Obama endorsements

[cos]

Yesterday, Barack Obama was endorsed by Ted Kennedy (video), and ... by xkcd. I wonder which one will end up mattering more?

Comments

[catness.livejournal.com]

An xkcd endorsement goes further with *you*.

How many actual voters read xkcd? ;)

[mizarchivist]

Not enough.

[cos]

Well, you know me, I think: I'm thinking systemically, and I observe many different parts of the process of campaigns and elections. Endorsements rarely change anyone's mind directly, but have great value for other reasons. The number of people who will actually decide to support Obama because Kennedy endorsed him, but who were not already leaning strongly that way and were not going to otherwise do so, is probably very very small - probably smaller than the number of people who read xkcd. xkcd is unusual in that it actually *does* change people's minds, but the direct readers are a pretty small number too.

Indirect effects are much more interesting, and on the surface, it'd seem that Kennedy is clearly more valuable. He can hold rallies and raise lots of money... but Obama already has great fundraising and the marginal value of adding another great fundraiser to his team doesn't necessarily make a big difference (though it might). Kennedy can speak at events in a way that motivates existing supporters, and he'll clearly do that with a lot of people, and that is valuable. But the main function of endorsements is message. For example, having Kennedy gives Obama better cred with the wing of the Democratic party that wants a strong liberal progressive and is wary of Obama for his conciliatory bridge-building style, without in any way requiring Obama to shift away from that style. That's big value.

xkcd's value is much harder to guage. It's an unusual endorsement in that it reaches a very particular kind of people with little outside visibility, carries a lot of weight with that set of people and will change a lot of people's minds, aligns with a particular set of issues & concerns, and includes among its target a high proportion of people who are very involved & active (geeks seem to donate money and volunteer on campaigns at higher levels than the general population, for example). Also, there are a relatively small number of people in this country who follow politics & government closely, and a much much larger number who use the former as opinion leaders, for guidance. People do this in sophisticated ways; for example, the know who to ask about particular issues, or how to take a friend's opinion in light of what they know about that friend's other opinions. Personally-known opinion leaders are part of a candidate's message even if the candidate has no contact with them or control over what they say.

At first it seemed to me obviously not as important as Kennedy, but the more I thought about it, the less confident I was. I haven't fully formed my ideas on the effects of this one, but partly I posted this to ask for ideas. (and partly just for fun)

[racheloxuke.livejournal.com]

Did you read xkcd's blog. Httpblag. Xkcd. Comobama/ Yes, Obama is a very good speaker. But that's the least important issue - it's what he stands for that matters.