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 »

New Media • June 25th, 2008

Politicians tweet to future voters

by Jon Tingley

You may have heard about a crazy new thing called Twitter lately. The truth is, it’s not that new, and it’s not that crazy. Twitter was launched almost two years ago in July and has since gained almost 2 million users worldwide. The number of Twitter users is constantly growing, as is the sites popularity; around 2 million tweets are sent each day. As you’ll read below, a few politicians have started using Twitter and one has seen overwhelming success.

What is Twitter? Well, as confusing as it sounds, the idea behind the service is very simple. The service is based on the question “What are you doing now?” and from that, you can communicate your own or your business’s status to the world. Twitter was created as a cross-platform tool to communicate your status to friends. All you have to do is create an account, find some people to follow, find some people to follow you, and start tweeting. The beauty of it all is that your followers can choose how they would like to receive your updates, either by text message, instant message, or on the web. You can also update your status from your mobile phone, instant messenger, on the website, or through the multitude of applications and plug-ins that have been created just to tweet.

What can this do for you? Twitter may have been intended for individual use, but it hasn’t taken long for a few enterprising minds to think of ways to use this in political settings.

For example, Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton and John McCain have all embraced the service as a way to recruit and communicate with America’s youth. While it has been successful for two of them, Obama is leading with nearly 42,000 people following him over Clinton’s 4,142 and McCain’s 68. What’s interesting about Obama’s use is that not only does he have thousands of followers, but he is also following over 43,000 people; imagine the tweets he gets. Click the links for their pages. Obama. Clinton. McCain.

The bottom line is that we are living in an age where information is updated and disbursed every second. For a politician to succeed, they will have to figure out how to keep up. Will Twitter be the way?

No Comments »

Messaging, Views on News • June 23rd, 2008

Picking up the pieces

by Jon Tingley

It seems the Democrats are getting back on track after announcing Obama as their nominee.  It was just announced that former Obama rival Hilary Clinton will be joining him on the campaign trail in an attempt to reunite the party.  This comes at a critical time for Obama as he tries to underscore his decision to deny public funding for his campaign, a move that has sparked intense criticism of his credibility from both sides.

The question I have is: will the Clintons actually support Obama?

The press will be paying very close attention to Mrs. Clinton on Thursday and Friday when she meets with Obama and her top contributors to raise money for the Democratic bid.  So far, it seems she has gracefully stepped to the side to allow Obama to shine, but everyone will be watching to see if she can keep up the act.  Obama has been trying to do his part to mend their tumultuous relationship, even going so far as to scold his supporters in Detroit for booing Senator Clinton, saying, “Senator Clinton is one of the finest public servants we have in American life today.”

Only time will tell if the former contenders can patch things up with their supporters in time to succeed in November; maybe that’s why Obama is taking the extra cash.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Views on News • May 12th, 2008

Good idea, gimmick…or both?

by Chris Lato

At first blush, a federal gas tax holiday this summer sounds like an awfully good idea as gas prices in Wisconsin edge toward a sickening $4 a gallon in some places. US Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) is on board, although not without his own twist on the issue – paying for the holiday by suspending earmarks. It’s the kind of tacked-on idea that can torpedo the whole endeavor, although Ryan deserves much credit for being a consistent conservative in going after how Washington conducts its budget business.

Hillary Clinton and John McCain like it, arguing taxpayers need a break this summer. Barack Obama says it’s a gimmick designed to pander. A politician - pandering? Shocking!

I will say I’m down for anything that lowers gas prices. The jury is still out on who would benefit, with a fair number of economists saying a gas tax holiday is not the way to go.

It is interesting to consider whether this is just a cheap election-year ploy, designed to get votes and nothing else. Consider the tax rebate checks, which are now in the mail or being direct-deposited nationwide. When Congress approved the checks in 2001, critics called it a gimmick. Seven years later, with a new round of checks going out, do those same critics still see things the same way? Is it a gimmick to put some tax money back in people’s pockets? I, for one, am looking forward to getting that $600.

Still, the underlying problem is that it feels like nothing is being done to address the long term issues that are contributing to the sky-high gas prices. In that sense, rebate checks and tax holidays ARE gimmicks – they sell a short-term solution to a long-term problem. It requires bravery, innovative thinking, and big action to get to the bottom of why we are here and how we can change course. The tax holidays and rebate checks grab headlines for their political supporters now – but what happens when the summer is over?

Comment (1) »

2008 Primaries, Views on News • May 8th, 2008

When ego gets in the way

by Chris Lato

With Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign basically in death-rattle mode, the inevitable question surfaces: what about a Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton ‘dream ticket?’

Well, holy cow. That would be some ticket. I daresay that kind of powerhouse ticket would be awfully hard to beat – that is, if the rivers of bad blood between the two camps could somehow magically disappear.

Too bad it’ll never happen.

The old political saw is that the vice-presidential candidate makes little difference in an election. This year, though, the rules are changing.

John McCain is no spring chicken. He is well aware of the focus on his age and the need to pick a younger running mate in case his health goes south. That pick will weigh on the minds of voters who will otherwise say McCain is too old.

For the Dems, the idea of having the top two survivors of this extreme-fighting match of a primary season united on the ticket has to be powerfully appealing. So what’s to stop it?

Ego. From both candidates.

Start with Obama. Beyond all the political baggage the Clintons bring, does anyone think Obama wants Hillary Clinton, and her former president husband, kicking around the White House and demanding their say in what’s going on? And bad mouthing him when the Clintons don’t get their way?

Obama wants to be the leader. As president, he will not be looking to share this responsibility. It would be an extraordinarily awkward arrangement. He knows better than to undermine the image he is looking to present.

Which leads us to Clinton. After a bitter, hard-fought loss, is her desire to get back in the White House so strong that she would be willing to play the role of second banana under President Obama? It’s hard to process that one.

It will be fascinating to watch this all play out in the next few weeks. The talk of an Obama-Clinton pairing will undoubtedly heat up. And it will undoubtedly collapse.

And if I’m wrong, well, I’ll shave my head bald.

Comment (1) »

2008 Primaries • May 6th, 2008

The Democratic Dichotomy

by Jon Tingley

The battle for the Democratic nomination continues after Obama narrowly escapes defeat in Guam by 7 votes. The fact that Guam’s four delegate votes mattered to Clinton and Obama is a telltale sign of how close this battle really is. The question Democrats should ask themselves now is: what is this prolonged battle doing to the Democratic party? This power struggle between Obama and Clinton could divide the party and lose them the election if they don’t figure out how to unite after their nominee has been chosen.

Howard Dean has said that the deciding will be done by June 3^rd, but many still question whether he has the power to make that kind of guarantee. Both Clinton and Obama have shown how dedicated they are to winning, so unless one of them suffers a huge loss soon, I don’t see this fight ending by June. While the two continue to throw punches, McCain is out recruiting more Republican voters and improving his image.

It’s hard to blame the Democrats though, both nominees are pretty evenly matched. For example, both have a hard time remembering the facts about their past. Hilary spoke in March about her experience in war, which proved to be far from the truth. Obama has made a similar mistake in addressing his relationship with good ol’ Rev. Wright. In the beginning people seemed to believe that Obama had never heard or supported Wright’s radical views, but now his assertions are becoming hard to believe. The effect of these follies is magnified in this election because it is not a fight between Republicans and Democrats, but a fight between Republicans, Obama and Clinton. The two Dems are concentrating more on battling each other than beating McCain and I’m not convinced that the Democratic party will be able to rise from the aftermath in time to win the election. According to a poll in Pennsylvania, 26 percent of Clinton supporters said if Obama won the nomination they would vote for McCain, while only 19 percent Obama backers said they would support McCain if Clinton won.

As this battle continues, the Democratic party loses ground in the eyes of the electorate. Who will win the nomination? It’s hard to tell, but unless things shape up soon, the Dems are in for a world of hurt.

Just for fun, check out Conan mocking Wright on Late Night.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Branding Politix, Messaging, Views on News, public relations • April 30th, 2008

The Wright stuff

by Chris Lato

Am I the only one who’s really jazzed to see Hillary Clinton go toe-to-toe against Bill O’Reilly tonight? She is throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. It’s a Hail Mary pass. Pick your favorite cliché and go with it. How it will go is anybody’s guess, but this is as good a test as any of Clinton’s ability to defuse the enemy and connect with an audience that, charitably, is not inclined to support her. Check your local listings to find out when World War III begins.

While we’re at it, do you think Barack Obama’s head is ready to explode yet over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy? These are the kinds of things that, if played right or not addressed properly by the candidate, can absolutely derail campaigns. Rev. Wright has been saying things that will be viewed as incendiary by many. When tied to Obama’s longtime relationship, people may justifiably ask what Obama was doing giving this gentleman so much credence in his spiritual life.

There is a strong case to be made that this isn’t over, and a smart campaign will know how to maneuver this public-relations nightmare into a positive – both Clinton and, later, McCain will be able to really dent Obama if they play their cards right.

The fascinating thing here is that people are defining the enigmatic Obama by his associations, and there is a lot of political heat around this issue now. Why? Because Obama has, quite vaguely, defined himself as an ‘agent of change.’ OK, that’s fine as far as it goes, and thus far it has definitely resonated in his favor.

But here’s where things get tough - it is time for Obama to start putting some meat on the bones. The press will lend a helping hand if you are unwilling to do the defining yourself, or wait too long to address the issue at hand. Rev. Wright has captured so much attention because we know too little about what Obama stands for. For better or worse, Rev. Wright gives us insight into where Obama is REALLY at.

It’s quite unfair to exclusively define Obama by his relationship to Rev. Wright, but by the same token it is an illustrative association. As for the ongoing press heat, I’ve said it before – the honeymoon is over. The protests that this is all ‘politics as usual’ only carry you so far. The press certainly isn’t buying that one anymore. Is Team Obama really ready to step up and take these serious issues head-on?

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Views on News • April 21st, 2008

Pennsylvania blues

by Chris Lato

Will the Democrats’ long national nightmare finally come to an end this week? Will Barack Obama finally seal the deal? Or will Hillary Clinton surge in Pennsylvania, allowing her to continue justifying her quest for the White House?

The attacks are flying on TV in Pennsylvania, and John McCain is helpfully tossing a grenade here and there to keep everyone on their toes.

The polls show things are holding up well for Clinton. However, the question is whether she wins big enough. It still won’t mean a huge boost in terms of delegates, but Clinton would at least be given the moral victory of a popular vote boost, and maybe help keep some money flowing her way…which means the Democrats’ nightmare would continue.

In any event, it seems very unlikely that this will end after the votes are counted Tuesday, unless Clinton is absolutely blown out of the water in Pennsylvania. At the same time, The New York Daily News makes the case that Clinton may feel compelled to stay in until the convention – which also feels unlikely. There’s a lot of dead time between the end of voting and the convention proper, and if things are still in the same general situation, look for the Dem leaders to really turn up the heat to push Clinton out.

But, political junkies rejoice - this thing shouldn’t end for a little while yet.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Views on News • April 17th, 2008

The ABCs of the Dem debate

by Chris Lato

Wow, is ABC being raked over the coals for its handling of Wednesday’s debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I can’t say it’s unjustified.

For starters, the questions coming from Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos were, for a good stretch of time, pretty idiotic. At one point, I left the room and my wife yelled at me to come back to the TV to get a load of the latest stupid question being posed. And we were far from alone in this reaction: TV critic/analyst Tom Shales has a great column that breaks down just how much of a wasted opportunity this debate really was.

Still others were fired up over ABC’s bizarre decision to have Stephanopoulos co-anchor the debate. After all, he was a top dog in the Bill Clinton White House. Seems kinda biased, no?

This is an interesting question and I have some personal experience on this one. As a former reporter who later worked for the Wisconsin Republican Party, then returned to reporting for a time in 2007 as an anchor/reporter for WTMJ-AM in Milwaukee, I took some heat from those who asked how I could be unbiased after working for the evil GOP. I did stay unbiased (I received not a single complaint about perceived bias during my nine months on-air). I have no doubt Stephanopoulos is sensitive to this charge too.

Still, co-hosting a debate in which one of the participants was a confidante and the wife of your former boss is a little different. And, indeed, ABC is accused of being pro-Clinton on this debate. That is the risk they took by putting Stephanopoulos in charge.

Obama is obviously paying attention and reaping the benefits, using the generally sour debate reaction to his advantage.

Poor Hillary just can’t land a punch on this guy. We’ll see if the poll numbers in Pennsylvania hold up, or if this whole thing will all be over a bit before the convention.

No Comments »

2008 Primaries, Views on News, public relations • April 16th, 2008

No liberal media here…

by Chris Lato

News flash: the press loves John McCain and isn’t too keen on Barack Obama. Anyway, that’s the takeaway from this article.

Give McCain credit: he has made the press feel really good about themselves for a long time, and that warm and fuzzy relationship may pay some dividends this election year. This coziness is part of what gets conservatives’ knickers in a twist – that McCain is sleeping with the liberal enemy (figuratively speaking, of course).

I’m struck by this article’s portrayal of the media as fawning over McCain and giving the cold shoulder to Obama. Why would that be? For starters, the press has taken a beating for appearing to allow the Obama love-fest to go on unchallenged. Editors are probably feeling the pressure to appear they aren’t in the tank for him, and the press is starting to turn.

Also, McCain hasn’t been shy about cozying up to the media. He is seen as quotable, a straight shooter, sometimes to his detriment. The press likes that.

Obama is a dazzling orator, but some in the media are asking what is underneath that veneer. The press, in particular, may be feeling their B.S. detectors are at their limit. Obama’s comments in San Francisco are prompting another round of questions: just who is this guy?

This ties into my experience, and the notion that the ‘liberal media’ is overblown. Granted, I did not work for an outlet in New York, Chicago or LA. My ten years in broadcast journalism were entirely in Wisconsin, including five years as reporter and, later, news director for the Wisconsin Radio Network (not to be confused with Wisconsin Public Radio – but it often is anyway).

There are liberal reporters and editors in the media. I have worked alongside plenty of them. I’m friendly with some of them. I’ve hired a couple. Everyone has opinions, and some do a better job of concealing them than others. That’s where the real problem lies.

But in my experience, reporters thrive much more on old-fashioned conflict and on challenging B.S. That’s what gets the ol’ juices flowing. In dealing with the press, I counsel clients to look at reporters not as an enemy, but someone who has a good sense of when you are being honest and when you are blowing smoke. You can win them over by engaging on an honest level with reporters, knowing that everything you say may be used - most of the time, you will be OK.

Come in with your guard up, convinced that the evil liberal reporter is out to ‘get’ you, and things probably won’t go well. You’ll appear secretive, evasive, combative – not a good combo.

BONUS PARAGRAPH: So, you think your job stinks? Maybe you want to send your resume to this outfit. It reminds me of the abuse heaped on the real estate salesmen in ‘Glengarry Glen Ross.’ Always Be Closing! (I’d link to Alec Baldwin’s speech from the movie, but it’s way too profane for young, impressionable ears and eyes.)

No Comments »