Voters using Google to research candidates in competitive House races this year might not realize that the “voter guide” that pops up in their browser is actually funded by a House Republican political group.
The new digital tactic has frustrated Democrats who claim the site gives the appearance of being non-partisan when it instead presents GOP attack lines.
The campaign manager for LuAnn Bennett, a Democratic candidate in Northern Virginia who is challenging GOP Rep. Barbara Comstock, found “voterguide2016.com” when he was searching his boss’ name. While the layout and biographical information was fairly straightforward, the language on the campaign matchup immediately resembled GOP talking points.
The “Need to Know” section describes Bennett’s record as “making promises she doesn’t keep, like promising to build a preschool and daycare center with green space and a playground for the DC community. However, she never completed it.” The “On the Issues” area proclaims Bennett supported “President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, even though it allows Iran, a state sponsor of terrorism, the ability to eventually produce its own nuclear weapons.”
On Comstock the site describes the freshman lawmaker as “an independent leader” and lists several issues that are top items on the minds of voters in the area: “Opioids, traffic congestion, Metro funding — Barbara has been in the thick of today’s public policy debates.”
At first glance the “voterguide2016.com” website looks like a neutral source. It features pictures of candidates of both parties in more than two dozen districts, with maps and sections labeled “trending” and “candidates.” It doesn’t specify that a “Republican” created it. But if you scroll all the way down to the bottom you find in small print the initials for the party committee that indicate it is a biased webpage — “Paid for by the NRCC and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. www.nrcc.org”
The NRCC is the Capitol Hill-based National Republican Congressional Committee, the main political arm for House Republicans.
Democratic campaigns in roughly eight swing House races realized that the GOP strategy involved not only creating the site, but also buying geo-targeted Google search terms to drive people to it. When voters in these districts type in candidate names the search engine lists this Republican generated page at the top of the results.
It’s not against any rules, but Democrats who reviewed the sections and what is designed to look like analysis on the site told CNN the tactic was “misleading and underhanded.”
Robert Howard, spokesman for Bennett’s campaign, criticized Comstock’s party for the strategy, telling CNN, “Without a record to stand on and an agenda more in line with Trump than her constituents, it’s no shock she and her allies would resort to deceiving voters with a fake website.”
But according to advertising strategists this approach is a natural extension of how the parties already use contrasting messages. Outside advocacy groups regularly prepare voter guides to give to voters to specify which candidates back their causes.
“Over 40% of all digital advertising is search. It would be silly to ignore this, whether you are selling soap or political candidates,” one leading digital ad strategist, who is not affiliated with either political party, told CNN.
The NRCC’s “independent expenditure” or “IE” arm is responsible for the site not the committee itself, according to one senior Republican source. This separate group uses millions to run ads and support GOP candidates but cannot coordinate with the NRCC or individual campaigns. No one from the IE would talk to CNN about what they are spending on the site or why they chose to use the model it on a voter guide.
Independent expenditure groups are established by both party committees and frequently produce some of the more negative political ads during the campaign season. They give the candidates and the party some cover because while they can’t talk directly about their content, they can mimic messaging to help reinforce how races are framed.
Katie Martin, spokeswoman for the NRCC views the new website as part of the broader effort to reach voters, telling CNN Republicans are “constantly working to find new, creative, and innovative ways to target voters online.”
Many House candidates on both sides already establish websites to attack their opponents. But when they buy the domain name election laws require that they disclose the campaign is behind the effort. For example, the Bennett campaign bought “stoptrumpcomstock.com” which links the GOP congresswoman to Donald Trump, the GOP presidential nominee, who is unpopular in the district.
Democratic campaign operatives maintain that this particular voter guide site is in a different category because it is an attacking candidates under the premise that it is presenting unbiased information without making it clear that one political party is paying.
Martin, not surprisingly, disagrees, telling CNN, “While Democrats might cry foul because they want to continue to hide from their records, the NRCC is happy to make their positions known in a smart and completely transparent way digitally.”
It’s unclear how much traffic the site will get, and whether it will translate into actual votes in November. Democrats will have to decide whether it’s worth shifting money out of ad budgets earmarked for television commercials on local stations, which are the most expensive line item with the broadest reach, or to counter with their own digital response.