Republican practitioners are holding up Trump’s campaign as not just an example of effective media spending, but also grassroots outreach.
That’s a shift from pre-Election Day when some on the right had raised concern that grassroots outreach activities like canvassing were getting funneled through PACs or groups as opposed to coordinated party efforts.
But Mike Young, who was recently promoted to partner at FP1 Strategies, said practitioners going forward should look at the Trump-Vance campaign as a model for its effective canvassing program. In fact, he called it “the most sophisticated field program to date” for Republicans.
“They measured voter contacts by effectiveness rather than press releases,” Young told C&E. “We talked to the right voters with the right message to turn them out.
“The biggest thing that the Trump campaign realized early on was some folks are always going to vote, some for you, some against you, but it’s the folks who might vote or might not vote where that volunteer can have an impact and that staffer can have an impact turning them out.”
Last cycle, FP1 produced advertising for the pro-Trump Preserve America PAC and Elon Musk’s America PAC. Young, who has a background as a general consultant, said part of the innovation that the Trump-Vance camp employed was a boiled down walkbook.
“In the past, we’ve seen these hyper-dense walk books, but this time it was just talking to the people that we had to talk to. They really revolutionized the game in that respect by just focusing on the people where you get the most lift,” Young said.
“Because ultimately on every campaign you have two opponents. You have the other party, in this case, the Democrats, and you have time. And using that time effectively is something that the Trump campaign made the decision to do early.”
Now the Trump approach to field could be implemented by down-ballot Republican campaigns in the 2025 contests. “In the House seats in Northern Virginia where TV is relatively unaffordable compared to a house race and say, Roanoke, you are going to see a disproportionate amount spent on field versus television — just because that’s the best bang for your buck,” said Young.
That increased investment in field could continue into the midterms, he added.
“With more mid- and low-propensity voters in a midterm than in a presidential year, you’re going to see some more dollars spent on that.”
