Ok, I know it's Father's Day, but I'm in the mood to talk about mothers. I have been thinking all week about how my generation of women is transitioning in this age of new media. I read articles saying how suburban women in their 30's and 40's are supporting Hillary and how they will be the group that ultimately gets her elected. And I see polls that say she's leading that also suggest it is because of these same women. But the more I think about this, the more it makes no sense. There is no way that traditional polling is accounting for how women my age are going to vote. I'm a suburban woman in my 30's and I wouldn't answer the phone for a polling company if I had to. How many women do you know that don't screen their calls using their caller id's? All the moms I know are at the height of multitasking when those kinds of calls come in. I can guarantee answering a bunch of questions on the phone while emptying the dishwasher, acting as a toy-disagreement-referee, planning a weekly schedule, wiping a little nose, and helping someone with their homework is just not going to happen. As a matter of fact, I have several friends who don't even have home phones anymore...they just use their cells. So who exactly is answering these calls and taking the polls that show Hillary in the lead? I have a pretty strong suspicion that it is the group of women that is one generation older than mine. This group is probably less likely to have caller id. Or maybe they have it, but don't care as much about screening out 800 and unfamiliar numbers. So their views are accounting for the rest of us. As much as I want my beliefs reflected in national polling - because I know numbers show trends that create buzz that raises money and gets media coverage - I'm still not going to answer a poll call. So what do you do if you are an organization trying to get real data in this age of new media? Send me an instant message that takes me to a website polling company. Let me take a poll generated in email. Have me watch something on YouTube and then ask my opinion about it. But don't use a technique that was outdated 10 years ago and then tell me that's how my contemporaries are going to vote. Most of the candidates have embraced new media. I just am waiting for the day when the organizations that conduct polling catch up with them.
Knowing that Republicans are salivating over the prospect of facing Hillary in the General Election is nothing new. But watching them so vocal, and dare I say vicious, about her candidacy at the Republican Presidential debate last night should be more than enough to get Democrats thinking. It's not enough to support Hillary on the basis of her experience and her ability to lead. Democrats supporting Hillary need to have a moment of clarity and consider her ability to win. I saw a poll this week on MSNBC that shows her beating Senator Obama in the primaries. Link But this same poll shows Obama beating Guiliani in the general election. *Added 5/6/07, a second poll showing this trend Link* Even just anecdotally, people I talk to have a true, gut feeling that she can't win against a Republican. Voters need to think about this and also look at history: both Gore and Kerry's 'inevitability' status, possibly only in part, led them to win the nomination. But, in the grand scheme of things, that's also what led us to the mess we are in right now. Neither one of them could pull out a general election win: looking back at the disastrous eight years of Republican rule should be more than enough for Democrats to make their choice, in part, on whether or not winning is the goal. It's not like us to think this way, I know, but really that's the point.
There is an absolute connection between the online political movement and the grassroots political movement. The way that Americans have put their stories, thoughts, comedy, drama, views and creativity online (Time Magazine didn't vote 'you' the person of the year for nothing) is a true movement. And to have this happening at the same exact moment in time that a presidential candidate has based his entire campaign on the hope and action of 'the people', well, it just seems like the perfect storm for change. I would say, too, that the reaction to the viral video that exploded a couple of weeks ago (you know, the Hillary 1984 one) just speaks to America's ability to embrace this change, even while we are smack in the middle of it. It's nothing short of monumental. The fact that this video was on virtually every news and political program, paper, post and blog really goes to show that the idea of it's existence was a bigger story than it's actual content. The latter part was just icing on the cake. By the way, watch a truly great and, I think, truly viral political video that I saw right before the '06 mid-term elections that I hope will inspire you to get out there and get a little 'viral' yourself: Link
Right now, as I write these very words, Senator Obama is rubbing elbows with Hollywood's A-List. Presidential candidates and Hollywood are a match made in heaven: JFK Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton are just a few candidates who benefitted from this courtship. Senator Obama seems to be getting the most of it, too, reportedly $1 million dollars tonight alone. Many may fret about how this might look to middle America, but I'm pretty sure that US Weekly and People Magazine sell just as well in the heartland as they do in New York and LA. Politics follow trends and trends are made in Hollywood. Like it or not, people watch and listen to and wear what the trendsetters watch and listen to and wear (how else could you ever explain the return of those dreadful skinny jeans?). I love Obama...but the fact that Clooney loves him, too? Just icing on the cake.
