Election Reflection

In 2012, the presidential election, communication technology is making waves. Governor Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama are in a tight for the White House race as the United States of America approach November sixth. Both candidates are making their rounds of the states but how can they keep their focus on the entire country at once? The answer is communication and information technology. It is changing the way America hears

from its politicians, learns about its politicians, and gets involved. Mastering the technology

for campaigning in the 2012 election will result in victory for the candidate that does so. This

is due to the advantages communication technology allows candidates to gain in campaign funding, broadening their reach, getting party members involved, and a new revolution in

campaigning this year, data mining and interpretation. In this modern world, voters do not just

learn about candidates; candidates learn about their voters. Whoever responds the best has the

key to victory.

The concrete way to win a campaign in politics, as it has been for decades, is to raise

and then spend money. According to CNN, recently, "The only victors whose campaign committees raised less than their opponent were Bill Clinton in 1996 (raising $116.8 million to

Sen. Bob Dole's $134.7 million) and Ronald Reagan, who raised less than Jimmy Carter but nevertheless swept into Washington in a 1980 landslide. (Krumholz, 2008)" As of 2010, there are no limits to how much money corporation can contribute to a campaign. This is in thanks

to the Supreme Court, who ruled in the case of Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission that there would no longer be a limit to what a corporation can contribute to a political campaign. The decision was based on the court finding that restricting political spending and campaign contributions by businesses, unions and corporations was a violation of the First Amendment, which grants the freedom of speech. Previously, the cases of

McConnell vs.. Federal Election Committee from 2003 and Austin vs. Michigan Chamber of Commerce from 1990 led to restrictions on expenditures and contributions as well as requirements that contributions and political expenditures be made public. After Citizens

United vs. Federal Election Committee, making expenditures and contributions public is still a requirement.

Governor Mitt Romney has benefited from this immensely. His super PAC, a special

type of political action committee, which was made possible by the 2010 Supreme Court decision, has contributed, as of September 21st, $145 million while President Obama's has

contributed a measly $44 million according to the Washington Post (2012). Governor Romney's Republican party has contributed $50 million more than President Obama's Democratic party as well. However, the Romney campaign, having raised $784 million in

total, only leads the Obama campaign by $5 million. President Obama has raised $157 million more than Governor Romney through actual campaigning. This involves direct donations of $2500 or less from individuals. President Obama and the Democrats have utilized modern technology to bridge the massive gap.

The Obama for America app, which is available for free on all major mobile app stores, has a large "DONATE" button link located on the bottom right of the screen of the phone it is

running on. With about four or five taps of the screen in simple steps, any individual with a smart phone can donate up to $2,500 electronically from the phone that fits easily into a pocket. The app is an extension of the website, www.barackobama.com.

The site basically allows people to do anything from reading Obama's campaign platform to getting involved. A 2009 dissertation, written by Rebecca Hayes of Michigan

State University, posits, based on findings, that, "use of social network sites for political purposes can have a positive impact on political learning efficacy and, thus, on knowledge and

participation." The site has a blog, a built-in Twitter feed, a multi-media channel with photos

and even live video, and countless prompts to donate or get involved. Constant email reminders to "donate five dollars" here and "pledge some cash for the cause" there are sent to all members and the donation process is designed to be fast and fluid. Obama is getting his

donations in smaller chunks but at a much higher frequency than Governor Mitt Romney.



The site has its own social network built-in as well. Once a member, one is given his or her own profile page and "dashboard" and is encouraged to link together with others and invite more people to join and more importantly, donate and organize. Members can link their

pages to social networks such as Facebook and Twitter. This is where anyone with a computer can become a contributing, whether donating or not, member of the President's campaign. The site has become somewhat self-perpetuating. According to Lindsay Hoffman, a Professor of Communication & Political Science, University of Delaware, "42 percent of Obama's blog posts originated from [ordinary] citizens. (Hoffman, 2012)" Obama seems to

have the Internet and social media recipe down better than any candidate ever has.

In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama was eons ahead of his opponent, John

McCain in the Internet and social media race. During his campaign, McCain even admitted in

an interview with the New York Times that he barely used the Internet, "I don't expect to be a great communicator, I don't expect to set up my own blog, but I am becoming computer

literate to the point where I can get the information that I need. (2008)" This year, Obama's opponent is a bit more savvy. Governor Romney has a well designed website as well. He

also had an app to go along with it. While not as interactive as the President's page, Governor Romney's page supplies his proposed policies and campaign platform in pages full of info- graphics that can be accessed by stylish, link buttons. Again, the site is littered with donation

prompts and has some ways viewers can get involved in the campaign.

Both candidates have their apps and sites and strategies, but whose works?