Skip to comments.Paging Dr. Sauerberg
Posted on 07/21/2008 11:41:23 PM PDT by BillyBoy
Thursday, July 17, 2008 Paging Dr. Sauerberg
Paging Dr. Sauerberg
by Curt Mercadante
I have long held that underdog political campaigns should - must - put together an aggressive e-strategy.
That strategy starts with introducing yourself (or your candidate), reaching out and building your base support online during the primary, and then transitioning through the general election campaign to build your broad coalition online to win.
A comprehensive e-strategy can help you raise money, inexpensively recruit volunteers online (helping equalize your inability to pay for costly field staff) and communicate your message to tens of thousands at the click of a button.
If you can't afford to communicate sufficiently on TV, radio or through direct mail - why wouldn't you take advantage or your only remaining recourse to recruit, communicate and get out the vote?
Unfortunately, we have seen many underdog campaigns ditch online when their budget gets tight. Or, equally as bad, they do two random email fundraising appeals...and when that doesn't work...they give up on the e-campaign.
Enter Dr. Steve Sauerberg, Republican candidate for U.S. Senate here in the Prairie State.
Dr. Sauerberg's big news this week was that Durbin is only around 50% in a latest public opinion poll (Sauerberg is around 35%). I also read another story about Sauerberg's paltry fundraising totals (only about $1 million in the bank, as compared to Durbin's $8.2 million bank account).
Sauerberg has missed a prime opportunity to build an aggressive e-campaign to build buzz (should've started in tthe primary) about his campaign, recruit volunteers, maybe even raise some money and position himself for the General Election.
The state GOP worked its email list hard (notice I didn't say smart) for Sauerberg in the primary - blasting out numerous emails urging people to support and vote for him.
But a quick look at Sauerberg's Web site shows that, except for an updated news page, they have decided to go through the motions on the e-campaign. Sauerberg used the ILGOP's favorite firm - The Stoneridge Group - for his site (they also do the ILGOP's main site and The Railsplitter, as well as 8th District CD candidate Steve Greenberg's site.). They do nice looking sites. But after the site is developed - it's up to the campaign to make good use of it.
But a quick link to the campaign's YouTube page shows that no videos have been posted since January 9. Most of the videos posted here (and on the web site itself) are actually reposts of NRSC or RNC videos.
The Flickr page? There's a grand total of 2 - yes two - photos here. Are you kidding me?
How about some quick, down-and-dirty (and virtually free) digital videos from the campaign trail? How about some video testimonials from supporters around the state. Maybe take 'em and put them up on the Facebook page.
As for the Facebook page, I've been a "friend" of the campaign for several months, but according to a quick search on my gmail account, I've only received two Facebook updates from the campaign. And those were back in February. There are no updates on the Facebook page, and the most recent photo posted was from the doctor's December campaign announcement.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying an effective, aggressive e-campaign is going to put Sauerberg over the top. There's a good chance that Durbin - if, for some reason, he decided to spend all his money - could outspend him 10-to-1.
But if you're not going to have money for TV or radio...if you're not going to have money for mail or phones...then what is your strategy to get your message out and win?
For underdog, underfunded campaigns, I will argue that the last thing that should be cut is the e-campaign.
It just may be the only lifeboat that keeps your campaign close and, hey, if you do it right, it may catapult you to victory.
Grassroots. Earned Media. Paid Media. Fundraising. The e-campaign is the only tool you have that can accomplish all four of those campaign goals (if you do it right).
Cross-posted at Prairie State 2.0.
Sauerberg is a totally unknown obscure medical doctor running against Durbin during an election year with Illinois' own Barack Obama on top of the ticket (thus making it extremely difficult to "beat Durbin" even if the GOP had fielded a popular, credible political figure as his opponent), but some posters here seem desperate to work night and day trying to convince freepers to hitch themselves to Sauerberg's pathetic campaign. I wonder what their motivation is.
Sauerberg's "people" certainly have done a good job displining his supporters about their marching orders. Go on any pro-Sauerberg thread and see how much info the poster gives about Sauerberg. 99% of the information will just be a rehash telling conservatives what we already know about Durbin, following by a one-sentence mention that Dr. Sauerberg is "the Republican candidate against Durbin" and a link to his donation page. Sauerberg and his fan club seem desperate to avoid giving conservatives ANY information about their own candidate -- who he is, what he believes in, how he will govern if elected. If Sauerberg's staff gets any stricter with the 'he's not Dick Durbin' target message, Sauerberg would probably enter the U.S. Senate with a paper-bag over his head labeled "Durbin's Republican Opponent"
Perhaps they're so terrified about discussing Sauerberg's views because they know he's an pro-abortion, pro-gun control, gay-rights friendly empty suit RINO with zero qualifications. And we can't let THAT little detail become public on FR, can we?
Memo to Sauerberg & his fans:
Your "campaign" against Durbin is nonexistent and I am embarrassed you are our nominee.
Memo to freepers:
Sauerberg is a
Isn’t he the “environmental” candidate for Senate?
But according to Sauerberg's fan club here, there's nothing to see, move along. Just blindly donate to Sauerberg and he will magically "beat Durbin" -- even though his campaign is in total disarray.
I'd say we have alot of paid RNC shrills posting on FR.
Who’s the RINO ? Sounds to me like you want to see Durbin get re-elected...
If this guy wasn’t making “noise” then why did Durbin change his position on drilling ? Or Durbin start running fund raisers ? If you take a look at any of the candidates (including their websites)running against Dem Senate and House leadership few get any help from the national its not on their target. He’s making use of an issue Repub;licans can get solidly behind and the second phase is in my website http://www.theusmat.com
I agree with Bill. Sauerberg is a RINO. He’s pro-choice, pro-gun control, and pro-Hillarycare. Our primary had a candidate who was pro-life, pro-gun rights, anti-Hillarycare, and anti-illegal alien (Mike Psak), but the majority of the republican leaders endorsed Sauerberg.
Durbin has ALWAYS been opposed to drilling in ANWR and he's ALWAYS been holding fundraisers (ususally to give the money to fellow Chicago RATs as he never has much "opposition"), I don't know where you've been.
Most telling is that NONE of Sauerberg's primary opponents will endorse his candidacy. They spent monthes on the campaign trail and they know him best, and both are adament in saying Sauerberg is some sacrifical lamb put up by the state party who has NO chance at winning and is little more than Durbin-lite. What's the point of spending all that time and money running "against" Durbin if you've going to govern just like him? Following your logic, perhaps you think the Republicans who ran in the primary "want to see Durbin re-elected" too.
The fact is I'd LOVE to see a far left socialist blowhard like Durbin defeated but Sauerberg is a hack recruited by our state party chairman (who is "chums" with Durbin and whose daddy has repeated donated to Durbin... look up Andy McKenna online if you don't believe me). If Sauerberg wants to "beat" Durbin so badly why does he skip most invitations from conservative grassroot invitiations to speak and was scared to death of having to debate his opponents during the primary? You think a first time guy would WANT to get his face out in public as much as possible, but not Sauerberg. He just has his surrogants endlessly give the public the run around about his candidacy.
There's some pretty damning evidence that Sauerberg is simply a plant who was installed to GET Durbin re-elected, and if you'd read up on his campaign you'd see that.
Maybe they should run Oberweiss... now there’s a real winner.
But I think it goes without saying what whatever RINO the Illinois GOP recruits and proclaims is "electable" in a given election year isn't. Remember, the last time we had a WINNING Senate candiate, Peter Fitzgerald in 1998, the state GOP opposed him in the primary with their own "moderate" choice (Loleta Dickinson)
Looking back to 2006, I think Al Franken is going to be the Katherine Harris of 2008 and Steve Sauerberg is going to be the Jan Ting of 2008 (look how much time and money the Deleware GOP wasted to shove that RINO down the throats of GOP voters in the primary and then hype his non-existance "race" in November) Ting barely won the primary over a good conservative choice (Mike Protack) because the Delware GOP proped him up and kept insisting he was the only "serious" candiadte (as the IL GOP did for Sauerberg this Feb.) A bunch of gullible conservatives then rallied to "distingushed university professor and immigration expert Dr. Jan Ting" (immigration being the ONLY issue Ting had an actual position on) and predicted he would be an aggressive campaigner that would put Tom Carper on the ropes. Instead, Carper cruised to re-election. They threw their money down the toilet on that race when it could have gone to worthy candidates in tough races.
Interesting trivia: Defeated 2006 U.S. Senate candidate Jan Ting (who somehow managed to do WORSE than Alan Keyes) is now a campaigning for Obama... showing his true RINO colors.
It’s time to scuttle the ship of the IL GOP and let it sink.
You can see my original post on the matter here. Sauerberg seems to be carbon-copy of 2006’s Ting, right down to the “where he is?” factor whenever a conservative event is held in the state.
You can see my original post on the matter here. Sauerberg seems to be carbon-copy of 2006’s Ting, right down to the “where is he?” factor whenever a conservative event is held in the state.
Get over it ! Sour grapes ! Why ? Because the libs on on the wrong side of the issues...This is another election which this time is so important because if they take the exec as well as the legislative bodys we are in deep do-do..
You failed to mention that candidates name and an excellent candidate pulled from out of state to run after the Ryan debacle. Allan Keyes. Since you failed to mention his name were you also ashamed to ring door bells on his behalf ? I wasn’t.
You also fail to mention the shamefull inter nicine battle that went on and the treatment Keyes recieved by Judy Barr Topinka while she was party chair which despite this did a creditable job. Your doing the same thing.
If McCain can be turned around so can this guy, he ain’t perfect but he’s a hell of a lot closer to what we want than “Slicky Dick” Durbin. Pal don’t be a “nattering nabob of negativism”. If he causes Durbin to drop bucks (and he’s starting to do this and reach into deep Obama’s pockets) even if he doesn’t win it will help. Your attitude doesn’t.
Turban Durbin will win another term. It didn’t really matter who won the primary this year.
McCain is not a true conservative either but he's worked to EARN the support of conservative groups through his solid record on some conservative issues like the WOT, pro-family, pro-life, opposition to pork, etc. -- supporting conservatives 80% of the time. McCain doesn't "campaign on" abortion EITHER but if he's asked, he gives voters a STRAIGHT answer about where HE stands, instead of ducking the question and repeating endlessly "I'm running against Obama". I may not agree with McCain on alot of issues, but I know where he stands.
WHAT is the 80% of issues Sauerberg and I agree on? He won't say.
Sauerberg isn't causing Durbin to "drop buckets" at all and if you check how he's actually polling you'll find that Sauerberg is behind by about 40 points and would probably lose every township in Cook County if the election was held today. If you want to donate to a non-entity like Sauerberg that's your buisness, I will be supporting decent candidates in competative races around Illinois like Marty Ozinga for Congress and Anita Forte-Scott and David McAloon for State Rep. Your money and time would be much better served trying to help THEM out than a clueless RINO like Sauerberg. You might as well light $20 bills on fire, that would advance conservativism as much as donating to Sauerberg will.
If Sauerberg wants my support he can earn it. The fact it's been nearly a month since I inquired about his positions on THIS thread and his campaign has yet to respond to his "base" speaks volumes of what Sauerberg thinks of conservatives.
Bear in mind that DICK Durbin never campaigned as "I'm an ultra-socialist liberal blowhard who supports abortion on demand", he campaigned as a "middle of the road" centrist who refused to give details about how he would govern. In 1996, Durbin would assure pro-life voters that he was "personally opposed" to abortion and that he shared their concerns even though he's quitely admitted to reporters that he favored keeping Roe v. Wade on the books and would support abortion-on-demand judges. That's the EXACT same thing Sauerberg is doing 12 years later. Ah, the irony, Sauerberg is using the exact same stragedy as the guy he purports to be against. How is Sauerberg 2008 different from Durbin 1996?
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
With Obama on top of the ticket, you're probably right, but the question is whether he will win another term with 55% of the vote or 72% of the vote. With empty suit RINO Sauerberg as the nominee, the latter is looking ever more likely.
And I think the same point applied two years ago with Jan Ting in Deleware.
I voted for some guy named Psak cause he’s against tolls.
Because to date the Sauerberg campaign has refused to clarify key Republican Party plank positions; some of the folks who earlier this month hosted Sauergerg for Senate signs upon their lawns, have now taken them down.
The campaign response to calls and e-mails explaining the predicament I was in, is not reassuring. People are simply not going to call the Sauerberg headquarters to answer questions that I should know already know the answer to.
When canvassing door to door, one needs to know exactly where a candidate stands. The answer, “I not sure, you’ll have to call the office at 630-424-3490,” although honest; doesn’t do much for your both your personal credibility as well as that of the candidate’s.
Thank you for acknowledging what PhilCollins and I explained was the problem with the Sauerberg's campaign. As you can see, we have been dealing with the same problem for monthes and therefore cannot in good faith endorse Sauerberg. His campaign seems to deliberately avoid telling voters how he will govern in office.
Unfortunately, freepers like Maelstorm continue to post vanity after vanity thread trying to get misled freepers into beliving Sauerberg is a solid conservative, and that bothers me. Everytime freepers donate their time and money to a poor candidate like Sauerberg, they miss an opportunity to help a solid Reagan Republican who is in a competative race.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.