Media Coverage of Ground Campaigns can be an Adventure

I've run a lot of field campaigns, and I should cut a little slack to media types who haven't. It's easy to not understand the ground game side of campaigns for people who haven't worked on them before. Still, when I read this New York Times article, I'm horrified at this depiction of the Bush campaign:

DES MOINES – It is a portrait of deep frustration. Jeb Bush’s campaign has 10 paid staff members in Iowa, it has made 70,380 phone calls to state Republicans and it has collected 5,000 email addresses. For all that, it has recruited just four volunteers statewide and has identified only 1,260 supporters.

They clearly don't understand what they read here. If you just read this as supporters against phone calls, you see a picture of a candidate with no support. I'm going to go out on a limb though and say his campaign has actually talked to 15,000 voters in Iowa at most, out of that 70,380 calls. Your actual contact rate is usually very low on the phones. If he's at 1,260 supporters out of 15,000 calls, he's actually right about where he's polling nationally. That would make more sense than to view this as 1,260 out of 70,380.

There is a good reason to be horrified though, and that's the four volunteers number. There is no substitute for on the ground manpower, and Bush doesn't have it. There is no enthusiasm for his campaign if that number is true, which is pretty remarkable. Iowa Republicans, who have picked such yahoos as Santorum and Huckabee the last two caucuses, appear hellbent on picking another neanderthal in 2016. Candidates like Bush aren't getting traction.

The Times has some of the best political coverage around though, and they got some fascinating stuff in this same article that is worth your reading:

In the weeks before voting begins, the campaign plans to spend $1.36 million on advertising in Iowa, $5.6 million in New Hampshire and $2.7 million in South Carolina. One slide from the report claims that in the six weeks since ads for Mr. Bush began airing in New Hampshire, the share of voters who say they support him when contacted by the campaign has doubled, to 14.8 percent.

It is unclear why the full strategy memo surfaced now. It may have been leaked to encourage a campaign shake-up, to communicate strategy to the Bush-affiliated “super PAC,” or to lower expectations for Mr. Bush in Iowa.

The campaign has set a goal of winning 18.45 percent of the votes on caucus night, Feb. 1. It predicts total Republican turnout will be 128,800, slightly more than in 2012. Four years ago, Rick Santorum won Iowa with 29,839 votes (Mitt Romney received 29,805 votes), but it is unclear where Mr. Bush would place in the much broader field if he somehow manages to hit his goal of almost 24,000 votes.

Bush looks pretty much toasted to me. We'll see if he can hang in there.