Living in a “swing state” really seems to draw more attention to elections. When I was in Massachusetts and Texas, any vote I cast would make little difference in national contests, since a majority of the voters were certain to vote Democratic and Republican, respectively.

Ohio is different – parts are red (Republican), and parts are blue (Democrat), but the state-wide margin is close. I now live in a small city in rural Ohio centered around a liberal arts college, so the current presidential battle here is pitched. We’ve drawn visits from both a VP candidate and a Washington Post columnist. The Democratic secretary of state has had her hands full dealing with local resistance to changes in voting procedures, and my county still votes on Diebold touch-screen machines.

So I thought it would be worth my time to document my observations on early voting in my rural Ohio town. As in yesterday’s post on the marketing of elections, my comments are non-partisan: I’m interested in the election, but am not trying to influence your vote.

Publicity

Political signage is everywhere in town, both for the presidential contest and a wide variety of state and local contests. Driving through town, one would see about an even split between Obama and McCain signs, though some neighborhoods definitely lean one way or the other.

Our local paper has been a focal point for political commentary. Letters to the editor seem to lean towards the right, and the radical element seems over-represented, with many referring to “Hussein Obama“, William Ayres, and Rev. Wright. There have been many letters on both sides, however, and the paper has not endorsed any candidate.

We have had a multitude of robo-calls, all of them from pro-Obama celebrities, and have been visited at home three times by Obama get-out-the-vote walkers. We have received four anti-Obama mailings from the state Republican committee and one pro-Obama mailing from his campaign.

Interestingly, there is relatively little publicity for the actual process of voting. I’m glad I knew where and when to show up for early voting, but I have no idea where my regular polling place is. The same situation troubled me in Massachusetts and Texas. Elections officials need to do more to let people know when and where to vote!

Early Voting

Voters line up to cast an early ballot in Wooster, OH

Ohio apparently allows early voting on weekdays right up to the election. Since I will be out of town for work tomorrow, I was happy to be able to show up and cast my ballot today, one day early. 

The polling place was full, with a line of about two dozen people waiting to vote and a table set up in the hall to check registration. A poll worker told me it’s been like this since early voting started, a sign of a heavy election day turnout!

Voter Verification

Before receiving an (instant) application to vote early, we were asked for our name and address but were not asked to show any ID. I was registered under the Motor Voter Law, so I never had to file any previous paperwork since I had not moved my home address.

One woman in line had recently moved, but she was allowed to vote after showing her ID. In the half hour I was at the polling place, only one person was denied entry: An older black man who apparently wasn’t listed in the registration rolls and didn’t have an ID with his current address. I am not trying to insinuate any discrimination, but this stood out somewhat since, as would be expected in a county with 95.7% white residents, he was the only non-white person there.

Applying to Vote

As mentioned, every person who came to vote early was given a form to fill out, requesting an “absentee ballot”. This form was awful – everyone around me had trouble filling it out and were asking each other for advice. Everyone I talked to about it had filled it out incorrectly!

Let’s just mention some of the issues I noticed:

• It was the same form for early voting and requesting an absentee ballot, but many people started filling out their mailing address, which was only required if a ballot was to be mailed.
• It was the same form used for primaries, so most people checked boxes other than the single “general election” box.
• Applicants were required to write in the date of the election first, and today’s date later, so most people entered the wrong date.
• One was asked to provide one of three forms of ID: An Ohio drivers’ license number, the last four digits of one’s social security number, or a bank or utility statement showing their home address. The little old lady in front of me had all three, and apologized that her bank statement didn’t have her correct address. Imagine: Some people think it’s acceptable to require a bank statement in order to vote!

All of these issues could have been solved in one of three ways, none of which were present:

1. Have a poll worker instruct voters on how to fill in the form.
2. Make instructional posters of flyers available
3. Use a decent form

Again, I would like to stress that even though everyone around me filled in their forms incorrectly in one way or another, everyone was allowed to vote! Well, all but that one guy who was turned away before being given a form.

Paper or Electronic?

My local elections officials are at odds with Ohio’s secretary of state, Jennifer Brunner, over eliminating the disgraced touch-screen voting systems used here. Their staunch advocacy of electronic voting systems was evident at the polls, with no mention of the availability of paper ballots made by anyone. I did see two voters request and receive paper ballots, but these were fetched individually from the back room rather than being made generally available.

I was personally conflicted about the question of paper or electronic. Although I firmly believe that touch-screen systems are prone to error (and worse), I wanted to try them myself to see how well they worked. In the end, I decided to test the Diebold, lining up and accepting my smart card and stylus like the most of the rest in line.

As far as was evident, the machines worked flawlessly, with no delays or errors evident on the screen or the printed receipt. However, since votes are counted internally, not directly from the “printed ballot” or screen, one cannot be sure that their vote was cast correctly. I will just have to trust it, which really makes me nervous. I much preferred the paper ballots used back in Massachusetts.

The Ballot

Wayne County is still voting on Diebold touch-screen machines

The on-screen ballot itself was somewhat troubling as well. here’s what I noticed:

• There were many presidential races listed – more than a page of them! Obama was listed third on my ballot, and McCain was last, on the second screen of names.
• It was not obvious how to change one’s mind after selecting a candidate: The other boxes simply disappear once one is selected. I discovered that one could tap the selected box a second time to get the others to reappear, but this is not exactly intuitive.
• The ballot was grouped into partisan, non-partisan, and initiative sections. Most of the positions had two or more candidates listed, but some were unopposed.
• One of the initiatives (dealing with construction of a casino) was split across two screens, with all of the text on the first screen and the “yes/no” boxes standing alone on the second screen.
• Although one could review their choices prior to “casting their ballot” (printing the receipt), only the candidate names were listed. The initiatives were just listed as “Proposition 2: Yes”, making it difficult to remember and verify if the vote was cast correctly.

Closing Thoughts

My Ohio early voting experience was acceptable, but not altogether positive. I would like to see some things change in order to improve:

• Improve communication with voters regarding when and where to vote, including early voting options
• Replace the generic absentee voting form with a special simpler early-voting form
• Improve signage and communication regarding how to fill out forms and vote
• Make paper ballots more accessible
• Try some usability testing on the ballots
• Get rid of the Diebold machines already!

Note: It is legal in Ohio for a voter to take photos inside a polling place, though non-voters may not enter for any reason and no one should interfere with or publicize another person’s vote. Therefore, faces have been blurred and no ballot content is visible in the accompanying photos for this story.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Notes On Early Voting In Ohio
This post was categorized as Everything. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

This is part of an ongoing series of longer articles I will be posting every Sunday.

This is not a political blog, and this will not be a political post. But there is something to be learned about marketing from the way that political campaigns market their candidates, and this is a lesson for all time.

Watching the polls on FiveThirtyEight, the push and pull between moonbats and wingnuts on Electicker, and the strongly opposed views expressed in the letters to the editor section of my local paper, I began to ask myself how two obviously different candidates could be so close in the polls. Are Americans really divided almost equally between these two men, their running mates, and their platforms? How can so many people want the old senator and the unqualified governor? How can so many want the pairing of un-American and crazy senators?

I began comparing them to Coke and Pepsi, McDonald’s and Burger King, and I realized I was right. These candidates are marketed with extreme precision to maximize their appeal to the widest set of American voters. I imagine that their intrinsic qualities could eliminate them from consideration for some and cement their appeal to others, but the bulk of the electorate is swinging on the messaging. And this simple fact explains why Obama/Biden is now leading against McCain/Palin.

Demicans and Republicrats?

Sometimes, during election time, the candidates speeches can seem to be eerily similar. This was especially the case at the debates, where both Obama and McCain hit the same notes, made the same points, and seemed to be delivering the same messages: Change, fairness, helping the economy, foreign policy strength, and energy independence.

A reasonable person could easily have seen their own beliefs reflected in either candidate. And as in every election, roughly half of all Americans seem to be rooting for one candidate, and half for the other. Are we really divided, red versus blue, or is there something else at work here?

Now let us consider the stump speeches, conventions, and deeper conversations that each candidate has had. Although they pander to their listeners, as was made plain recently, with Obama praising both the Tampa Bay Rays and Philadelphia Phillies, and Palin rooting for these two as well as the Boston Red Sox, they also try to draw out distinctions.

These candidates are very much not the same. Their views differ greatly on major issues of the day, from tax structures to international relations to energy. A thoughtful listener hears a message of trickle-down economics versus lower- and middle-class support, of hawkishness versus engagement, and of increased supply versus alternatives and conservation from McCain and Obama, respectively. Nowhere is the difference more apparent than in the health plans of the two candidates: One is decidedly free-market while the other is government-driven.

Marketing takeaway: Sometimes, two products with distinct and meaningful differences can be so cleverly positioned that some rational people can’t tell them apart!

Going Negative

Ohio residents are deluged with anti-Obama mailings like these from the state Republican Committee

But these issues don’t get as much coverage as hot buttons like abortion, gay rights, and civil liberties. And nothing wins like pointing out the negatives of the other guy.

Carefully-selected name-calling seems to be the tactic of choice: Palin and McCain are careful to not exactly call Obama a communist, a terrorist, or a non-American, but their speeches seem to leave their listeners with these impressions. Similarly, Obama and Biden have been using words like “erratic” to draw a conclusion from the listener that McCain is senile, and thus too old to be president, or even downright crazy.

The Obama side has been carefully tiptoeing around questioning McCain’s age, just as the McCain side has been with the fact that Obama is black. Neither wants to come out and say these things for fear of alienating voters, but both wants to plant the seed in the listener’s mind. This is especially true when the other guy or his fans slip up, like Murtha’s “racist area” comment or the shouts of Republican rally attendees.

Marketing takeaway: Negative positioning of a competing product can take many forms, from blatant attacks to subtle “meme implants”, but the overt messaging of true believers can be much more damaging!

Feedback Loop

The exhaustive coverage of polling at Pollster, RealClearPolitics, and especially FiveThirtyEight really boggles the mind. I’m something of a math nut, so Nate Silver’s explanations of the intricacies of political polling has been a blast to watch unfold. The mechanics of polling vary somewhat and are prone to error, but the combination of these different polls becomes a powerful predictor of the future. And I’m not the only one watching!

Each campaign has its own poll watchers and spin masters, and these are constantly reacting to up-to-the-minute feedback from the voters. Not only are they dissecting the 40 or so polls that we see, they are commissioning their own polls to figure out how one issue or another can be positioned to maximize their appeal. It’s a tug of war between two slick machines.  American national politics is like the Segway two-wheeled scooter – constantly taking input from the tilt sensors to keep it perfectly balanced.

Marketing takeaway: When powerful opposing forces have the same data, it’s easy to play to a draw!

Winning

Obama's mailings don't even mention John McCain - they're all about energizing voters to turn out at the polls

One would think that these well-funded and informed campaigns would always reach a stalemate, and indeed national polls routinely show a near-even split between Obama and McCain, just as they do nearly every year. Yet, most elections are called fairly decisively, and this year is tilting strongly towards Obama.

How can this be? Simply put, it is not public opinion that declares a winner. No amount of positioning can force a consumer to buy a car he can’t afford – he has to decide to go out there and buy it. Analysis of past elections shows that elections are normally decided based on the enthusiasm behind a candidate rather than the general opinion of the electorate. Democrats weren’t all that enthusiastic about Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale, and the rest, just as Republicans weren’t too enthusiastic about George H. W. Bush and Bob Dole.

And yes, Republicans really aren’t all that energized by John McCain, either. Sure, they’d like him to win. And yes, they don’t want the un-American socialist in office. But if it wasn’t for Palin, they wouldn’t even be bothering with the man many Republicans have long regarded with scorn as a traitor and outsider to their party.

Contrast this with the fire in the Obama supporters. They love him even more than the right loves Palin, and that’s really saying something! Most analysts expect a strong pro-Obama turnout on Tuesday and expect it will match the pro-Bush, pro-Clinton, and pro-Reagan partisan turnout. Although the margin will still be close due to habitual voters on both sides, this push for the candidate should be enough to ensure victory.

Marketing takeaway: Don’t mistake desire for a sale – your customers can’t just like what you’re selling or dislike what the other guy offers, they have to be willing to buy!

What We Can Learn

I think this election cycle has a lot to teach us, both as marketers and consumers. And in the end, both buyer and seller have to be wary of the tactics used to play the game.

1. Keep your eye on the ball!  Don’t assume that the intrinsic qualities of a product, service, or person will drive success. People tend to overlook the forest and concentrate on the trees, deciding based on small and even inconsequential features rather than large and rational factors.
2. Watch what others are saying for and against you! It’s hard to control word of mouth, and it’s much easier to plant a seed of doubt than prove virtue.
3. Butting heads results in a draw! In a game between two equal foes, no amount of effort will force victory.
4. Play for victory, not just success! As in sports, a good defense is a requirement, but you’ll never win without a risky drive to score.

More on this topic:

• Marketing lessons from the US election by Seth Godin
• Ten marketing lessons from the Barack Obama Presidential campaign by David Meerman Scott
• Election Day Marketing 2008 by The Rogue Marketer
• Marketing – Obama style is winning style by Results Revolution
• Simple by Timothy Coote

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | What Elections Teach Us About Marketing
This post was categorized as Everything. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.