URGENT: a shift in our fundraising strategy is needed

[ronpaul4pres]

If you don't think making the $12 million fundraising goal set by the official campaign is important, then you can stop reading now. If you'd like to discuss the merits of that goal, please start another thread. Thank you!

After the first fundraising week in October, a small vocal minority saw that we were seriously behind on our Q4 goal. This message did not catch on. Some suggested we'd make it and not to worry. Some blamed it on "donor fatigue" from the last week in September and everything would be OK soon afterward. Some responded that the campaign should have used a more "reasonable" $3, $4, and $5 million donation strategy for Oct, Nov, and Dec, respectively. Some suggested $12 million was too high (if that's you, then you should not have read this far! :) ). Well, guess what? We're not making it, and we're not even going to reach $3 million for October at the current rate.

All is not lost, and here is a strategy to get us there:


#1: LET'S GET REALISTIC.
Only when we realize where we are can we make a plan for where we need to be. For example, an effort to get 100,000 people to donate $100 is not a realistic plan. Here's why (I'm not being "mean" or making fun of this idea - I'm just making a point):


We're very far away from having 100,000 donors.

The total number of donors for Q3 was only 21,642 as you can see from the following links:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/10/12/politics/horserace/entry3362383.shtml?CMP=OTC-RSSFeed&source=RSS&attr=Horserace_3362383

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/10/12/pauls_numbers_show_his_online.html?hpid=news-col-blog

Online, there are "only" 54,000 people in Meetups, who are that "serious" about Ron Paul.
It's hard to get 100% participation with the wrong message. As we've seen with Nov 5th, many will refuse to donate for a message other than Ron Paul and his message of freedom and liberty.

Not everyone can afford a $100 donation.

In fact, half of all donations in Q3 were less than $45.52. So, in effect, you'd need over 200,000 people to get 100,000 to donate even over just $50.
Such a pledge would require that most donors be new. However, the odds are very low that someone would give that much for their first donation: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28659
Over 50% of us on ronpaulforums.com are aged 30 or under (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28273). That age group can not afford large donations as a whole.

As we've seen time and time again in the charts, a monster donation drive with the same base of donors is more about manipulating daily averages and moving money from one day to another. Although one day will see a spike, the subsequent days will have absolutely horrible donations.


#2: SEE WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO.


25 days into October, we've raised $2,250,000+. That's an average $90K per day.
Dividing $12,000,000 by 92 days shows we need to raise an average $130K per day.
We have a deficit of $40K per day or $280K per week.
Goal 1: close the gap on this deficit.
Goal 2: make up the $1 million already "lost". It's impossible to do this until we at least meet Goal 1; otherwise, we'll just keep falling further behind.


#3: HOW DO WE DO IT?


Increase total Q4 donation amount per person.

IMPORTANT: Think small! Why do most people here think in $100 terms? The fact is that the majority of supporters do not donate $100 in a quarter (see above). However, if a supporter went on a plan to give a small $10 donation each week for 10 weeks, that supporter would give $100! Can you afford $1.43 each and every day? Most likely! We can get practically every donor to give about $100 if we just think about it in the right way.
Make it easier to donate. Again, stop thinking in $100 increments! Think in $5-$10 increments. Let's break up the larger goal into more manageable weekly goals for all to march towards. We can pay per month to reduce credit fees, but I think it best to think in terms of setting aside money each week.

Increase the number of donors.

Get ALL Ron Paul supporters interested in donating. Be inclusive of everyone when starting donation drives. It's always better to get 10 people to give $5 than 1 person to give $50. Those 10 people can more easily give $5 every week. That 1 person is much less likely to give $50 every week. Remember: asking for $100 automatically excludes the vast majority of donors, and you will get very few new donors this way.
Focus on untapped markets. Apparently, 93%+ of people on this site have already donated (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28659), so don't start here. Start sending this message to your meetup groups, where, apparently, 30,000+ have yet to donate!
Keep spreading this message.

Get new Ron Paul supporters. (I may have made one today - someone who never heard of Ron Paul. He loved the statement, "We just marched in, so we can just march out!")


#4: MAKE A PLAN.
Now that we realize where we are, need to be, and how to do it, we can make a plan.

Goal 1: Here's an idea: We have at least 30,000 supporters in meetup groups that have yet to donate to the campaign. We have a deficit of $280K per week. If they started contributing $9.33 per week, we'd instantly make up the deficit. Heck, I'd be happy if half of them just donated just $5 in a week. That would instantly close the deficit by over 25%! (don't give me any bull about credit card fees - they'd only take up 8% of $5). Start with your meetup! This is the best way to help encourage new donors to donate to the campaign!

Do you have an idea? Let's hear it!


Goal 2: Once we increase our base of donors, a good number of the $5-$10 donors could easily make up $1 million. As another supporter wrote: the most important dollar you donate is your first one.


#5: LET'S WORK TOGETHER AND HAVE FUN!
We all want to see this succeed. There's no need to bicker over different donation ideas. As long as we don't step on each other's toes and are focused on the same goals, we should be fine. Finally, let's all have fun just like Ron Paul says.

[centure7]

You could have just said: Next time lets have a commitment for small weekly contributions and sold me on that. I like the idea of small but weekly contributions. Now since you brought up the idea its YOUR job to talk to the nov5th website and plan with them the next donation.

Furthermore, I suggest that the donation starts as soon as they sign up rather than waiting! The sooner the money gets to Paul the more it means to the campaign.

[TechnoGuyRob]

One problem with the weekly donations idea (if you can do it in one lump) is that Paypal charges $0.30 per transaction, plus another percentage, so a huge part of the weekly donations would go to processing charges.

[nayjevin]

excellent post!


Thank you very much for your donation of $25.00 to the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Your donation will allow us to expand and grow our campaign.

We depend on donors like you to help us spread the message of freedom, peace and prosperity through Ron Paul’s candidacy.

Thanks for being a part of the campaign!

Your confirmation number:
T69788-98111971

[centure7]

One problem with the weekly donations idea (if you can do it in one lump) is that Paypal charges $0.30 per transaction, plus another percentage, so a huge part of the weekly donations would go to processing charges.

Good point... what do you think is the best spacing between donations.

[brumans]

We need to hit 3 million before the end of the month!!

[NewEnd]

better to donate in one large sum , than many small, due to processing fees.

[Bluedevil]

How much have you donated?? I always wonder when people write these long letters trying to convince others to.

[Taco John]

We're not only on pace to hit our $12 million dollar goal, but we might break it by a couple million. Don't let the $7 million dollar projection fool you. The campaign is growing exponentially, which is not reflected in that figure.

[LibertyEagle]

better to donate in one large sum , than many small, due to processing fees.

Checks are still an option too. I didn't donate with checks either, but maybe I should have. The processing costs for Paypal are huge. Even if we just used checks to donate sometimes, it would help.

[Ozwest]

Great idea, in theory, but most people need added incentive to donate that "little bit extra", and that's why "bomb" projects are successful. Contributors love the "hype" and "comradery" that these drives create. It's human nature.

[tfelice]

One thing to consider too, is there is a lot of big money waiting on the sidelines. Let's say you are moderately politically aware and you have the ability to contribute $4600 (you & your spouse combined) without blinking an eye. You see the Paul campaign and they strides it has made, you like Paul, but at the same time you aren't sure you want to plop down $4600 if the guy doesn't have a chance. "Scientific polling" doesn't help much in this regard. So you wait on the sidelines for an indication that your money won't be going to waste.

I know someone like this myself. He has the money, likes Paul, would love to contribute, but isn't yet convinced he can make it through to the end.

A victory in NH would change that. I think if Paul can win NH, that we will see a flood of max contributions coming into the campaign from these folks that are presently on the sidelines. So how many people are sitting on the sidelines? I don't know, but if it were only 2000 couples that could mean a $9 million surge of funds into the campaign. All the more reason for our eyes to be on the goal of winning NH.

[Ozwest]

One thing to consider too, is there is a lot of big money waiting on the sidelines. Let's say you are moderately politically aware and you have the ability to contribute $4600 (you & your spouse combined) without blinking an eye. You see the Paul campaign and they strides it has made, you like Paul, but at the same time you aren't sure you want to plop down $4600 if the guy doesn't have a chance. "Scientific polling" doesn't help much in this regard. So you wait on the sidelines for an indication that your money won't be going to waste.

I know someone like this myself. He has the money, likes Paul, would love to contribute, but isn't yet convinced he can make it through to the end.

A victory in NH would change that. I think if Paul can win NH, that we will see a flood of max contributions coming into the campaign from these folks that are presently on the sidelines. So how many people are sitting on the sidelines? I don't know, but if it were only 2000 couples that could mean a $9 million surge of funds into the campaign. All the more reason for our eyes to be on the goal of winning NH.
You are spot on. Also, these wavering contributors may be encouraged to donate if they see a headline such as: "Ron Paul receives over 2 million in donations in one day!"

[LibertyEagle]

You are spot on. Also, these wavering contributors may be encouraged to donate if they see a headline such as: "Ron Paul receives over 2 million in donations in one day!"

Yeah well, Oz, roughly 50% of the people who "pledged" to contribute to TV ads in New Hampshire, have failed to come through with the dough.

[Ozwest]

Yeah well, Oz, roughly 50% of the people who "pledged" to contribute to TV ads in New Hampshire, have failed to come through with the dough.

That SUCKS! Send Tony Soprano around to convince them to meet their obligations.

[tfelice]

You are spot on. Also, these wavering contributors may be encouraged to donate if they see a headline such as: "Ron Paul receives over 2 million in donations in one day!"


I'm sure that wouldn't hurt. Not a hard analysis on my part though. You just need to look at Rudy to see it. He is the "frontrunner", has been condiered it for a while and also has a lot of money. The big-money people that support have already put their money on him since he appears to have a chance. Conversely, Hunter, who has zero chance, has no money and never has had any money. Reverse their positions (ie if Hunter was the perceived frontrunner from the start) Rudy would be sitting there with very little cash.

[LibertyEagle]

That SUCKS! Send Tony Soprano around to convince them to meet their obligations.

Yeah, right Oz. :rolleyes: It just seems to me that if you promise to do something, you do it. Or, at least come up with a damn good reason why you did not.

[Ozwest]

I'm sure that wouldn't hurt. Not a hard analysis on my part though. You just need to look at Rudy to see it. He is the "frontrunner", has been condiered it for a while and also has a lot of money. The big-money people that support have already put their money on him since he appears to have a chance. Conversely, Hunter, who has zero chance, has no money and never has had any money. Reverse their positions (ie if Hunter was the perceived frontrunner from the start) Rudy would be sitting there with very little cash.

Winning New Hampshire would be the "BULLS JEWELS".

[Ozwest]

Yeah, right Oz. :rolleyes: It just seems to me that if you promise to do something, you do it. Or, at least come up with a damn good reason why you did not.

I'm sorry about what's happened. I can assure you I keep my commitments. Always... Why are you directing this agro in my direction? You are a champion for Ron Paul, I have no gripe with you.

[tsopranos]

That SUCKS! Send Tony Soprano around to convince them to meet their obligations.

Alright, how many boxes of ziti did these meatballs fall short on? :D

[Ozwest]

Alright, how many boxes of ziti did these meatballs fall short on? :D

Delegate responsibility I say. Send Nunzio!

[LibertyEagle]

I'm sorry about what's happened. I can assure you I keep my commitments. Always... Why are you directing this agro in my direction? You are a champion for Ron Paul, I have no gripe with you.

Oh no, Oz. It wasn't directed at you. Sorry, if it seemed that way.

You were just talking about the big upcoming fundraiser on the 5th and it reminded me of all the people who hadn't yet paid up on the TV ad fundraiser. That's all. :o

[Stealth4]

How much have you donated?? I always wonder when people write these long letters trying to convince others to.

Very Good Question.

Plus we have ways to easily contact people who like RP to ask them to donate (The RP myspace effort), which work, but people on this forum are reluctant to sign up and therefore thousands of people are not contacted.

[Mortikhi]

This forum used to be about ideas, freedom, and liberty.

Now over half of it is MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEEEEEYYYYYYY and the other half is people critizing other people's ideas.

[ItsTime]

easiest way to get more money is to gain new voters. hand out slim jims, pass out flyers, talk to people, plant signs anything that can get more people into our voting pool.

[Ozwest]

Oh no, Oz. It wasn't directed at you. Sorry, if it seemed that way.

You were just talking about the big upcoming fundraiser on the 5th and it reminded me of all the people who hadn't yet paid up on the TV ad fundraiser. That's all. :o

I never mentioned the November 5 donation drive. It"s all good.

[Ozwest]

This forum used to be about ideas, freedom, and liberty.

Now over half of it is MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEEEEEYYYYYYY and the other half is people critizing other people's ideas.

I agree, but check out the world you live in. Grit your teeth, and do what needs doing. I fear you have but one chance!

[LibertyEagle]

I never mentioned the November 5 donation drive. It"s all good.

Yeah, you're right. I just saw the "surge in campaign funds" mentioned and at first thought that's what you meant. Sorry.

[Ozwest]

Cool mate. We both swing from the same tree!

[DaronWestbrooke]

Online, there are "only" 54,000 people in Meetups, who are that "serious" about Ron Paul.

One of the people in my meetup found a flaw in this number everyone should be aware of. I, for example, am a member of ASU, Phoenix, and Arizona meetups, that is counted as 3 meetup members, not one. The numbers are based on going to each meetup and counting members. This doesn't work. Just saying that here before someone pulls it on us.

[LibertyEagle]

Are you sure, Daron? I remember someone saying a while back that members were not counted more than once, regardless of the number of meetups they join.

[DaronWestbrooke]

Just what I was told when someone was challenging us on the number of Arizona meetup members there were. One of our people put it on a spreadsheet and when he removed the duplicates, it was half of what we thought.

[Sematary]

Your first assumption, that we will not reach the 3 mil goal for October is wrong.

[koob]

i think the point about getting people to donate 10 dollars is a good one. if they donate once, chances are, they may donate again.

[Andrew76]

Yes, yes, and yes. Look, the original point here can be summarized thusly: don't just focus on donations of 100.oo or more. Smaller donations are an easy sell.

People who want to and have the capability to donate 100 bucks or more, will do so. I myself, am a poor dude, so it's a lot of loot for me to able to donate 25.oo, which I've done three times now. By comparison to many of you, that isn't a lot, but for me it is.
There's people out there who haven't donated, or are on the fence about it. Would you rather have them donate 5 to 10 dollars versus nothing at all? Jesus people, this is simple logic and hardly worth the bickering that seems to be going on in this post.

Small donations are an easy sell. When you approach someone who's yet to donate, you say, "Well, hell if you've got five dollars, that's something. We can use all the help we can get!" This is exactly the kind of reasoning that made me donate in the first place. It's all too easy to start thinking, "well, I don't have a hundred bucks to donate, so,... maybe I'll wait till my next paycheck, and I'll see what I can do." And then you never donate. Remember, something is better than nothing. Tell people to break open their piggy banks! Loose change? We need it! Flip up the couch cushions people. No need to be ashamed about how much you donate because, every cent truly helps.

As others have correctly pointed out, getting someone to donate even once ups the likelihood that they'll donate again. Hell, I did. Processing charges? Are we really worried about 30 cents? Again, something is better than nothing.

The message needs to be, "Donate whatever you possibly can, whenever you possibly can. ALL donations are welcome. ALL donations are needed! Every red cent will be put to work!"

And for the love of Zeus, stop the bickering. It's getting us nowhere. ;)

[centure7]

Yes, yes, and yes. Look, the original point here can be summarized thusly: don't just focus on donations of 100.oo or more. Smaller donations are an easy sell.

People who want to and have the capability to donate 100 bucks or more, will do so. I myself, am a poor dude, so it's a lot of loot for me to able to donate 25.oo, which I've done three times now. By comparison to many of you, that isn't a lot, but for me it is.
There's people out there who haven't donated, or are on the fence about it. Would you rather have them donate 5 to 10 dollars versus nothing at all? Jesus people, this is simple logic and hardly worth the bickering that seems to be going on in this post.

Small donations are an easy sell. When you approach someone who's yet to donate, you say, "Well, hell if you've got five dollars, that's something. We can use all the help we can get!" This is exactly the kind of reasoning that made me donate in the first place. It's all too easy to start thinking, "well, I don't have a hundred bucks to donate, so,... maybe I'll wait till my next paycheck, and I'll see what I can do." And then you never donate. Remember, something is better than nothing. Tell people to break open their piggy banks! Loose change? We need it! Flip up the couch cushions people. No need to be ashamed about how much you donate because, every cent truly helps.

As others have correctly pointed out, getting someone to donate even once ups the likelihood that they'll donate again. Hell, I did. Processing charges? Are we really worried about 30 cents? Again, something is better than nothing.

The message needs to be, "Donate whatever you possibly can, whenever you possibly can. ALL donations are welcome. ALL donations are needed! Every red cent will be put to work!"

And for the love of Zeus, stop the bickering. It's getting us nowhere. ;)

For now on I think we should have the user enter the amount they will donate. Official sites always suggest amounts and its probably based on a lot of experience with donations. Therefore, I suggest we simply copy the $25, $50, $100, $500, $2,300, OTHER______ and have the user enter their own pledge amount. I could code something like that myself but I don't know enough about security to do it well.

I also think we can improve on the RonPaulIsHope.com video each month and post a new version directly below where we ask for money. To accomplish a better video, we can have "market surveys" where we show different versions to random people on the street and ask them how appealing they find the ad. This serves to let people see what impacted is so much while at the same time continuously improving on a good thing. We ask them "will you rate this video for a market survey?". I think anyone with an iPod or iPhone should be able to show the video to random people on the street.

PS - People who sign the pledge should pledge to write him in in the 2008 election rather than "voting the machine". This way they won't have to think about whether or not Ron Paul wins the primaries. Ron Paul will still get amazing news coverage next year if there are a huge number of write-ins for him yet a relatively small number of votes.

[ronpaul4pres]

How much have you donated??

Bluedevil, it's very interesting that you would ask such an inappropriate question. If you have a problem with what I wrote, I'd be happy to debate it with you. If you want to attack me personally to try to descredit the message, well, it won't work. :) I'll say that I have personally donated and leave it at that.


Yes, yes, and yes. Look, the original point here can be summarized thusly: don't just focus on donations of 100.oo or more. Smaller donations are an easy sell.


You get it! And, I hope everyone gets it! But, that's just a part of my message...


Now over half of [this forum] is MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEEEEEYYYYYYY...

Very good point. I actually do agree with you, and it is my hope that my post helps in this regard. The other part of my message is that I see all of this amazing amount of energy going into money raising (do you see all the work that went into Nov 5th????)), and I see that it's unorganized (i.e. all the bickering) and misdirected (i.e. unrealistic/unfocused), and we're wasting some energy on the wrong goals. Hopefully, this message sinks in, we get organized, we have direction, and the fundraising will just "happen." We can then focus that wasted energy, instead, on educating others (more Ron Paul voters!) and having the fun Ron Paul wants us to have.

[amakris]

Checks are still an option too. I didn't donate with checks either, but maybe I should have. The processing costs for Paypal are huge. Even if we just used checks to donate sometimes, it would help.

Do not use checks. This is like walking to work because it's free. Not really. It takes you a damn hour. Opportunity cost, my friend.

[Corydoras]

Recruit, recruit, recruit. We don't just need the votes, we need new donors.

[shepburn]

Recruit, recruit, recruit. We don't just need the votes, we need new donors.

if we can just get people to the official web site, a significant % will donate. This is a better approach then asking random people to donate for the cause

[mannycp]

This forum used to be about ideas, freedom, and liberty.

Now over half of it is MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEEEEEYYYYYYY and the other half is people critizing other people's ideas.

rIGHT ON THE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Corydoras]

if we can just get people to the official web site, a significant % will donate. This is a better approach then asking random people to donate for the cause

My apologies, I meant recruit to the cause of the Ron Paul Revolution... I kind of thought that getting their vote first was implicit... certainly we can't go around with a can as if we were the Red Cross or the American Heart Association.

[Calvin]

IMO, the campaign should bring back the one-week thermometer during these last days of October. The countdown should end Oct 31 at Midnight Eastern. It will make the urgency of the monthly deadline apparent.

Frankly, I had expected them to last Wednesday.

[LibertyEagle]

IMO, the campaign should bring back the one-week thermometer during these last days of October. The countdown should end Oct 31 at Midnight Eastern. It will make the urgency of the monthly deadline apparent.

Frankly, I had expected them to last Wednesday.

Well, we kind of have that right now. The clock is counting down the end of the month and the statue of liberty is showing the monthly total. If people cannot see the urgency, I don't know what it will take.

I think one of the things that is hurting the fundraising might be the devastating fires in California. The campaign was getting a lot of support from Californians, and not surprisingly, that has tremendously slacked off since the wildfires.

[wgadget]

[QUOTE=ronpaul4pres;317420]If you don't think making the $12 million fundraising goal set by the official campaign is important, then you can stop reading now. If you'd like to discuss the merits of that goal, please start another thread. Thank you!

After the first fundraising week in October, a small vocal minority saw that we were seriously behind on our Q4 goal. This message did not catch on. Some suggested we'd make it and not to worry. Some blamed it on "donor fatigue" from the last week in September and everything would be OK soon afterward. Some responded that the campaign should have used a more "reasonable" $3, $4, and $5 million donation strategy for Oct, Nov, and Dec, respectively. Some suggested $12 million was too high (if that's you, then you should not have read this far! :) ). Well, guess what? We're not making it, and we're not even going to reach $3 million for October at the current rate.



On the campaign website, I just read an article from the New York Times that has the campaign quoting exactly that: $3M in October, $4M in Novermber, and $5M in December.

[LibertyEagle]

wgadget,

I know. We'd really better kick it up a bunch of notches. The campaign is in full gear. They have hired people left and right. Three new offices in S. Carolina alone. 430K radio ad buy, over 1 million TV ad buy, a 12 page mailout to NH Republicans. They are going through the money very fast.

We simply must replenish their coffers, or this thing is going to be over very fast. I don't know what else to say.

[ronpaul4pres]

On the campaign website, I just read an article from the New York Times that has the campaign quoting exactly that: $3M in October, $4M in Novermber, and $5M in December.

Then the official campaign folks need to get their act together and fix Lady Liberty to present the true goals.

With the holidays in December, I have to wonder if existing donors will donate 25% more to make the $5 million (whether that was the real goal or not, it's reality now). I think the answer is 'no' and they'll probably donate less on an individual basis. I think this makes it just that more important to build up the base of donors (get existing supporters to make their first donation and add to our group of supporters).

So, I'll repeat: if you know a supporter who hasn't donated because they can't donate hundreds or thousands of dollars, then politely suggest that even $5 will help. It's better than $0, and they'll be over that donation "hump." And, let's all get one new supporter this weekend!

[LibertyEagle]

Then the official campaign folks need to get their act together and fix Lady Liberty to present the true goals.

What they have IS the true goal. They had to back off of it publicly because we were FAILING! :rolleyes:

[ronpaul4pres]

excellent post!

Thank you, and thank you for your donation!

[ronpaul4pres]

Great idea, in theory, but most people need added incentive to donate that "little bit extra", and that's why "bomb" projects are successful. Contributors love the "hype" and "comradery" that these drives create. It's human nature.

OK - that sounds great and nothing in my post contradicts that. I actually agree that some individuals are more likely to donate as part of a group than on their own.

However, I don't think my point got through. My point was that I see an amazing amount of energy being devoted to fundraising in ways that aren't completely thought through. It's up to us to change that.

I'll repeat:
1) The majority of Ron Paul supporters have yet to donate. Proof: I gave a 54,000+ figure for meetup groups. Some say there may be double counting. OK, so there are 70,000+ myspace friends. Only 21,000+ actually donated in Q3. We should reach out to those yet to donate.
2) We need to push a message that includes all sizes and types of donations. Most people do not donate $100 (example: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=28659). So, let's modify our "everyone donate $100" message to simply "everyone donate" - even if it is as little as $5. Ron Paul brings us all together with a common message of freedom. Why should we divide donors - shouldn't we all work together for the common goal?

Finally, I'll say one more time: it is correct to say that money is not the most important thing. We need the hearts and minds of our fellow Americans to vote with us. But, I see opportunity for us to redirect all this amazing energy driving our fundraising into a much broader and, hopefully, much more successful message, so we can get on with other aspects of this campaign.