• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Propertius on I’d like to think…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on How many voters get this?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on How many voters get this?
    William on How many voters get this?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on How many voters get this?
    William on How many voters get this?
    riverdaughter on A tale of two diplomats.
    Parvios on A tale of two diplomats.
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d like to think…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d like to think…
    William on I’d like to think…
    Propertius on A tale of two diplomats.
    jmac on I’d like to think…
    campskunk on A tale of two diplomats.
    Propertius on A tale of two diplomats.
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    December 2011
    S M T W T F S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • We Are Going To Go Thru Hell, So What Now?
      I was born in 1968, the year Wallerstein calls one of “world revolution”. It was a revolution that both failed and succeeded: women and minorities got more rights, often a lot more, but the end result was an oligarchy, where most people were equal in their lack of power, and where every year saw ordinary people becoming poorer, no matter what the official st […]
  • Top Posts

Thursday: Political Brand Loyalty

Busy day today.  This will be short.

Yesterday, I posted a couple of videos featuring Australian Jane Caro, a former advertising creative type, now writer.  Go check out those two videos.  Caro’s take on feminism and religion is really funny.

I found another video featuring Jane where the topic was political spin.  Jane’s background in advertising gives her some insight into brand loyalty and what makes a good politician (extends his/her brand loyalty).  Here’s the video, Jane comes in at minute marker 18.20.

Strange.  The guys who had the idea for Occupy Wall Street were also formerly in advertisment and now make it there mission to debunk the ads…

For those of you who want the short summary, here are Jane’s rules of marketing and advertising for political brand loyalty (paraphrased):

1.) Underpromise and overdeliver.
2.) Be voter centered. Convince your voters that you put them first. Take risks in defense of what you believe even if it may cost you personally.
3.) Don’t sacrifice what your core voters always liked about you to buy new voters.
4.) All voting decisions are made emotionally and then post-rationalized. There are two emotions that change behavior: Hope and Fear. If you want to change behaviors, get to know what are the voters’ hopes and fears.
5.) While voting decisions are made emotionally and are post-rationalized, you must give voters ammunition to defend their choice.
Policy is important.
6.) Raise voters’ morale and your own. We want to vote for people who look like they want the job and once they’ve got the job, look like they love the job.
7.) Lower voter anxiety about YOU.
8.) Voters want politicians to love their constituency.

How does Barack Obama perform according to Jane’s rules?  From my observations of his performance and his supporters’ reaction to it, he has violated every one of these rules.

1.)He overpromised and waaaay underdelivered.

2.)He never takes risks in favor of his voters.

3.)He’s dumping the Democratic base to chase independent swing voters.

4.)He has no idea what our hopes and fears are (hint, it’s not about the deficit).

5.)His policies are crap.

6.)He doesn’t look like he loves the job and he allows his Treasury Secretary to tell the nation that their lives are going to get tougher.

7.)He continually caves to his opponents, providing no backstop to their most radical ideas.

8.)And he doesn’t appear to love his constituency. He’s very cool to the people who sacrificed everything to get him into office and he has no qualms about punching the hippies.

In short, he’s been so bad and has violated so many of these rules, that it makes me wonder what the heck is really going on here.  Is he just a pathetically bad politician who is going to take the rest of the party with him when he goes down?  Or is the party sticking with him because they know that it doesn’t matter how bad he is?  Is it possible that the game is already so rigged that Obama could be videoed in boat shoes on some big bastard’s sailboat, swigging single malt scotch and taking bags of cash and it the outcome wouldn’t matter?  Are the anti-democratic forces in our political system so entrenched that there is nothing we can do to dislodge them so they can act with impunity? Or do they just think they are secure? Contrast the Democrats efforts at building brand loyalty with the Republican effort.

There’s a possibility that Obama could start behaving like he actually wanted a second term.  In fact, he almost has to because this is not 2008 and he’s no longer a historic candidate.  Now, he’s just another guy in the White House.  But given his history, why should we trust him if he makes a U turn?  How many people have married the wrong spouses thinking that they can be changed?  It almost never works out.  If the Obama contingent is hoping that Obama’s second term is going to be better than his first, it should take a look at those 8 rules and ask itself if that’s a realistic expectation.  What I find interesting is that Democrats seem to think they deserve the poor treatment they get while Republican voters play hard to get.  The fact that a popular millionaire’s tax is going to be dropped in the budget bill is proof of this.  Republicans punish representatives and senators who raise taxes and those Congresspersons know it.

Or, it can wait until Iowa when we find out who the Republican nominee is going to be.  The Republicans may not like their current choices but they always come around by the end.  And if that person is Romney, all calculations say that Obama will lose.  Maybe he should have spent more time cultivating brand loyalty.

17 Responses

  1. Breakfast: Homemade yogurt (2%) with a tablespoon of pure apple butter (no sugar added) and topped with 1/4 cup granola. Tangerine. Coffee. Yummm

    • Scrambled egg topped with white American cheese on a toasted bagle. The missus found a small bagel size frying pan.

    • RD – you indicated that you might be interested in going to DC on 01/17/2012 for the Occupy Congress Rally – is that still your thinking? It’s a one-day rally with possible Occupation if someone is so inclined. I’d like to know if anyone else is going as I plan to be there and would love join a group, if possible.

  2. Some years back I knew a guy that sold radio advertising, he told me successful sales-reps has no empathy for their customer’s circumstances. Selling the product was the be all and end all, even if it wasn’t in the customer’s best interest. Think of all the foreclosed homes buyers were convinced they could afford. Anyway Obama was that product and his campaign team was that sales-rep.

    The only thing that will save his bacon is the line up of loons vying for the republican nomination. Since it’s only the party faithful who caucus or vote in the primary it’s a good bet one of them will be the candidate. It will be interesting to watch and listen.

    On “our” side I see lots of D’s and I’s with buyer’s remorse sitting 2012 out. Against a loon I give Obama 50/50.

    • Mr. Mike, we don’t have to passively wait to see what loon the R party faithful decide to nominate. Millions of us can reregister R just long enough to invade the R primaries and vote for Romney. That will free up millions of disappointed Democrats to realize that they are indeed free to treat the election as a referendum on the Goldman Sachs Rubinite Obamazoids currently owning and running the Democratic Party.

      • The problem with that is that Romney is a Goldman Sachs Rubinite type, too.

        • Yes, that is a problem. However, is he very much worse in that regard than Obama himself? I figure if Romney wins it is just worse of the same.

          However . . . if Bachmann or Paylinn or Gingrich get nominated and then elected, we (including I) will suffer from a whole new level of bad.
          I would rather have a Rubinite than a Biblical Inerrancy Dominionist or a Rapturanian or an Armagedonite from President.

          So if Romney gets nominated and Obama loses, what’s the worst that could happen? We get a Rubinite President regardless. Therefor I would feel set free to start burning down the entire Goldman-Sachs Rubinite Democratic Party apparatus starting with Obama himself and just keeping going from there. That’s why I hope Romney gets the R nomination and that’s why I will lift my little finger towards that end.

  3. a toss up right now!!! 🙂

  4. I’ve got a real soft spot for Buddy Roemer, who seems like the only candidate in either party who really gets it. I really like the way he says “Goldman friggin’ Sachs”. He’s also a supporter of OWS.

  5. BuddyRoemer: I don’t support torture, or denying personal liberties. “@kleinmaetschke: .@BuddyRoemer What’s your stance on NDAA?”

  6. I would offer a disagreement with one particular item. I don’t believe Obama “caves” to his “opponents”. I believe he and his “opponents” secretly conspire together ahead of time to manufacture the appearance of “caving” to his “opponents” so that he and they can get what they have both already agreed that they both already wanted.

    For example, he and McConnell conspired together to extend the Bush tax cuts with Obama tossing out the “raise taxes on the richest” as an apple of discord designed to trick the liberals into thinking he actually wanted to “raise taxes on the richest” while inspiring the Republicans to oppose “raise taxes on the richest” so that Obama could pretend to be “helpless” in the face of Republican “opposition”. It is an extended shuck-and-jive stringalong thing. He is now conspiring with the Republicans to extend the “payroll tax holiday” in hopes of making it permanent so as to defund and destroy Social Security at some future date. Are the “Democrats” simply shuck-and-jive strungalong? Or are they part of the conspiracy to destroy Social Security?

    Matt Stoller guest posted an interesting article on Yves Smith’s Naked Capitalism blog called Obama: What Presidency? in which he describes the treacherous deceit at the core of Obama’s Presidency.
    His presidency is based on “fooling liberals” and Stoller describes how in detail. Link will have to follow on a subordinate self-reply.

    • And here is the link to Matt Stoller’s “Obama: What Presidency?” guest-post on Yves Smith’s Naked Capitalism website.
      http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/matt-stoller-what-presidency.html

      • The comments are surprising, I though they would be over run by O-trolls from the Kosshole place.

        • If you mean the Kossholes overrunning the Naked Capitalism thread,
          Yves Smith moderates and sometimes bans after saying exactly why.
          And since it is almost always a strictly finance and economics website,
          the Kossholes may not know that Matt Stoller sometimes writes about the political side of economics there. Or maybe it is just too intellectually difficult for the Kossholes.

          In all fairness to Kossholia, I have sometimes seen interesting things there in the diaries section, but only if linked-to by others. (The website is too visually ugly for me to look at. That means that I could me missing out on some good content if it has any because it is just too physically ugly for me to look at.)

  7. well i read yesterday that Rocky Anderson is running as a third party alternative (Justice Party). I’m voting for him. I don’t care if he can win or not. I refuse to vote for Obama, and unless Huntsman wins the Republican primary (highly unlikely) they’re running another friutcake. Rocky Anderson managed to drag Utah to the left. He alks the walk.

  8. Obama has shown a great deal of disrespect for his base. There is no case to be found where a President has acted in such a callous manner. Barack Obama is a charlatan. The Kosbots and company can cry all they want. This is their fault.

    Obama is giving us the populist fast talk ONLY because election season is upon us. Do NOT expect anything different from him should he receive a second term. Not once has he governed in a way that promotes the well being of the working class. In addition, Obama has signed into law the NDAA, which gives the military the power to detain anyone indefinitely with the President’s authority. Had piece of horse manure been promoted By George W. Bush, the Kosbots and Democratunderground mob would be up in arms claiming the second coming of Hitler. Now that a Democrat is doing it, all is well.

    This is where the two party system is broken. Principles only matter when the other side is violating them. For the side in power, maintaining power is all that matters.

    I am listening to many alternatives to the current choices because the current choices are unnacceptable.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: