Thread by @RachelBitecofer

Ok, here's is my 1st, "Let me fix that message for you."

It's for the @ossoff campaign- whose effort down in GA Senate could very well be the Dem's 4th seat- their majority maker, which I think is something they might want to highlight on their digitals to Dem coalition voters.

https://twitter.com/ossoff/status/1317232370580393985

2. What is going on in this @ossoff ad? First, and foremost it is fixing the main mistake that the original ad makes. It is nationalizing the race/pitch by tying in Trump and McConnell and that stirs up those fab negative partisanship emotions in the target & in my theory

3. would make them more like to pony up money bc now they realize the "stakes" of the race are higher than one random senate race about some dude they'd never heard about. Esp if they happen to be a younger voter or a voter of color- bc yawn, its a boring white dude (Ossof isn't

4. actually boring, but he LOOKS boring, so you have to already know he isn't boring to know he isn't boring or you have to get interested enough in the ad to go check him out & then you'll realize, "hey, that dude has some balls!" THAT's the moment, at this point especially, you

5. really want to create. Its hard but guess what?! Out there, in the real world, many millions of people are just now, finally and for the first time realizing there's an election happening because they are not freaks like us. So they don't watch news and don't do political

6. which is, BTW one of the smaller versions or worlds of twitter, entertainment twitter is WAAYYY bigger than political twitter. So you want to catch these people's attention. You want to convey why this thing "the senate" matters. That's why the GOP has used "nationalized"

7. mailers for a very long time, & to great effect. I mean, if 2018 is any testament bc without any natural reason for a large negative partisanship surge, they had one and I believe it is from the negative partisanship nature of their electioneering efforts (plus their god-awful

8. conservative media eco-system. Dems are now trying to ensure massive turnout among the lower turnout elements of their coalition: younger voters and voters of color. These voters will have much higher turnout than 2016 no matter what bc of Trump being in office & the neg

9. partisanship effect- so it IS going up. We are watching that prediction, once again, come to fruition in real-time in the form of early voting lines (which are, of course, also a product of voter suppression). But just bc they go up naturally doesn't mean they should be left

10. that way. Oh hell no! The persuasion band expanded this cycle (and as far as I know it is from a greater % of pure Indies breaking in favor of Biden & Ds than might have otherwise bc of COVID mismanagement, so say 60%- 40% rather than 55%-45% like I originally anticipated and

11. NOT bc right-leaning Rs are deserting the Rep Party but I am trying to get access to large N data that would allow me to look at this Q by separating out Indie leaners and pure Is to see if R leaners are below 90% maybe 88% of Trump support. That is where they have stood the

12. entire cycle & the last time I had access to large n, high-quality data to run analysis (ended on July 1). So I would like to know if any of the fall campaign events affected R leaners. But the persuasion effort is only 1 part of a campaign. THAT is what my research argues

13. when it is not intentionally being misrepresented & delegitimized over personal grudges by small men w large egos. The other half of the modern campaign- campaigns run in a hyperpartisan, polarized environment involve trying to equalize the partisan turnout of your opponent

14. bc when you don't as, as Ds didn't in the CA 25 Special Election this spring- you get your ass kicked. And bc that election took place in a state w party reg & in a system voting under a total vote by mail system due to a pandemic- the whole of the election analysis world

15. watched that election play out in real-time. Watched as the GOP dominated the ballot return game. Watched as the Dems failed to ever catch up- even on Election Day voting. And thus, at the end of the day, when GOP candidate Mike Garcia, who was a good candidate who "fit the

16. district" bc he was Latino vet and Christy Smith was rumored to be a lackluster nominee (mostly she was an average person trying to fill above-average @KatieHill4CA's shoes) no one was confused as to HOW Garcia won. Republicans outperformed Democrats on turnout in that

17. election by 14pts. In fact, composition of the electorate-wise, it could be said that in the special election CA 25 reverted back to its 2014 form from its 2018 form. Independent turnout and Dem turnout collapsed as turnout from younger voters, Latino voters, and Black voters

18. declined sharply. No surprise- an electorate w a massively Republican Party advantage in it....elected a Republican & in-so-doing, hopefully, remind Democrats that the only thing protected their House majority is demographics: keep them friendly- stay in power. Let them

19. revert back to 2010 and 2014 & Happy Days will be coming back to the Republican Party, even IF it's embracing racism, and extremism, and authoritarianism. hence, my "fierce urgency" for electioneering reform NOW. newrepublic.com/article/156402…