PDA

View Full Version : who writes the letters for the campaign?




FriedChicken
07-31-2011, 08:14 AM
I just got a letter from "Ron Paul" filled with bold letters, repetitive information, underlines, capitalized words and over all felt like it was directed towards idiot or something.

I hardly ever read my campaign for liberty emails anymore for this reason. Is John Tate writing the campaign's letters?
If so I think this is a huge mistake. My sister is a member of C4L as well and can't stand John's writing style either and the average American that isn't a die hard supporter would think the guy is crazy just based on the URGENCY NEEDED TO DEFEAT THE WASHINGTON BUREAUCRATS!!!

This isn't a diss to John, I know he is a good friend of Liberty and to Ron Paul and is an extremely hard working and productive person to the cause.
I just think that his writing/communicating style shouldn't be what represents the campaign.
Hopefully someone from the campaign will read this.

My wife, my sister, several of my friends and I all don't read his letters all the way through ONLY because of his writing style. I wanted the campaign to know.

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 08:43 AM
I can usually spot a few errors in every email, but the one you referenced even referenced the wrong election--2010 instead of 2012--in one section. All I can say: they (we) need better proofers.

MRoCkEd
07-31-2011, 08:48 AM
The style might not work on you, but it works on the people most likely to give money. They aren't stupid; they have raised tens of millions of dollars using this method.

Maximus
07-31-2011, 08:49 AM
All their letters are like this. Rand's letters in 2010 were written the same way. I think this is typical of most candidates. It must get certain people RILED up!

pacelli
07-31-2011, 08:54 AM
Ron Paul writes them.. he signs them. I'd love to sit down with Ron and go over some of his letters and ask him how come he never talks like that during interviews or debates. I was really surprised during the last debate when they didn't give RP a chance to talk to Mitt about the whole "RomneyCare" moneybomb & related emails. We really lucked out that they gave pawlenty the opportunity instead of RP.

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 08:55 AM
All their letters are like this. Rand's letters in 2010 were written the same way. I think this is typical of most candidates. It must get certain people RILED up!

No Rand letters had underlining in 2009--when his campaign began. Possibly after the primary he could have switched, but I don't think he did.

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 08:58 AM
They aren't stupid; they have raised tens of millions of dollars using this method.
Look, if you and I had a good list, we could raise millions. The content is important, but not as important as the names on the list. Just because Jesse, John and a few others have raised a few million underlining red meat doesn't mean millions couldn't have been raised without underlining, and etc.

They may not be stupid, but they're not exacting trendsetters either.

Tarzan
07-31-2011, 09:50 AM
I'll go ahead and beat a dead horse here... this is an example of why you hire professionals, not activists, for these roles.

If we are ever going to get serious about winning we have to hire people who know what they are doing and now how to win... this ain't it.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 10:07 AM
Look, if you and I had a good list, we could raise millions. The content is important, but not as important as the names on the list. Just because Jesse, John and a few others have raised a few million underlining red meat doesn't mean millions couldn't have been raised without underlining, and etc.

They may not be stupid, but they're not exacting trendsetters either.

The question of what kinds of fund raising letters prove to be the most effective is not just some subjective thing where one person's opinion is as good as another. It's been studied and studied. And, as I understand it, the annoying over the top letters work the best. Same goes for commercials on TV and radio. Correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Granted, there shouldn't be typos. But the rest I think we should just tolerate if we want them to maximize what they raise.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 10:10 AM
I'll go ahead and beat a dead horse here... this is an example of why you hire professionals, not activists, for these roles.

If we are ever going to get serious about winning we have to hire people who know what they are doing and now how to win... this ain't it.

You don't think bold letters, repetitive information, and underlining is what professionals would recommend? I bet they would. And for all I know, they already have.

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 10:16 AM
The question of what kinds of fund raising letters prove to be the most effective is not just some subjective thing where one person's opinion is as good as another. It's been studied and studied. And, as I understand it, the annoying over the top letters work the best. Same goes for commercials on TV and radio. Correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Granted, there shouldn't be typos. But the rest I think we should just tolerate if we want them to maximize what they raise.

Right, but those studies are never controlled because what makes someone donate is subjective.

P.S. Real pros would target age groups and not just blanket mail every age group with the same appeal, imo. Of course that isn't easy. And it seems what it said to work for older voters (underlining, etc.) appears to turn off younger people (under 40).

I've had some dealings with mailing lists and fundraising appeals with Ron Paul affiliated lists, and trust me there is a ton that could be done with those lists, imo.

P.S. Imo, it has more to do with Ron Paul's brand than the content. For example: anyone could raise some amount of money with any email/letter appearing to be from Ron Paul, assuming you have his mailing list.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 10:25 AM
Right, but those studies are never controlled because what makes someone donate is subjective.

What are you basing that on?

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 10:25 AM
Here's was the major f*ck-up:

From Ron's email:



News reports are that Speaker Boehner is trying to ram through a deal to raise the debt ceiling by $900 billion with no real spending cuts.

This is NOT what the American people overwhelmingly elected Republicans to do in 2010.

So if the Republican leadership shrinks from this fight, they'll pay the price for this BETRAYAL at the ballot box in 2010.


What, we going back in time?

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 10:26 AM
What are you basing that on?

Knowledge.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 10:27 AM
Knowledge.

Not facts?

Johncjackson
07-31-2011, 10:33 AM
You don't think bold letters, repetitive information, and underlining is what professionals would recommend? I bet they would. And for all I know, they already have.

This. Having been involved in receiving fundraising and sales letters my whole life and having dealt with people who write direct mail copy professionally, this is pretty much standard direct mail pro repertoire- bolds, underlines, highlighted copy, calls to action,etc. No one would just write a plain letter.

MRoCkEd
07-31-2011, 10:33 AM
P.S. Real pros would target age groups and not just blanket mail every age group with the same appeal, imo. Of course that isn't easy. And it seems what it said to work for older voters (underlining, etc.) appears to turn off younger people (under 40).
I think that's a fair hypothesis, and something I've thought about too.

MRoCkEd
07-31-2011, 10:33 AM
P.S. Real pros would target age groups and not just blanket mail every age group with the same appeal, imo. Of course that isn't easy. And it seems what it said to work for older voters (underlining, etc.) appears to turn off younger people (under 40).
I think that's a fair hypothesis, and something I've thought about too.

FriedChicken
07-31-2011, 11:03 AM
Well heres the thing ... no one posting in this thread has said that they like the style and no one has said that it makes them more motivated to donate. In fact most of us find it a turn off ...
Is it possible that everybody not donating after they receive these letters is turned off?

So we have a large group of people saying "well no, it doesn't work on us- but it works on everybody else"

It would be encouraging to know that at least one person here admired the format of the letters. Does anyone here even read the entire letter? I've read several of RP's books but its more challenging to me to finish a 5 page letter than a 300 page book.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 11:08 AM
I can usually spot a few errors in every email, but the one you referenced even referenced the wrong election--2010 instead of 2012--in one section. All I can say: they (we) need better proofers.
Can you please send me a picture of this error? :confused:

trey4sports
07-31-2011, 11:08 AM
The style might not work on you, but it works on the people most likely to give money. They aren't stupid; they have raised tens of millions of dollars using this method.

this

Maximus
07-31-2011, 11:09 AM
Well that's because I donate regardless of how many bold words are in Ron Paul's mailers.

These letters are written for the older folk, I get that. When I get emails from other campaigns they all use the same style.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 11:10 AM
Well heres the thing ... no one posting in this thread has said that they like the style and no one has said that it makes them more motivated to donate. In fact most of us find it a turn off ...

It doesn't work that way. TV commercials that people find the most annoying are also the ones that are most effective in getting them to buy the product, even though they themselves don't think the ads work, or so I've read somewhere.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 11:13 AM
Can you please send me a picture of this error? :confused:
Never mind, I got it.

trey4sports
07-31-2011, 11:14 AM
It doesn't work that way. TV commercials that people find the most annoying are also the ones that are most effective in getting them to buy the product, or so I've read somewhere.

bottom line, the copy on these letters is designed to raise money. It's not subjective, they're not going by what a couple people on the internet think. They are going by methods that have been studied over and over again to raise the most amount of money.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 11:19 AM
Well heres the thing ... no one posting in this thread has said that they like the style and no one has said that it makes them more motivated to donate. In fact most of us find it a turn off ... The people who read RPF in their spare time is not the targeted audience for these mailers.



It would be encouraging to know that at least one person here admired the format of the letters. Does anyone here even read the entire letter? I've read several of RP's books but its more challenging to me to finish a 5 page letter than a 300 page book.Again, you are not the target demographic here.





If so I think this is a huge mistake. My sister is a member of C4L as well and can't stand John's writing style either and the average American that isn't a die hard supporter would think the guy is crazy just based on the URGENCY NEEDED TO DEFEAT THE WASHINGTON BUREAUCRATS!!!

This isn't a diss to John, I know he is a good friend of Liberty and to Ron Paul and is an extremely hard working and productive person to the cause.
I just think that his writing/communicating style shouldn't be what represents the campaign.
Hopefully someone from the campaign will read this.

My wife, my sister, several of my friends and I all don't read his letters all the way through ONLY because of his writing style. I wanted the campaign to know.Well the fact that you read any of it at all is telling that their effort is working. 80% of the challenge of any direct mail piece is getting the envelope opened.

Have you never been to a Campaign For Liberty training session? :confused: If not you should go sometime, they explain their methods quite extensively.


Look, if you and I had a good list, we could raise millions. The content is important, but not as important as the names on the list. Just because Jesse, John and a few others have raised a few million underlining red meat doesn't mean millions couldn't have been raised without underlining, and etc.

They may not be stupid, but they're not exacting trendsetters either.They don't want to set trends, they want to use proven methods that are guaranteed to get a certain % return. They test their mail all the time and know what tends to return the highest %.





Right, but those studies are never controlled because what makes someone donate is subjective.Yes but over time one can notice trends of what works better than other methods.


P.S. Real pros would target age groups and not just blanket mail every age group with the same appeal, imo. Of course that isn't easy. And it seems what it said to work for older voters (underlining, etc.) appears to turn off younger people (under 40).Yeah, that would be very hard to acquire that data, and ensure that it's accurate when attached to the list.

Esoteric
07-31-2011, 11:40 AM
yeah, I agree with OP. I used to read all of the "Ron Paul" e-mails. Now I treat them like spam, unfortunately, due to their lack of brevity and overly desperate appeals for money.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 11:53 AM
I just got a letter from "Ron Paul" filled with bold letters, repetitive information, underlines, capitalized words and over all felt like it was directed towards idiot or something.

I hardly ever read my campaign for liberty emails anymore for this reason. Is John Tate writing the campaign's letters?
If so I think this is a huge mistake. My sister is a member of C4L as well and can't stand John's writing style either and the average American that isn't a die hard supporter would think the guy is crazy just based on the URGENCY NEEDED TO DEFEAT THE WASHINGTON BUREAUCRATS!!!

This isn't a diss to John, I know he is a good friend of Liberty and to Ron Paul and is an extremely hard working and productive person to the cause.
I just think that his writing/communicating style shouldn't be what represents the campaign.
Hopefully someone from the campaign will read this.

My wife, my sister, several of my friends and I all don't read his letters all the way through ONLY because of his writing style. I wanted the campaign to know.

Hear, hear. I said the exact same thing. The implication that this 'works on us' is positively insulting, if you think about it, so I try not to. I usually just throw them away so I don't get pissed off, but this one had a specific target for fundraising, so we discussed it on these forums.

Whatever. I don't think they are going to change it, so I'm going to ignore it (except when I take swipes at it from time to time.)

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 11:55 AM
The people who read RPF in their spare time is not the targeted audience for these mailers.


Again, you are not the target demographic here.



Well the fact that you read any of it at all is telling that their effort is working. 80% of the challenge of any direct mail piece is getting the envelope opened.

Have you never been to a Campaign For Liberty training session? :confused: If not you should go sometime, they explain their methods quite extensively.

They don't want to set trends, they want to use proven methods that are guaranteed to get a certain % return. They test their mail all the time and know what tends to return the highest %.




Yes but over time one can notice trends of what works better than other methods.

Yeah, that would be very hard to acquire that data, and ensure that it's accurate when attached to the list.

Of course the people who support Ron are the targeted demographic since he took our names off his donor lists. And I had not opened it until his letter was discussed here on the forum. As happens it was discussed here the same day I got it so I hadn't thrown it away yet.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 11:57 AM
Right, but those studies are never controlled because what makes someone donate is subjective.

P.S. Real pros would target age groups and not just blanket mail every age group with the same appeal, imo. Of course that isn't easy. And it seems what it said to work for older voters (underlining, etc.) appears to turn off younger people (under 40).

I've had some dealings with mailing lists and fundraising appeals with Ron Paul affiliated lists, and trust me there is a ton that could be done with those lists, imo.

P.S. Imo, it has more to do with Ron Paul's brand than the content. For example: anyone could raise some amount of money with any email/letter appearing to be from Ron Paul, assuming you have his mailing list.

Underlining and hyperbole is not associated with age imho but with education. My Dad wouldn't read this stuff and he is 'older'.

LibertyEagle
07-31-2011, 11:59 AM
Hear, hear. I said the exact same thing. The implication that this 'works on us' is positively insulting, if you think about it, so I try not to. I usually just throw them away so I don't get pissed off, but this one had a specific target for fundraising, so we discussed it on these forums.

Whatever. I don't think they are going to change it, so I'm going to ignore it (except when I take swipes at it from time to time.)

Ron Paul has been sending letters out like this since the dawn of time. I remember seeing them on my parent's kitchen table many, many years ago.

Not everyone is going to like all things. But, they DID work for him. If they did not, he would not be continuing to use the same style.

Typos are another thing, entirely. If they are making those, then they need to be proofing them better..

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 12:00 PM
Ron Paul writes them.. he signs them. I'd love to sit down with Ron and go over some of his letters and ask him how come he never talks like that during interviews or debates. I was really surprised during the last debate when they didn't give RP a chance to talk to Mitt about the whole "RomneyCare" moneybomb & related emails. We really lucked out that they gave pawlenty the opportunity instead of RP.

Ron Paul most certainly does not write these, and there are 'autopens' that sign things.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 12:01 PM
This. Having been involved in receiving fundraising and sales letters my whole life and having dealt with people who write direct mail copy professionally, this is pretty much standard direct mail pro repertoire- bolds, underlines, highlighted copy, calls to action,etc. No one would just write a plain letter.

And they are mostly thrown away. A novel approach might get people to open them.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 12:01 PM
Of course the people who support Ron are the targeted demographic since he took our names off his donor lists. And I had not opened it until his letter was discussed here on the forum. As happens it was discussed here the same day I got it so I hadn't thrown it away yet.

I still haven't opened mine. I never do. I take for granted that it's asking for money, and I'm fine with that. I know the drill. Who am I to say that stuff doesn't work?

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 12:02 PM
this

The money is driven by support of Ron. People who don't support Ron are not going to read a 5 page letter and if they already support him all they need is two paragraphs imho.

LibertyEagle
07-31-2011, 12:03 PM
And they are mostly thrown away. A novel approach might get people to open them.

Obviously, a lot of people do open them. Otherwise, they would not continue to use the same style.

I am quite sure they are constantly reevaluating. But, geez, they are on our side, and if something is working for them, I darn sure want them to continue doing it. Regardless of whether I personally like the style of the letters, or not.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 12:04 PM
The money is driven by support of Ron. People who don't support Ron are not going to read a 5 page letter and if they already support him all they need is two paragraphs imho.

Is sending shorter letters so important that it's worth raising less money?

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 12:04 PM
I still haven't opened mine. I never do. I take for granted that it's asking for money, and I'm fine with that. I know the drill. Who am I to say that stuff doesn't work?

The point is no one has said it does.

And 5 pages costs more money to send. And the style and length is the reason I don't open them. If they actually said something, I probably would. I LIKE Ron.

I think a lot of what is used on Ron's campaign was developed for different kinds of candidates. When I see these letters, I figure they could have been written for McCain, and of course his voters must be brain dead anyhow, so there it makes sense. I don't think market research with thinking people's candidates has really been done.

Having said that, I can overlook it and just not open it. But I vote for a different style as well as the OP.


Is sending shorter letters so important that it's worth raising less money?

You have not demonstrated a correlation between shorter letters and less money. The thread does seem to show a correlation between longer letters and not opening them.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 12:07 PM
The point is no one has said it does.

Where are you getting that?

It's not my area of expertise, and I'm not inclined to spend time studying it just so I can put the right answer on an internet forum. But I assume it has been proven to work. If somebody else thinks otherwise, I'll wait for them to prove it.

specsaregood
07-31-2011, 12:09 PM
Well heres the thing ... no one posting in this thread has said that they like the style and no one has said that it makes them more motivated to donate. In fact most of us find it a turn off ...
Is it possible that everybody not donating after they receive these letters is turned off?

So we have a large group of people saying "well no, it doesn't work on us- but it works on everybody else"

It would be encouraging to know that at least one person here admired the format of the letters. Does anyone here even read the entire letter? I've read several of RP's books but its more challenging to me to finish a 5 page letter than a 300 page book.

That letter that just went out to Iowans worked for me, I loved it, if I hadn't just donated the day before I would have after reading it. It was great, especially calling out the other pretenders; and promoting his record and past associations with reagan and his son. I hope to see more like it with bold letters, underlines and haymaker style comments.

FriedChicken
07-31-2011, 12:10 PM
Okey dokey ....

I didn't mean for this thread to become a hot topic like this - honestly there are more productive things for us to talk about. I was just a little frustrated this morning when my wife told me I got a letter from the RP campaign and I got all excited but before I opened it I even said that I hope it wasn't one of the "C4L" type letters ... at first glace I saw all the caps, bolds, underlines, etc. skimmed through it and got the feel it was a repeat of the same info over an over and disappointingly threw it away.

With all that said, I hope that the campaign finds another way to communicate but I also know that they probably won't and that sitting around and complaining about it doesn't accomplish a thing in regards to electing Ron Paul so I'd hate for this discussion to turn into an argument or even a vent lasting several pages.
I'll just suck it up and deal with it - I don't think its as effective as it could be but my opinion doesn't really matter on this subject and I can't do anything about it.

Lets put our time towards more productive causes.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 12:10 PM
All I can prove is it doesn't work on me.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 12:12 PM
All I can prove is it doesn't work on me.

Same here. But I don't care if it works for me or not. I just want RP to win.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 12:15 PM
me too. But I figured if there was a thread where everyone said if the style worked for them or not, it might serve as a kind of targeted market research for the campaign...

But I don't feel a need to open the letters, so it doesn't matter that much to me unless it could be more effective otherwise.

V3n
07-31-2011, 12:18 PM
I figure most people don't read the whole 5 pages, but just skim the bold and underlined sentences to get the gist of what it's about.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 12:29 PM
I figure most people don't read the whole 5 pages, but just skim the bold and underlined sentences to get the gist of what it's about.
They know this, and that's why they do it like they do.

erowe1
07-31-2011, 12:30 PM
Each method of communications also accomplishes other things beyond the superficial reason they give for what they're for. Different forms of communication have different effects on different people. And the combination of multiple different forms can be important too.

I remember talking on the phone to the state director of a certain group in 2010 asking if they would endorse Hostettler for Senate, since they had endorsed him in the past for the House. And, even though he was ahead in the polls at the time, and even though he had been a congressman in the past, they were leery about endorsing him over Stutzman, and one reason was that they thought Stutzman, who was only a state senator, might be a more serious candidate. The main reason she gave me for that was that she had received mailers from Stutzman and not Hostettler.

MelissaWV
07-31-2011, 12:40 PM
I figure most people don't read the whole 5 pages, but just skim the bold and underlined sentences to get the gist of what it's about.

I was told this as well, and also that people skip down to the postscript to get the most important information.

I have often wondered, given this information, why I am not encouraged to write a cover letter for a resume by touting my AMAZING SKILLS and attention to detail or perhaps drawing attention to my incorrect age (no one has yet explained the 2010 instead of 2012 mistake as an appeal to idiocy).

If the point is to hammer home a few key ideas, perhaps a more memo or invitation style would be more efficient. Get the who, what, when, where, why, and how out there, and then fill in the bottom with a little more information for those with an attention span slightly longer than that of your average gnat.

I have proofread for all sorts of different agencies, and I don't see the campaign's letters as being professional or even particularly informational.

specsaregood
07-31-2011, 12:44 PM
I have proofread for all sorts of different agencies, and I don't see the campaign's letters as being professional or even particularly informational.

Melissa, have you chimed in on the sentence that the politico went out of their way to say was "oddly worded".

erowe1
07-31-2011, 12:48 PM
(no one has yet explained the 2010 instead of 2012 mistake as an appeal to idiocy).

Was that sentence in bold, underlined, or red? If not, maybe you just weren't supposed to read it.

KCIndy
07-31-2011, 12:49 PM
And it seems what it said to work for older voters (underlining, etc.) appears to turn off younger people (under 40).



I'm an "older voter" (over 40) and it doesn't work for me at all.

I'll have to confess that I very rarely bother to read anything from CFL or John Tate anymore for exactly this reason.

All that bold lettering and italicization and CAPITALIZING and repetitive repetitive repetitive writing over three or four double sided pages!!! WOW!!! It's SO SO SO irritating!!!!

I just contribute because - - hey, it's Ron Paul!

MelissaWV
07-31-2011, 01:21 PM
Melissa, have you chimed in on the sentence that the politico went out of their way to say was "oddly worded".

I'm not sure which sentence that is. My presence has been a little ... random ... of late :p

specsaregood
07-31-2011, 01:30 PM
I'm not sure which sentence that is. My presence has been a little ... random ... of late :p

From:http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?305739-Politico-Paul-Hits-Bachmann.../page3
The politico said:


He also features, as is an ever-popular reference this cycle, a picture of himself with Ronald Reagan, with the slightly oddly-constructed sentence, "I am the only candidate in this race to have been endorsed by Ronald Reagan."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/60273.html


These are the 2 related sentences from the mailer:


I am the only candidate in this race to have been endorsed by Ronald Reagan.

and


Speaking of President Reagan, I have the honor of being the only candidate in this race for President to have been endorsed by him in an earlier run for Congress.


I fail to see what is oddly constructed about them. But I'm not the resident grammar nazi on the forum. :P

LibertyEagle
07-31-2011, 01:37 PM
II have often wondered, given this information, why I am not encouraged to write a cover letter for a resume by touting my AMAZING SKILLS and attention to detail or perhaps drawing attention to my incorrect age (no one has yet explained the 2010 instead of 2012 mistake as an appeal to idiocy).

On what page are you seeing that typo?

amyre
07-31-2011, 01:52 PM
Totally agree with the OP (and others.) The letter/emails make me cringe....they'd not ever prevent me from donating, but they aren't a pleasant read and I worry about their effectiveness.

teacherone
07-31-2011, 01:54 PM
"I am the only candidate in this race to have been endorsed by Ronald Reagan."

He wasn't endorsed in this race by Ronald Reagan...sadly, the Gipper is dead.

specsaregood
07-31-2011, 01:58 PM
He wasn't endorsed in this race by Ronald Reagan...sadly, the Gipper is dead.

hence the "have been". and that is just a summary under the picture, the full sentence is in the letter immediately to the left:


Speaking of President Reagan, I have the honor of being the only candidate in this race for President to have been endorsed by him in an earlier run for Congress. .
Both sentences are completely factual, grammatically correct -- as far as I can tell -- and not misleading. How are they "odd"?

teacherone
07-31-2011, 02:00 PM
hence the "have been". and that is just a summary under the picture, the full sentence is in the letter immediately to the left:

not a grammar nazi myself, but the "have been" directly following "in this race" certainly seems to imply that Ronald gave a posthumous endorsement.

specsaregood
07-31-2011, 02:02 PM
not a grammar nazi myself, but the "have been" directly following "in this race" certainly seems to imply that Ronald gave a posthumous endorsement.

yeah, its a minor thing; but I can be fairly anal and claims such as "oddly constructed" leave me wanting an answer as to why it is so. I don't see how it is oddly constructed even if it does "imply" such. It certainly doesn't say it and one would have to think lots of voters think Reagan is still alive to gather that was the intent of the sentence.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 02:07 PM
yeah, its a minor thing; but I can be fairly anal and claims such as "oddly constructed" leave me wanting an answer as to why it is so. I don't see how it is oddly constructed even if it does "imply" such. It certainly doesn't say it and one would have to think lots of voters think Reagan is still alive to gather that was the intent of the sentence.

Considering the same guy who wrote that was oddly constructed also wrote that Pelosi is Senate Majority Leader, the entire thing can be taken with a grain of salt.

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 02:49 PM
Here's what CFL does to "test" their list: They send out 10 to 50 color coded letters, with a few different letters, and see which one produces the best results (they send them to similar donors, like people that have donated over $1000 in the past, or they test the $100 group, etc). The problem with this method is that you never know why one donor might decide to send $2000 bucks and another only send $100 bucks (assuming both are big past donors), was it the letter (?), was it that they were pissed at politics as usual (?), was it (?) etc... You just don't know why a donor donates, and why they donate x amount. Therefore it's easy to see how a small test can be skewed.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 03:23 PM
Here's what CFL does to "test" their list: They send out 10 to 50 color coded letters, with a few different letters, and see which one produces the best results (they send them to similar donors, like people that have donated over $1000 in the past, or they test the $100 group, etc). The problem with this method is that you never know why one donor might decide to send $2000 bucks and another only send $100 bucks (assuming both are big past donors), was it the letter (?), was it that they were pissed at politics as usual (?), was it (?) etc... You just don't know why a donor donates, and why they donate x amount. Therefore it's easy to see how a small test can be skewed.Of course, but repeating this test a few times can indeed indicate trends.

Tarzan
07-31-2011, 03:29 PM
We could go round and round on this forever. The campaign is going to do what they are going to do and have not been responsive to any type of input on this or other matters. Having activist train activists how to market is a really bad idea. These types of fund raising letters can be effective to the right target market. But, this is a national campaign requiring a broader market appeal.

To win this election we have got to be more professional and use what works. These types of fund raising letters are NOT what professional use or recommend. I am not a fund raising professional but have worked in marketing (professional at large ad agencies) and have seen several that actual work. The CFL test isn't just skewed... it is such a small sampling as to be useless. Having former CFL workers train others to use these methods or to continue to use them in a broader effort is not cost effective in this broader market.

The only way to win this election or to get the type of funds needed to campaign effectively is by reaching a broader market. Efforts that get a good response from other activists are not the method to gain support and contributions.

But... my opinion doesn't matter... on the other hand, neither do the opinions of anyone else here. They are going to continue to do what they have always done with the same results.

The insiders who come here to post 'secretly' don't know any better and are stuck in activist mode. Its like a group of militia who are self confident and cocky because they think they have learned their stuff... until they face a professional military unit and get their asses handed to them.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 03:57 PM
Of course, but repeating this test a few times can indeed indicate trends.

Or that the person was hit when they had more cash available. Have you ever donated based on what one of those letters said? Other than Ron saying 'I really need money' none of it means anything to me.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 03:59 PM
We could go round and round on this forever. The campaign is going to do what they are going to do and have not been responsive to any type of input on this or other matters. That is actually not true. People who work for the campaign do indeed read the forums and have taken action on many issues raised here.


Having activist train activists how to market is a really bad idea. These types of fund raising letters can be effective to the right target market. But, this is a national campaign requiring a broader market appeal.Not true believe it or not. Most of these letters are to raise funds, not gain votes. And you always target a very narrow market so that they are most effective.




These types of fund raising letters are NOT what professional use or recommend. I am not a fund raising professional but have worked in marketing (professional at large ad agencies) and have seen several that actual work. The CFL test isn't just skewed... it is such a small sampling as to be useless. Having former CFL workers train others to use these methods or to continue to use them in a broader effort is not cost effective in this broader market.Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. The people who are in this business, specifically political fundraising, and are helping the campaign have been doing it for dozens of years.

Napoleon's Shadow
07-31-2011, 03:59 PM
Or that the person was hit when they had more cash available. Have you ever donated based on what one of those letters said? Other than Ron saying 'I really need money' none of it means anything to me.
Again, it's not targeted to you.

Tarzan
07-31-2011, 04:01 PM
Sorry, but your ignorance is showing. The people who are in this business, specifically political fundraising, and are helping the campaign have been doing it for dozens of years.

If that fund raising letter is a product of their work, then they have hired a bunch of imbeciles... but, they have already hired other unqualified imbeciles so this would be nothing new.

:collins:hole

Ben Richards
07-31-2011, 04:24 PM
Letters are targets for the broadest age range, educational background, economic status, etc. Because while direct targeting will always be the most effective it is not necessarily the most efficient. You don't know which member of the household will open the mail, you don't know if somebody has moved or what other details have changed.

What might be the eight thousandth e-mail from C4L, might be the first for somebody new, somebody who is introduced to Ron through the letter.

The length of the letter allows people to feel involved, the formatting makes it hard to skim, and the important info is highlighted, capitalized, etc. so people who won't read it still get the info. The language is a little childish to reach out to people of all educational backgrounds and letters work better than color ads because they seem more personal, more direct and take more effort.

TheDriver
07-31-2011, 04:29 PM
On a side note: there was an email from the campaign, a few weeks ago, that was motivational.

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 04:33 PM
Again, it's not targeted to you.

No offense, but it is SENT to me....

sailingaway
07-31-2011, 04:34 PM
On a side note: there was an email from the campaign, a few weeks ago, that was motivational.

Yeah. The ones that are nothing whatsoever like this letter :p

Look, I don't really care, I just think they might as well be sending something good if they are sending something. But no biggee. That is why I throw them away, though, without opening them.

FriedChicken
07-31-2011, 04:50 PM
Thats how I feel about it. The letters bug me and I personally don't think they're very effective ... but unless I can make a difference and get the campaign to change their tactics than I don't see a point in getting worked up or wasting time reading the thread I started ranting about how much their letters suck.

What would be a great thing though is if the campaign could take me off their list of people to send fundraising letters to - I donate what I can when I can anyway regardless of the letters I get. I can save the campaign $.65 they spent on postage.

I think we should focus on something else right now. Rather than read this thread or make posts anyone who is able should make some phone calls to Iowa instead.

Seriously. Making calls would help the situation. Lets do that instead.

dusman
07-31-2011, 08:10 PM
To think a professional would suggest this kind of method, is silly. While, these features do serve a purpose in marketing letters, it's done very strategically and for very specific purposes. In those cases, the language is just as important as the emphasis on the language. If you do this, without a boundary on what that message should convey, you'll get a tacky, ineffective letter.

If you want to see it done aggressively in the right way - check out Frank Kern's stuff. He's a bit of a rogue element in marketing, but after much learning and applying, I found his to be the best. His successes are pretty impressive, 4-5 marketing launches pulling in $25million in 24 hours.

Ben Richards
08-01-2011, 12:33 AM
If you want to see it done aggressively in the right way - check out Frank Kern's stuff. He's a bit of a rogue element in marketing, but after much learning and applying, I found his to be the best. His successes are pretty impressive, 4-5 marketing launches pulling in $25million in 24 hours.

Are you suggesting the campaign pull a con?

pacelli
08-01-2011, 05:58 AM
Ron Paul most certainly does not write these, and there are 'autopens' that sign things.

If thats the case, wouldn't you think he learned his lesson with the media in 08, with those other newsletters that were also auto penned? Is RP a masochist or something?

bamafanmco
08-01-2011, 08:20 AM
I don't want to cease receiving communication from the campaign, but I can't stand to read the letters I just pull out the donate here part. If most of you are like me, I see every single apperance Paul makes as soon as its on youtube. The letters are uniformative, very repetitive and makes Paul seem like every other politician begging for money. Which I know is not the case. I realize part of this is the move towards mainstream, but that doesn't make me like it anymore.

sailingaway
08-01-2011, 08:34 AM
I don't want to cease receiving communication from the campaign, but I can't stand to read the letters I just pull out the donate here part. If most of you are like me, I see every single apperance Paul makes as soon as its on youtube. The letters are uniformative, very repetitive and makes Paul seem like every other politician begging for money. Which I know is not the case. I realize part of this is the move towards mainstream, but that doesn't make me like it anymore.

this

It is a shame Ron is marketed like everyone else when the entire point is how different he is.

But I don't want to campaign bash, I just wish we could come up with something better. Maybe we should be putting pen to paper to come up with hypothetical letters the campaign could look at as positive suggestions....

TheDriver
08-01-2011, 08:42 AM
Besides the nitpicking, the campaign does need to mail a lot, and email often (perhaps daily). So if they're struggling for Ron Paulish material for the communication--hire more writers. Didn't they hire Jack Avenger recently? Let him write a few.

sailingaway
08-01-2011, 08:48 AM
Jack Hunter would be a great idea for a few. And I agree having writers people actually like to read, not just 'campaign writers' is a good idea.

zerosdontcount
08-01-2011, 08:50 AM
Anytime I see comic sans or bold courier I immediately lose interest.

FriedChicken
08-01-2011, 03:00 PM
I think making suggestions would be a productive thing to do ... potentially very productive if we come up with something that works better.
I might be able to spend a little time writing but I don't think I'll be able to help much - does anyone else think they can volunteer their time? If we get a few letters put together we can send them to the campaign for them to consider sending in an email or direct mail.

We could grant them permission to change the letters as they see fit for proof reading and other reasons. Maybe then we'll get the best of both worlds on this.

Whatcha think?

LivefreeVA
08-01-2011, 10:21 PM
That's not even close to being correct. Direct mail tests aren't considered statistically valid unless they have at least 5,000 letters in each segment of the tests. Most test routinely use 10,000 or more. And they are repeated often. You have to get meaningful numbers to be sure of test results.

Professional direct mailers understand the that data is not the plural of anecdote. And that "subjective" results or thoughts mean absolutely nothing if you are mailing millions of pieces of mail per year.





Here's what CFL does to "test" their list: They send out 10 to 50 color coded letters, with a few different letters, and see which one produces the best results (they send them to similar donors, like people that have donated over $1000 in the past, or they test the $100 group, etc). The problem with this method is that you never know why one donor might decide to send $2000 bucks and another only send $100 bucks (assuming both are big past donors), was it the letter (?), was it that they were pissed at politics as usual (?), was it (?) etc... You just don't know why a donor donates, and why they donate x amount. Therefore it's easy to see how a small test can be skewed.

Tarzan
08-02-2011, 12:26 AM
I think making suggestions would be a productive thing to do ... potentially very productive if we come up with something that works better.
I might be able to spend a little time writing but I don't think I'll be able to help much - does anyone else think they can volunteer their time? If we get a few letters put together we can send them to the campaign for them to consider sending in an email or direct mail.

We could grant them permission to change the letters as they see fit for proof reading and other reasons. Maybe then we'll get the best of both worlds on this.

Whatcha think?

I think this is a wonderful idea. Now for the big BUT:

BUT... on repeated occasions actual professionals in different fields here on the forum have spent time and intellectual blood to provide suggestions, backed with solutions, for the official campaign only to have them totally ignored. Once that happens enough you get a little drained and see any further such effort as pointless and not worth the time or pain.

There is also the issue of the 'gatekeepers' of the campaigns doorways. The same people who would be reviewing any new work are the ones writing the current materials. A large number of these folks appears to be activists who, while they may be devoted, true believers, are not professionally competent to be generating the materials for this level of campaign. As the gatekeepers are convinced of their absolute correctness any alternatives we submit would be rejected out of hand at that level... and would never reach the people who might be able to guide the campaign in a better direction.

Look at the arguments and so called reason for continuing the methods already employed: Test mailings of 10-50 pieces, extolling the training provided by CFL as authoritative, alluding to unnamed 'people in the business' who are helping the campaign write this stuff. But the sockpuppets making these arguments are the same activists working at the campaign and providing the bad materials and bad advise. Their arguments on this forum demonstrates the lack of depth, inability to consider change and a combative and self centered rationale. There has been no evidence this will change.

So, for myself at least, I can only bang my head against the wall so many times before I desist in the behavior. My head hurts and I give! Other threads have questioned our passion and numbers... frankly, this head banging has exhausted several serious current members and caused others from the last cycle to be less active or absent.

Its a wonderful idea... if someone responsible were listening... alas, that has not been the history. On the other hand, give it a try. Perhaps 50 or 60 times is the charm.

cue the Troll from Tennessee... and watch him prove my point