2008 Primaries, Views on News, public relations • July 3rd, 2008

Children of the corn

by Chris Lato

In the corn-growing Midwest, members of Congress are picking sides over ethanol. This is shaping up to be a serious campaign issue, but one presidential candidate is walking a tricky line that will be tough to maintain as anger over high gas and food prices grow, and the public gets restless and demands solutions.

To set the stage, U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner recently sent a piece out to his constituents with the headline: “Ethanol Mandate Must End.” He makes the argument that record prices for gas and groceries can be traced back to a great extent to the mandate, which subsidizes the ethanol industry and gives incentives for farmers to grow more corn to use in fuel.

Sensenbrenner points to studies that contend ethanol is actually bad for the environment in a number of ways – causing more carbon emissions, prompting poor land use decisions, and requiring a huge amount of water to produce ethanol.

Now, consider this bit from a long interview with Barack Obama in the current issue of ‘Rolling Stone’ (I know, I got a lot of column fodder from this issue). The interviewer is the fair-and-balanced Jann S. Wenner, who actually makes a half-hearted attempt to pin Obama down on this one. Wenner actually sounds a little like Sensenbrenner – talk about strange bedfellows.

Jann S. Wenner: You’ve been a big supporter of ethanol. But studies show it doesn’t do anything to reduce global warming, it’s actually a less efficient way to produce energy than gasoline, and it’s contributing to growing food shortages worldwide. Are you going to continue backing it?

Barack Obama: Corn-based ethanol I see as a transitional technology. We’ve got to invest in alternative fuels.

Wenner: This one is ranked as pretty bad.

Obama: I understand, which is why we’re going to have a transition from corn-based ethanol to cellulosic ethanol, not using food crops as the source of energy.

Wenner: So you foresee this coming to an end.

Obama: What I foresee is us transitioning into other ways of developing these energy sources. The fact that we had corn-based ethanol, and that industry has matured, provides us with distribution networks and infrastructure that can ultimately be used for other ethanol sources.

Wenner doesn’t touch on why Obama has been a big supporter of ethanol, and notice Obama is carefully refusing to explicitly bash ethanol. He has his reasons – read this fascinating New York Times story to get the scoop on why this is.

For starters, I’m not a scientist but I have to think it’s not as easy as just flicking a switch to make such a massive change in the production of ethanol. Will the government be funding such a massive changeover? How long would it take? What about farmers being pushed to make a big change in what they grow, such as switchgrass, which Obama has said could be used to make cellulosic ethanol?

Also, Obama is a Senator from a corn-growing state. He has voted for the ethanol mandate in the past. Does he now repudiate that vote? Will he continue to support corn-based ethanol, of immediately push in a new direction? What will his friends in the ethanol industry think?

No one asked me, but I would suggest Obama rethink his campaign structure when it comes to those he is relying on as energy advisors, and make a stronger effort to advance his energy agenda specific to ethanol. The public is moving past rhetoric and looking for answers every time they put $80 in their gas tank and pay ever-rising prices at the local Piggly Wiggly.

Obama and John McCain both have energy plans out there for all to see. But as the cliché goes, the devil is in the details. And when it comes to politicians, it’s what they do, not what they say, that is always the most telling. Speeches may dazzle, but voting records are far more telling.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Branding Politix • July 2nd, 2008

The case of the reappearing pin

by Chris Lato

I have subscribed to ‘Rolling Stone’ for nearly 20 years now. What can I say? I like the pop culture coverage. As for the political stuff, it’s all been downhill since Hunter died.

Anyway, I was greeted at my mailbox this week with the new issue of ‘RS’ and the grinning face of Barack Obama, eyes closed, head tilted slightly downward…

OK, the coronation of Barack Obama has begun at ‘RS.’ That’s about the least shocking news in recent memory. But what I was struck by was the very conspicuous return of ‘The Pin.’ With such a basic, copy-free cover, that American flag pin on the senator’s lapel just leapt out at me.

Remember the flap a few months ago when Obama took the time to offer a dissertation on why he wasn’t wearing an American flag pin on his lapel? Read this for a refresher.

Now, I wouldn’t deny Sen. Obama the right to change his mind (the more combative term is ‘flip-flop’). Ultimately, it is up to the voters to weigh whether Obama’s changing positions are a thoughtful reconsideration of the issues, or a sign of a candidate who is not prepared to lead.

The flag pin sends an undeniable message. In some states, refusing to wear that pin would cost a whole lot of votes. I appreciate Obama’s belief that his ‘ideas’ are the true sign of patriotism, but sometimes in politics the game is simple: step up and embrace the symbolism along with the substance. Not wearing the pin on the campaign trail, and offering what could be perceived as a condescending explanation of that decision, also sends a powerful message.

The flag is one of those few symbols that many Americans of all generations respond to deeply and without apology –witness the passion that emerges anytime a flag-burning story is in the news. To deny this basic truth is to run the risk of alienating large chunks of voters. It looks as though Senator Obama is learning as he goes on the campaign trail. The real question is whether he is learning fast enough.

Regarding candidates and patriotism, check out this week’s exchange between Greta Van Susteren and Karl Rove. The full piece can be found here.

ROVE: Well, remember also, Senator Obama said that he stopped wearing a flag lapel pin because he decided after 9/11 that true patriotism did not consist in wearing a flag lapel pin but in speaking out on the issues. He questioned the patriotism of anybody who thought, you know, that they were honoring their country by putting a flag lapel pin on. So I mean, I thought it was really interesting that he was so sensitive. I don’t know who he’s talking about questioning his patriotism, but I do know that he questioned the patriotism of literally millions of Americans, who in a symbol of devotion to their country, put a flag on their lapel or on their uniform or on their automobile. I mean, I just — you know, it’s…

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, I take sort of a flip on that, though. I actually — I side with Senator Obama partially on that, is that anyone who would criticize him for not wearing a flag pin, because you know, I — I don’t know why, but that’s not the measure of my patriotism, so…

(CROSSTALK)

ROVE: I agree — I agree with you.

VAN SUSTEREN: OK.

ROVE: Nobody should be criticized for not wearing a flag lapel pin. On the other hand, nobody should say that you’re not being a true patriot if you do wear a flag lapel pin, which is what he said. He said true patriotism does not consist of wearing a flag lapel pin but instead speaking out on the issues. Look, you can be a true patriot and wear a flag lapel pin or not. You can be a true patriot speaking out on the issues or not. But the judgmental nature of his approach, saying if you wear a flag lapel pin, that’s not true patriotism, that was calling into question the patriotism of those who make the decision to wear that symbol.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Branding Politix, Strategic Blueprints • July 1st, 2008

And the best candidate for vice-president is…

by Chris Lato

You’ll never believe this. Or maybe you will. At first blush it seemed ridiculous, but upon reflection it makes some sense.

Colin Powell for Vice President? For BOTH McCain and Obama? This story offers a fascinating, if egg-headed way of reaching this conclusion. His is the one name that hasn’t really been on the radar screen until now. Perhaps Powell paid for the study?

But consider: Powell is seen as a moderate who can work from the middle to achieve consensus. And while he has been tied to GOP administrations and his initial support of the current Iraq war, he offers the ‘elder statesman’ heft that Obama needs, and a moderating influence for those ‘McSame’ critics who believe McCain is little more than a war-monger in the Bush mold. He’d be a pretty strong pick for either one, if you believe (as I do) that the VP choice matters more in the 2008 cycle than it has in the past.

Interestingly, this story surfaces as the debate rages over the degree to which McCain should discuss and campaign on his military service record. Wesley Clark took McCain to task, and now Obama is backpedaling while the GOP lines up in a massive fit of outrage.

I remind you only of this: four years ago, if memory serves, the military service records of our presidential candidates was a pretty darn big deal. Remember the howls from the left about President Bush’s service in the National Guard while John Kerry was in Vietnam? Remember how Kerry proclaimed he was “reporting for duty” at the 2004 national convention? Hmm. I guess certain political experts are counting on the voting public to have a short memory about these things. But I digress.

Back to the VP-picking: Will anyone choose Colin Powell? Nah. He’s probably not interested. But it’s fun to ponder these notions of a dream ticket, and how things like ego trip up notions of a perfect pairing of candidates.

Just like Obama won’t pick Hillary for VP, and McCain is said to be weighing whether he can stomach Mitt Romney as a running mate (seems like a long-shot to me, but that would be a pretty strong ticket), this is the kind of prognosticating that we can - and probably will – be doing right up to national convention time.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Grass Roots Organization, Leadership, Messaging • June 30th, 2008

The best use of resources…?

by Chris Lato

Good-government types are always bemoaning the fact that Wisconsin’s legislative incumbents often sail to re-election without even facing a legitimate challenger – which makes this piece from Wispolitics all the more interesting.

Take a poll of friends and neighbors of what they think of their representative, and the answer is often the same when you drill down to it: the Legislature is corrupt, but MY representative is A-OK. Why? Because if the incumbent has half a brain and wants to keep his or her job, a constant presence will be maintained in the community. Appearances at parades, mailers to constituents, open houses/townhall meetings, good constituent relations, etc. are all part of keeping up appearances with those who put you in office. A good level of contact typically keeps constituents satisfied and maintains the profile of the politico.

Anyway, Wispolitics reports the Democrats are taking it to the GOP, fielding candidates in all but a handful of Wisconsin’s 99 Assembly districts. There are two ways to look at this development.

The first: the Democrats are clearly counting on a repeat of ’06, when virtually anyone with a ‘D’ next to his or her name rode the wave of anti-GOP (and anti-Bush) sentiment, regardless of actual merit as candidates. It’s also a perception game: give the impression that Dems will be out in force and aggressively take it to the other team. Remember the ‘Barack Obama invades Wisconsin’ story?

The other side of that coin is that Assembly races are extremely localized and people will respond not just to the political affiliation, but to the person doing the job. Some of these districts are so safe that Democrats are running as little more than cannon fodder.

Also, a lot of it depends on resources. If the Dems are actually willing to commit to supporting those candidates, then this tactic will be interesting to watch play out. However, if it’s all a smokescreen - these candidates are sub-par and are only out there to put someone with a ‘D’ on the ballot, and are left to twist in the wind without support from the state party - then local voters will be smart enough to see through the ploy and will likely vote accordingly.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Messaging, Views on News • June 19th, 2008

Feingold still hearts McCain

by Chris Lato

He’s backing off considerably, and falling into line like a good Democrat, but it’s clear Russ Feingold still thinks John McCain is a force to be reckoned with this fall.

This has to be giving Democrats heartburn. It wouldn’t be the first time Wisconsin’s senator has said things that get the DNC’s teeth gnashing, but in a charged and competitive election year, Feingold’s continued words of praise for McCain as a colleague and candidate have to sting. They should also be admired by any reasonable person who’s not on the extreme fringes of either party – which represents a good chunk of Wisconsin voters.

Feingold’s intelligence and political instincts deserve respect. That said, his comments about McCain should give pause to those who think Barack Obama is simply going to have his way with McCain this November. It’s just not shaping up to be that easy, and Feingold can read the tea leaves as well as anyone.

McCain and Feingold have both positioned themselves as ‘mavericks,’ but while they can articulate the decisions and stances they take in a well-reasoned manner, they are also political animals who understand when they can take a calculated risk by stepping away from their parties.

McCain is paying the price for that this year, however. His already strained relationship with conservatives means they have been slow to embrace him. At the same time, as Feingold understands, the current political climate favors someone like McCain, who holds appeal beyond the established base. It’s a tricky balance McCain has to strike, but it can be done. Beating the ‘McSame’ drumbeat is disingenuous and won’t fly – and Feingold has to know that.

The connection between McCain and Feingold is striking. It’s a combination of political savvy and native intelligence that makes them spiritual blood-brothers. They are both very good at navigating shark-infested waters.

It must be tough being a communications manager for either one – the endless challenges and headaches would be enough to write a book. But the way McCain and Feingold operate, on policy and in public, works for them. John McCain and Russ Feingold are their own best PR managers.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Branding Politix, Creative, Report from the Field, Views on News • June 12th, 2008

Notes from the silly season

by Chris Lato

In the “Herding Cats” department, some party leaders are straying from the pack – and it’s happening on both sides of the aisle.

Democrats don’t like Barack Obama. Republicans don’t like John McCain. Hillary supporters are saying they’d rather vote for McCain - “Anybody but Obama.”

more »

Comments (4) »

2008 Primaries, Grass Roots Organization, Strategic Blueprints, Views on News • June 11th, 2008

In search of…Obama’s ground troops

by Chris Lato

Well, this is interesting. Turns out Barack Obama may not have a gargantuan campaign operation running full-steam ahead in Wisconsin after all. Please refer to my Tuesday column for more about this fracas, but it does make my point that campaigns routinely talk tough about organizational strength, but the hot air often can’t be backed up by facts.

I know what you’re thinking: this is a news release from the Republican Party. We all know it’s full of lies and scurrilous innuendoes. How can we trust it? more »

No Comments »

2008 Primaries • June 10th, 2008

Noooooo!

by Chris Lato

This is not a winning strategy for John McCain if he plans to take Wisconsin.

For some reason it reminded me of Carl Spackler…it’s so easy to mix up ‘golfers’ and ‘gophers.’

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Grass Roots Organization • June 10th, 2008

Are McCain’s Wisconsin ground troops MIA?

by Chris Lato

At first blush, this doesn’t sound good.

What has John McCain been doing these past few months? Is an opportunity now lost? Has Barack Obama laid the groundwork for an unstoppable juggernaut of a campaign in Wisconsin?

Hold your horses a moment. In past columns I have discussed the need to have a strong ground game, and the importance of field organization in winning races in Wisconsin. It’s not the sexiest part of the campaign, it doesn’t get much attention, but it is absolutely vital, especially in a battleground state such as ours. And the Trib article suggests McCain is already falling behind. more »

Comments (2) »

2008 Primaries, Messaging • June 6th, 2008

The air war begins

by Chris Lato

Wisconsin is about to see a new round of presidential campaign ads, courtesy of John McCain. If you needed a sign that Wisconsin will be a battleground state this year, this is as sure a sign as any – TV ads in June signaling the general election campaign is here in earnest.

It’s a character piece, intended to remind people of McCain’s bona fides on issues related to war. It offers no specifics but sets the tone of seriousness with which McCain would presumably approach Iraq, while subtly distancing him from the cavalier ‘cowboy’ image President Bush’s opponents have tagged our current president with. Iraq, the word and the war, is never mentioned directly in the spot.

The unmistakable undercurrent: John McCain is seasoned and tested by experiences the vast majority of us are lucky we will never have to face…and Barack Obama is not.

We’ll see the messages Obama chooses to focus on. The economy? The war? Fuel prices? There are plenty of issues on the table in this summer of discontent.

No Comments »