website statistics



Rightroots, Big Red Tent and Slatecard: An Assessment

Logos for Slatecard, Rightroots and Big Red Tent

Online fundraising startups are a longstanding interest of Blog P.I. In our year and a half, we’ve devoted more than a few posts to the subject, including the progressive, Democrat-supporting ActBlue, the conservative, Republican-aligned newcomer ABC PAC/Rightroots, attendant security issues and flawed coverage often (but not exclusively) in the Washington Post. The last time I wrote about it, Rightroots had relaunched, and two similar Republican fundraising startups — Big Red Tent and Slatecard — were announced and on the way shortly.

Now, all three have been up for more than a month, which I think is enough time to make an early comparative assessment.

For those playing at home: Rightroots is a reboot of the ABC PAC/Rightroots slate that saw a trial run fairly late in the 2006 cycle, controlled by McCain adviser Becki Donatelli, former Giuliani Patrick Ruffini and Mike Turk, an outside adviser to the Thompson campaign. Big Red Tent is an outside-the-beltway venture by a pair of Austin, Texas web consultants Ryan Gravatt and Brad Jackson. Slatecard is the brainchild primarily of ubiquitous DC Internet guy David All and web developer Sendhil Panchadsaram (who strangely has no website that I can find).

Last weekend, I signed up for each one and made some nominal contributions. Since then, I’ve continued poking and prodding. I thought about putting together an elaborate chart comparing their features side-by-side. Perhaps in a future post I will, but for now, but I don’t think that gives as clear a picture of what I thought about them. Instead, this post collects my observations, with screen captures. It’s a long one, so I’ve tucked the rest of this post below the fold. Follow me…

I should preface all of this with a caveat: These observations are simply what I found when I visited over the past week. It’s possible there are oversights in my summary, and if there are I will update this post. In true Mystery Shopper style, I didn’t discuss my testing process with any of those involved, so this should not be taken as a fully reported piece. There are probably good explanations for many of the problems I encountered, and if they are given, I will gladly link to them in an update.

Choosing a candidate to receive my small donations was not difficult: I am not only providing outside counsel to the Fred Thompson campaign through my employer, New Media Strategies, but I am also a FDT supporter. Thompson’s consistent federalist philosophy being a large component of my enthusiasm about his candidacy, where I could, I termed my group or slate “The Frederalist Society.”

With that out of the way, here are my thoughts on each in turn, followed by a conclusion. As always, YMMV.

· · ·

Rightroots Logo

RIGHTROOTS

Because Rightroots is the oldest, arguably best-known and first to go live (again) this summer, that’s where I started:

  • The website is very simple, and not difficult to navigate. From the main page, one can click through to “Candidates & Races” or perform a search, enter the amount of money you want to donate and proceed to its Amazon.com-style checkout.
  • Rightroots includes a link to the candidates’ homepage, which is nice, but that’s about it for any information about the candidates. One pretty much has to know who they are supporting before they get there.
  • Using Rightroots, I donated $5 to Friends of Fred Thompson. This went fairly smoothly, up to the point where I had to enter a credit card. The confirmation number on the back of my card has just three digits, while the form demanded exactly four. So I put a zero in front of the digits, and that did the trick. It would have been nice if it would recognize the different security systems for each of the major cards.
  • The front page of Rightroots also lists “hot slates” (groupings of candidates) but it doesn’t list figures for how much each have raised. These slates were evidently compiled by Rightroots itself, and so does not answer one of my main criticisms from last year — that it does not allow for users to compile and promote their own slates. I was told this feature would be included next time, but for whatever reason, it didn’t happen. Consequently, this was also the one site where I was unable to set up my “Frederalist Society” slate.
  • Now, the selections for some of these slates make good sense — “100% No Earmarks” is described on that page as:
    Honoring House Republicans with a perfect 100% voting record against pork barrel earmarks in the 110th Congress, as recently scored by the Club for Growth.
    Nice. On the other hand, one slate merely collects all of the Republican presidential contenders — well, except for Alan Keyes; I doubt that bothers you. But I also doubt very many people want to donate to all of the White House candidates.
  • There is a “Donate All” button for each slate, but it’s hidden at the bottom, underneath the last candidate’s picture — it is not flush with the other, similarly-designed donation buttons.
  • More nitpicks — Rightroots’ poll, promoted on the front page, is out of service. Try voting, and you get this:
    An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.
    The good news is, the error message goes on to detail instructions for fixing the error. I don’t do code, but if I could get terminal access, even I could probably take care of that. Also, there is no button to view the results without voting.
  • Along the same lines, I also got this certificate warning at one point:

  • Rightroots Certificate Warning

  • But I really dig the link to the FEC query for Rightroots’ own reports. The others should follow this example.
  • I gotta give Rightroots this: It is back. The website languished after the November ‘06 midterms, which I complained about in January, drawing strong objections from some of those involved. I wasn’t sure that it would actually return, but it certainly has done that.
  • Unfortunately, the follow-through seems to be half-hearted. Nothing has been added to the News section since August, and it’s been just over a month since anything was added to the blog (there are 5 posts total). It’s not clear to me why there are separate sections for “News” and “Blog.” This reminds me of typical campaign websites, which have had a press release section since the dawn of online politicking, then added blogs separately when they became the norm. Why not put everything in one place?
  • RightRoots is simple, but it’s too simple. The site lacks any compelling reason to use it. (Really, not even a widget?) There is nothing that makes the site sticky, or compels you to come back.

· · ·

Big Red Tent Logo

BIG RED TENT

Next, the one I know the least about:

  • My relative ignorance about Big Red Tent probably has something to do with the fact that its creators are based in Austin while the others are inside the Beltway. On the Internet, physical location is of much less of a consideration, but it still hasn’t received much coverage. It does have the official backing of RedState. But I haven’t seen them write about it since it first went up.
  • This site is quite a bit different than the other two, starting with the sea of white compared to the others’ dark backgrounds. I like that. I like the logo, too — it’s the best of the three, I think. Moreover, it also has the best name, communicating its intent to build one large, happy GOP family.
  • Otherwise the site is a chore to navigate. Why does Big Red Tent not have a “Sign up here” button on the front page? Why can’t I click on the logo to return to the homepage? Rightroots and Slatecard offer both.
  • When you go to sign up and give money, the form asks for your blog URL (sure, why not) as well as my IM screen name (hmm) and cell phone number (really?). There are not required, but it would be nice to know why they were asking. This reminds me of the website Radiohead built to sell their latest album, “In Rainbows.” Am I opting into future text messages? I know people who just elected to grab it off BitTorrent instead. I don’t think that quite works for Big Red Tent.
  • The reliance on Drupal means I was assigned a convoluted password, rather than being able to choose my own. Maybe I should write down every single password for every single site where I’ve created accounts, but I don’t. So this bugs me.
  • Big Red Tent is not free of bugs, either: I kept getting this when I was logged in:
    “The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.”
    Hitting “reload” did take care of the issue, but it happened a couple more times thereafter.
  • Alone among the three, Big Red Tent has a Twitter account. Great! Unfortunately, it hasn’t been updated in approaching two months:

    Big Red Tent’s Forgotten Twitter Account

    In that case, it’s fortunate that it isn’t featured on the main page (where it probably should be), where it would signal to all that there isn’t much activity here.
  • Big Red Tent offers a widget that I didn’t test, but looks attractive enough to place in my sidebar. However, it seems to be fairly wide, and I doubt it would fit in everyone’s sidebar. (But I certainly approve of the fact that the example widget shows Thompson at the top.)
  • Is Big Red Tent trying to do too much? Take for example BRT TV — a promised series of video interviews, hosted by Gravatt and Jackson’s Patriot Group colleague Jill Warren, that has no third video (really second, as the first is an introduction). Again, the lack of follow-through isn’t promising.
  • More questions: Why does signup page still ask if I want to be notified when they launch? Seems to me like they’ve already launched. Why can I click into Groups at the top of the page, but not individual Slates? Isn’t “Group” just another word for category from the blog? Where is the blog? The Field Report is helpful, but I could use more of it. I also can’t find the Stump Speeches feature now, so I can’t link to it.
  • Stump Speeches, Slates, Groups, Files, Contact lists, Guestbooks, Inboxes... help! I’m utterly lost. The confusing array of features reminds me of the late, unmourned HotSoup and its “issue loops.”
  • At least you can create your own slate. As Gravatt explained to Matt Lewis in a Town Hall interview this summer:
    We were faced with a decision: Who will the PAC support? We only liked two options. Option 1 is for Brad and I to decide, and Option 2 is to let others decide. We decided Option 2 would be best for a PAC with an online community.
    That’s right on, although it doesn’t seem that there is much of a community so far. That said, at least it offers the possibility, which Rightroots does not.
  • I concluded my experiment with Big Red Tent feeling both overwhelmed and underwhelmed. It’s great that there are several functions, but it seems there are several too many. Ultimately, I felt like maybe there was something going on that I just didn’t get.

· · ·

Slatecard Logo

SLATECARD

And the newest kid on the block:

  • Slatecard had both the longest incubation period and was the last to launch. This owes something to principal David All’s penchant for self-promotion, which may bug others (including some at Rightroots) but probably serves Slatecard well.
  • At Slatecard, the minimum donation is $10, unlike the others, where I was able to give just $5. Credit card processing fees do take a big bite out of proceeds, so I understand this, and there are probably very few who can afford to give no more than $9.99. On the upside, Slatecard alone lets you check a box to make your donation recurring monthly, if you’d like.
  • On the downside, unlike the other websites, my phone number was required. I would kind of like to know why.
  • Otherwise I had no problems signing up or making a donation. If there are bugs in the site, I didn’t encounter them. It was the smoothest experience I had at any of the three.
  • On the other hand, why isn’t there a search function on the website? The other two do offer this capability.
  • The front page of Slatecard shows you who’s “hot” — individual candidates and user-created slates — and includes dollar figures. That’s cool. The non-disclosure from the other sites I believe is a holdover from traditional campaigns, where if you’re not sucking up the dollars (and therefore sucking), you don’t want that public. All puts his cards on the table, and I respect that.
  • Speaking of which, All has led an e-mail drive to raise $75,000 overall in the first month since going live. He didn’t quite make it, but it was very close — and within days, the $75,000 goal was met.
  • Slatecard offers widgets, of course, and they are the best-designed of the bunch. In fact, if you’re on a Leopardized Mac, All has even explained how you can put one in your Dashboard. (Note: This is a Leopard feature; one could do this with Big Red Tent’s widget as well.)
  • True to All’s love of all things social networking, candidate pages link to each candidate’s official pages on MySpace, Facebook, Twitter and the like. Each is represented by the socnet’s logo, but you have to mouseover to know that they go anywhere. Slatecard links to candidate official sites as well, but it’s just a clip art image of a house — I got it the second time, but it would make a lot more sense if I could just see the URL as on Rightroots.
  • Because Slatecard has the best pages for individual candidates, it paradoxically left me wanting even more. For one thing, the biographical summaries are clearly copied from older versions of each candidate’s Wikipedia page. I can tell because I know Wikipedia style, but it doesn’t identify the source.
  • And these pages would be improved if you could add comments. Slatecard gives the impression of offering greater interactivity than the others, when in fact Big Red Tent so far allows for the most feedback.
  • Perhaps the most unique aspect of the site is the ability to add “issue badges” to candidates you support. As much as I’d like to sneer, “we don’t need no stinkin’ badges,” I dig this:

    Slatecard Candidate Issue Badges

    Naturally, I added the “Federalism” badge to Thompson’s page. It makes sense that you can only add a badge if you have donated to a particular candidate. However, I was only able to add one badge, and the site doesn’t say how many added the same badge as I did. It would also be nice if you could organize by badges and call up a list of all the candidates whom users think they describe. And would it be too difficult to let users create and upload their own?
  • This feature also includes idiosyncracies that are all All — one of the issue badges is for “Supports Net Neutrality,” a pet issue of All’s, and something only Mike Huckabee does. As Ruffini has noted separately, it’s essentially a lefty issue. Sure, you can add the “Opposes Net Neutrality” badge… but why is “Support” represented by Pac Man and “Oppose” is represented by Blinky (the red ghost villain)? An annoying editorial tic.
  • Slatecard “Defeat Radical Islam” Badge
  • Perhaps a more serious issue — the badge for “Defeat Radical Islam” puts the Universal No symbol over the Star and Crescent. The war against radical Islam is not, the last time I checked, a war against all Muslims. But that’s what the badge implies.
  • Most promisingly, the frequently updated blog announces milestones and upgrades, and has done so consistently since Slatecard launched.

· · ·

CONCLUSION

All of these sites are good enough — that is, they do what they advertise. It’s just a baseline, though these websites are still in their infancies (maybe some are toddlers). After tinkering around with each, Slatecard emerges the winner in my book so far. It’s by no means perfect, but it seems more thought-out than its rivals. It offers some unique features that are still fairly intuitive, and it appears to be the most active. While there hasn’t been much activity on either Rightroots or Big Red Tent since their respective launches, I presume both parties imagined the sites would be self-perpetuating and requiring minimal upkeep. At least Rightroots doesn’t promise much more than it delivers; Big Red Tent was more ambitious but almost feels abandoned.

Most of my judgments above are fairly subjective, so I did try to include one objective (if imperfect) metric — how often each site is linked to by third-party websites. Since BlogPulse advertises this capability (unlike IceRocket) I fed the URLs for each into their Trend Tool, selected feedback for the last three months, controlled for possible alternatives (ABCPAC.com and BigRedTent.com both redirect to their respective main sites), and here’s what I found:

BlogPulse measures Rightroots, Big Red Tent and Slatecard by inbound links

Rightroots has had the highest highs, Slatecard is buzzier now, but thanks to an apparent spike in attention last month, Rightroots is hanging in there. I presume that All’s frequent promotion for his project is propping up his numbers a bit. Big Red Tent was in the mix when it launched, but never received as much attention and has since dropped off significantly. (Note: I also fed the names of each site into BlogPulse; the Trend Tool returned more spikes for each, but the pattern was the same.)

Although there are many differences between the sites, they are not so far apart that, given an update or two, Rightroots or Big Red Tent couldn’t usurp Slatecard as the go-to site. But perhaps the most important thing about Slatecard is that, like ActBlue but unlike its Republican counterparts, it has already made the transition to being the primary fundraising mechanism of a political candidate. That’s VA-01 hopeful Kevin O’Neill. So far he’s raised nearly $65,000 — so All should definitely be thanking him for helping reach that $75,000 goal. Of course, candidate support is just what a site like this needs to gain credibility in Republican campaigns, and it’s no secret that brick-and-mortar GOP consultants are warier of using the web than their Democratic counterparts.

I salute each one of these websites, and their creators, for doing what they are doing. I hope they all continue to upgrade, borrow features from each other and compete for online GOP fundraising supremacy. And there’s no reason why there needs to be just one; perhaps they can all find a niche. I hope they do.

Disclosure: As previously noted, I’m with Fred, but that merely influenced the direction of my extraordinarily modest contributions. Otherwise, I do know some of those involved. I consider David All a friend, Patrick Ruffini a friendly acquaintance, and while I have not met Mike Turk in person, we do sometimes work together behind the scenes in the Thompson camp. None of them knew I was writing this post, and I doubt that any of them will be entirely happy with it.

4 Responses to “Rightroots, Big Red Tent and Slatecard: An Assessment”


  1. 1 David All

    Thanks for the thoughtful analysis Bill. It’s good to see you back in the blogging saddle. We no doubt have work to do to catch up to ActBlue but I’m glad to see that we’re all, collectively, working to give them a run for their money.

    I appreciate the good work of Rightroots and Big Red Tent. The guys behind those operations have some great ideas and impressive initiative. It is my hope that there’s room at the table for all three of these operations to help push and pull the GOP to the modern world.

    Three points I’d like to add with regard to Slatecard and then I’ll address your direct points:

      1. Take Control Candidate Portal


    As you correctly noted, we have been honored that several candidates are using Slatecard exclusively to transact their online donations. In fact, organically, we now have eight candidates seeking Federal office doing so.

    And with the launch of our candidate portal, Take Control, we expect many more as campaigns realize the benefits of using Slatecard over a political or commercial third-party vendor. Those benefits include superior technology, a smarter aggregation of real-time data, and a cost-effective pricing structure (no set-up, monthly, or per transaction fees — flat 4.5% of donation). We’re hopefully appealing to the commonsense side of the decision-making process.

    As you may know as a reader of our blog, the Take Control candidate portal (Version 1.0) gives campaigns real-time access to donor information which can be downloaded as a text or excel file and the ability to update their Slatecard directory profile. (And don’t blame us for that 120-word bio that we found on their website or Wikipedia entry — campaigns have the ability to control every single word on it — and someone from Fred’s campaign should do so!)

    With regard to the socnet icons linking to the profiles - I think that’s pretty easy to figure out for users. Or at least once they do figure it out, they’ll understand what the entire “Connect,” section is for. However, using the URL instead of the Home icon isn’t such a bad idea.

    But the point I’m trying to make here is that we have always given campaigns a way to update their profile, but we’re still going to do our best to fill in the gaps in the meantime. With over 420 candidates - it’s a long process.

      2. Transparency in Processing


    Transparency, openness, and honesty are guiding principles at Slatecard. That is why we are committed to being honest with the candidates that use us and the Slatecard community about what fees (flat 4.5%) are taken out of the credit card donation for processing and why that’s necessary.

      3. “Snacktivism” and the Ticker


    The third innovation which could increase activism is the notion of “Snacktivism,” the combination of “Snack” “Activism.” Because every action on Slatecard is registered in The Ticker, a stream of all action on the site and personalized for each Slatecard and candidate, we’re letting activists play the role of a voyeur. The activists can see who is popular on the site and read the messages that other candidates are sending to the candidates through the issue badges. By so doing, people can poke around the site freely, partaking in snack activism.

    I’ll be open with you. Since you’re not privy to a more accurate portrait of our website analytics, here’s the executive summary from our launch on October 8 to December 2.

    • 15,603 Visits
    • 66,065 Pageviews
    • 4.23 Pages/Visit
    • 47.34% Bounce Rate
    • 00:03:38 Avg. Time on Site
    • 64.74% % New Visits

    Innovations, like the Ticker, have led to some impressive early website stats. In fact, those metrics I’m proudest of include our decent bounce rate (which is the sexiest web metric ever), our ridiculously high pages/visit and nearly four minute average time spent on the site. These are clear indicators that while we still have some work to do, we’re heading in the right direction with our community.

    Remember — not a single dollar has been spent on advertising. This is all organic. Friends are telling friends. Bloggers are alerting their readers about Slatecard. The influentials are paying attention. Collectively, we’re starting to get it.

    But to be sure, we have work to do.

    You’ve noted some good advice in your blog post and we take advice seriously. A few answers and thoughts with regard to your direct points:

    • We ask for your phone number in case there is a problem with your donation. This information is also collected and passed along to the campaign in case they need to follow-up.
    • We’re working on search. It’s not a switch that we can simply flip but we’re getting to it. It’ll be there in the near future.
    • Re: Issue badges. Each issue badge is weighted with the dollar amount and number of individuals which have given that badge. As you look at a candidate’s profile, the issue badges read left to right with respect to their “value” by the community. This data is accessible by the campaign. Obviously, as has always been the plan, once we have more issue data for all candidates, we’ll launch our issue search function to find candidates who receive the issue badges that you care about.
    • Net Neutrality is an important, non-partisan issue. So far, only the “Supports Net Neutrality” badge has been given out to Republican candidates. As our community recommends, we’ll continue to add more Long Tail issues as we progress.
    • You make a good point about the “Defeat Radical Islam” badge. I sought outside advice from several bloggers I trust on the issue and that was the recommendation. It’s very difficult to visualize but I’m open to suggestions for swapping it out. We had another idea of using an AK-47 to represent it holding up the Islam flag. Thoughts?

    Thank you for noting our early success. As of today, we’ve raised $77,083.35 from 520 donations for Republican candidates and committees.

    But we’ll never rest on our laurels. We’ve got some neat things cooking in the oven that I need to tend to.

    Revolution,

    David All
    http://slatecard.com

  1. 1 Slatecard takes Best In Show at Blog, P.I
  2. 2 Blog P.I. Gets Results! Plus, More Thoughts on GOP Online Fundraising at Blog P.I.
  3. 3 e.politics: online advocacy tools & tactics » Quick Hits — December 11, 2007

Leave a Reply