If you saw my post of about two months ago, a personal "dumping of my buckets" regarding the 77th Assembly District race, you will know why I have no choice but to gush today. In the dust-up to fill the Jay La Suer seat, a great big harrumph to Joel Anderson and Team (manager Collin McGlashen) for putting together one of the most efficient "bang for the buck" campaigns seen in recent history.
Although there are about 35,000 ballots left countywide (likely no more than 6,000 of those in the 77th) 
Anderson leads Santee Councilmember Jack Dale by 671 votes….a huge statistical mountain for Dale when he trailed at every click on Tuesday night.
There is no question that Dale led this match two weeks out, perhaps even one week out. Joel’s mail was just beginning to barrage the mailboxes….he ended up going district-wide with about 14 great pieces of mail designed by Jim Nygren. In some respects, the messages were about the same as that of Dale and Debbie Beyer (immigration, taxes, immigration, whatever, immigration) but Joel had more of it, the timing was superb, and he had some endorsements that maybe rang the loudest…Tom McClintock and Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association to cite a couple.
Given the nature of an open seat and a five-way primary with candidates all of great credentials, there are some lessons we can take from the outcome, that can be used anywhere:
Lesson #1: Know the difference between inoculation and suppression… In the final days, Anderson’s mail included the "comparison piece," him vs. Dale. (I know Jack may call this tactic "negative," but a 20-year local government voting record usually does include a mixed bag.) It may have been obvious it was coming, so Dale’s mail included the proverbial "Don’t believe the mudslinging" piece. Nada, however, to flesh out Anderson…to do likewise in return. If Dale’s team didn’t know in the final weeks that Joel was the main competition, they should have.
Moral… To only inoculate yourself but to do nothing to suppress your competition’s vote — especially when you have the resources — is not the best strategic move.
Lesson #2: Signage means Jack Squat… As a primer, read Duane Dichiara’s post of a few days out on the subject. I had many folks saying, "Joel has no signs, what’s the deal?" He may argue with me, but he really didn’t…at least not in the highly populated areas, and Joel buddy…yours were ugly. Every other candidate had signs all over the place, Dale tons of 4X8s, Nancy Beecham with COGS, Beyer and Bill Jenkin with a slew. In a low turnout election, Anderson decided to put most of his resources into direct, targeted voter contact (mail and ground), not general visibility.
Moral… A lot of people see signs, not all of them vote. Actual voters see targeted mail. The human resources spent on a signage effort are much better spent on walking the households of likely voters.
Lesson #3: Don’t place all your eggs in the Big Endorsement basket… Six years ago, La Suer was endorsed by Duncan Hunter and then Assemblyman Steve Baldwin. This version, Debbie Beyer had Hunter and La Suer. Some watchers were pegging this thing for Debbie on that alone. Yet, in 2000 Jay had unquestionably the best resume (military, law enforcement, councilman) and limited competition. Baldwin went to the mat for him in the personal fundraising department, like only Steve can when focused.
Moral… The best endorsements may mean nothing unless it translates to money raised.
Lesson #4: A long background of GOP and conservative activism can generate volunteers… This could also be called "Don’t underestimate a great ground campaign," but that’s way too obvious. Anderson’s long track record of activism and involvement in many issues meant many folks walking precincts, especially groups like the Young Republican Federation of SD. The other true conservative activist, Beyer, has a great record with Concerned Women for America and Women VIPs, although neither group is known for shoe leather.
Moral… It counts to be running four years in advance for a seat.
If you have any more lessons or morals, or if you don’t have any morals, please post a comment. Have a great Sunday!
June 11th, 2006 at 12:00 am
I would add a couple more items…
Of course, Barry (always the modest one) probably discounts the personal support that he has given to Joel. Barry is very well-known and well-respected inside of the 77th District (every time it opens, Barry himself is talked about as a potential GOP candidate).
Also, Joel’s willingness to stand tall with fellow conservatives when it hasn’t always been popular to do so gave many volunteers and donors the assurance to know that they would be sending a principled leader to Sacramento, who would not bow down to the special interests. Someone who knows that the ‘line in the sand’ is just not crossed – for any reason.
Joel will be an outstanding legislator! Congratulations.
June 11th, 2006 at 12:00 am
I of course think the CRA IE was invaluable
June 11th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Barry,
Regarding endorsements, I think a candidate can overemphasize
endorsements. The Beyer campaign highlighted the Duncan Hunter and Jay LaSuer
endorsements to such an extent that it overshadowed the candidate
herself and raised questions that she might not be her own person.
I heard ordinary voters make comments about “Jay pulling the strings
or running her campaign.” Frequently, I heard voters refering to Beyer
without using her name; instead, they’d refer to her as Duncan Hunter’s
or Jay Lasuer’s candidate.
Successful campaigns with great endorsements use those endorsements
in a way that doesn’t take away the spotlight from the candidate, but
rather uses the endorsements to highlight the candidate. I think that was
Beyer’s biggest mistake; she simply put all of her eggs in the Duncan &
Jay endorsement basket.
Regarding Jack Dale, I agree with everything you said, but I would
add that the Dale people might have been a bit complacent. Prior to June
7, Dale had never lost an election. Two weeks out, Dale probably knew
he was winning and the actions of his campaign are indicative of a
campaign that thought they had it wrapped up. JRW
June 11th, 2006 at 12:00 am
As for CRA’s involvement, yes, I agree, this election could have easily changed with one less or more item on either side, Anderson or Dale. CRA’s endorsement was huge because of 1) the name, and 2)IE activity.
Thanks, Jon, for the nice comments. As for my modesty, now that you’ve established such, I will say that my picks have gone 7 for 7 in the last 7 election cycles in the 77th, although this one took place on 6-6-6 (assuming, of course, that Joel hangs on in the general. Ha.)
And, just so James Hartline can establish even more conspiracies, two of the last three members or to-be-members were in my wedding party, and the other I worked for in his district office for three years.
;-)
Barry
June 12th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Received this from Michael McSweeney:
Joel is by far the most disciplined, focused and hard working candidate I’ve seen in recent memory. All of his opponents were honorable folks and solid Republicans. The one major difference as I see it was the one line on Joel’s political resume’ that his opponents didn’t have. His one political race for assembly (in the old 75th) in 1998 (I think) where he was unsuccessful. That experience was the equivalent of a political Masters Degree. That experience and Joel’a ability to build upon and expand beyond his conservative base outwards allowed him to build the winning campaign team. Joel will be a great addition to our Sacramento caucus and he understands the importance of building the local “farm team.” He will follow in the shoes of Mark Wyland in that regard.
Congratulations Joel and his team. They understand that politics is a TEAM sport.
-Michael
June 12th, 2006 at 12:00 am
This horse is clearly dead but I wanted to respond to Mr. Webers comment about our use of Hunter and LaSuer’s endorsement. At the outset, we knew we would be outspent wildly (we did 5 mail pieces)…and while completely agree that endorsements are never going to deliver an election, advertising is about frequency, so yes we did highlight the endorsements…on only 5 pieces of mail…moreover, by branding Debbie with the arms crossed “she’s not going back down theme” we tried to enhance the little amount of advertising we did. I agree with you, but every race is different and must be viewed within the context of the hand you’re dealt.
June 12th, 2006 at 12:00 am
A minor point: Advertising is not only about reach and frequency, but a coherent message that resonates with the target audience (your comment indirectly highlights my theory that the media components of political campaigns differ little from ad campaigns for commercial products). If you feel that your endorsements, imagery, and message were the most effective way to leverage the reach/frequency your resources allowed you, then you should be able to rest easy at night on this one.
June 12th, 2006 at 12:00 am
On a different note, Michael McSweeney raises a great point that also applies to his own campaign! His close showing with Nakamura, driving her into a runoff, deserves a big round of applause. Although I haven’t been around to see it, Michael has also been working in the trenches helping build the party – a recipe that worked pretty well for Joel. If we can sign one more client in the next month, Michael gets a modest contribution from me.