There’s no better conference on the intersection of technology and politics than the annual Personal Democracy Forum. This year looks to be the best yet as the conference expands to two days, and I’m psyched to see these leaders in politics and technology:

• Clay Shirky, author of the excellent book “Here Comes Everybody” and thought leader on social technology
• Vint Cert, the father of the Internet and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google
• Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist
• Larry Lessig, free culture champion and Change Congress founder
• Bloggers like Robert Scoble and Michael Arrington on the tech side, with Arianna Huffington, Ana Marie “Wonkette” Cox, Josh Marshall, Jane Hamsher, and Matt Stoller on the political side
• Current and former staffers and figures from 2008 presidential campaigns: Elizabeth Edwards, Joe Trippi (Edwards), Joe Rospars (Obama), Scott Goodstein (Obama), and many more

So plan on getting to NYC on June 23-24 and join me there. The early registration rate of $595 has been extended through June 4.

We’ve all seen microsites used in politics, from ImpeachGonzales.org last year to the recently launched CanWeAsk.com. Common to microsites are a clear message and clear call to action. ImpeachGonzales.org was a video and a petition to, well, impeach former AG Alberto Gonzalez, while CanWeAsk.com, an RNC effort playing off the “Yes We Can” slogan, is an effort to collect non-friendly user-generated questions for presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama.

But as I read Micah Sifry’s post from earlier today, I wondered how the virally-spreading rumor of Barack Obama’s Muslim roots could be countered. I then remembered something I saw over two years ago:

Is Lost a Repeat?

Lost fans were frustrated by the unpredictable schedule of repeat episodes airing during the regular TV season, and an inventive fan came up with this solution. Really simple, and really to the point. Even smaller than a microsite: a nanosite.

I thought the same concept can be applied to the Obama/Muslim issue. Alas, I’ve already been beaten to the punch by two anonymous domain purchasers. IsBarackObamaAMuslim.com was purchased in February, and IsBarackObamaMuslim.com was purchased several days ago. I prefer the latter, as the footnotes provide some… what’s the right word?... facts.

But there’s a change of medium to note here. The Obama/Muslim rumors are being spread by chain email, so a website isn’t the same turf. And boring truths are not nearly as viral as salacious rumors.

Back in 2004, the country was treated to the glorious JohnKerryIsADouchebagButImVotingForHimAnyway.com, a site which is sadly no longer active and not archived. I have a personal project at TheHug.com, but I wouldn’t consider it a success (yet).

Are there any other notable nanosites out there being used in politics?

The John McCain campaign has been pilloried time and time again when it comes to their email strategy. The emails are overly long, unclear, and designed as if they were a piece of direct mail. But, as a public service to all campaigns and organizations looking to execute solid online organzing, I thought it would be illustrative to point out exactly what makes an email successful.

Here’s an email sent on Monday from the Clinton campaign:

This email, my dear friends, is the work of a fine craftsman at the top of his/her game. The execution is flawless, and I let it sit in my inbox for several days just so that I could quickly come back to it and admire its brilliance. Advocacy emails simply don’t get better than this.

A Clear Ask For Action

Within three seconds of opening this email, it’s clear why you have received this email, and it’s clear what you’re being asked to do: The primaries in Oregon and Kentucky are tomorrow and you need to help the campaign by making calls. Simple and clear.

Structurally, there are six areas that catch the eye, and they all help hammer the message home:

1. The clickable graphic on the right
2. The three bolded lines, sprinkled evenly throughout the text
3. The two lines of links, each standing by itself in its own paragraph

All six areas emphasize calling Oregon and Kentucky. They ask nothing more, nothing less. If a person reading this was ever going to make calls for Clinton, this email would have gotten them to do so.

Full Use of Screen Real Estate

The software, devices, and websites we use to read our email come in all shapes and sizes. And because of that, considerations have to be made for viewing window size when formatting an email. While many tech-savvy users have adopted Gmail as the tool of their choice, which provides plenty of vertical screen real estate, the reality is that most email gets read in the smaller “preview” windows found in Microsoft Outlook, Outlook Express, and the like.

The email as formatted above, with the clickable graphic on top and the links at the middle and bottom, guarantee that the readers will always have a target to click on, no matter how small their reading window is and no matter what part of the email they’re reading. And clicks are good, because they translate into action.

Simple Guidelines Backed by Empirical Data

So some simple rules to live by:

• Choose a clear message and a clear action. If you can’t keep it simple, don’t send the email.
• Limit messages to 5 to 7 paragraphs.
• A clickable rectangular graphic aligned to the right of the opening paragraphs will always get the most clicks.
• Do not embed links in a larger paragraph. Allow them to stand alone with whitespace above and below.
• Use formatting like bold, underline, and italics sparingly, and only to drive the main point.

These best practices weren’t pulled from the sky. They weren’t determined by gut instincts, and certainly not by direct mail specialists. Instead, they were culled from years of empirical testing and hard data.

For example in the technique known as A/B testing, one batch of email would be sent without a top right graphic, and another batch would be sent with it included. When the batch with the graphic was clicked on more often, the best practice was established.

The funny thing is, none of this is particularly new. The Left had established these practices by 2004, from the combined experiences of MoveOn.org, the Dean campaign, and the Kerry campaign. Campaigns and organizations on both sides should be actively testing all their messages even today, gathering more data that should continue to refine and maybe even redefine best practices. Please don’t send emails that look like this.

Everyone’s favorite liberty-loving Republican, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, kinda-sorta admitted defeat in the Republican presidential nomination back on March 6. Despite coming up well short at the polls, Paul’s campaign left quite a mark when it came to the use of technology in politics, particularly with organic, supporter-driven efforts like RonPaulGraphs.com, a site which published detailed graphs and charts of the campaign’s fundraising in a radically transparent manner, and Ron Paul Moneybombs, day-long orgies of online fundraising.

So now that McCain is the presumptive Republican nominee, where will Paul supporters direct their energy? If former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr has any say in the matter, he hopes that Paul supporters flock to his candidacy. Barr, who served in Congress as a Republican but is now registered with the Libertarian Party, today formally announced his entry into the Presidential race, and as the only candidate for his party’s nomination who has actually won a significant election, will likely be the Libertarian candidate this fall. Can Barr harness the energy from the Paul campaign and mount a disruptive third-party run? Or is he doomed to receiving a miniscule portion of the popular vote, as has been the case with past Libertarian presidential candidates?

Laying the Groundwork

Barr’s website, BobBarr2008.com has a similar look and feel to RonPaul2008.com, complete with live-updating fundraising statistics on the front page. This is no coincidence, as Barr’s campaign has hired the same web firm that Ron Paul’s campaign used.

On the ideological front, Ron Paul and Bob Barr share very similar views on the major issues:

• After voting for the USA PATRIOT Act while in Congress, Barr is now a vehement opponent of it.
• Barr is strongly against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, and touts his authorship of the Defense of Marriage Action, which allows states to ban or allow gay marriage as they wish.
• A rejection of pre-emptive war and a commitment to a foreign policy of non-intervention.
• Working in coordination with the ACLU, Barr has been a consistent opponent of the Bush Administration’s anti-terrorism domestic surveillance activities.

Potential Roadblocks

But the path for Barr to become the next Ron Paul isn’t as clear as it may seem. First, the Ron Paul campaign is a memory too fresh in many supporters’ minds. In fact, as Patrick Ruffini notes, Paul supporters are dominating local Republican delegate selection meetings, electing themselves as delegates to go to this September’s national convention in Minneapolis. In other words, Paul supporters are still backing their guy, only this time they’re doing it to secure Paul a prime time speaking slot at the Republican National Convention. Several pro-Paul bloggers are also wary of the idea of backing Barr as a Libertarian Party candidate because it would undercut their efforts to transform the Republican Party.

While it’s true that Barr shares many of the same views as Paul, he so far has received very little traction in the niche demographic that propelled Paul’s candidacy: wealthy white males working in information technology. Members of Digg, the social news site essential to the viral growth of Ron Paul’s campaign, seem not to be at all thrilled at Barr’s candidacy. As of May 11, only one news story about Barr was promoted to the front page, posted over a year ago and about medical marijuana. Recently submitted stories about Barr have been “dugg” very little.

Mounting a Strong Campaign

It’s unlikely that Barr will be able to replicate the successes of Ron Paul without a strong endorsement from Paul and a passing-of-the-torch moment. Paul supporters remain deeply loyal to their candidate, and seem gung ho in their efforts to transform the Republican Party through aggressive (some say annoying) means.

But to wage a technologically savvy, modern campaign, the candidate and his senior staff must be committed to doing so. But this morning, Barr chose to formally announce his candidacy at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington. The press conference was not covered live on any cable television outlets, and the only streaming video was available via CNN.com. One wonders why Barr didn’t choose to announce via a web video, as Obama, Clinton, and Thompson all did in 2007. Barr had little excuse not to do so, as he already has a YouTube Channel.

Barr does have the opportunity to mount the most serious third party run since the days of Ross Perot. Since 1984, the Libertarian presidential candidate has not done better than 0.5% in the national popular vote. But today, the libertarian message resonates with enough Americans to be politically viable, and it will be up to the Barr campaign and the Libertarian Party to take advantage of what Ron Paul began.

A new meme is spreading around the Tubes, and it’s a good one. Clay Shirky, part sociologist and part technologist, has coined the term “Cognitive Surplus”. Shirky, the author of the must-read Here Comes Everybody, gave a talk the other week on the topic, and his own words best explain the concept:

The implications of this idea in the political arena are already becoming apparent. Uber-blogger Chris Bowers has been writing on OpenLeft on this very concept. Recent history proves Shirky’s point: In 2003, Howard Dean supporters who rallied around the candidate’s fierce opposition to the Iraq War used their Cognitive Surplus to organize themselves on Meetup.com, create (along with Clark supporters) the Netroots, and donate an unprecedented amount of dollars and volunteer hours. Between 2004 and 2006, many of those supporters turned to local politics, helping run the campaigns of down-ballot candidates, and in some cases, running for office themselves. And of course in 2007 and 2008, the campaigns of Barack Obama on the left and Ron Paul on the right have harnessed an untapped Cognitive Surplus to awaken the political consciousness of huge swaths of the citizenry.

The pattern is clear: More Americans are taking a proactive role in their politics, and social technologies are helping them do it. As Shirky talks about above, we are producing and sharing, not just consuming.

Since you’re reading this blog, none of this is completely new to you. But the Washington establishment seems clueless to this growing trend. A recent Bloomberg News article, titled Obama’s Gigantic Database May Make Him Party’s Power Broker, illustrates how stuck in the last century the Beltway consulting class appears to be.

The article discusses the massive supporter list the Obama campaign has built for itself. To be sure, the list is unprecedented. The membership of My.BarackObama.com is pegged at an astonishing 800,000, which would translate into a broader email list of at least 8 million. But throughout the article, the Obama list is emphasized to be a mere vehicle for fundraising. An ATM machine.

McIntyre, a Republican and former chief national spokesman for the National Rifle Association, said the data entered by 800,000 names on mybarakobama.com[sic] may be worth as much as $200 million.

[...]

Even as Obama’s interactive databases prove to be efficient ways to energize volunteers, their ability to raise large amounts of money may outlast the current campaign, said Tad Devine, an independent media consultant.

“That’s really what we are talking about here,” said Devine, a former strategist for Democrat John Kerry’s 2004 presidential bid. “We are talking about a fundraising network that will far surpass the dominance that the Republicans held in the ‘80s and even in to the ‘90s.”

No, that’s not what we’re talking about, actually. The citizen is no longer a mere consumer. What we’re talking about is a social network (a real-world one) whose power is rooted in its ability to take action. Obama has built a network that knows how to knock on doors, make phone calls, drive people to the polls, and win elections. Via My.BarackObama.com, the campaign has an even better type of data than consumer data: producer data. The campaign knows who has set up groups and events, who’s been making phone calls, who goes to other states to canvass, who’s signed up for voter registration drives, etc.

Just as a four year old child expects all media to be interactive, the American people are beginning to expect politics to be hands-on. Civic duty is no longer confined to casting a ballot on Election Day, or cutting a check after receiving a piece of direct mail. Political activism is no longer the domain of a few die-hard (and kind of weird) party activists and political junkies. As the Obama campaign has proven, it’s something within the grasp of all Americans, because with the help of social technologies political activism can now be on our own terms. Here comes everybody, indeed.