A Winning Strategy

[Big Guy]

I doubt if anyone is convinced of what party to vote FOR based on the postings of self serving information on the Internet and certainly not on anonymous public access bulletin boards. But they may be (and generally are) influenced by the perceived personality of those supporting a particular party.

Ii is not uncommon in local elections to have a campaign team working all the anonymous boards in the area. A few months before an election you establish one or more avatars (depending on the number of opponents) per board who are particularly aggravating, annoying and generall unpleasant. You make sure that those avatars express and dictate a daily show of support for your opponents and ratcheting up the confrontations right up to election day. People can get really pi$$ed at these "individuals" and can be influenced to NOT vote for those targeted opponents.

It works.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Big Guy

[scribblet]

Really, I've worked on a lot of campaigns and have never seen or heard of that being done. Maybe it's only Liberal or NDP campaigns that do that?

Edited August 17, 2015 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post

[Big Guy]

Really, I've worked on a lot of campaigns and have never seen or heard of that being done. Maybe it's only Liberal or NDP campaigns that do that?

I am surprised. The successful campaigns have to keep up with the new computer technologies. Since you have worked on a lot of campaigns you must have realized that winning strategies are not all condoned by the candidate nor specific to a particular party.

You appear not to be a fan of the Liberals or NDP. Then perhaps you may try these techniques. Just be belligerent, antagonistic, irritating and loathsome (that may or may not be difficult) while purporting to be a Liberal or NDP supporter - or involved in their campaign.

Or you could continue to be the wonderful person that you are and claim to support Harper and encourage others to vote for him.

I wonder which method would be more effective to swing votes towards Harper?

Edited August 16, 2015 by Big Guy

[BubberMiley]

You mean when people engage in all the Media Party victimhood, it's all a charade to make Conservative Party supporters seem like petty whiners?

[scribblet]

I am surprised. The successful campaigns have to keep up with the new computer technologies. Since you have worked on a lot of campaigns you must have realized that winning strategies are not all condoned by the candidate nor specific to a particular party.

You appear not to be a fan of the Liberals or NDP. Then perhaps you may try these techniques. Just be belligerent, antagonistic, irritating and loathsome (that may or may not be difficult) while purporting to be a Liberal or NDP supporter - or involved in their campaign.

Or you could continue to be the wonderful person that you are and claim to support Harper and encourage others to vote for him.

I wonder which method would be more effective to swing votes towards Harper?

Define a 'winning strategy' but what you describe is not condoned (to my knowledge) by any candidate I've worked for.

[waldo]

You mean when people engage in all the Media Party victimhood, it's all a charade to make Conservative Party supporters seem like petty whiners?

bingo! There's one particular MLW member who makes petty whining over the so-called Media Party her personal cause celebre!

[Big Guy]

Define a 'winning strategy' but what you describe is not condoned (to my knowledge) by any candidate I've worked for.

Has it ever been discussed? Why would it have to be condoned?

It is legal, it is effective and it is successful. Nothing keeps any supporter of any party from using this technology with or without the knowledge of the campaign committee.

Just look at the passionate tunnel-visioned cheerleaders for the various political parties on this board. Are they all really supporting the people they say they do? Does their cheerleading make you more or less likely to vote for their candidate?

A winning strategy is one that legally gets your candidate elected.

[Freddy]

Has it ever been discussed? Why would it have to be condoned?

It is legal, it is effective and it is successful. Nothing keeps any supporter of any party from using this technology with or without the knowledge of the campaign committee.

Just look at the passionate tunnel-visioned cheerleaders for the various political parties on this board. Are they all really supporting the people they say they do? Does their cheerleading make you more or less likely to vote for their candidate?

A winning strategy is one that legally gets your candidate elected.

Paying a fake political partie supporter go on radio or live TV and make a total a$$ of himself??? Maybe. Boards and forums would be a waste of time and money.

[Evening Star]

Or perhaps you could do this for a while and then, after an election is called, you could claim to have had a radical overnight conversion and seen the light.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post

[Moonlight Graham]

Big Guy, do you have any evidence of this happening?

I think hitting large online forums like newspaper comment sections might be effective, but to target a smaller board like MLW would be a waste of time.

[Big Guy]

Big Guy, do you have any evidence of this happening?

I think hitting large online forums like newspaper comment sections might be effective, but to target a smaller board like MLW would be a waste of time.

I agree that the process is far more effective in municipal elections where the target audience is quite small, you have a limited number of anonymous boards and the participation is mainly local and dealing with local issues.

As to MLW board having too geographically diversified an audience, you may well be correct and the percentage of the electorate that you may influence may be quite small - but if you feel that your personal vote is important then even causing one vote to switch is also important.

What I find interesting (and self defeating) are posters who do really believe in the candidate, indicate their position and then antagonize, insult and demean other posters. Anyone who has not yet decided will certainly be put off and will reject the candidate as supported by the irritating poster. I am always suspicious of such anonymous posters. Either they are not very bright because they are undermining their choice or they have another agenda having nothing to do with politics. Either way, I give no credence to their negative cheerleading.

And to Charles - Thank you for moving this topic to its own thread. I do tend to deviate from an established thread - especially one that has been going on for a very long time and I am not prepared to re-read from the beginning every time - memory requirement update for seniors.

[Evening Star]

Big Guy, do you have any evidence of this happening?

http://torontoist.com/2010/10/rob_fords_team_created_a_fake_twitter_account_and_this_is_it/

@QueensQuayKaren didn’t stop; she continued tweeting for four months, up until three days before the election.

The 150 tweets sent out from the account range from weirdly uncritical of Ford for a Smitherman supporter (“I can see Ford’s appeal. I don’t agree with him on everything, but the man speaks the truth. George needs to improve on that.”) to weirdly scathing of Sarah Thomson for a Smitherman supporter (Philby attacks her for having a “bitchy attitude,” calling her a “total embarrassment”) to weirdly hateful of George Smitherman for a Smitherman supporter (“I know [he’s] an asshole, but we need to stop Ford.”)

Edited August 17, 2015 by Evening Star

[Topaz]

I'll tell what happen in my area newspaper....many don' t like Harper and the MP in the area is a Tory, and comments were being about the MP in the next election, like he doesn't like coming out to debates and he doesn't have to worry because the city in which his family business is, always votes for him, and rural areas don't matter, he never does much for the area because he's a back bencher and has no power and always votes with the leader and not with his constituents etc. The paper shut down the comments area. No freedom of speech. The MP will probably win again because the city people will support him and many rural voters don't and because there more voters in the city than rural the MP will always win until the voters of the city decide not too. Although in the last provincial election the NDP came close of winning over the Tory MPP.

[ReeferMadness]

Ii is not uncommon in local elections to have a campaign team working all the anonymous boards in the area. A few months before an election you establish one or more avatars (depending on the number of opponents) per board who are particularly aggravating, annoying and generall unpleasant. You make sure that those avatars express and dictate a daily show of support for your opponents and ratcheting up the confrontations right up to election day. People can get really pi$$ed at these "individuals" and can be influenced to NOT vote for those targeted opponents.

Are you saying that you know for a fact that parties engage in this type of behavior?

[Big Guy]

If it is legal, effective and works to garner and/or switch votes during an election then it is being done. I have done it in the past.

[Michael Hardner]

If it is legal, effective and works to garner and/or switch votes during an election then it is being done.

In the 1970s, the parties used similar tactics to inundate call-in radio shows with supportive calls when their candidate was on. The idea was to ask from a list of softball questions that the candidate had ready answers for.

[Argus]

In the 1970s, the parties used similar tactics to inundate call-in radio shows with supportive calls when their candidate was on. The idea was to ask from a list of softball questions that the candidate had ready answers for.

Different matter entirely. Has anyone noticed any new members who are spouting one-sided propaganda lately? A few, all from the Left, though.

But that doesn't count, of course...