Gary Johnson-Supporting SuperPAC Thinks Polls Show They Nearly Doubled Support for Johnson in a Maine District
Traditional media still more important than social media or online, Americans Deserve Better PAC argues their results prove.
I reported last month on how the Americans Deserve Better SuperPAC (their web site address hits one of their big selling points: "Vote for the Adults"), supporting the Libertarian ticket of Gary Johnson and William Weld (two former Republican governors), targeted one congressional district in the state of Maine with TV and radio ads for the candidates.

The PAC had promised to, as I reported, "poll to see if it seemed effective."
They have done that polling. A memo produced for them by the Patterson & Company polling operation, provided by PAC principal Nancy Neale, claims impressive results. The ad campaign seemed to move polled support for Johnson from 5.5 to 10.6 percent.
The company polled the 2nd congressional district of Maine three times, on August 3, 18, and 28. Between the first and last poll, support for Johnson nearly doubled, and he was the only candidate to gain support.
The ads bought by the Americans Deserve Better SuperPAC ran in two weeks in that district between the first and last poll, from August 12-26.
The PAC is confident their ad push is responsible for the polled rise in support, because the candidates did only one appearance in the area. That was on the last day of their ad campaign, "and as such [Johnson and Weld] received very little earned media coverage compared to Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton over the same period."
They bought ad time on six distinct area cable systems, four broadcast TV stations (two CBS affiliates, one NBC and one ABC), and four three radio stations (two FM, one AM). There was also an online portion, which consumed around 10 percent of the total of $92,789 the PAC spent on the Maine ad buys. Broadcast TV consumed 51 percent of that budget.
From the Patterson & Company memo:
In the first round of polling, the Maine 2nd evinced a close race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, with Clinton showing a little more than three point lead, just beyond the margin of error. Johnson registered at slightly more than five points.
Three and a half weeks later, in Wave 3, support for Johnson had risen about five points (5.5% to 10.6%), while support for all other candidates decreased, with the largest decrease found among Clinton (-2.7%), whose lead over Trump receded slightly to within the margin of error.
Also in Wave 3, we reconnected with 488 respondents from Wave 1. Of these, about 15 percent changed their preference. Of those changing their preference, Johnson was the clear favorite by nearly 3-in-10, followed by Trump, those becoming undecided, Clinton, and finally the Green Party's Jill Stein. Wave 2 provides additional data points that suggest the same basic movement about midway through the time period of interest.
An ancillary memo from the PAC itself that Ms. Neale provided argues that their strategy is the only pro-Johnson one that has proven to work, and laments efforts from both the official campaign and other SuperPACS aimed at the online and social media world as opposed to traditional advertising.
"Although the way in which people consume information is changing rapidly," the memo states, "we still live in a world where voters watch the 6pm local news and listen to the radio on their way to work. If you are not represented in those spaces, you are not going to move the needle for your candidates or your cause."
"The only way to disrupt the status quo," the Americans Deserve Better PAC concludes, "is with cost-effective, data-driven messages that are focused in areas also contested by the Republicans and Democrats. This will grow the Johnson/Weld ticket's electoral support, increase its national exposure and relevance, and force the ticket into the national conversation as spokesmen for the liberty message."
Chad Crow, who worked with the PAC on this campaign, said in an email today that "we tracked results halfway through the buy and then at the end of the buy and found the upward movement to be slow and steady, rather than 5 points week one and then no movement week two, or the other way around."
This indicated, he believes, that "the messaging was pretty spot-on, and just as important, the tone was right – from the music to the voices to the imagery. Most ads we're hearing from others have a much harsher tone with intense music and graphics, or the opposite where the narrator sounds as detached and robotic as Donald Trump trying to use a teleprompter. That's not a great way to emotionally connect with voters, and that's really the name of the game on TV."
Crow thinks this proves that if everyone involved in pushing the Johnson campaign forward had similar success, which involves "a methodical plan that grinds it out in the trenches" that "they'd be doing debate-prep right now and we'd be having an entirely different conversation."
The PAC chose that particular district, they wrote in the memo they provided, because it:
offered affordability, partisan parity within the electorate, and a level of undecided voters on par with the national average….We chose not to focus on a district with a large electoral advantage for either the Republicans or the Democrats, because voters in those areas realize they are inconsequential in the Presidential election. Their electors are pre-determined by the dominance of one party or the other, so it is easier to cast a protest vote knowing that it won't impact the election.
By choosing an area that is in-play for both the Presidential and a Congressional or Senatorial race, we increased our degree of difficulty in winning support for the Libertarian ticket, but also created a scenario in which we could more accurately measure the effectiveness of our messaging, as opposed to simply racking up protest votes in a heavily red or blue district.
The first TV ad, aired from August 12-19 in that Maine market:
The second TV ad, aired from August 20-26, stressing peace, prosperity, and debt:
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What Doherty won't tell you is that the Americans Deserve Better SuperPAC is run by Herb Tarlek.
So, to double they can go from one supporter to 2. The spin is good.
Hey, if you can't win the district containing both The Forks AND West Forks, Maine, you can't win anywhere.
Ah. Spencer beats me to the punch. I came here to make that very comment.
I prefer the RKO duty to the Paramount duty.
So? let's see if they can repeat this success nationwide!
I had a long drive for work yesterday. The GayJay spots are running on Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in different cities. The best one was GayJay apologizing directly to to the millennials. Fuckin' chrono-traitor! I hope they eat him first. Or sacrifice the former Republican governor to appease their student loan-in-default Gods.
Much as I want to see the libertarian party win Gary just keeps getting less and less different to me than a liberal in libertarian clothing.
Open borders without checking the welfare state, forcing people to bake cakes, a FREAKING CARBON TAX?
How is this guy the best libertarians could put forth?
Gary Johnson is not a libertarian
JOHNSON IS PART OF THE GLOBALIST CONSPIRACY!!!! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!
Thank you for punching that professor in the solar plexus, Grand Moff.
You are a real American.
The problem is, neither is no one else. So you can:
1. Not vote at all. (A valid option)
2. Vote for Hillary.
3. Vote for Trump.
4. Vote for Jill Stein.
Of 2-4, which is the most libertarian solution to you?
Darrell Castle, because banning porn is so libertarian.
No, no, no, letting the states ban porn and other unholy things is libertarian. Because libertarianism is a means to an end not an actual belief system that values freedom.
In this case, the end is a Christofascist dystopia.
You will never get the succ.
How can I reech these commenters?
Has Darrell Castle ever said he supports or intends to ban porn? Sure, there's something about that in the Constitution Party platform but does the candidate agree? We know Johnson/Weld totally disavow the Libertarian Party platform and are running, in their own words, as "two Republican governors".
Of 2-4 Trump is where I would pick, but only because I have no fucking idea what he's going to do if he gets elected and I don't think anyone on the entire planet including Trump himself does either.
Hillary lied to parents standing next to their dead children (and continues to lie about lying about it!) for her own personal petty political gain so 2 is a vote for Satan essentially. Stein is a more wasted vote than Gary.
I want to vote Gary even though he's a terrible libertarian, but I'm a terrible libertarian too, so who knows.
I just wish he acted more like a leader and less like the guy everyone avoided in 7th grade because he picked his nose too much.
A guy can't clean clean house every now and then?
I mean, what if Trump isn't terrible and everyone is so terrified he's gonna nuke everything that they essentially neuter the presidency? That particular branch has been growing wayyyy to fast lately and it could use a trimming.
Gary wants a freaking Carbon Tax. I can't get behind someone who is this delusional with everyone else's money.
I just wish he acted more like a leader and less like the guy everyone avoided in 7th grade because he picked his nose too much.
"Booger-Eatin' Johnson
Concern troll is concerned.
What was the other one, SSB?
Or new math?
Anyone have the fortitude to watch the "Commander-in-Chief" forum?
Why bother? However, I did give IAVA a one-star rating.
Doesn't Maine split up it's electoral votes by district or something like that? They should spend all their time in that one district and go for the one vote. It would still be pointless, but it would be kind of fun.
So in her segment of the forum Hillary Clinton:
1. Said no Americans died because of the Libya intervention
2. Vowed to resist all efforts to privatize the VA
3. Reiterated her support for banning people on the no-fly list from buying a gun
She also looked like she wanted to unscrew Matt Lauer's head and shit down his neck because he asked her a question about her email server.
Trump is now spewing word salad.
It's going to be the classiest military ever, really high class and stylish
Oh thank god, what a pleasant surprise: it only lasted an hour.
Be the 1%
VOTE JOHNSON
I hope this boring turd of a post isn't the last one for the night.
Eh, you did your duty.
Gary Johnson-Supporting SuperPAC Thinks Polls Show They Nearly Doubled Support for Johnson in a Maine District
As P.G. Wodhouse used to say, "It fails to grip."
Emily Ratajkowski Is Out to Prove That Women Can Be "Serious and Sexual"
I wasn't aware of that distinction at all. I thought men were just as self-conscious about wanting to seem un-self-conscious w.r.t. women.
Just the opposite of characters on Lost, who tried to be noticed trying not to be noticed.
People don't realize how brave Super Models like Emily Ratajkowski really are for speaking out like this.
So, so brave.
I label the man a narcissist too, honey.
It's known that men emit a cloud of privilege which protects them from any form of anxiety in social situations.
It's called "cologne".
Thanks, H.M. Now there's a job Americans would do.
Case in point
What were the figures in the 1st CD?
"The only way to disrupt the status quo," the Americans Deserve Better PAC concludes, "is with cost-effective, data-driven messages that are focused in areas also contested by the Republicans and Democrats. This will grow the Johnson/Weld ticket's electoral support, increase its national exposure and relevance..."
Here is the more accurate way of saying that...the only way to disrupt the status quo is money, from whence those ads come. Certainly when you are A third party. And money is speech, isn't it? At least since Citizens United it is. You think similar ads targeted like those above but done by Rs and Ds instead won't get similar results? They will And they will always outspend you. By a great margin.
But Citizens United was the cats meow, wasn't it?
Before Citizens United, the Libertarian Party had a fighting chance! Why can't you fanatics realize this?
Behold the derangement that passes for the mind of a proglodyte.
Only you would argue that a right isn't a right simply because your ideological opponents might do it better.
Johnson/Weld - Don't be a Purist!
Johnson/Weld - because Castle's party endorses statist stuff - *our* party doesn't do that, only our candidates do!
Wait! You're Castle! It all fits!
I'm fairly sure he's a Protestant.
Is there a difference?
This is someone dying while having an MRI scan. Before you die, your brain releases tons and tons of endorphins that make you feel a range of emotions. Tragically beautiful.?
Got a 403 forbidden upon clicking. That's probably how it ends anyway.