What Data Crunchers Did for Obama
Sophisticated politic microtargeting efforts are grouping us in surprising ways. For Obama, swing voters known as Barn Raisers proved pivotal 
Austin Cornelio
By Stephen Baker
About three minutes into his speech on Jan. 20, President Barack Obama spoke a word never before uttered in a Presidential inauguration oral communication: "data.". The word may hearty nerdy, and Obama used it in reference to indicators of economic and other crises. But it’s no exact overlapping the expression. rest its way into his remarks. The harnessing of data has been crucial to Obama’s rise to host.
Throughout the campaign, Obama and his team not only bested his Democratic and Republican rivals in social networking and fund-raising from one side the Internet, they in addition engaged in a data battle to locate possible wave voters. These efforts zeroed in on hotly contested states and congressional districts, where the shift of 1,000 or 2,000 voters could prove conclusive—meaning the focus was on only a tiny fraction of the voting public. But to find those swing voters, both sides hired tech wizards to sift through mountains of consumer and demographic details. They scrutinized nearly everyone they could find.
Ten "Tribes"One Democratic consultancy, Spotlight Analysis, took this field-sport to extraordinary lengths. Working on behalf of Democratic candidates, though not directly for the Obama campaign, Spotlight crunched neighborhood details, family sizes, and purchasing behavior. It then grouped nearly every American of voting age—175 million of us—into 10 "values" tribes. Fellow nation of uncivilized people members may not share the same kindred or religion, or fall into the same income bracket, but they have common feelings about issues that transcend political affairs: God, community, responsibility, and opportunity. Spotlight believes that one of these tribes, a morally guided (but not necessarily religious) grouping of more 14 the public voters—dubbed "Barn Raisers"—held the key to the argue between Obama and his Republican challenger, Arizona Senator John McCain.
The definition of a Barn Raiser cuts straight to the heart of what distinguishes political microtargeting from traditional civic groupings. Barn Raisers have power to be of any race, religion, or ethnic group. About 40% of Barn Raisers are Democrats, or rely that track, and 27% favor Republicans—though the group strongly supported President Bush in his 2004 reelection campaign. Barn Raisers are little less likely to have a college education than Spotlight’sitting other swing groups. They’re active in community organizations but are ambivalent about government. And they care more deeply than most people about "playing by the rules" and "agreement promises," to application Spotlight’s definitions.
With especial appeals to Barn Raisers in swing states, Spotlight’s clients, including the Service Employees International Union and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, hoped to hinge battleground states such as Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and Ohio. The data-based techniques they rustic to use, similar to those used to target supermarket shoppers and strange to say to hunt for terrorists, are turnery political affairs into the sophisticated calculations typically associated with Google (GOOG) and its ilk. In a fraction of a ensnare part with, computers sort us into segments and then calculate the in posse that each of us has to swing from red or purple to blue. For many, this signals the dehumanization of political affairs.
Others say political data mining helps better pinpoint individuals whose views and priorities may otherwise be overlooked. Consider a voter in, say, Richmond, Va. Republican and Democratic facts miners regard the number of children she has in school, they take note of her car, her Zip Code, her magazine subscriptions, and the balance on her mortgage. They might uniform find in her data that she has two cats and no dog. (Cat owners lean slightly for Democrats, dog owners tendency Republican.) In the end, they place her into a political tribe and draw conclusions with regard to the issues that matter to her. Is that so horrible?
