|
By Rachel Marsden | Bio
As any
political strategist will tell you, messaging is everything in political
campaigns. It’s the candidate who gets his message out there in front first --
who sticks to it and keeps hammering away at it -- that will ultimately win the
race. In
the George W. Bush vs. John Kerry match-up, one campaign has stuck to
consistent, clear messaging, while the other is still very much trying to find
itself. And that is precisely why this political strategist is predicting a
victory for President George W. Bush on November 2nd. Key
campaign messages need to be in the can long before any door-knocking, party
conventions or stump speeches ever take place. They must be hashed out and
debated, and then tested to death in focus groups in order to find out how they
resonate with the public. When the rigorous process is complete, these messages
become the candidate’s platform, and every advertisement, piece of literature,
or candidate speech must be geared toward burning these messages into the brains
of voters. Certain
key themes dominated the Republican National Convention: safety, security,
leadership, integrity, compassion. Every example and anecdote presented by the
various speakers served to illustrate one of these notions. By the time Bush
took the stage himself, each one had already been driven home repeatedly. He
didn’t have to explain what he stood for, because the consistent messaging
throughout the entire four-day TV advertisement had already taken care of that
for him. Bush
is now leading Kerry in public opinion by 5-10%, depending on which poll you
happen to be looking at. But even when the two candidates were in a virtual
dead-heat -- with Kerry even slightly ahead -- the Bush campaign didn’t change
or alter its message. The
Kerry camp, however, is in deep trouble. Despite nearly 20 years in the Senate,
no one really knows what John Kerry stands for. If you don’t believe me, ask
any 20 people on the street the same question. In a recent Time Magazine
interview, Kerry says, “The trail of broken promises and reversed decisions of
this Administration is unlike any I have ever seen at any time that I have been
in public life, and I'm going to draw that picture
as clear as a bell.” In other words, the race is headed down the final
stretch, and John Kerry is still psyching himself up and doing visualization
exercises. At this rate, maybe he’ll actually have his messaging ready for
2008. I
have no idea whose brainchild it was to have Kerry base so much of his campaign
on four months’ worth of military service, but the issue seems to register
lower on the Richter scale than filmmaker Michael Moore doing a set of jumping
jacks. Service to one’s country is to be highly commended, but it certainly
doesn’t translate into election wins. If it did, Kerry wouldn’t be standing
there representing his party in the first place--Democratic primary candidate
and decorated former General Wesley Clark would be. George H.W. Bush was awarded
the Distinguished Flying Cross for his heroism in action against enemy Japanese
forces during WWII, and he was beaten in 1992 by draft-dodger Bill Clinton. Adv:
What
does the government know about you? The
Kerry campaign is now scrambling to find an effective message to cling to, but
it’s too late. Signs of trouble include the recent drafting of Clintonites
specializing in damage-control, such as former Clinton press secretary Joe
Lockhart and presidential assistant Joel Johnson. The ship is sinking and these
guys have been brought in to bail water with teaspoons. When your campaign
announces, as Kerry’s has, that you’re getting the most extreme liberal in
the Senate to stump on your behalf, you know the game’s over. The only
‘boost’ Ted Kennedy is going to cause is on some poor scale somewhere along
the campaign trail. But then I suppose the DNC is like the basketball coach
whose team is down by 40 points with a minute to go, and figures he may as well
play a few benchwarmers. What’s the harm now? Let’s make it all about
participation! Bring
back Howard “Screamer” Dean-er, too! That guy was fun.
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHH! Once
you’ve been thrown off your front foot in a campaign--and off your message, if
you’ve ever had one--you’re toast. A perfect example of this is the June
2004 campaign by the Conservative Party of Canada against the reigning federal
Liberal Party. The Liberal government had been drowning in scandal since it was
revealed that $100 million had been paid to Liberal-friendly advertising firm
cronies in exchange for little or no work. Canadians were livid, and it seemed
quite feasible that the scandal could bring down the government. All the
Conservative Party had to do was capitalize on the issue and paint themselves as
a more fiscally responsible alternative. The
Conservatives kicked off the month-long campaign in a dead-heat with the
Liberals. Key messages of fiscal accountability, good governance and ideological
moderation were making their way out to the masses, and were resonating. Because
the Liberals were on the defensive, they were hamstrung in communicating their
own platform. So
why is Canada now saddled with yet another Liberal government today? Because the
Conservative Party was bucked off message and put on the defensive. Near the end
of the campaign, the Conservative leader’s office put out a media advisory
accusing the Liberal leader (Prime Minister Paul Martin) of supporting child
porn. Huh? Betcha they didn’t test that one in focus groups! It was over the
top, and everyone knew it. Moreover, when he was confronted about it,
Conservative leader Stephen Harper stood by the statement. Another horrible
public relations move. Then
someone cued the knuckle-draggers. One Conservative Member of Parliament
publicly opined that there’s no difference between abortion and the beheading
of American contractor Nick Berg in Iraq. Another Conservative MP said in an
interview that a Conservative government would invoke the notwithstanding clause
of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to overrule court decisions that it
didn’t like.
Get
the Updated Popup Blocker! free
download! Now
if you happen to agree with these sentiments, then good for you. Most people
don’t. They don’t represent the centre of the political spectrum, and in
Canada -- as in the USA -- you can’t get elected if you represent the extreme.
The Bush campaign knows this, and it’s why you saw Rudy Giuliani, Arnold
Schwarzenegger, John McCain and political tranny Zell Miller during GOP
convention prime-time--not Rick Santorum and Jerry Falwell. Rachel
Marsden is a political strategist, columnist and talk show host whohas worked in
politics and the media in both the USA and Canada.
Her website is www.rachelmarsden.com
|
|
Home | PUSA Columnists | Talking Heads | Links | Submit | Contact Opinions
expressed do not necessarily reflect those of PoliticalUSA.com.
|