Editor's note: This story has been updated. EVANSVILLE — It's a behemoth in the world of political fundraising, with "billions raised online since 2004," according to online platform ActBlue's website. And donations processed by ActBlue are the largest ...

Controversial online fundraising tool processes almost $80K into Evansville mayor's race

Online fundraising platform ActBlue is the largest source of campaign cash to Democrat Stephanie Terry's campaign for mayor of. But critics say ActBlue makes it too easy for contributors to hide their identities.

Controversial online fundraising platform pumps almost $80K into Evansville mayor's race

TRUMP JUDGE SAYS SHE CAN'T REMEMBER ACTBLUE CONTRIBUTION. It can be hard to keep up with all the legal actions against former President Donald Trump. It's not just the highest-profile cases; anti-Trump lawyers are swarming courtrooms across the country suing Trump or charging him with wrongdoing

Trump judge says she can't remember ActBlue contribution

Democratic and progressive donors raised $283 million on ActBlue in the third quarter of 2023, according to numbers first shared with The Messenger.

Democrats Raised $283 Million Through ActBlue In Third Quarter of 2023 (Exclusive)

Only about 21% of the quarter-million dollars raised in Evansville City Council races came from citizens. The rest came from PACs and other sources.

Evansville City Council campaigns are funded by PACs, corporations and anonymous donors

Fair Fight asks the court to find that True the Vote violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act and to bar the organization from future operations in Georgia.

Georgia election case goes to trial over mass voter challenge as cases mount

No one yet knows whether the campaign kitty Democrat Stephanie Terry raised through mid-October will be enough to secure victory in the race for mayor of. It's less than half of Republican Natalie Rascher's haul but several times what Libertarian Michael Daugherty brought in.

Here's who is giving Stephanie Terry money in race for Evansville mayor

No one yet knows whether the campaign kitty Democrat Stephanie Terry raised through mid-October will be enough to secure victory in the race for mayor of Evansville. It's less than half of Republican Natalie Rascher's haul but several times what Libertarian Michael Daugherty brought in.

There are also two occasions, April 19 and Aug. 8, when Jason Wells, the COO and president of CenterPoint, contributed $500 and $520.51 to Rascher. Christopher Foster, CenterPoint's executive vice president and CFO, also contributed $500.

CenterPoint appears in two of the three Evansville mayoral candidates' finance reports

ActBlue

actblue

Foreign Private Equity Hooked New England’s Fishing Industry: Here's How

Technical Interviews have evolved a lot since I transitioned from being a Software Engineer to an Engineering Manager. Particularly in the post-Covid era, there's been a greater emphasis on which I think is an important and welcome change. the person, Over the decade of interviewing hundreds of coders, I've also had the pleasure of working with various bootcamps, colleges, and hundreds of individual job seekers on LinkedIn. Across all the changes over the past years, across the various locations and mediums, something remained consistent throughout: The questions I get asked. With that in mind, I thought - why not make a FAQ from my perspective as a hiring manager? While this is my perspective, it's based on years of observation and supporting data. But that being said, advice is not fact. You may disagree with certain points, and that's OK. Opinions we disagree with allow us to better understand our own views. At best, I hope these responses help you land your dream job. At worst, I hope they'll help you form your own ideas on how to approach your career. In this part, I’ll focus on the questions I’ve received about . resumes On Managers You should have regularly scheduled one-on-ones. No less than once every 2 weeks, but ideally once a week. Regular meetings are crucial to tracking how are you doing so that you're set when performance reviews come around. How often should I be meeting with my manager? Don't have a status meeting. Don't give an update on the project you're working on. If your manager seems to mostly focus on whatever work is currently in flight, ask them if you can also discuss your overall performance. 1:1s are great times to talk about your objectives, how you're growing, where you think you're weakest, where you want to be in 6 months, 1 year, 3 years. It's also a good time to focus on areas that are normally outside your purview. Maybe you've identified an inefficiency - or maybe you've felt someone else isn't fully performing to the best of their ability. While you want the main focus of your 1:1 time to be with your manager, you also want to make sure that you're both on the same page come performance review time. If you're having candid conversations regularly there should be no surprises. Feel comfortable with even asking, very plainly: "How am I doing?" or "Is there something I should be doing that I've not been doing?" or "Where am I weakest? What should I focus on learning/growing?" These questions are direct, and some managers have a hard time with candid and honest criticisms, even if it's constructive and actively being requested. Don't be afraid to ask for it a few times. In the absence of a meaningful answer, give your own. "Well, it's great to hear you think so - but here's what I'm trying to learn on my own. Would love to get your thoughts..." What should we be talking about when we meet? Not all managers will be invested in your growth, and you don't need their investment in order to grow. Of course, when they are invested it can be really rewarding - but I've also learned and grown a lot under managers who only cared about results. It's ultimately a matter of your own perspective and how you apply yourself to different challenges. You'll always encounter people who are difficult. Learning to work with different styles will greatly help you. Case in point, I once had a manager who never provided feedback. Neither positive or negative. No criticisms, ever. Given that I was still pretty junior at the time, I needed the feedback but wasn't getting it. Eventually, I grew to realize how he communicated expectations and how he measured quality. I got there by mostly observing his interactions with others. He had the habit of casually talking around problems and ambiguously assigning ownership and accountability. But I clued into the fact that he wasn't talking about something - that generally meant he was good with it. I'm not defending the style, and it definitely was a struggle - but I couldn't easily change his style, nor could I easily change managers. Most importantly, after learning his style - it became as effective for me as anyone who was more explicit. Once you decode an illusion, it never fools you. As a result, years later I had a manager with a very similar style. That manager was largely disliked by the team - but yet, having cracked the code with a different manager, I was successful with them. That's one approach. Other managers are a lot more receptive to criticism and suggestions. Especially if they're early in their management careers, they are learning how to adjust from an individual contributor to a manager. They need help in learning that people are their priority. Managers can learn a lot about their role from their team members, and that's where the 1:1 can be really valuable. talks about how, to be a good manager, you should learn how to be managed. The sad truth is many managers learned poor management from their own managers. Learning to manage upwards by setting expectations and communicating openly will help you - whether it's with respect to your code, the product you're producing, your own growth. The more you relate it all back to relationships with people (and not ), the more successful you become. I'm not sure my manager is invested in my growth, or really knows me. What should I do? if The Manager's Path roles Being a manager comes with a lot of difficult responsibility. You're made aware of different challenges and risks, and you have to carefully navigate the space while being accessible and honest with your team. Full 100% transparency may sound ideal, but it can actually create more chaos than you may want. As a manager you learn about budgets, customer attrition, business challenges. Managing through those circumstances is a balancing act. Sharing too much (in the interest of transparency) can create chaos and uncertainty in the team's life. Sharing too little creates a sense of distrust. Saying*"Trust me, things are good..." "We're about to lose our highest paying client..."* doesn't help anyone. It's speculative, for one. Stating things in these terms creates chaos, stress, anxiety, and uncertainty. No one does their best work when they're hearing that kind of news. I feel like my manager isn't being very transparent. What should I do about that? also creates distrust. Hearing 2 weeks later, the manager may then update everyone with Or they may say: "Great news! They've signed on for 2 more years!" "I called it. Yeah, we lost them. This is going to impact our budget..." Managers who try to be fully transparent create distracting emotional roller coasters. A good manager will address lingering concerns or suspicions while doing their best to avoid introducing unnecessary chaos. They focus on facts and share them as they materialize. They'll avoid speculating or editorializing. If, in the earlier example, the team begins sensing something is going on a good manager will step in to say: "I know you've noticed the stress the sales team has had lately. They're dealing with frustrations from our largest customer - the current experience is slowing them down. We're working closely with them to get a better idea of how we can address those issues. You may see me get pulled into a few urgent calls - but to be clear, this is a priority for me, not for you all. I'll let you know if/when it ever needs your attention. For now, it's too high level to be worth distracting any of you guys with it." Someone on the team may ask: "Are they cancelling their contract with us?" And the manager would say: "That's too speculative. Right now, we're still looking to understand the gap in expectations. Keep building against the backlog because that work has been vetted and prioritized. If priorities shift, you'll be part of the conversation." Managers are often asked questions that require their speculation, and that can also be difficult. or or "Will we hire for more roles next year?" "Are we going to get the investment we need from the business?" "Will we have the budget for me to get a raise?" Good managers won't give concrete answers to those questions and will probably give you the answer you are expecting: "It depends." My recommendation is, if you're seeking transparency, ask questions that they can answer honestly and without speculation: " " or " " A safe follow-up could be " " How am I tracking against my yearly objectives? Will you be asking for additional headcount next year? What if we don't get the additional headcount? This last question isn't asking your manager to speculate; it's asking them to share their contingency plan. First off, do some research. It's often true that job-hopping will also increase your salary faster than staying at the same place - but it can also damage your reputation if you hop around too frequently. A lot of companies have a 3-6 month ramp up. If you leave shortly after a year, or even at the national average of 18-24 months, your contribution will be pretty minimal. Leaving too soon means it's harder to share our outcomes and impacts on your resume. You're not giving yourself enough time to be successful - and eventually the hopping will catch up to you. So, do some research. Find out what you could make if you were to leave, but also find out what you should be making if you stay. It could be less - but it shouldn't be below the average of what people make at your level. Next, track your work and progress over the year. Start at the beginning of the year - don't wait until the end of the year to quickly summarize it all. Instead, keep a running log of your "wins" and contributions, and use your 1:1s & quarterly check-ins to talk through those and show your progression. It's good to be aware: many managers suffer from recency bias when doing annual reviews. If you had a strong first half of the year, but then later slowed down, they'll remember the slow down. On the flip side, if you were lazy in the first part of the year but really applied yourself in the later half, they'll likely forget your laziness. Don't track your progression in a vacuum. Keep your manager informed and involved so you don't unload a long list of wins at year's end. Instead, go into 1:1s and mention a recent accomplishment. Ask them to break down for you what you could have done better, if they believe you can take on a larger challenge, etc. Make them a part of the discussion. The easiest raises I've given as a manager is when all the work was done for me. I didn't feel like I had to advocate for someone out of the blue. Instead, I could be talking about someone's progression on my own 1:1s. I could be prepping my own manager for the inevitable ask: How should I ask for a raise? (Incidentally, if you're worried about handling attrition, you should check out my primer .) on Systems Debt (That being said, I wouldn't advise being lazy if you're going to ask for a raise...) "Sally finished that one major project ahead of schedule - and not only that, but she's also continued to grow beyond her current role. Just giving you the heads up - when we do annual reviews in 4 months, I'll probably be looking to promote her and give her a raise. At the pace she's growing, I don't see us retaining her if we don't recognize her work." In a nutshell, when you're asking for a raise - plan early to be asking for a raise and know that you're not asking your manager for the raise. You're helping your manager get you a raise. On Growth & Career Progression I'll often point to a study that shows tech professionals stay with a company for before looking for their next role. I've seen this number a few times, and it's also been an anecdotal observation as well. If you think of that period, it generally makes sense: 18-24 months is long enough to have shipped some meaningful projects, it's also long enough to burn out, grow bored, start re-evaluating your priorities.*Maybe you got married? Maybe you had your first child? Maybe you bought a house?*A lot can happen in 18 months, and even more in 24. Incidentally, if you're a manager, isn't it funny how , and then we're surprised when half that time passes, and people leave? It's almost as Anyway, does this mean you need to leave at 18 months? Not at all. In fact, I don't think you should unless you're not getting the support you need. I've stated this in another response to a question, but I'll re-state it here: if it takes you 3-6 months to ramp up at company, and you leave at 18 months, that only gives you 12-15 months to have made a meaningful contribution. It's definitely possible to do that - but your opportunity is lower, and your impact is less measurable. Plus, you never want to be the candidate who is ditching their team in the midst of a super big project that is nearing release. I've seen many candidates who are on the cusp of delivery - and unless they have a compelling case for why they are leaving, it can be a red flag. The thing is: getting a project over the goal line is tough. The first few months are super exciting, but that excitement decreases quickly and then it's a slog. You start to encounter bugs, things you had beautifully designed have become to get cluttered and sloppy. You've had to cut corners. You're increasingly less proud of what you're delivering and quicker to pass the work on to others. You lose the desire to see it through. While tackling this problem is worth a - the simple point is that there's lots of value in seeing a project through. If you're getting antsy and want to leave, ask yourself why. You may be unhappy with the company, or maybe the work has lost its novelty. If you struggle with that, and always get distracted by bright and shiny new toys, try to learn to trade novelty with nuance. As you learn to appreciate nuance, projects remain appealing. You start to broaden your perspective around problems and come up with new solutions. The experience you gain from getting a project released is huge - and it'll help you fight the feeling the second time you butt up against it. So, when should you leave? Either when: When should I leave my current role? 18-24 months we'll ask candidates about their 3 year goals if...we've...not...actually...invested...in...them.... separate article You're in a toxic, unprofessional, negative environment. Your growth has been stunted, or you're hearing false promise after false promise, You're being drastically underpaid/underappreciated, You've stopped learning, An amazing opportunity has come your way that you can't pass up, Your personal priorities have shifted The important thing is to always try to leave on good terms. Don't burn bridges, keep connected with the supportive people. You probably won't return to that company, but those people will help you build your network. What do you expect to get out of your network? If you have an answer to that, then you're doing it wrong. Your network is made up of professional friendships - and any good friendship doesn't come with expectations. They're supportive, they're genuine, and they may or may never have a big pay-off. Your goal, with any kind of friendship, is friendship. If any other benefit comes out of it, that's just an unplanned perk. The larger (and more genuine) your network, the greater the odds of realizing some kind of perk - maybe a connection into a company you've always wanted to work at, maybe a connection to a mentor, maybe you can learn from them, they become a resource, whatever - but you can't make that your end goal and you have to be willing to provide similar perks for others. Connect with people because we are social creatures*(even the introverts)*, and we long ago realized that there's power in connections. Am I networking correctly? Reach out to people on LinkedIn, at virtual events, at live events - and have genuine conversations. (non-needs-based) This one is an easy one: Growth. Have a growth mind-set. Embrace and be empowered by the fact that you don't know everything, but that you can learn it. Be a forever learner. Be interested in things. Skill is important, but candidates who also convey that they're continuously looking at how to grow are the best hires. You can learn new tech stacks, new methodologies, no paradigms and technical concepts. But there's so much more about that. Learn about productivity methods, learn about leadership, learn about management skills (even if you don't want to manage), learn about the industry you're in, learn about your product, its history. People who learn have infectious enthusiasm. Share what you're learning. Learning is the one thing that you can unabashedly brag about. I personally love learning, and I love being taught things. When someone teaches you something, you see them light up with energy and passion. Lastly, and critically: the opposite of a learner is someone who is stubbornly stuck in the same spot, refusing to budge. Don't be that. What personality traits should I highlight, emphasize, grow? Not constantly. There's lots of people who have had successful careers and only code at work. It can definitely help you grow your skills, it can definitely help you stand out as a job candidate, it can definitely help you keep your skills sharp when you start to code less professionally (yes it will happen, even if you stay a coder.) Don't just read theory, put it to practice. Even if to get a sense of how it works. Do I need to constantly be coding? There are so many great books out there - and in the interest of being a forever learner, you should read more than what I've listed here. These books have had a profound impact on my own career, and I'm always quick to share them: What books should I read? The Manager's Path by Camille Fournier Working Effectively With Legacy Code by Michael C. Feathers Agile Project Management with Kanban by Eric Brechner Cracking the Coding Interview by Gayle Laakmann McDowell Programming Interviews Exposed by John Morgan The DevOps Handbook by Gene Kim Dealing with Difficult Customers by Noah Fleming Thinking in Systems by Donella Meadows An Elegant Puzzle by Will Larsen Cracked It! by Bernard Garrette Agile Estimating and Planning by Mike Cohn The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni Accelerate by Nicole Forsgren Measure What Matters by John Doerr The Success Equation by Michael Mauboussin Start With Why by Simon Sinek Have others you'd recommend? Send them my way! It's worth noting, all these responses are my own subjective views that I've generalized across small and large companies. They reflect my personal style, but I'll also happily submit they're not 100% right either. It's what's worked for me - but I love getting input and thoughts from others. Have any questions I haven't answered? and send them to me! Connect with me on LinkedIn Also published . here

FAQs For a Software Engineering Hiring Manager - Part 5 of 5: On Managers, Growth & Progression

Preguntas frecuentes para un gerente de contratación de ingeniería de software - Parte 5 de 5: sobre gerentes, crecimiento y progresión

FAQ pour un gestionnaire d'embauche en génie logiciel - Partie 5 sur 5 : À propos des gestionnaires, de la croissance et de la progression

एक सॉफ्टवेयर इंजीनियरिंग हायरिंग मैनेजर के लिए अक्सर पूछे जाने वाले प्रश्न - 5 का भाग 5: प्रबंधकों, विकास और प्रगति पर

ソフトウェア エンジニアリング採用マネージャー向けの FAQ - パート 5/5: マネージャー、成長と進歩について

Perguntas frequentes para um gerente de contratação de engenharia de software - Parte 5 de 5: Sobre gerentes, crescimento e progressão

Câu hỏi thường gặp dành cho người quản lý tuyển dụng kỹ thuật phần mềm - Phần 5/5: Về người quản lý, tăng trưởng và tiến bộ

软件工程招聘经理的常见问题解答 - 第 5 部分（共 5 部分）：关于经理、成长和进步

Meet the Winners of Startups in North and Central America

It’s easy to feel powerless given our politics today. It feels like the media, big money and the elite are manipulating the system to their benefit at the expense of everybody else. You’re not wrong. But we can’t let that continue. Each of us can do our small part to make our republic better so that we can all live our best life. Understand toxic partisanship There’s nothing inherently bad about being a proud Democrat or Republican. However, it can quickly become damaging when people consider those in the other party to be their enemy. Learning more about how we became so partisan and what forces make us feel that way gives you the skills to prevent yourself and others from becoming dangerously partisan. For the bookworm: Love Your Enemies For the article reader: No Hate Left Behind For the data wiz: HiddenTribes For the podcaster: More Divided Than Ever: Excavating the Roots Of Our Political Landscape Define what matters to you Some of us have a specific idea of what we want in a politician, most of us do not. We don’t know what things we should value. Should we care about policy? Experience? Effectiveness? Character? How should we compare which factor matters more than another? If I think a candidate is smart and honest, but they support policies I don’t like, how should I feel? Unfortunately, there is no objectively right answer, but there is likely a right answer for you. Thinking about this in a structured way can help. Since our brain likes to feel like it is consistent and logical, it’s best to come up with a framework that makes sense to you, before inserting any real person into it. This way, you may feel like you’ve picked someone with a bit more thought than who you’d rather have a beer with (but, hey we’re a democracy, so do what feels right boo). Because it’s complicated and nuanced, most people feel overwhelmed about the prospect of figuring out who they should support. This is a big reason why we tend to ignore the political process until there are only two options left to choose from…which has not turned out so well for us. If you need a place to start, I created a one-page(ish) framework to evaluate the 2020 presidential candidates. The framework for evaluating presidential hopefuls can be found here: What matters in a President: A framework for evaluating politicians. Micro donate to your favorite candidate Adding money to politics may not seem like a helpful thing on the surface, but are a fundamental part of our democratic process, at least right now. We can use it for good or opt-out and let the big companies and the elite wield it for their self-interest. political contributions Once you have an idea of which candidate you like, sending them a small donation has an impact beyond just helping them buy more cheesy TV ads. It sends a signal to the candidate and to other people that this person is worth supporting – social scientists call this social norming. Take two candidates, Ashley and Will. Ashley has received donations from 20 million people while Will has received donations from 100,000 people. If we have no other information about either of them, we will have a more positive view of Ashley because more people support her. This is why likes and views dictate everything in the social media world. If there’s a candidate you support and you can spare the change, send them a small donation and tell your friends – you’ll be helping them more than you know. Donate to Democrats: ActBlue Donate to Republicans: WinRed Donate to Independents: The google machine Small steps add up Politics is simply the name for how we – as a country – try to take into account the opinions of over 300 million people. Looking at the United States from that vantage, it’s pretty bananas we’re able to get anything done. If we each take a little time to understand what we want a bit better, life can get better for all of us. Remember, you have influence, you just need to claim it. This article was submitted by Kylie, ChangeRoots Editorial Member written by Jake Sandler, ChangeRoots CEO, and originally posted on ChangeRoots.com

3 Micro Steps You Can Take Towards a More Politically Woke 2020

Can AI improve midterms forecasts? Context awareness AI is larger than machine learning. The physical world around us and our society compute themselves, constantly. What is the use of glorified statistical models that tell us something about how the world was yesterday -what happened in the last election- if our machines do not perceive what is important to humans today, the sudden & subtle changes in human priorities? People vote with ballots and with their wallets People really care when they put money on the table -it is unlikely that a voter who was materially committed to a cause by means of a political donation does not show up to vote. That (a driver) that machines can count on. But is also possible that after outspending on amplification, the contest is lost because resources were misallocated. Luckily, once provided with purpose, machines excel at planning. Therefore, political campaigns need to understand those trust signals and . measurement of trust is a signal optimization objectives Online contribution platforms We study the user behavior in online contribution platforms, to discover what campaigns are more/less successful -then we study those campaigns individually to learn they are successful. why Since this is a quantitative macro approach based on open data, we do not access individual private data at any point — we are concerned only about group behavior and observed probabilities (what actually happened). The data is generated for specific periods of time (e.g any month going back 2 years), or on what is a nearly real time in the realm of campaign finance (2 days ago to 4 trailing weeks). Weighing for recency allow us to account for the effect of momentum. MyNGP One good example to look at is the NGP platform. The popularity of campaign contributions The figure shows thousand of campaigns and movements that collect donations. Some may capture a large share of attention at a moment in time, but do not sustain grow. Some are evergreen: they generate growth outbursts many months after they first started. Most are too little to likely make any long-lasting difference. And there are the whales: the candidates or causes that account for dozens of the small ones. But how? You can find all sort of surprises. For instance, democrats use republicans overtures to advance their own narratives, like in the case of one of the top donation pages in Actblue (Actblue is another fundraising platform frequented by democrats) that is not about a democrat but about a cause, and actually uses the position of a former republican presidential candidate as a pitch for “tax fairness”. Other services, such as Anedot, are popular among GOP candidates and are worth studying to develop a digital campaign strategy that covers multiple angles. By having this information campaigns can compare their performance to the most successful within their own party, but also between competing political parties — then, replicate the tactics that work. Augmenting human intelligence Often times, traditional methods such as polling and history of fundraising are not definitive — a few seats are too close to call. It can even happen that “expert” forecasts and comparable-based statistical methods are completely off. In those cases the of AIs that sense and compute the -of people who actually pay attention and commit resources- is akin to a professional punter. embedded intelligence belief consensus Because even Nate Silver has to toss-up a coin, sometimes. FiveThirtyEight Fivethirtyeight, ABC The rise of decentralization in politics One of the main takeaways is to see the very low traffic in the majority of the small district campaigns — they have no forceful online media strategy. In general, pages where the candidates branding is strong and the value proposition/message/imaging is loud & clear, perform well. Pages that simply ask for money upfront do less well. A bad way to ask for money, is to do nothing more than asking for money But there is something more fundamental going on: . One can see it with the prevalence of peer-to-peer (P2P) texting; the bitcoin community rally behind libertarians, greens, and Sanders during the past election; the emergence of mobile Apps as social media alternatives to convey a discourse and to build grassroots movements. the decentralization of political financing A is particularly good at doing cohort analysis that shows the “churn” patterns of the users of popular political apps. With these insights you can understand when you will “lose” the attention of your voter, and when the re-engagement activities should be programmed. For instance, political risk AI 1.You can capture the attention of voters that are interested in your competitor. 2.You can the attention of someone who visited your fundraising platform, even if they did not committed funds. re-capture Having this information on hand, operational implementation is straightforward: campaigns can engage person to person in the places where THEY ARE, or use programmatic marketing services to display ads in those places specifically (e.g. where & when they consume news). Without this knowledge, you will be shooting in the dark, and burning promotional budget. Case in point: A candidate that did not win the primary in his congressional district, but received 80,000 online donations. Desktop users of his website on a particular month were mostly male (51.84%), and over 65 years of age (22.61%). In the other hand, mobile users were predominantly female (59.2%) and between 55–64 years old (22.84%). Younger generations (millennial, etc) were a small fraction in both cases. This difference matters because that month the website received 72.89% of visits from mobile devices, which indicates that there was a “blind-spot” in terms of reach — or perhaps an opportunity to engage that population (around 19.1 thousand women) as standard bearers. The candidate had a strong personal brand, 60.44% of the visits from search engines such like as Google came from the candidate’s name query (around 4,630 visits), and it would cost him $ 0.34 per click to get those visits using paid ads. Another sign of his strong candidate brand is the fact that 81.14% of the visits to the website were direct (not coming from email, or search), and more than 70% of the visitors checked more than 1 page before leaving the site. In his case, fundraising was only half way through: he needed the intelligence data to understand where his political efforts were at risk. The digital realm is a competition for attention — if people are interested in local politics, but are not spending time at your site or at your competitors, they are probably hanging out where the undecided are. And today, that happens to be mobile, the handful of apps that people use repeatedly, and their cross-app usage in the intersection of life and politics. Based on a political risk forecasting algorithm developed by https://www.economymonitor.com EM’s Percy Venegas is also the author of , published by . Trust Asymmetry Springer

Stories, News & Mentions about ACTBLUE

Actblue’s Stories on HackerNoon

Actblue's News & Mentions