Does the MVP model still work? What does the data say?

Short answer: Yes, but we need to scale it up, improve it, and invest in new approaches.

MVP’s basic premise has always been a “triple bottom-line” approach: that year-round local organizing helps: 1) win elections, 2) fuel policy change, and 3) build lasting power by engaging people in ongoing, non-transactional ways. There is strong evidence of our model’s quantitative and qualitative impacts.

That said, the field of local voter organizing is getting just a fraction of the resources it needs. Even Jen O’Malley Dillon, chair of the Biden & Harris campaigns, thinks so!

Yes, Democrats nominally had the better conventional “ground game” in 2024 — but as organizers Marshall Ganz, Astra Taylor, and others point out, much of the canvassing by candidate campaigns and the Democratic Party was based on a shallow, short-term, transactional model of voter contact. 

“Voter outreach needs to be people- and place-centered, not data- and advertiser-driven. It needs to be issue-focused and year-round, not scaled in eight weeks and gone overnight. And it must offer more than an awkward conversation at the door and an alienating avalanche of texts treating recipients like little more than ATMs. People need a sense of belonging and a compelling and credible vision of a future worth fighting for.”

– Astra Taylor, ”Democrats Much Touted Ground Game Was A Disaster”, in The Guardian

What’s the solution? More funding for independent, locally-based organizing, earlier and steadier, is a big part. But it’s not all of it. We also need to adapt our approaches to today’s media ecosystem. We are in the early stages of this area of inquiry, but we are confident this will be an important piece of how we win power back – not just in one election, but for the long run.