It's better to be smart than to be rich

It's better to be smart than to be rich.  That just about sums up the Obama-Romney campaigns in 2012.    Oh, the Obama team raised lots of money too, both from millionaires and from millions of ordinary folks giving small amounts.

But the Obama team was 21st century smart, while the Romney team relied on 20th century tactics, fueled by their headline billionaires supplying the SuperPacs.

In a New York Times article by Jim Rutenberg, it becomes clear just how 21st century smart the Obama team was.    We knew they had a superior "ground game," by which I thought they meant huge armies of volunteers, knocking on doors, giving folks rides to the polls, etc.

They had that, but their really smart ground game took place on their computers and in their computer gurus' brains.   And that's where it's better to be smart than rich.

It seems that they used the data-mining techniques that I abhor -- you know the ones where some computer knows what TV shows you watch, what preferences you have for underwear (from online purchases), what old movies you watch, etc.

And from such data, plus mounds of data gathered from all those volunteers knocking on doors and identifying likely voters, uncommitted voters, disinterested non-voters, etc.

Then they figured out what kinds of TV shows those different groups tend to watch and made their TV ad purchases to match content to types of people likely to watch certain types of shows.

For example, the Obama team wound up putting a lot of ads on a network that mostly shows re-runs of old shows -- not your usual political adman's choice for where to advertise.   But they knew that this demographic was likely to be "low information" voters who weren't particularly interested in politics and, if they voted, wouldn't decide until the last minute.  They used ads designed to generate their interest and enthusiasm, and to provide content likely to speak to them.    Just as they put ads on Gray's Anatomy designed ads to appeal to single women, 18 to 34.

The 21st century benchmark for political campaigning has been set by the 2012 Obama team.   The Romney campaign got left in the dust of the 20th century.

Besides, Obama had the truth behind him, while Romney had only on truthiness.

Ralph