Here's just a few "Catch 22" situations and hypocrisy I've observed from the recent campaign.
1. Obama is criticized for his position on Iraq and then when he moderates his stance, he's accused of being a flip-flopper.
2. When there was a lot of violence in Iraq, we had to keep the troops in to maintain stability, then when the violence declines, we have to stay in or all our gains will be lost.
3. We needed large tax cuts as a peace dividend when the economy was going well, then we needed large tax cuts as a stimulus when the economy was going poorly.
4. Bush tried to open ANWAR for drilling before energy prices went up, and we needed to drill after prices went up.
5. Bush was planning to invade Iraq before 9/11, then the tragedy was used as an excuse for war after 9/11.
6. We needed to cut Social Security always at all times. The current exemption of higher earnings from Social Security taxes would fix the situation, but somehow that isn't proposed as a solution.
7. Somehow regulation of the market regarding oil speculators isn't mentioned as an alternative to lower gas prices, even though everyone seems to agree that it's the speculation, and not supply and demand, that is driving the increase.
8. McCain says the economy is not his strong suit, then spends all his time campaigning about it.
9. Bush is a good President for McCain's private fundraisers, but then is shunned in all public situations.
10. McCain is a maverick and an orthodox Republican at the same time.
This is just a short list of contradictions, lies and deception. I'm sure the reader can think of many more.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Monday, July 7, 2008
10 Suggestions for Obama and McCain: Try PR 101
Here's a note to both candidates regarding some fundamental tenets of public relations (see my company website at www.cioediting.com -- Cut-It-Out Communications -- for my professional qualifications).
1. First, get all your ducks in a row. Both Obama and McCain need to control their own surrogates a little more. Wesley Clarke shouldn't be making controversial remarks on Face the Nation, and Charlie Black shouldn't be fantasizing about political implications of the next terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
2. Choose no more than three talking points and stick to them. Both campaigns need to emphasize just a few themes to the exclusion of all others. I know there seem to be so many great topics out there, but the impact gets minimized when it's Iraq one day, the economy the next, and health insurance third. Bill Clinton had a way to focus when he told his campaign, "It's the economy, stupid."
3. Decide who's your target audience. It's nice for McCain to be concerned about the environment to go after independents, but his support for the Bush tax cuts tends to drive them away.
4. Pay attention to details. Things like the ugly green backdrop for McCain's speech after Obama won the nomination... And, if Obama's going to triangulate by talking about "refining" his Iraq policy, he'd better be prepared for the reaction, and not have to call another press conference to explain it.
5. Be consistent. McCain can't complain about Obama's failure to consider the realities on the ground in Iraq and then criticize him for flip flopping when he announces his trip to do so.
6. This one's primarily for McCain: Learn how to read a teleprompter already. It may be cute to brag you've never used a computer, but this tends turn off voters younger than 70. If you can't handle fundamental electronic equipment, maybe you should find a less demanding occupation.
7. Another for McCain: When your opponent has the eloquence and persuasive charm of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., all rolled into one, it might be helpful to learn how to give a speech. Like when to smile, when to pause, when to pause and smile, etc. You can't hold town hall meetings for the entire campaign.
8. Stick to your strong points. I know Obama's a capable guy, but why does he want to fight the campaign on national security, his opponent's best asset? Is this a matter of egotism? And why does McCain brag about his age during every speech?
9. Provide a long-term vision. We're all sick of the daily back and forth on who said what when.
10. Don't triangulate. This favorite tactic of Bill Clinton doesn't work when there's 24/7 cable news coverage, and every word you say is being recorded for posterity.
Just a few minor tips for the pros and their campaign staffs...
1. First, get all your ducks in a row. Both Obama and McCain need to control their own surrogates a little more. Wesley Clarke shouldn't be making controversial remarks on Face the Nation, and Charlie Black shouldn't be fantasizing about political implications of the next terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
2. Choose no more than three talking points and stick to them. Both campaigns need to emphasize just a few themes to the exclusion of all others. I know there seem to be so many great topics out there, but the impact gets minimized when it's Iraq one day, the economy the next, and health insurance third. Bill Clinton had a way to focus when he told his campaign, "It's the economy, stupid."
3. Decide who's your target audience. It's nice for McCain to be concerned about the environment to go after independents, but his support for the Bush tax cuts tends to drive them away.
4. Pay attention to details. Things like the ugly green backdrop for McCain's speech after Obama won the nomination... And, if Obama's going to triangulate by talking about "refining" his Iraq policy, he'd better be prepared for the reaction, and not have to call another press conference to explain it.
5. Be consistent. McCain can't complain about Obama's failure to consider the realities on the ground in Iraq and then criticize him for flip flopping when he announces his trip to do so.
6. This one's primarily for McCain: Learn how to read a teleprompter already. It may be cute to brag you've never used a computer, but this tends turn off voters younger than 70. If you can't handle fundamental electronic equipment, maybe you should find a less demanding occupation.
7. Another for McCain: When your opponent has the eloquence and persuasive charm of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., all rolled into one, it might be helpful to learn how to give a speech. Like when to smile, when to pause, when to pause and smile, etc. You can't hold town hall meetings for the entire campaign.
8. Stick to your strong points. I know Obama's a capable guy, but why does he want to fight the campaign on national security, his opponent's best asset? Is this a matter of egotism? And why does McCain brag about his age during every speech?
9. Provide a long-term vision. We're all sick of the daily back and forth on who said what when.
10. Don't triangulate. This favorite tactic of Bill Clinton doesn't work when there's 24/7 cable news coverage, and every word you say is being recorded for posterity.
Just a few minor tips for the pros and their campaign staffs...
Saturday, June 28, 2008
A Place Called Unity
It was political theater at its best in Unity, NH this week. It's not that I don't believe Hillary. It's just got to be so incredibly hard for her to do this, and she deserves all the kudos she gets. Just imagine being the favorite to win the Democratic nomination and then the Presidency, only to see it all slip away. It would have crushed other people, but Hillary did what she does best, pressing on despite all the clamor around her. It was that poise in the face of the Monica Lewinsky scandal that earned her stripes. Despite all the humiliation, she took counsel and decided to save her marriage.
This time, she's saving her political career and her husband's legacy, and I have no doubt she'll do it. Hillary does indeed love her country, and she's come out of this campaign with the admiration of all around her. I heard on TV the other day, she's in the same league as some of the noblest leaders of recent history who didn't quite make it: Al Gore, Hubert Humphrey, Adlai Stevenson. That's quite a rarified atmosphere, and I look forward to what she does with her new power. I have only the highest expectations.
Monday, June 23, 2008
The New McCarthyism: A Challenge to John McCain
I am sick to death of the cynical efforts of the Bush administration to equate any disagreement with their viewpoint on the war of terrorism as tantamount to unpatriotic beliefs. Since when, in a democracy, is disagreement and healthy debate on the issues transformed into personal ad hominem attacks on the individuals making them?
This is, in fact, the new McCarthyism, and I challenge John McCain to disavow it once and for all by firing his chief strategist, Charlie Black. Today, Charlie Black invoked the spectre of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil as beneficial to the McCain campaign. After a few non-denials, he issued a typical political non-apology.
Does Senator McCain have the courage of his convictions and his vow to run a campaign on the issues without innuendo or fear-mongering? Does he really belief in the honor and respect needed to do so?
If he does, it will require some hard decisions on his part. Firing Charlie Black would send a strong signal that Mr. McCain means what he says.
This is, in fact, the new McCarthyism, and I challenge John McCain to disavow it once and for all by firing his chief strategist, Charlie Black. Today, Charlie Black invoked the spectre of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil as beneficial to the McCain campaign. After a few non-denials, he issued a typical political non-apology.
Does Senator McCain have the courage of his convictions and his vow to run a campaign on the issues without innuendo or fear-mongering? Does he really belief in the honor and respect needed to do so?
If he does, it will require some hard decisions on his part. Firing Charlie Black would send a strong signal that Mr. McCain means what he says.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Barack Obama in a Landslide
Am I missing something, or does it look like Barack Obama will win the November election in a landslide?
Almost every issue is in his favor. People are fed up with gas at four dollars a gallon, and two oil men are in the White House. The Republicans aren't even trying to reduce the price, other than using the issue to promote drilling offshore and in the Alaskan wilderness. And this is just a hypocritical effort to enact legislation they have sought for years.
Other than gas, there's the rising cost of food and a general malaise in the economy. This weakness can be attributed directly to the financial effects of a huge deficit, primarily because of the war in Iraq and taxes heavily skewed to favor the rich.
How can the Hispanic vote go Republican after that Party stoked the flames of nativism and prejudice? They endorsed the break-up of families and punishment for some of the lowest tiers of our society, people who struggle every day to just make ends meet and fill some of the jobs no other American would touch.
What about universal healthcare and the fact we are the only developed country in the Western world without a safety net for our citizens? How much longer will the Republicans be able to veto legislation such as the Children's Health Insurance Program?
And regardless of your opinion of the surge, how come the Republicans voted against a GI bill designed to offer veterans a free education after putting their lives on the line for our country? This is not a Democratic or Republican issue; it's only the same thing we did for veterans returning after World War II.
How about all the Republican scandals? The corruption, the outing of CIA agents like Valerie Plame, the usurpation of power in the executive branch, or holding civil judges to a political litmus test? Not to mention Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, warrantless wiretapping, the use of torture such as waterboarding, suspension of habeas corpus and other civil liberties.
What about the ongoing shameful response to New Orleans? President Bush promised a Marshall Plan to rebuild the area. Well???
I know John McCain is not as bad as George Bush; that's a very low bar. But someone, or some Party, must be held accountable.
Almost every issue is in his favor. People are fed up with gas at four dollars a gallon, and two oil men are in the White House. The Republicans aren't even trying to reduce the price, other than using the issue to promote drilling offshore and in the Alaskan wilderness. And this is just a hypocritical effort to enact legislation they have sought for years.
Other than gas, there's the rising cost of food and a general malaise in the economy. This weakness can be attributed directly to the financial effects of a huge deficit, primarily because of the war in Iraq and taxes heavily skewed to favor the rich.
How can the Hispanic vote go Republican after that Party stoked the flames of nativism and prejudice? They endorsed the break-up of families and punishment for some of the lowest tiers of our society, people who struggle every day to just make ends meet and fill some of the jobs no other American would touch.
What about universal healthcare and the fact we are the only developed country in the Western world without a safety net for our citizens? How much longer will the Republicans be able to veto legislation such as the Children's Health Insurance Program?
And regardless of your opinion of the surge, how come the Republicans voted against a GI bill designed to offer veterans a free education after putting their lives on the line for our country? This is not a Democratic or Republican issue; it's only the same thing we did for veterans returning after World War II.
How about all the Republican scandals? The corruption, the outing of CIA agents like Valerie Plame, the usurpation of power in the executive branch, or holding civil judges to a political litmus test? Not to mention Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, warrantless wiretapping, the use of torture such as waterboarding, suspension of habeas corpus and other civil liberties.
What about the ongoing shameful response to New Orleans? President Bush promised a Marshall Plan to rebuild the area. Well???
I know John McCain is not as bad as George Bush; that's a very low bar. But someone, or some Party, must be held accountable.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
God Bless Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
What a great speech Senator Clinton gave today. Her soaring rhetoric, magnaminous attitude and retrospective on her candidacy were truly inspiration. She really has done this country an enormous service, and somehow she knew how important it was to stick to her guns until the end.
Even if her contributions came to an end today, her devotion to her signature issue of universal health care will be remembered by future generations when they look back in shock at our current state of affairs. That devotion and commitment is clearly the driving force behind her endorsement of Barack Obama, not political expediency or a desire to become Vice President, as some pundits would have you believe. She has literally sacrificed herself to this cause, and her followers would do well to heed her advice and remain in the Democratic fold.
I think many felt a sense of irritation at Senator Clinton's persistence, but today's speech put everything in perspective. Her devotion to women's rights drove her to go the distance, and this achievement goes beyond symbolic impact. It is a trendsetting precedent for the next female candidate for President, whether it's her or someone else. It puts women into the major leagues as Presidential contenders, and that's a good thing for our nation. As over 50 percent of the population, the resources women offer our society should be encouraged and treasured. The potential they represent is important in all fields, not just politics. Who knows what women will discover a cure to cancer or make a technological breakthrough or change our society in some other fundamental way?
So, kudos to Senator Clinton today. She may have been unappreciated, and she may have been ridiculed by some, but the good she has done for our national soul will last for a long, long time.
Even if her contributions came to an end today, her devotion to her signature issue of universal health care will be remembered by future generations when they look back in shock at our current state of affairs. That devotion and commitment is clearly the driving force behind her endorsement of Barack Obama, not political expediency or a desire to become Vice President, as some pundits would have you believe. She has literally sacrificed herself to this cause, and her followers would do well to heed her advice and remain in the Democratic fold.
I think many felt a sense of irritation at Senator Clinton's persistence, but today's speech put everything in perspective. Her devotion to women's rights drove her to go the distance, and this achievement goes beyond symbolic impact. It is a trendsetting precedent for the next female candidate for President, whether it's her or someone else. It puts women into the major leagues as Presidential contenders, and that's a good thing for our nation. As over 50 percent of the population, the resources women offer our society should be encouraged and treasured. The potential they represent is important in all fields, not just politics. Who knows what women will discover a cure to cancer or make a technological breakthrough or change our society in some other fundamental way?
So, kudos to Senator Clinton today. She may have been unappreciated, and she may have been ridiculed by some, but the good she has done for our national soul will last for a long, long time.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
The End of Hillary Clinton's Dream
Imagine being the odds-on favorite to become President of the United States and then see it all slip away. That is a very small club. Al Gore is a member. John Kerry may have been a member. And now Senator Hillary Clinton is about to become one.
The widely acknowledged frontrunner at the beginning of the primary season, Hillary Clinton was leading in national polls, and it was, and still is, a very Democratic year. Thanks in no small part to George W. Bush, Republican scandals, an unpopular war -- seemingly without end -- rising gasoline prices, the foreclosure crisis, the increasing cost of food, and a generally stagnant economy, a Democrat should be able to sleep-walk his (or her) way to the White House.
Hillary Clinton was much better than the campaign she ran. In fact, if she had learned to trust herself instead of listening to high-priced consultants such as Mark Penn, and those who said a woman had to be perceived as tough to become commander-in-chief, we would be sitting here congratulating her instead of Barack Obama. If Hillary had campaigned from the beginning in the same manner as the past six weeks, she would have won the nomination in a walk.
There were three major problems with Hillary's campaign. First, as noted in the above paragraph, she felt a need to vote in favor of the Iraq War to show her toughness, instead of doing what in her heart she felt was best for the country. That vote plagued Hillary throughout the primary season, and she clung to it because of her conceived need to seem tough for the general election campaign. However, you can't get to the general election campaign until you win the nomination, and Hillary's foes were able to paint her into a corner on that vote and torpedo her relationship with Democratic activists.
Second, Hillary Clinton was pre-empted in the message of change. She chose the theme "experience" instead, ready on day one, yada yada. But this represented a fundamental misreading of the Democratic electorate, and Barack Obama outflanked her on the change message. Where were you Mark Penn? What were you thinking? How could you miss the importance of the change theme after eight years of George W. Bush? I'm a lousy Harvard graduate with a degree in Government (and the owner of a PR firm, www.cioediting.com), and I could have given her better advice.
Hillary's final mistake was an organizational one. She had a nationwide organization, the support of the Party, elected officials all over the place, and she let Barack Obama build a competing structure. HILLARY should have been winning all the caucus states, not the other way around. Instead, she coasted on her name recognition, assured by her experts that the race would be over after the regional primaries in February. When it wasn't, she was unprepared for the caucus contests that followed, and let Barack win a string of 10 elections in a row.
Instead, tonight, we have this bittersweet moment, the wistful looking back at what might have been.
The widely acknowledged frontrunner at the beginning of the primary season, Hillary Clinton was leading in national polls, and it was, and still is, a very Democratic year. Thanks in no small part to George W. Bush, Republican scandals, an unpopular war -- seemingly without end -- rising gasoline prices, the foreclosure crisis, the increasing cost of food, and a generally stagnant economy, a Democrat should be able to sleep-walk his (or her) way to the White House.
Hillary Clinton was much better than the campaign she ran. In fact, if she had learned to trust herself instead of listening to high-priced consultants such as Mark Penn, and those who said a woman had to be perceived as tough to become commander-in-chief, we would be sitting here congratulating her instead of Barack Obama. If Hillary had campaigned from the beginning in the same manner as the past six weeks, she would have won the nomination in a walk.
There were three major problems with Hillary's campaign. First, as noted in the above paragraph, she felt a need to vote in favor of the Iraq War to show her toughness, instead of doing what in her heart she felt was best for the country. That vote plagued Hillary throughout the primary season, and she clung to it because of her conceived need to seem tough for the general election campaign. However, you can't get to the general election campaign until you win the nomination, and Hillary's foes were able to paint her into a corner on that vote and torpedo her relationship with Democratic activists.
Second, Hillary Clinton was pre-empted in the message of change. She chose the theme "experience" instead, ready on day one, yada yada. But this represented a fundamental misreading of the Democratic electorate, and Barack Obama outflanked her on the change message. Where were you Mark Penn? What were you thinking? How could you miss the importance of the change theme after eight years of George W. Bush? I'm a lousy Harvard graduate with a degree in Government (and the owner of a PR firm, www.cioediting.com), and I could have given her better advice.
Hillary's final mistake was an organizational one. She had a nationwide organization, the support of the Party, elected officials all over the place, and she let Barack Obama build a competing structure. HILLARY should have been winning all the caucus states, not the other way around. Instead, she coasted on her name recognition, assured by her experts that the race would be over after the regional primaries in February. When it wasn't, she was unprepared for the caucus contests that followed, and let Barack win a string of 10 elections in a row.
Instead, tonight, we have this bittersweet moment, the wistful looking back at what might have been.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
