice an electorate. There is a clear theme running through many small firms on why the founders went out and started their own firm: the ability to be up to their eyeballs in data for each cli- ent was more appealing than the prospect of more clients and larger returns. As I said, we are an odd bunch.
So if small firms are just as capable and qualified as large firms to provide high quality data analysis to campaigns at all levels, what should a campaign look for when making a decision on which polling
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79