Organizing for America was advertised as the nucleus of the progressive wave supposedly sweeping America. OFA was to have the capacity to organize, motivate, and deploy liberal drones throughout the country. They would utilize the passion stirred up from the 2008 presidential election, mobilizing campaign volunteers into policy advocates. Yet, everything we have seen is telling us that OFA is fading fast. When you build a system of spoils, there will always be those upset about not receiving their just reward. Support has not turned in to favors.

Obama put together an organizational structure built on the illusion that those at the bottom have the power. Yet, in his book “The Audacity to Win,” David Plouffe makes it very clear that power and decision making ultimately remained with a small group at the top. They worked to build a list, not a movement. This was their achilles heel. Once Plouffe, Axelrod, Obama and others transitioned from campaign mode to White House elitism, they forgot and abandoned those that put them in office: the progressive base promised a new America and  the swing voters promised a new DC. The reality has set in that the people who voted for change were not organized in a new or powerful way. In fact, despite the extraordinary illusion that this campaign embodied the people from the ground up, it appears it was politics as usual:

In the end, the special interests sat first at the table and wrote the playbook, expecting OFA to follow. The top-down structure remained, yet the passion had flamed out. David Plouffe announced back in December of 2008 that more than half a million supporters had responded to an online survey of OFA’s future, with 86% saying they felt it was important to help the Obama administration pass legislation through grassroots support; 68% agreeing that it was important to help elect state and local candidates who share Obama’s vision; and a surprising 10% indicating that they would be interested in running for elected office. The desire to support the movement at a local level was there. People yearned for change in their communities, not just in Washington (sound familiar?). Yet, no actions was taken. Those at the top failed to realize this, focusing instead on demanding grassroots support for policy created behind closed doors and benefiting big corporations and bigger government. Now, after an historic loss in Massachusetts the myth is meeting reality and the American people on both sides of the political spectrum are getting restless. Organizing for America is seeing their passionate base shrink rapidly, interior structure deteriorate, and effectiveness diminish. This is undeniable proof of what architects already know: the world’s tallest buildings were built ground-up.

In a move that resembles MoveOn.org, OFA recently sent out an email asking its members to plan the course for 2010. While the strategy has worked in the past, this appears to fall under “too little too late:”

While progressives scramble to recreate the magic of the 2008 presidential election, a truly organic movement has been brewing in the union. A movement that I argue has done things right.

The tea party movement has been repeatedly attacked by those most afraid of its success, but this snake has no head. There is nobody calling the shots, no Plouffe controlling the message, no list to be bought and sold. This movement has no title, no political affiliation. This is about principle over party, the individual over the state. In this movement, the power rests with the people, and the people are growing restless.

Read a single post from CNN, Washington Post, or Fox News and it becomes clear that the tea party movement is becoming a legitimate force in American politics. Obama’s campaign has shown the people how to organize, what we as individuals can accomplish when passion and inspiration meet opportunity. Poll after poll has shown us that more Americans self-identify as conservative than any other political ideology. So when Obama and his campaign elite MovedOn (pun intended), it set the stage for a dramatic shift. Unlike the progressive nanny structure, our movement is based on the individual, on personal freedom and equality. The tea parties and 912 groups are evidence of this, of individuals banding together and self-organizing in their communities. We represent a true, grassroots movement in America. There are no campaign managers, no Axelrods to lead us and leave us. Because of this, we will be stronger, last longer, and bring more change to the political landscape. An opportunity like this comes along only once in a generation. For years we have chose the lesser of two evils, but for the first time in my lifetime, we as a nation are saying we don’t want whats on the menu, we demand more.

Ironically, both OFA and the new conservative movement can be said to embody the political style for which they fight. OFA shines light on the faulty premise that the state knows best, that an enlightened few knew best for their supporters. When they abandoned the wheel, the ship ran ashore. In contrast, our movement has no leader, at least not one in control of information and strategy. We have all decided the strategy, we have all shared power, and we will all share victory. 2010 will be a record year for the political organizations. We have written on this site before about leaderless organizations and the conservative surge in online media, but history has yet to be written.

We now have two very different political forces on the ground in America. A force from the liberal left of the country struggling to find focus in the shadow of an abandoned leader and a rising force from the conservative right struggling to find cohesion among the pull of individualism. Who will win? What is in store? Only time will tell.

Due to a winter storm that hit the Fayetteville area, this event has been postponed.  The American Majority Arkansas office will notify attendees of rescheduling information.

Our nation was founded by ordinary citizen activists desiring a government that was accountable to the people.  Today, ordinary citizens across our nation are tired of the status quo and ready to engage for the betterment of their communities.

American Majority Arkansas is pleased to announce an Activist Training will be conducted on Monday the 8^th of February in Fayetteville, AR to provide citizens with the tools necessary to become effective activists

The training will take place at the Ozarks Electric Building (Community Room) located at 3641 Wedington Drive in Fayetteville from 6:00 to 9:00pm.   Registration opens at 5:30pm.  The cost is $5.00 if you pre-register online by February 4th and $10.00 at the door.  Space is limited.  Pre-registration is strongly encouraged.

Topics* to be covered during the Training include:

• Building Coalitions and Reaching Your Community (ideas and practical steps to engage your community and organize a coalition of volunteers)
• Government 101 (how government operates, how legislative and executive bodies work, how to get involved)
• Holding Government Accountable (how to hold leaders accountable once they are in office)
• Effectively Communicating Your Views (how to write effective letters to the editor, opinion editorials and blogs, using social networking tools and wiki projects)

Full training materials, samples and supplements will be provided to help you apply what you learn to your organization, candidate, cause or community.  Refreshments and dinner will be provided.

Registration is available online by clicking here.  If you have any questions or would like additional information, call Laurie Masterson at 501-258-6353or e-mail laurie@americanmajority.org.

American Majority is a non-profit and non-partisan organization whose mission is to train and equip a national network of leaders committed to individual freedom through limited government and the free market.

* Topics are subject to change.

It has become increasingly clear to most Americans that the mainstream media is courting the current White House with the intensity of a 17-year-old boy. As I flip through the major networks, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC, it becomes painfully clear that there is an agenda they want to see pushed. When the president does this– elation. When the president does not– criticism. That is not news, that is a drama filled episode of HBO’s Big Love.

Coming from a traditional communications background, I am disappointed and deeply saddened at the loss of objectivity and standards within the news today. As an amateur historian, I am embarassed that the memory of men like Franklin and Jefferson are made a mockery by people like Matthews and Olbermann. Benjamin Franklin, who owned and published a newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette, once said that “a newspaper in every home” was the “principle support of…morality” in civic life. Unfortunately, the current news structure has become less about education and knowledge and more about persuasion and opinion. In today’s era of big media, there unfortunately is another quote from Franklin that comes to mind, “When truth and error have fair play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter.” 50 years ago the media was there to tell the nation what the people thought. Today, the media exists to tell the nation what to think.

Any sane individual can clearly delineate the lines drawn in the sand. Victor Davis Hanson has done an excellent job recapping the media’s treatment of both Bush and Obama in a piece for The Corner. Specifically, Hanson noted the lack of “substantive criticism of Obama’s flips on renditions, military tribunals, wiretaps, intercepts, Iraq..” and the “Obama plan to run up more red ink in a year than Bush did in eight.” Apparently, an objective stance on the growth and over-reach of government is less important than ensuring the masses accept their fate and relinquish decision making in an appropriately jovial fashion.

In addition, Pew Research notes that this Administration has received an extraordinary amount of positive press, almost double that of Bill Clinton and George Bush. Their study has found that positive stories about this Administration have outweighed negative by two-to-one (42% vs. 20%) while 38% of stories have been neutral or mixed.

It seems objectivity is not only lost by those who produce the news, subjectivity is quickly overtaking those who consume it: According to the new poll out by Gallup, nearly half of Democrats (45%) say the media have done an excellent or good job as a watchdog of the Democratic Obama administration, compared with 29% of independents and 30% of Republicans. You can read the whole article here: Click to Read the Full Article

There are many speculating on why the mainstream media favors this Administration and why limited government never gets a fair shake, leave your thoughts in the comments and let me know what your take is. Me: I believe the news is there to inform, not influence. As Thomas Jefferson once said, “I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.” This country was built on the ingenuity of free men and will continue to remain so only with the input of an educated, informed populace.

Regardless of our political affiliation, for now the writing remains on the wall; or in this case, the heart shaped eyes and dropping jaw remain on Chris Matthews:

You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour.

WATCH THE FULL CLIP HERE

Times, they are a changing. With the rise of blogs and social media, I hope we will fulfill the wishes of both Franklin and Jefferson in creating an educated, informed populace with the knowledge and know-how to steer this country from the bottom-up. Until then, I’ll take my news with a grain of salt…and a margarita.

I think it’s clear that what we’re seeing is something new in politics with the tea party movement, and especially with what took place last night in Massachusetts. It’s not about people choosing this party or that party, nor is it just about the anger of independents. It’s people looking for leadership that will actually do what it says, and that will look out for their interests, not the interests of the politicians or big business. They want government that is responsible, not invasive. People don’t like the fact that the absurd spending and bailouts are all taking place on their backs, out of their pockets. As a friend said, “People know the fix is in with big government and big business and they’re not going to take it anymore.”

But after last night, I want to throw something out as a topic of conversation: does the tea party movement need a central leader/and or leadership? I have been quoted as saying I believe local tea party and 9.12 organizers should stay independent, while remaining on the same page with like-minded leaders from across the country. Quite frankly, I’m not convinced about some of these so-called “national” tea party organizations. I either question the leaders’ motives, or their strategy (which is to suppose they even have a long term strategy beyond the next protest). If those reading find those words provocative, so be it. Regardless, the question remains: is leadership needed for the movement to be sustainable in the long term? And I’m not talking about an election cycle or two, but fifteen, twenty, even thirty years or more. 

The tea party movement began as an organic movement, literally exploding from the grassroots and taking the political stage by storm in 2009. However, the problem with organic movements is that they are highly de-centralized. There are positives to be gleaned thus far from the movement. For example, demonstrating the true grassroots nature, thousands of tea parties and 9.12 groups are in existence today, with many flourishing despite having existed for only a year’s time (stop and think about the amazing nature of that: January, 2009. No tea parties. No 9.12 groups. January, 2010. Thousands of local tea party and 9.12 groups). And  despite being de-centralized, the local tea parties are working well together, for the time being. In Massachusetts, tea parties from New Hampshire, Connecticut, and New York City were working jointly with the Massachusetts’ tea parties to get grassroots workers to help Brown.

The negative, however, is that history tells us that highly de-centralized movements do not succeed in the long run unless they give way to some sort of unified, and dare I say, centralized leadership. Before you write the idea off, think about the newly independent United States in the 1780s. Every one of the 13 states thought and acted like a sovereign nation. They’d all played nice with each other during the war with Great Britain (well, sort of). But once the threat of Great Britain was gone, and they were independent, things started to sour with the United States. Within a matter of years following the Treaty of Paris, the United States actually stood on the brink of total collapse, with fierce internal dissension and bickering, from thirteen different currencies to repressive trade policies between the states. And we shouldn’t forget, the states were also dealing with continuous external threats from the European superpowers: Britain, Spain and France, each circling like wolves, waiting to strike.

The miracle in Philadelphia saved the United States from disaster. The Constitutional Convention took the thirteen states, each like a thin reed, and bound them together, increasing the strength and stability of all. There was give and take, with compromises struck, deals reached, with ultimately a new national government put in place. Each of course remained its own independent state, but they were now in union with the others. It is my opinion that without this, the states would never have survived, ultimately falling prey to petty in-fighting and greed, and eventually to one of the European powers. 

Now, in 2010, we are again faced with a pivotal moment to ‘Unite or Die.’ What if the thousands of tea parties and 9.12 groups around the country decided to come together? What if they really formed a legitimate, national structure, not something arbitrarily attempted by those seeking personal glory, and certainly not by one individual, but rather a circle of principled leadership. I’m becoming more and more convinced that if we do not begin working together strategically, the movement will melt away; people will not continue to protest ad nauseam.

What the election in Massachusetts last night showed is that if the tea party movement works together, amazing things can happen. But the serious problems facing this country will not be solved, and the country fundamentally, changed unless the tea party movement becomes better organized and more long term in its vision.

I’m not entirely sure what that would look like, but that is why I am asking the question. It seems that I am constantly seeing new “characters” emerge as self-proclaimed leaders of an organic, de-centralized movement – which I find odd. Each appears more inclined to profit from the movement than the one before. Now is the time we invest in the movement, instead of profiting from it. 

My hope is that this year, and in the years to come, the tea party movement evolves into a legitimate, sustainable political force; not a party, but a force, that dictates the direction this country takes. How this happens or what this will look like remains to be determined and so I ask again: Is it time to start thinking about leadership within the movement?

By now, most of you know the news: Scott Brown has won Massachusetts’s special election for Ted Kennedy’s seat. Although his platform was one of transcendence and accountability, the fact still remains that Brown is a Republican. A Republican in a seat that had been a liberal shade of blue for over three decades. One can also argue that Massachusetts remains one of the most liberal states in the Union. So what does this all mean?

I would argue that Washington has a lot to fear. Not just Democrats, but Republicans alike. Remember that Brown’s campaign was built largely around an anti-establishment platform. Like him or hate him, Brown represents the “every man.” As we saw in Sarah Palin, and will continue to see in 2010, the people have seen the path taken by liberal elitism, choosing to support the honest, relatable candidate instead. The American majority has discovered that the power does indeed lie with them and they have only just begun to exercise it.

Given the recent elections and the growing fear among the Left, it appears that history does indeed repeat itself. The contemporary tea party movement was sparked by the same government reach and growing bureaucratic policy that initiated the original act on December 16 of 1773. Originating in the harbors of Boston, the American people once again stand defiantly in the belief that the individual deserves the freedom to choose what is best for their family, unobstructed from a disconnected government. The tea party movement has returned home, to its roots, to secure a powerful electoral victory in Massachusetts. If there was any doubt on that cold December day about what the colonists were fighting for, they have now been laid to rest on this cold January morning…

The tea party’s rallying cry is clear, “We will support principle over party. We will support candidates that stand for fiscal discipline, Constitutional restraint, and a government accountable to the American people. If you do not stand for these things, you better stand aside.”

One of the best bits of advice I got when I was younger was that, “Readers are leaders, and leaders are readers.” I send the AM staff a book a quarter that I feel will help them become better at what they do.

1. The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism by Robert Murphy. A quick and easy read, but with some nice “sound bites” on the free market system. Murphy’s book is good for those that aren’t going to dig into Hayek, Mises, etc., but still want to have a better idea of what the free market is all about. Took me maybe a few days to read thru it.

2. The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton Fulsom. Not a long book, but an interesting look into the misconceptions about the Vanderbilts and Rockefellers of this world. Fulsom really lays out the difference between political entrepreneurs, or crony capitalists, and the real market entrepreneurs. The book really does give a better appreciation for what the real free market entrepreneurs accomplished, and how they made people’s lives better.

3. The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand. I read Atlas Shrugged in 2008, and of the two, Atlas is my favorite. While I dismiss Rand’s objectivism, I think both are worthwhile reads.

4. Free to Choose by Milton and Rose Friedman. A classic that everyone interested in knowing more about the free market should read. Took me awhile to get into it, but once I did, flew through it.

There were others I read, like Founding Characters, which explores the lives of some of the key Founders, that I would also recommend.

This year, American Majority will be launching its Patriot 2.0 training program, Gulp…..

As we trained around the country last year, the same questions and comments were being made, “Can the government track me through Facebook?” (“Ma’am, your life is not that interesting.”) and “I don’t use social media because it’s for Liberals!” (“Sir, with that reasoning, I could be a liberal, and you should leave now before brainwashing begins.”) There was even a few, “How does the CIA’s facial recognition software work?” (“Once I get my top secret clearance, I’ll let you know.”) Needless to say, these statements left most of us bewildered and shaking our heads wearily. This also got me thinking – why are Conservatives so far behind the technology curve? Why did we not embrace social media sooner?

After months of talking about it with trainees and asking others in the field, here is what I have come up with…

Politically, Liberals Believe Social Platforms Can Affect National Change
At the core of liberal philosophy…or progressivism, or whatever the title is they give themselves to avoid the inevitable term of ‘Socialist,’ is the belief that freedom did not come from nature or God, but instead is a product of the state. Essentially, the state is a reflection of the people and the people a reflection of the state. So when a communication platform comes along that embraces the many-to-many model, it would seem a natural fit for groups looking to mold society by either influencing enough people to mimic national support or coordinating mass pressure on public officials to influence the people. For these reasons, the Left was an early adopter of such technology.

Politically, Conservatives Will Not Embrace Social Platforms for Individual Decisions
My mother and father are good examples of why new media has not been adopted readily by the conservative base. As my father has said many times before, “If I know someone, they are in my cell phone.” As he would argue, “I have so much to do locally, why do I need to talk to someone half way around the world?” and to some extent, he would be right. Conservatives tend to believe that individuals are capable of making personal decisions best suited for themselves and their families. Creating a massive, online movement via Facebook to change the local sewer standards in one’s town doesn’t make much sense under conservative philosophy. As the mindset goes, “If conservative politics is local, where is the political advantage in starting a Facebook Page?” For these reasons, the Right is a late adopter to such technology.

Now What?
But, where does this leave us? I would argue that the time for excuses and debating over the issue has passed. The decision has been made for us. Understandably, emerging technology and dramatic change can be scary, but with increased communication comes increased influence; over 80% of those under 30 find the majority of their information online. Don’t you want to engage the next generation of leaders on issues? I equate conservative involvement in national politics to the old saying, “If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around, does it make a sound?” I am here to tell you that yes, yes it does make a sound, a very loud, crashing ‘boom.’ The same goes for bloated, over-reaching government. Because you do not participate does not mean it will not grow and it will not find you; you either do politics, or politics will do you. And if you are doing the politicking, you’re on the offense. If politics is doing you, you’re on the defensive, and you can only play defense for so long before losing.

It is time to understand what the Left is doing and rise to the occasion, if not for you, then for your children. Conservatives maintain the majority status in America and unless our voices are echoed online, we will fail to influence, mobilize and win in coming years. To me, this is unacceptable. It is time to leave our comfort zones and take our Sunday conversations online, helping win the battle for hearts and minds in communities unknown and with allies yet to be realized.

People will sometimes ask what I read. Here are some of the books I read in 2009, and would recommend.

1. Economics in One Lesson  by Henry Hazlitt. A really concise read on free market economics in layman terms. Couple hundred pages long, so not a heavy read.

2. The Essentials of Economics by Faustino Ballve. A little tougher read, though just over a hundred pages. But Ballve, a Spanish economist, has gems like this: “. . . the free market is the most obvious expression of the sovereignty of the people and the best guarantee of democracy. Individual guarantees stated in writing in the constitution are of no use to a nation if it is not the people, but a third party, whether government or trade-union, that fixes prices and wages . . . for in that case the people, in being deprived of their right to free choice in the market, i.e. their right to assign everything the rank and the value it suits them to give it, from being sovereign are reduced to the status of slaves.”

3. The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression by Amity Shlaes.  Shlaes does an excellent job of really taking another look at the history of the Depression, FDR’s policies, and some of the impacts, short term and long term, of those policies. Really good read. Little longer, but worth it.

4. The American Cause by Russell Kirk. Not a long book, but a must read for those wanting to better understand who we are as a nation, what the principles are that have made us great, and why they’re worth fighting for. 

More recommends tomorrow.

The Telegraph, a British newspaper, is running a series this week on the top 100 conservatives and liberals in America.  The paper ranks the individuals according to their accomplishments and present-day influence.  This is a follow-up article to their rankings in 2007.

The article defines conservatives and liberals in a more European style than many Americans would define them.  Conservatives are defined as “people identifiably – though not always self-described – as right of centre,” while liberals are “are those identifiably left of centre.”  The article also points out that the rankings are not based upon ideological purity, i.e. Jimmy Carter is not ranked above Jesse Jackson because the former President is more liberal.

The top 20 of each will be announced on Friday.  American Majority is asking if you did the rankings, who would be on your top five list of conservatives and liberals in America in terms of accomplishments and present-day influence?

American Majority Kansas is gearing up for an exciting 2010!  After a successful 2009 that involved dozens of candidate, activist and campus trainings, we’re looking forward to connecting with even more of you this year. 2010 will be an important year, as activists engaged in the liberty movement through the 2009 tea parties organize and strategize to make an impact, and as candidates around the state look towards launching their elective campaigns.

We will be traveling throughout our home state and into other areas of the country to take our trainings to liberty-minded individuals and groups. Ready to take your activism to the next level? Join us in Manhattan on March 27th for full Activist Training! Ready to campaign for liberty through elected office? You won’t want to miss our Candidate Training scheduled for May 8th in Topeka.  If you’re interested in either event or want to schedule training in your area, drop us a line at KS@AmericanMajority.org or call the office at 785-233-3800.

We are looking forward to a full year in 2010, working to educate, equip and inform liberty-minded activists, candidates and college students!

There are a lot of groups out there these days trying to get off the ground purported doing the Lord’s work for the advancement of freedom. Not all of them make it. Some of them are questionable. I pray very hard these days for God to give me some sense of discernment between the groups worth standing on the bridge with and those not worth it.

I won’t always be right and sometimes will be had. That’s life.

But over the past year I have fallen in love with one new group that has yet to disappoint and that frequently excites me. It’s American Majority. Those of you who attended the RedState Gathering last August know them well. They helped sponsor the event and made a presentation.

Slowly and carefully, American Majority is raising up a new batch of conservative leaders at the local level. Their goal is not to find the next conservative for congress, but to find the next conservative for the school board, the town council, the county commission, etc. They intend to rebuild the conservative farm team.

And they do fine work. They are a solid group I’m pleased to promote and partner with whenever I can.

[UPDATE:] Cross posted at Redstate.com

Drew Ryun of American Majority provides a detailed podcast on how to win your precinct.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Drew Ryun of American Majority provides a detailed podcast on how to micro-target your community.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

2010 promises to be a good year for conservative campaigns both in North Carolina and across the country. Whether you are running a campaign for town council or a statewide Senate campaign, Twitter can play an important role in helping you win.

I’ve compiled ten tips and observations to help conservative campaigns engage conservative voters in 2010. These important (and perhaps obvious) Twitter tips are based on what I’ve seen campaigns do and not do with their Twitter strategies in the past year.

Take a look, remember that followers are potential voters, and get tweeting!

1. Realize Successful Twitter Accounts Do Not Come Overnight.

Campaigns need to be prepared to invest in this new media tool. Twitter accounts, like all other aspects of your campaign, will require staff time and resources. Start by creating a long term Twitter strategy that focuses on reaching and educating your potential voters. As you continue, remember that successful Twitter accounts are not measured by the amount of followers you have, but the impact your message has on those you are trying to target.

2. Customize Your Twitter Account

Fill in any possible information on the Twitter Profile (name, website, and bio at minimum), including dates for primary or general elections. Create a custom background that corresponds to the branding on your website and Facebook Page or use the background space to list url information for your other social media accounts. There are multiple options for customization, but the point here is to create a Twitter profile that is engaging and informative.
3. Remember You Have a Twitter Account

This seems obvious, but I can’t tell you how many campaigns I have seen start accounts on social networks and then fail to follow through. Twitter should be your second new media priority (after Facebook), but if your campaign hasn’t developed a strategy for using Twitter, don’t launch an account yet. It does you no favors for potential voters to see a campaign Twitter account that hasn’t been updated in months. (Of course, if you are itching to start using Twitter and just can’t seem to come up with a strategy, let’s talk).

4. Know Who Is Tweeting

For most organizations, parties, groups, and online grassroots movements, I recommend keeping personal and business accounts completely separate. However, for campaigns it’s effective for candidates to show a personal side. The trick here is to make sure it’s clear who is tweeting. If campaign staff will tweet sometimes and the candidate others, create an easy way for followers to distinguish the tweets.

5. Hashtags. Use them.

Hashtags are my favorite part of Twitter because they allow you to reach new people and categorize your tweets.  I am continually amazed that there are candidates running for any office, especially Congress or Senate, who are still not using hashtags. Look around and find out which hashtags your potential followers are using and use them constantly. You could also create your own hashtag and feed it to your campaign website (warning: don’t forget that anyone can tweet anything with any hashtag). Either way, encourage your supporters to retweet or tweet about you using the hashtags your campaign is using.

6. Stop Expecting People to Come to You.

Many savvy political tweeters will seek out your Twitter account, but many, many more potential supporters will not. The best way to increase your base is to follow the people you hope will follow you. My tip for finding your followers is to pick influential tweeters in your district and follow the tweeters who are following them. You might even ask those same influential tweeters to recommend people for you to follow.

7. See Follower, Think Voter

When you see the word follower, think “potential voter” and engage tweeters in every way possible. For example, thank followers for retweeting important links and encourage them to do so in the future. Consider encouraging followers to ask questions and use the Twitter account to respond to those questions. However you go about engaging your followers, remember that followers are potential voters and you need them come Election Day.

8. Use Twitter Lists

Engage and recognize your supporters by grouping them in specific Twitter lists. Consider sending the people on these lists your press releases and links to your latest blogs first. It’s likely they will appreciate the recognition and start spreading your content. Twitter lists are an easy and quick way to see what your supporters are tweeting about.

9. Know What People Are Tweeting About Your Campaign

Don’t rely on Google alerts and the Twitter @ reply function (which is unreliable at best) for Twitter reputation management. It’s important to take time to use the Twitter search function to search for your name, district, your opponent’s name, and other relevant keywords. Follow the people who are supporting you and address any questions that have been raised by other Tweeters.

10.  Don’t Stop Tweeting Once You Win

Change your account name from @nameforcongress to @RepName and tweet more than ever. You will be glad you did when the next election cycle rolls around.

(Note: This blog has also been posted at majorityconnections.com and runsmart2win.com.  Comments or suggestions? Connect with me on Twitter @jessicanwood.)