Saturday, May 17, 2008

Politics and Public Relations

As the Democratic campaign season winds down to a close, and there is a lull before the full-throated fall contest, it may be useful to look back at the role public relations and campaign strategy played in the primaries. As the owner of a PR firm (see Cut-It-Out Communications, Inc.), I am particularly sensitive to the relationship between empirical facts and image, or spin.

Hillary Clinton and her campaign made two fundamental miscalculations leading to their current demise. The first was her attempt to look strong as a potential commander-in-chief by voting for the war in Iraq. The idea was to counterattack any attempt to portray her as a woman, inherently unable to send soldiers to their death.

The result of this vote, and her subsequent refusal to apologize for it, gave impetus to her opponents in the early stages of the campaign. She wanted to project a strong image, and it was the wrong one to emphasize given the bent of the activist base of the Democratic Party. She adopted a general election stance, assuming the nomination was hers.

The second failure involved campaign strategy, and that was to adopt a theme of experience (I'll be ready on day one!) when the voters were primarily hungry for change. She was pre-empted on the "change" message by Barack Obama and could never get it back despite some belated efforts to do so.

Hillary Clinton was much better than the campaign she ran. She tried to create a PR persona of strength and experience when the voters wanted peace and change. As a result, Barack Obama was able to outflank her almost every step of the way and built a remarkable organizational structure to win the caucuses, the fulcrum in deciding the contest. In fact, Hillary Clinton was the one who had all the organizational advantages, but her campaign's focus on incorrect images led to their dissipation.