Compare the playbooks

Compare before you copy.

The same twelve axes for every case. Use them to choose what to combine in your campaign.

Choose the cases to compare:

JanonismoBrazil · 2026	The students winSerbia · 2026	MamdaniNew York · 2025	#RejectFinanceBill2024Kenya · 2024	The Discord assemblyNepal · 2025	Diomaye mooy SonkoSenegal · 2024	The multi-campaignPoland · 2023	Together for YesIreland · 2018	Barcelona en ComúBarcelona · 2015	Big OrganizingUnited States · 2016–2020	Obama 2008United States · 2008	The light stick revolutionSouth Korea · 2024–2025	From the square to a majoritySri Lanka · 2024	The 36th of JulyBangladesh · 2024	Till the end, every nightGeorgia · 2024–2026	A million doorsChile · 2021	People vs. moneyNew York · 2018	MomentumUnited Kingdom · 2017	Sunflowers and g0vTaiwan · 2014	Yes EqualityIreland · 2015	Led By DonkeysUnited Kingdom · 2019–2026	Let's do thisNew Zealand · 2017	Listen, organize, shieldFrance · 2017	We are hereUkraine · 2022	Humour over rumourTaiwan · 2018–2021	Climate strikeGlobal (began in Sweden) · 2018–2019
Theory of victory
We win if millions of supporters, coordinated from one channel, carry the message beyond the bubble through their own accounts and conversations.	We win if open assemblies build collective legitimacy, the street turns into contacts in every village and trained monitors protect the vote at every ballot box.	We win if organic video fills a funnel into a mass, volunteer-led field program, and that field turns out a new coalition around the cost of living.	We win if the law becomes readable to everyone, pressure hits those who vote at the moment they vote, and care keeps people coming back to the street.	We win if outrage spreads, the street forces the government out, and an open digital assembly with rules and public proof produces a name legitimate enough to take to the table.	We win if the organization can lose its leader, party and internet without losing the movement, trust passes to the stand-in, and a broad front forces the election to happen on time.	We win if dozens of nonpartisan messengers make voting the norm among young people and young women who never voted, and registration friction is removed before the deadline.	We win if a calm message of care, carried by trusted messengers, wins over the concerned centre while a mobilized base works the doors.	We win if a platform born from the movements earns public legitimacy before asking for votes and unites the left in a single list, without party labels.	We win if a mass of volunteers takes on staff work, talks to enough voters and brings young and infrequent voters to the polls.	The campaign wins if an owned platform recruits millions and community organizing turns them into neighborhood teams that talk to voters in the states that decide.	The movement wins if citizens show up in the first hour and then keep a welcoming street full every Saturday, tied to one institutional demand on the calendar of parliament and the court.	We win if a patient, territorial organisation is ready when the old party system collapses, with one anti-corruption message and no alliances with the old parties.	We win if a public but replaceable coordination keeps a daily calendar of dated actions going through repression and blackout until the regime can no longer hold.	We win if a leaderless movement stays on the street indefinitely, documents everything and shares the cost, until the regime has to give way.	The campaign wins if, under voluntary voting, it finds and brings out those who didn’t vote in the first round, widening the message without abandoning the base.	The campaign wins if, in a low-turnout primary, a candidate from the community widens who votes by reaching every registered Democrat, not just likely voters.	The campaign wins if a base concentrated in safe seats is trained and moved to the marginals, where every door counts most.	We win if we show everything live, open the infrastructure so anyone can help, and turn street energy into deliberation with rules that institutions commit to.	We win if real stories from gay and lesbian people and their families, in the press and on the doorstep, move the undecided middle without attacking it, and young people and emigrants turn out.	The group wins if the powerful’s own words, put up where they sting and photographed, travel through feeds and the press until journalists put them back to their authors.	The campaign wins if the leadership change becomes a restart that shifts tone and perception, and a field built in advance turns the wave of attention into work.	We win if a movement with no party starts by listening to the country, turns what it hears into a public story and withstands the attacks that will come.	We win if the leader proves presence every day and each audience gets a speech in its own history, with a concrete ask to a named recipient, answered through official, transparent channels.	We win if every trending rumour gets a correction within the same news cycle that is easier and funnier to share than the rumour, while independent fact-checkers check in the open.	We win if a gesture anyone can copy, repeated weekly by autonomous local groups and amplified by the press, makes climate inaction politically untenable.
Decisive audience
Undecided voters and first-round abstainers (voting is compulsory), reached through supporters’ personal networks.	Voters in villages and small towns who only watched pro-government TV, reached face to face; and the diaspora, registered to vote.	New Yorkers squeezed by the cost of living, especially immigrant neighborhoods that had swung right or left the ballot blank in 2024, reached in their own language.	The MPs voting on the bill and the president who had to sign it; to mobilize, young Kenyans across ethnic lines who understood what the bill would cost them.	Young Nepalis online and on the street; in the end, the Army and the President, who brokered the interim government.	Sonko’s base, which had to transfer its loyalty to Faye; and, for the rules of the game, civil society, religious leaders and the Constitutional Council.	Young people aged 18 to 29, especially young women, and those studying or working away from home who needed to change their polling place.	The “concerned centre”: undecided or conditional voters, about one in five in April, who wanted change without shouting.	Residents of working-class neighborhoods hit by evictions, the crisis and tourism, and left-leaning voters disillusioned with the traditional parties.	Primary voters in the states voting next; supporters who might stay home; and, in 2020, young and infrequent voters.	First primary and caucus voters (Iowa); then voters in the battleground states, contacted by neighborhood teams.	Lawmakers (200 of 300 votes were needed) and the Constitutional Court; on the street, citizens new to protest, with young women in front.	Voters who abandoned the traditional parties after the crisis and the Aragalaya: professionals, the middle class, women, young people and the diaspora talking to family.	Students first, then schools, madrasas, teachers and residents; in the end, the army, whose refusal to fire on 5 August decided the fall.	Pro-European Georgians willing to protest; to win, the large majority who stay home, whom the movement has not reached.	First-round abstainers in outlying neighbourhoods and priority comunas, especially women and young people.	Registered Democrats who don’t usually vote in primaries; her best results came from gentrifying neighborhoods such as Astoria and Sunnyside.	Voters in marginal seats: Labour supporters to get out and undecided or Conservative-leaning voters to persuade on the doorstep.	The Taiwanese public following the streams, against the TV version of events; and the legislature and its speaker, who decided the review of the deal.	The movable middle, especially men aged 40 to 60 who thought civil partnership was enough; plus young people and emigrants, for turnout.	Journalists and the online public who share and donate; critics say the voters to be persuaded were barely reached (it mostly preached to the converted).	Left voters drifting from Labour, especially women leaning Green, and the low-turnout areas the field program targeted.	Voters tired of the two main parties, from left and right; in the runoff, voters from several camps rallying against the far right.	Foreign parliaments, governments and companies that could send sanctions, weapons, equipment and money; at home, Ukrainians who needed proof he had stayed.	People sharing rumours in LINE family groups and on social media, and journalists who need both sides within the same news cycle.	School students as participants (38% were at their first demonstration); and, through the press, the public and decision-makers.
Command
A congressman with his own audience, outside the official structure, gives the orders.	Leaderless: open assemblies decide by majority and working groups execute.	An official campaign with a strong field director, in weekly partnership with an activist organization (NYC-DSA).	No central command: leadership distributed across creators, grassroots organizers and professional networks.	No single command: an NGO coordinated the server and negotiated, while other factions competed for leadership.	A charismatic leader in jail, with stand-ins ready and diaspora branches as a rear base.	No central command: dozens of NGOs, city halls and collectives, with one foundation backing campaigns and measuring afterwards.	Three co-directors from three organizations, a weekly Executive and a professional campaign manager.	A fortnightly plenary and a coordination team with spokespeople; a strong candidate, but chosen in primaries.	A small central team sets the plan, targets and scripts; volunteers lead the teams.	Central leadership in Chicago with daily goals; neighborhood teams with autonomy in how to hit them.	A coalition of about 1,700 organizations, with an operating committee and situation room; lots of citizen self-organization around it.	A disciplined cadre core (the JVP) inside a front of 21 groups, with open local councils.	Student coordination with public faces and a long list of substitutes; decisions in night meetings.	No central command: open groups, march conveners, observation NGOs and solidarity funds.	A small central team in three areas (politics, communications, territory) and a manager from outside the party.	A minimal campaign, recruited by a national network, with the field run by partner organizations.	A satellite organisation with few staff, separate from the party, beside Labour's official campaign.	No owner: a decision group in the chamber, NGOs on the street and an open civic hacker community.	Two co-directors from different organizations, a volunteer strategist and a daily meeting in the last six weeks.	Four founders decide everything; a network of collaborators and volunteers carries it out.	A new leader with a small office, a campaign manager speaking for the machine and a field director.	A small core of advisers plus an electoral consultancy; open local committees, run from the top.	The president sets the ideas; a core of three or four writers and editors writes; ministries act autonomously.	A cabinet spokesperson coordinates; each ministry answers for its own topic.	No boss: autonomous local groups, elected delegates and a national call in which each group has one vote.
Channel
A one-to-many WhatsApp channel; supporters' personal accounts for reach.	Dozens of accounts on Instagram, TikTok and X, coordination groups and a contact list of their own.	Organic video on Instagram and TikTok, with a DM funnel into the campaign's own CRM.	TikTok and X to explain and mobilize; WhatsApp, Telegram and Zello for logistics; phone calls to MPs.	An open Discord server to deliberate; Instagram and TikTok to mobilize; VPNs during the ban.	Cell WhatsApp groups, the leader's Facebook page and lives, TikTok via VPN, accounts abroad.	Facebook, Instagram and YouTube for reach; WhatsApp and Zoom to coordinate the committees; official online services for registration.	Door-to-door and local radio, with Facebook, Twitter and video supporting the conversations.	Manifesto with sign-up, neighborhood meetings, deliberation and voting platforms, Twitter and a network of online activists.	Web dialer, peer-to-peer texting, Slack, email and, in 2020, a friend-to-friend app.	The campaign's own email and text list, plus a campaign social network (MyBO).	YouTube lives on the first night; X and fan communities to call people out; messaging groups to coordinate.	Facebook and YouTube as main channels, TikTok for young people, WhatsApp groups, streamed rallies.	Facebook to announce; groups, Zoom and Discord to coordinate; SMS, calls and walls when the network went down.	Facebook groups (Daitove) and daily lists on Instagram to call; Signal to coordinate; livestreams to show.	Door-to-door, regional tours and social media fed by hundreds of self-run accounts and fandoms.	Door-knocking with an app, phone banks, peer-to-peer texts and a launch video on social media.	A seat-finder site with carpools, Facebook for videos, WhatsApp and texts for reminders.	Multiple streams gathered in a portal, Facebook, PTT and LINE; later Pol.is and Join.	Press, radio and TV under balance rules; Twitter and Facebook to mobilize.	Billboards, projections and banners photographed for the group's feeds and for the press.	Free-to-air TV, breakfast shows and debates, with Facebook Live, targeted video and context radio.	Door-to-door with an app, national press, TV and radio, livestreams, Twitter.	Telegram and short video at home, video calls to parliaments and X for the world, the official website as archive.	Official Facebook pages, LINE Today and fact-checking bots inside LINE.	Instagram and the press outwards; WhatsApp and Telegram inwards.
Street
Family and neighborhood groups, fan clubs, rallies and transport to the polls.	Daily silences, marches between cities, mass rallies, then villages, markets and door-to-door.	The core of the method: 3 million doors, 5,700 volunteer-led shifts, organizing by community and language.	Peaceful occupation on voting days, on Tuesdays and Thursdays, in dozens of counties.	A march of students in uniform that, after the shootings, became a revolt with arson.	Local cells, caravans through the regions, peaceful marches and strikes by the civic front.	Local committees, stalls, stickers and stencils, buses on campus, the big march and the election-night lines.	Local groups in every county, stalls, banners on roundabouts, a bus touring the country.	Assemblies in every neighborhood, small events and a network of artists and designers.	Barnstorms, phone banks at home, door-knocking and house meetings.	Door-knocking, phones and house meetings, run by volunteer teams backed by 700 offices.	Peaceful rallies outside parliament, the residence and the court; 18 Saturday marches and daily rallies in the final stretch.	Discreet participation in the Aragalaya, then district rallies, women-only rallies and local councils.	Blockades, campus occupations, “Complete Shutdown”, non-cooperation and a march on the capital.	Presence every night outside parliament, daytime marches by profession and neighbourhood, big weekend marches.	A million doors as the target, daily events, cultural events and observers at every table.	The core: almost daily canvassing, signature gathering and more than 120,000 doors, according to the campaign.	Doorstep canvassing in the marginals, about 50 campaign weekends and 1.2 million doors on polling day.	Occupation of the chamber, NGOs camped outside, street deliberation and a rally of half a million.	60 to 70 local groups, canvassing outside the capital and a bus through all 26 counties.	The street is the stage for the image: billboards, landmarks, beaches, opponents' events.	Door-knocking and phone banks organised as a snowflake, focused on low-turnout areas.	The 2016 Grande Marche door-to-door and big rallies; thousands of local committees.	Little street action because of the war; the leader's physical presence in Kyiv was the message.	Little street work: the correction goes back to family groups and to whoever flagged the rumour.	The weekly strike outside a building of power and global strikes on common dates.
Content
Urgent voice notes and short videos; hashtags, debate clips, symbolic photos.	Simple symbols (11:52, the red hand), humor and memes, countdowns.	Short videos of the candidate on the street, listening, with humor, in several languages, always with an invitation to act.	Clause-by-clause explainers, translations into local languages, chatbots, posters and songs.	The “nepo kids” contrast, short videos, live-streamed debates and rumor fact-checking.	The leader's videos and audio, creators' short videos, unedited footage, one phrase in Wolof.	Spots, unbranded celebrity videos, fictional audio pieces, symbols like the pink pen and the alarm clock.	Real stories from women and couples, doctors as spokespeople, a calm tone of care and compassion.	Manifesto, ethics code and program written in common; open images for remixing, humor and concrete language.	The plan to win, simple scripts and volunteers' personal stories.	Volunteers' personal stories; emails with an ask and a link; video and ads for recruitment.	K-pop light sticks, crowd-requested playlists, humorous flags and an open mic with a rule against hate.	One anti-corruption message repeated for ten years, speeches with numbers and humour, the candidate's biography.	Named, dated programmes, numbered demands, copyable posters, songs and evidence of the repression.	Protest lists, videos of police violence, election reports, portraits of protesters and prisoners.	Hope, guarantees and public safety; memes, songs and pop culture made by supporters.	The candidate in her own voice and one line: people vs. money.	Short satirical videos for young people and empathy-based persuasion conversations on the doorstep.	Raw video and live text, translations, ads paid for by small donors.	Personal stories from gay and lesbian people and families; factsheets with independent sources; a positive tone.	The exact words of the powerful, with date and source; long videos and parodies; humour at the right moment.	Relentless positivity, the Let's do this slogan and emphasis on housing, rivers, health and education.	A public diagnosis from the listening, stories by phase, a carefully managed image in the press.	An unstaged daily video, speeches tailored to each country's history, public asks with a named recipient.	Two images, very short text, humour without victims, with source and signature.	A handmade sign, a science-based demand and many young faces.
Timing
21 days, between the first round and the runoff.	About two years, from November 2024 to October 2026.	About 13 months, from the October 2024 announcement to the November 2025 election.	About seven weeks from tabling the bill to the vote; eight days on the street until the climbdown.	Four days from the march to the new prime minister; six months to the elections.	Three years of resistance; ten days of campaigning with the candidate free.	Months of preparation, peaking in the final eight weeks and in registration deadline week.	68 days of official campaign on top of six years of prior organizing.	333 days between launch and the vote, in phases.	Two primary cycles, 2015–2016 and 2019–2020.	About 21 months, from February 2007 to November 2008.	Six hours to defeat martial law; 11 days to impeachment; 123 days to removal; six months to the election.	Five years of a front (2019–2024), two years after the revolt and 54 days between presidential and parliamentary votes.	36 days from formal launch to the fall; about two months from the court ruling.	Three waves since April 2024; daily protest since 28 November 2024, more than 500 days in June 2026.	Four weeks, from 21 Nov to 19 Dec 2021, on top of a network built since 2019.	About 14 months, from April 2017 to June 2018.	Seven weeks of campaign on top of two years of organising since 2015.	24 days of occupation; years of deliberation afterwards, from 2014 to today.	About 100 days of campaigning, on top of years of work and months of voter registration.	From 2019 to today, with one-off actions pegged to the news cycle.	53 days between the change of leader and the vote, on top of six months of field preparation.	Thirteen months, from April 2016 to June 2017.	Crisis rhythm since 24 Feb 2022, sustained for more than four and a half years.	Two hours per rumour; system built between 2018 and 2020.	Thirteen months from one person to more than 4 million; then a slow decline.
People mobilised
From 50,000 to 10.9 million followers.	Hundreds of thousands on the streets, more than a thousand villages and towns visited, 26,000 donors and monitors at polling stations.	From a few hundred to more than 100,000 volunteers and 700 field leads.	Protests in dozens of counties (19 on June 20 alone); close to 1 billion views on TikTok.	About 160,000 members on the server; more than 10,000 in the live debate; 7,700 votes.	Local cells and diaspora sections, 356 million CFA francs declared by sections in five countries, and a broad civic front.	At least 27 nonpartisan campaigns with at least 407 million views, plus city halls, universities and local committees.	More than 2,500 volunteers routed to local groups through the website, with groups in every county.	30,000 signatures, around 1,250 regular activists and 4,583 primary voters.	Hundreds of thousands of volunteers, 75 million calls in 2016.	13 million emails, around 4 million donors and 1.5 million active volunteers.	About 418,000 people at the 14 Dec peak near the Assembly, according to mobile data; organizers speak of millions.	A JVP activist network in almost every Sinhala village, a front of 21 groups and collectives, and open local councils (Kottasha Sabhas).	Protests across the country, from universities to schools and madrasas; a 158-name coordination by August.	Tens of thousands a night at first, hundreds later; about 250,000 members in Daitove; more than 3,500 observers.	357 self-organised comandos already in the primary and hundreds of autonomous groups; “a million doors” was a target, not a verified total.	From a core of five people to more than a thousand volunteers by the end, according to accounts.	100,000 finder users, 3,000 trained, 10,000 volunteers on the day, according to Momentum.	About 500,000 on the street; streams with millions of views; 200,000 vTaiwan users at its peak.	60 to 70 local groups and about 60,000 new voters on the register (sources differ).	£499,000 from 16,492 donors and more than 330 billboards in 2019 alone.	Over 6,500 volunteers and 475,000 calls and door knocks, according to Ardern.	300,000 doors, 100,000 conversations and 25,000 questionnaires; more than 2,600 local committees, according to the movement.	Nine foreign parliaments in 17 days in 2022, daily videos to the nation, ministries and embassies with their own channels, and UNITED24’s famous ambassadors.	The whole central government, plus 46,000 messages to Cofacts in three months of 2018.	More than 4 million in one day, in about 4,500 locations in 150 countries (organizers, 2019).
Result
Lula won the runoff with 51.79%, 4.4 million votes ahead, after trailing by 2.2 million in the first round.	Student List 52.54% against 39.29% for Vučić’s list (RIK, preliminary, 8,077 of 8,392 stations), on 68.78% turnout; Vučić conceded on Oct 25, 2026.	Won the Democratic primary with 56.4% in the final ranked-choice count and the Nov 4, 2025 election with 50.78%, on the highest turnout since 1993.	Ruto refused to sign the bill on Jun 26, 2024 and, on Jul 25, MPs deleted every clause; some measures came back through other laws in Dec 2024.	Oli resigned on Sep 9, 2025 and Sushila Karki was sworn in as interim prime minister on Sep 12; in the Mar 5, 2026 elections, the RSP won 182 of 275 seats.	Faye won in the first round with 54.28% (2.43 million votes), ten days after leaving prison.	Turnout of 74.38%, a record since 1989; among 18- to 29-year-olds, from 46% to about 69–71%. PiS came first but lost its majority.	66.4% Yes (1.43 million votes) on 64% turnout: the Eighth Amendment was repealed.	First place with 25.2% (176,612 votes) and 11 of 41 seats; Ada Colau became mayor, governing as a minority.	Sanders lost the Democratic nomination in 2016, with 46% of pledged delegates, and in 2020, after Super Tuesday.	Obama won the primaries and the November 4, 2008 election, with about 53% of the vote and 365 electoral votes.	Martial law annulled 190 to 0; Yoon impeached on 14 Dec 2024 (204 votes) and removed 8 to 0 on 4 Apr 2025; Lee Jae-myung won the snap election on 3 Jun.	From 3.16% in 2019 to 42.31% in the first presidential count (55.89% after second preferences), then 61.56% and 159 of 225 seats in Nov 2024; 43.26% in the May 2025 local elections.	Hasina resigned and fled on 5 August 2024. In the February 2026 election, the students’ party (NCP) got 3.05% and 6 seats; the BNP took 209.	After more than 500 days, no new elections and no return to the EU path; in the 2025 local elections Georgian Dream took 81.73% on 40.93% turnout.	Boric won the runoff with 55.87% (4,620,890 votes), 2.8 million more than in the first round, with 1.25 million more voters.	Won the primary with 56.7% (16,898 votes to 12,880), with 29,778 voters, almost twice what the campaign expected.	Labour rose 9.6 points to 40% and gained 30 seats; the Conservatives stayed first but lost their majority. Labour finished 64 seats short of a majority.	The occupiers left on 10 Apr 2014 after the speaker promised an oversight law; the services deal was stopped, but the law never passed (eight versions between 2016 and 2024).	62.07% Yes (1,201,607 votes) on 60.5% turnout: the first country to approve same-sex marriage by popular vote.	It did not stop Brexit: in December 2019, pro-Brexit parties won a majority of seats. The gain was in earned media and in journalists using the quotes.	Labour got 36.9%, second to National’s 44.4%, and formed a government with NZ First and the Greens on 19 October.	66.1% in the runoff against Marine Le Pen (7 May 2017) and about 351 of 577 seats for his majority in June.	The speeches helped secure sanctions and weapons, Starlink arrived two days after Fedorov’s post and UNITED24 showed about $4 billion by Oct 2026; the war was not decided.	A rapid-response system across central government; by Jan 2020 many ministries answered within 60 minutes. The effect on belief in rumours has not been measured.	Worldwide attention and a mobilized generation, but no study links the strikes to specific laws; by Feb 2025, 130,000 in Germany, according to the organizers.
Proof of effect
No causal study: no published data isolates the channel’s effect on votes. Only follower counts and social media interaction figures exist.	No data isolates the effect of door-to-door or of the monitors; field numbers are the movement’s own, and record turnout and the opposition’s withdrawal also mattered. Results are still preliminary.	No study isolates the effect of the doors or the videos; field numbers are the campaign’s own and were never audited. US experiments find near-zero persuasion from contact in general elections; in a primary, and for turnout, the math differs.	The climbdown is documented; the mechanism is not. Nobody can isolate the weight of the calls, the videos, the street or the storming of Parliament in Ruto’s decision.	No proof the poll decided anything: about 7,700 anonymous, unverifiable votes on a server of 150,000+ members; participants say the choice also came from negotiation with the Army and Balen Shah’s support.	No published study isolates the effect of each layer; Pastef’s internal organization is poorly documented and the amounts raised are the party’s own declarations.	Correlation only: per Batory, 81% of those who saw the campaigns said they voted, against 63% of those who didn’t, mixing effect and selection. Field experiments elsewhere support social-norm and voting-plan messages.	No data isolates the canvass’s effect. In RTÉ’s exit poll, 75% said they had always known their vote, only 7% cited contact with campaigners and 43% cited stories in the media.	No study isolates any technique’s effect; the win also depended on Colau, the PSC’s collapse and fragmentation. The turnout rise in poor neighborhoods comes from Subirats’s account, not from official data consulted.	No study isolates the program’s effect; volume figures are campaign-reported. Experiments elsewhere find contact rarely persuades but voting-plan calls raise turnout; the 2020 bet on new voters did not materialize.	No experiment measures the whole program; an observational study (Masket, Public Opinion Quarterly, 2009) found a disproportionate Democratic gain in counties with field offices, enough to flip three states.	It is not possible to isolate how much the street weighed in the decisions of the Assembly and the Court, which followed their own rules; crowd counts range from 208,000 to 2.3 million by source.	Election figures are official, but the isolated effect of social media, women’s rallies or Kottasha Sabhas has not been measured; the collapse of the traditional parties weighed as much as the method.	No one can isolate the weight of each factor: the street, a blackout that backfired, the army’s stance. Many accounts are the coordinators’ own and have not been independently verified.	None: the method has not reached its goal so far. The evidence gathered documents fraud and violence, not that persistence works; the daily count is confirmed by reporting up to Jun 2026.	No study isolates the canvassing effect and there is no verified total of doors or volunteers. Turnout by age and sex are DecideChile estimates; fear of Kast, endorsements and the debates also counted.	No data isolates any piece’s effect; doors, calls, texts and the 68% turnout increase are campaign figures. Precinct-level analysis shows where she won, not why.	No one has isolated the effect of the canvassing or videos; reach figures are Momentum’s own. The British Election Study found no youth turnout surge, and US experiments find near-zero persuasion from contact.	No data isolates the movement’s effect on the opposition’s wins in 2014 and 2016; the 80% of vTaiwan cases leading to government action is counted by its own creators, without audit.	No data isolates the effect of the press or the stories. A post-referendum study (UCD/Red C) found canvassing raised turnout but did not change votes.	None on votes: impact has never been measured, and reach figures come from the group’s own award entry, not an audit. Donations are recorded on the crowdfunding platform.	No study isolates the method’s effect; donation and volunteer figures are the party’s own. The NZES election study shows much of the gain, especially among women, came from the Greens: a reshuffle of the left vote.	No study isolates the Grande Marche’s effect; the figures are the movement’s own and were disputed. The measured door-knocking effect comes from a field experiment in Hollande’s 2012 campaign (Pons).	There is no public measurement of the speeches’ effect on each parliament’s decisions, nor of the CCD’s impact; the UNITED24 figure is the platform’s own counter.	None on the core effect: no published study measures whether the memes reduced belief in rumours, and speed figures are the government’s own. A 2024 thesis found more goodwill but did not measure accuracy.	Participant surveys (Protest for a future, 2019) show who came and how they heard; none measures the strikes’ effect on laws. Street figures are organizers’ estimates.
Cost
Almost nothing in tools; the cost is people's time.	Protest almost free; a campaign of about €2 million, 98% from small donations.	An $8 million primary cap, including public funds; cheap tools; the real cost was volunteers' time.	Almost nothing on tools; tens of millions of shillings donated to care for the wounded.	Zero in software; a terrible human cost: 76 dead and more than 2,600 injured.	Software almost free; hundreds of millions of CFA francs from members and the diaspora for the campaign, lawyers and detainees.	Budgets unpublished; pro bono work, donated media and donor funds.	About €1.6 million raised in ten weeks, from crowdfunders, events and the shop.	More than €90,000 in donations and more than 200 microcredits; open-source software.	Cheap software; minutes, messages and support staff are the real cost.	A campaign costing hundreds of millions of dollars, about $280 million of it on TV; the organizing method itself mainly takes organizers' time.	Nearly free tools; food and warmth paid for directly by thousands of donors and artists.	Rs 528 million declared in the presidential race, less than half of the runner-up's.	Almost zero in tools; a human cost of up to 1,400 killed and more than 11,700 detained.	Tools almost free; hundreds of thousands of lari in fines paid by funds, plus lawyers and protective gear.	Low: self-funded comandos and less ad spending than the opponent.	A video for under $10,000; the opponent spent about $3.4 million.	Very low: unpaid trainers, volunteer-built tools and about £2,000 in ads.	Free and open-source software; equipment, connectivity and ads paid for by crowdfunding.	Started with €30,000 in the bank; funded by crowdfunding, events and a shop.	Space and kit, paid for by small donations; the software is almost free.	Not published; hundreds of thousands of New Zealand dollars in donations in the first days.	About €16.8 million for the presidential race, with tens of thousands of donations.	A tiny writing core and free channels; the real cost was access and time.	Almost zero in software; the cost is dedicated teams on call.	Almost zero: free and open tools, poster board and students' time.
Risks
Single point of failure, court suspensions, innuendo tactics, opacity.	Burnout, an informal hard core, repression and spyware, weak accountability once elected.	Dependence on the candidate and on a pre-existing organization, unaudited numbers, a network that's hard to sustain, opacity with creators once in government.	Deaths and abductions, doxing of MPs, disputed accounts, infiltration, a win reversed through other laws.	Incitement on the server, unverifiable voting, the Army as arbiter, fragmentation and personalization.	Violence and deaths at protests, arrests, internet shutdowns, financial opacity, personalization.	An effect without causal proof, a fragile nonpartisan line, opaque funding, impostors and infrastructure that blocks the vote.	Message discipline that silences part of the base, an overstretched headquarters, abuse of volunteers and storytellers.	Minority government, participation fatigue, institutionalization and dependence on one figure.	Starting late, volume without impact, privacy of friends' data, internal tensions.	The self-organization myth, demobilization after victory, burnout and dependence on money.	Troops on the first night, extreme cold, far-right backlash, disputed numbers and postponed reforms.	Opaque centralism, perceived hypocrisy, rapid loss of support, dissatisfied minorities.	Massacre, torture and disappearance, blackout, reprisals after victory, hidden agendas, electoral failure.	Fines, prison and ill-treatment, frozen funds, escalation without a mandate, fatigue and emigration, no political win so far.	Dependence on voluntary voting and on fear of the opponent; defeats in 2022 and 2025.	Depending on a favorable district and an exceptional candidate; establishment backlash; unaudited numbers.	Self-reported figures, divisive tone, dependence on one leader and faction, an overloaded central team.	Criminal cases, concentrated decision-making, rumours and chat infiltration, deliberation without official commitment.	Complacency over polls, debates with forced balance, abuse of volunteers, internal voices silenced.	Arrests, lawsuits, preaching to the converted, giving the target a platform, pretexts that deceive third parties.	Coming second, dependence on the leader, fiscal attacks in the final stretch, a platform limited by the coalition.	Hack-and-leak attacks, inactive members, a harsh press relationship, undeclared help.	Centralised information, eroding trust, a world whose attention tires and dependence on private platforms.	Government as judge of truth, little measured effect, platform dependence, laws that go too far.	Hate against exposed faces, exposed minors, divisions with no referee and attention that doesn't become policy.