The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson On The Ads That Actually Worked
The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson On The Ads That Actually WorkedPart 1 of our Q&AA with the veteran political strategist
Rick Wilson is a co-founder of conservative, anti-Trump PAC The Lincoln Project—that’s the first thing he mentions in his Twitter bio. The second thing, tellingly, is “ad guy.”
He made his name over the decades as a high-powered, highly effective Republican political strategist—who then famously broke from the GOP over its embrace of Trump—but when it comes right down to it, Wilson thinks of himself as a guy who makes ads for a living.
The Lincoln Project, of course, pumped out a lot of ads—with such finesse and success, under Wilson’s creative direction, that Ad Age has named the PAC one of 2020’s Marketers of the Year. In this in-depth conversation, Wilson (speaking by phone from his home in Tallahassee, Fla.) reveals some of the art and science behind TLP’s barrage of remarkable, agenda-setting, viral political ads.
Key excerpt:
We have very specific metrics in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, that we played a decisive role.
And what does that data show? Who did you shift?
We moved former Republicans, independents and current Republicans over what we call the Bannon Line. Steve Bannon, who is no fan of us, said, early in the process, if these guys can move 2% or 3% of the Republican vote, Trump is gonna lose. Well, from the metrics we’re showing, in the swing states, where we spent I would say 80% to 85% of our resources, we moved the Bannon Line, and crossover Republican votes, between 9% and 13%.
https://adage.com/article/campaign-trail/lincoln-projects-rick-wilson-ads-actually-worked/2300051
= new reply since forum marked as read
One is how far the Democratic party is willing to go in ads against Republicans, and their trepidation to offend anyone. And that by the time they check off all the PC boxes, there is nothing left but pablum.
The other is the willingness internally, within the party to acknowledge the progressive wing, which is growing, and has a lot of support outside of the Washington bubble. And the willingness to move away from appointing Department heads that are financially or otherwise connected to the industries that are affected by that department's decisions.
Such as Biden's senoir chief advisor, Cedric Richmond. How hard will he push for climate change policy?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/19/senior-biden-adviser-set-for-key-role-has-ties-to-oil-and-gas-climate-activists-warn
a Guardian investigation last year, revealing his extensive donations from oil, gas and chemical industries, as well as his perceived indifference to local air pollution issues.
Richmond’s congressional district, which encompasses the city of New Orleans and a number of highly polluted communities along the Mississippi River, is home to seven of the 10 most air-polluted census tracts in America, according to EPA data. This is largely due to the continued proliferation of oil and gas refineries and petrochemical plants.
................
The Sunrise Movement, a youth-led climate group that pushed Biden to intensify his climate platform, called Richmond’s hire a “betrayal”.
“Today feels like a betrayal, because one of President-elect Biden’s very first hires for his new administration has taken more donations from the fossil fuel industry during his congressional career than nearly any other Democrat, cozied up to big oil and gas, and stayed silent and ignored meeting with organizations in his own community while they suffered from toxic pollution and sea-level rise,” said Sunrise’s executive director, Varshini Prakash.
But like I said, that is for another thread.
....with just about everyone in our "tent". People have to realize that NO one is perfect, not even me! 
As for that fossil fuel criticism, contributors are categorized for the industry they work in (I agree, the subject for another discussion) but people from all sorts of occupations within the "fossil fuel industry" are lumped together into one big bucket. That could include:
Clerical workers
Book keepers
Maintenance workers
Oil rig workers
Cleaning workers
Cafeteria workers
Auto repair workers
Service station workers
Truck Drivers
Etc.
If they pump gas at their local gas station and indicate that in their form that accompanies their contributions, they're lumped into the "fossil fuel industry".
Cedric Richmond is the (ONLY) Democratic Representative from Louisiana. Their economy relies on the "fossil fuel" industry, and no doubt the huge majority of his contributions come from every day workers who happen to work for Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc. in Louisiana.
That means we must listen to each other, and know that for the most part we all want much the same thing, even if we have different opinions on how or how fast, we should try and get there.
Since you went there.....I'm not perfect either. 
I would say that there is a vast difference between a politician accepting huge donations from the fossil fuel industry, vs. some truck driver that gets a two week pay check from them. The politician has more of a choice, and has much more power.
But I take your point that he still has to answer to all those menial workers who may lose their employment if refineries are shut down, or even if its just new regulations, the companies will make sure the local papers make a stink about it, and they will always say it threatens workers (because they get layed off if there are not enough profits). So he has to be careful.
If Republicans would share the responsibility for a change to be the "bad parent" it would sure help. No help in fighting global climate change, telling industry they have to clean up, just like no help with fighting COVID by telling citizens they must wear masks. No help with discriminatory justice, telling the cops more money is going to community relations and less towards military weaponry. No help with even the most mild gun regulations. They get to always be the lax parent that says its okay to have that candy bar right before supper.....just don't tell mom. And I can see why that would be appealing to some, especially the selfish, already entitled lot.
The analysis (I call it that loosely) ignored all ad buys other than online advertising. Meaning, it's not analysis at all... merely another editorial predicated on incomplete data.
'Huh, what?' 
Goodness gracious.
just Exposed trump for the Hell Monster he is.