cummings of bloomberg news. thank you for being with us. >> and a little bit more than 20 minutes, we would take you live to pennsylvania where president obama will be attending a rally for tom wolfe. the associated press reports wolfe currently holds the lead. it is receiving some high profile help. event is expected to be president obama's last campaign stop before election day. it is one of two stops today for the president. earlier, he attended a rally for the connecticut governor. as we wait for president obama to emerge, we have a discussion

on how campaigns are to -- targeting voters from this morning's washington journal. guest: we are in the phase were campaigns are focused on getting out the vote. how has technology changed the effort? in the last 48 hour's, the key right now is reaching voters by any means necessary. knocking on doors, phone calls. the ability of matching a voter file with an online poll allows us to target voters using digital advertising. ds up andt those a

within an hour. with the internet? guest: you was es for the democratic party, barack obama, because cookies exist in your browser. they place a pixel on your browser. we can serve you ads almost wherever you go. host: this headline from the las vegas sun. it is amazing what political candidates know about you. what is the information the candidates are looking for? public information. it has been around for a long time. if you live in a state that has party registration. whether you're a registered republican or democrat. what elections you voted in. they develop a composite of profile of the likelihood of turnout. from there, you go back and figure out how main roads will

it take to win this election and how many people do i need to talk to to get that number of votes. information empero they are using? guest: voter registration status. it is compiled with other consumer data. they take all that information to predict who your target audience is. what your persuasion is. target.n on the right host: how do you predict voter behavior? guest: difficult to answer. there are hundreds of rows of information about every single voter.

one from catalyst will gather butjust voter data, magazine subscriptions, previous voting behavior, all that aggregated into one place and then creating predictive models from those. host: we are talking with michael beach and jim walsh. we are talking about voter turnout. i want to get your questions and comments in these last couple of days of the 2014 cycle. role.chnology plays a our guest are here to answer your questions. much should voters assume that campaigns are monitoring their social media pages? guest: it is a difficult job. campaigns are up to the challenge for there are all sorts of tools available to allow you to track trends. every campaign now has somebody

who is monitoring their twitter and facebook feeds every minute. host: mr. beach. voters facebook feeds. is a leading media indicator of where the conversation is going. the aggregate level for years now is how the conversation is shaping up. who is talking about them or the right issues. those of the voters to reach out to to build a coalition. host: a story in today's washington post. george will writes that the voting began in a campaign persuasion weeks ago. it becomes more important than as at this stage. feature campaign money may be increasingly spent on expensive labor-intensive business of identifying a prodding to the polls likely some orders.

walsh, i am assuming that you don't appreciate the comparison to tammany hall. guest: no. every election is turned by a few points. the reality is being able to carry your message to a specific audience. it takes a lot of work. technology helps us do that. i would not say that process necessarily relates to tammany hall. i would say that having the ability to target voters that are potentially swing voters, your group of voters that you want to turn, makes it better for a democracy to to participate. topaigns want people to go the polls and vote for who they believe in. host: how much of the campaign budget is directed specifically for the get out the vote, the

last 72 hours? the last three months -- inampaign art devoted the last 72 hours, i would say at least 30%. last 72t just the hours, it is the last week. sometimes a mixer persuasion and tv. you're seeing people knock on doors. hundreds of thousands, millions of phone calls. host: who does it better? guest: the turnout i think. if anything, the democratic operations like in 2006. -- one advantage -- turnout

50 main people have cast a ballot nationwide. voter registration, building the pull of eligible voters. going to people you don't know enough information about to turnout. figuring out who you can move into your column. that can-two-year process. peopleoter contact coming with these ipads and cell phones and what they say to you and your experience. our phone lines are open. mr. walsh, i went to give you a chance to answer that question. guest: the democrats do a better job. our technology is centralized. there are firms out there that do a good job making that every campaign that had have voter file and one database along with tools that enable them to do door knocking, make phone calls,

digital advertising. having that centralized database , not just the technology, but the database itself allows us to be more efficient. beam information back to the same database. it has real-time updates of which way voter is going to go. guest: turnout plays a big role in midterm. candidates in 2012 -- they create an audience that has an impact. host: let's talk to that audience. dale is on the line. question fore a your panel. it concerns the use of directed ads. i recently read that both directv and dish network are

basically injecting as based upon people's profiles. they have all the persons browsing history available to them. cable companies are doing this as well. they have the added it vantage that they have people's browser history's, from their cookies and other forms of collected data. my question is, i don't think that this really helps democracy. two-facedis lead to politicians who will say anything to anyone to get their vote? isn't that will we want to avoid? i think the opposite. the reality is that until recently we have been unable to get past the kind of broadcast nature of television, to reach specific voters. that is not a bad thing to do that is a good thing. we want to make sure our candidates are able to engage

the public where they are interested. if it is a specific issue they want to talk about. if it is a local issue that is more important than the national. there is nothing wrong with tailored messages, especially when you're talking about the environment where you're being imparted by messages all the time. the exact message to the exact right voter. it is better for voter engagement. how does targeted victory do that? addressable advertising is taking a group of targets, anonymizing the information, matching it to my profiles. set box data. directing the ad at a block of voters. they could be republicans, independents that live in a given district. two gems point, the television

advertising -- 80% of broadcast advertising -- media markets don't match up with political districts. geographic waste alone. voters who don't have the legal ability to vote aren't seeing messages. host: when i go the way of the dinosaur? inst: it is a long-term point. to optimize linear buying is the phase we're in right now. host: oklahoma on our line for republicans. we hear believe about this war on women when there's a war on moyers. camry's he left to rot in a mexican jail. they are sent to africa where ebola can kill them all. .hen they are fired

i don't know of most people know this. how would you like to get a pink slip while you're fighting the enemy. we are talking about the get out the vote efforts. the phones later to talk about any other campaign issues. it may be a good time to talk about those issues. we had two experts in the technology field. .evin in philadelphia good morning. caller: good morning. host: turned on your tv. caller: i wanted to talk a little bit about the voter turnout. i thought -- hold on for a thete -- the method that president obama used in his voting tactic in terms of getting all those people in a computerized system democrats

over the last voting trimester. host: can you talk about the history of this effort to bring technology to the stage of the campaign game? guest: absolutely. the reality is that some of the technology allows you to actually match a voter to a an online profile. it was expensive in 2008 and 2012. local candidates did not have the opportunity to use them. fortunately, because of firms like my own, we have been able to modify that time of injury -- that technology to provide that level of granularity of voter targeting online to raises all the way up to senate campaigns. that doesour firm

this differently? are you doing the same thing? we released a self-serving ad buying platforms. our firm has city council races, state house races, elections that could not afford to individually by that technology before. really aggregated as software. they can use it today and really drive more efficiency, and hopefully so far. are we talking hundreds of dollars or thousands of dollars? it is sort of amazing to think of this technology from an efficiency standpoint. local campaigns have so little money to reach voters. they do not get the millions of dollars to be able to