Adam - hoe do we reach the chairs of the DNC etc to tell them to stop using these spam firms & tactics ? These firms & tactics are a disaster for the party . All they do is turn Democratic donors off donating. With all the rest of the troubles the Dem party has , the least should be that we are destroying our donor base through deceptive & self enrichment tactics!
Thank you! & I just submitted my comment & question asking if they will cut off all contact with the Mothership & its related PACs ? Plus similar’con’ fundraising orgs ! Really appreciate your help!
Adam, I really appreciate your analysis and raising this problem that we as citizens ( as well as we as political scientists) all feel and experience every day. My question to those who study this is: did the Democrats just copy the Republican playbook on this, or have both parties been doing it for a long (and similar) time period? I noticed it in the GOP especially starting with Trump 1.0 when I got on some mailing lists and only a bit later from the Dems whose lists I had long been on, especially as they started selling their donor lists to every single campaign around the country, it now seems. I entirely agree with calling out the Dems to do something about this, but in terms of the hyperbolic, emotional scamming and grifting, I do see it in both parties and just wondering who first developed this tactic. (For campaign speech and rhetoric we have better data and information and can trace a lot to the 1990 Gingrich memo on Language.)
I think in general this conversation should be less about a singular uniquely evil entity/malevolent actor or collection of bad actors and more about how to solve a Tragedy of the Commons when it comes to digital fundraising.
This is hardly an issue specific to Mothership, DCCC, or any other national entity (they're just the most visible) and it is more a reflection on decreasing net return for digital-first fundraising organizations more broadly.
Yes it's helpful to identify the most visible and egregious examples of an issue, but the conversation needs to move forward from 'why haven't we heard from {insert organization here} about this?' and more into a positive creative space where we can offer an alternative model of digital fundraising or create incentives as an industry that helps entities act in the best interest of tending the overall donor 'garden' so to speak for long-term engagement and healthier Democratic branding and marketing.
Urgency is always what drives clicks and for individual entities and individual consultants (who move on after election cycles, have multiple clients, and are often compensated on commission) their hand is forced as far as making sure they're getting ROI on their actions. Focusing on the tactics as a uniquely negative aspect of a bad actor as opposed to incentive structures that are in some respects unchangeable (you can't tell a candidate to cool it on their final digital push before November), misses the big picture.
That said, these problems have also existed for several decades at this point (urgent puffery emails from the DCCC has been a meme even among the apolitical layperson since the early 2000s as has been pointed out in your original article) and political fundraising has generally ebbed and flowed (we'd in an ebb right now).
I think this is primarily an efficacy and donor fatigue problem across the industry causing revenue shortfalls and national organizations trying to adapt their spending to survive it (though not discounting the structural issues or what Mothership is doing on the outreach side, which seems to be in bad faith to some extent).
This is the first real period of scarcity in digital fundraising since digital fundraising matured as an industry and I'd attribute the Mothership issue more to lowering revenue than attempts to scam.
2016-17 saw absolutely monumental returns in the digital space, and then COVID and getting a bigger slice of folks' attention in lockdown helped to sustain that return. Many organizations then found in the 2022 and 2024 cycles that their expected revenue was far lower than their programming budget and the loser in balancing the sheets was the programming since staff overhead is more inflexible in the short-term.
There are several major entities that are largely digital-first or rely heavily on digital fundraising that have completely folded post November 2024, most notably New Working Majority.
It's a combination of low enthusiasm and low trust in progressive/democratic branded entities, but we're also seeing the fingers on the scales against earned media impressions on socials while email and text vendors getting better and better at filtering spam (yes it's for a valid cause, but we're indiscernable from spam to the end user because we are, fundamentally, spam).
I don't necessarily have a bag of solutions at hand, but the problem is much less about Mothership in my opinion and much more about the entire digital interaction space and digital fundraising best practices failing to endure contextual change as the economy and social/cultural space digests the November election and Trump's second term.
I basically gave up donating to any Democrat politicians after Act Blue changed their rules so that even US citizens traveling abroad can't donate through Act Blue. I am a CA voter based in Germany, with a US address, a US bank account and a US credit card -- and I still can't donate any more. I reached out to a few politicians I like (like AOC and Bernie Sanders) explaining the situation, and none of them ever responded -- so I just stopped donating. And I honestly am not sure contacting the DNC or any of them will change much -- they are too far gone in the corporate vortex. I now give what small money donations I can to independent media sources like this one. Thx to the comment on how to check if an org is legit before donating!
Thanks for taking the time to document what you found with Mothership. Also, thanks for taking the time while away to update us with additional information. Maybe us readers can stir things up with DCCC and DSCC!
I can't thank you enough for your vital work! While I can't afford to pledge, please know you are restoring my faith that corruption wherever it originates will be unearthed and PLEASE keep up this important work!
Bonnie, I have written and written and no one is picking up the mantel for this. I so appreciate Adam's work. While I receive 3-4 requests a day I have stopped giving. If I wrote to you ( let's say Kelly or Gallego, Mayes) and you could not respond I am done...and that means, horrors the Vet running against Boebart in Co ( I may be wrong on the specifics here<:). IT's sad. Keep the pressure on and I will keep posting. It would seem the banks that have to clear the double hacking from insiders might be a pressure point. They are having to do a lot of work to clear this dishonesty.
Adam - hoe do we reach the chairs of the DNC etc to tell them to stop using these spam firms & tactics ? These firms & tactics are a disaster for the party . All they do is turn Democratic donors off donating. With all the rest of the troubles the Dem party has , the least should be that we are destroying our donor base through deceptive & self enrichment tactics!
here is a link to send a comment to DNC https://democrats.org/contact-us/
Thank you! & I just submitted my comment & question asking if they will cut off all contact with the Mothership & its related PACs ? Plus similar’con’ fundraising orgs ! Really appreciate your help!
Adam, I really appreciate your analysis and raising this problem that we as citizens ( as well as we as political scientists) all feel and experience every day. My question to those who study this is: did the Democrats just copy the Republican playbook on this, or have both parties been doing it for a long (and similar) time period? I noticed it in the GOP especially starting with Trump 1.0 when I got on some mailing lists and only a bit later from the Dems whose lists I had long been on, especially as they started selling their donor lists to every single campaign around the country, it now seems. I entirely agree with calling out the Dems to do something about this, but in terms of the hyperbolic, emotional scamming and grifting, I do see it in both parties and just wondering who first developed this tactic. (For campaign speech and rhetoric we have better data and information and can trace a lot to the 1990 Gingrich memo on Language.)
Just to repeat these in a place where they're less likely to get buried:
https://ballotpedia.org
https://www.fec.gov/
https://www.opensecrets.org/
I'm definitely not perfect about it, but I generally check these sites before donating.
I think in general this conversation should be less about a singular uniquely evil entity/malevolent actor or collection of bad actors and more about how to solve a Tragedy of the Commons when it comes to digital fundraising.
This is hardly an issue specific to Mothership, DCCC, or any other national entity (they're just the most visible) and it is more a reflection on decreasing net return for digital-first fundraising organizations more broadly.
Yes it's helpful to identify the most visible and egregious examples of an issue, but the conversation needs to move forward from 'why haven't we heard from {insert organization here} about this?' and more into a positive creative space where we can offer an alternative model of digital fundraising or create incentives as an industry that helps entities act in the best interest of tending the overall donor 'garden' so to speak for long-term engagement and healthier Democratic branding and marketing.
Urgency is always what drives clicks and for individual entities and individual consultants (who move on after election cycles, have multiple clients, and are often compensated on commission) their hand is forced as far as making sure they're getting ROI on their actions. Focusing on the tactics as a uniquely negative aspect of a bad actor as opposed to incentive structures that are in some respects unchangeable (you can't tell a candidate to cool it on their final digital push before November), misses the big picture.
That said, these problems have also existed for several decades at this point (urgent puffery emails from the DCCC has been a meme even among the apolitical layperson since the early 2000s as has been pointed out in your original article) and political fundraising has generally ebbed and flowed (we'd in an ebb right now).
I think this is primarily an efficacy and donor fatigue problem across the industry causing revenue shortfalls and national organizations trying to adapt their spending to survive it (though not discounting the structural issues or what Mothership is doing on the outreach side, which seems to be in bad faith to some extent).
This is the first real period of scarcity in digital fundraising since digital fundraising matured as an industry and I'd attribute the Mothership issue more to lowering revenue than attempts to scam.
2016-17 saw absolutely monumental returns in the digital space, and then COVID and getting a bigger slice of folks' attention in lockdown helped to sustain that return. Many organizations then found in the 2022 and 2024 cycles that their expected revenue was far lower than their programming budget and the loser in balancing the sheets was the programming since staff overhead is more inflexible in the short-term.
There are several major entities that are largely digital-first or rely heavily on digital fundraising that have completely folded post November 2024, most notably New Working Majority.
It's a combination of low enthusiasm and low trust in progressive/democratic branded entities, but we're also seeing the fingers on the scales against earned media impressions on socials while email and text vendors getting better and better at filtering spam (yes it's for a valid cause, but we're indiscernable from spam to the end user because we are, fundamentally, spam).
I don't necessarily have a bag of solutions at hand, but the problem is much less about Mothership in my opinion and much more about the entire digital interaction space and digital fundraising best practices failing to endure contextual change as the economy and social/cultural space digests the November election and Trump's second term.
I basically gave up donating to any Democrat politicians after Act Blue changed their rules so that even US citizens traveling abroad can't donate through Act Blue. I am a CA voter based in Germany, with a US address, a US bank account and a US credit card -- and I still can't donate any more. I reached out to a few politicians I like (like AOC and Bernie Sanders) explaining the situation, and none of them ever responded -- so I just stopped donating. And I honestly am not sure contacting the DNC or any of them will change much -- they are too far gone in the corporate vortex. I now give what small money donations I can to independent media sources like this one. Thx to the comment on how to check if an org is legit before donating!
Got one today from forwardblue.org, fake "survey". Add this one to the list.
Nothing can be done about any of the problems in this country until we drastically limit campaign spending.
As a reminder this has been a source of frustration for some of us in the pro-democracy movement for years.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/end-citizens-united-pac-campaign-finance-reform_n_570e5308e4b0ffa5937da409
Aloha Adam,
Thanks for taking the time to document what you found with Mothership. Also, thanks for taking the time while away to update us with additional information. Maybe us readers can stir things up with DCCC and DSCC!
Have a great vacation!
I can't thank you enough for your vital work! While I can't afford to pledge, please know you are restoring my faith that corruption wherever it originates will be unearthed and PLEASE keep up this important work!
Bonnie, I have written and written and no one is picking up the mantel for this. I so appreciate Adam's work. While I receive 3-4 requests a day I have stopped giving. If I wrote to you ( let's say Kelly or Gallego, Mayes) and you could not respond I am done...and that means, horrors the Vet running against Boebart in Co ( I may be wrong on the specifics here<:). IT's sad. Keep the pressure on and I will keep posting. It would seem the banks that have to clear the double hacking from insiders might be a pressure point. They are having to do a lot of work to clear this dishonesty.