Democrats Adrift, Pt. II
There are two things the Democrats must learn from the Republicans: the art of message crafting, and having some brass (defined in the dictionary as “a type of insensibility to shame: very bold or impudent”). Since the 1994 “Republican Revolution” the GOP have used these to dominate the political landscape.
A long time ago, message crafting was something the Democrats were good at. For example, they turned the “Negro problem” into the “civil rights movement.” See Kevin Drum’s piece on this for more. But there’s more to it than just slapping a good-sounding label on an issue. It’s about constructing a seamless narrative about what the Democrats believe in, and providing a clear message about where they want to take the country. This point is explained brilliantly in a post at Daily Kos:
Democrats and Democrat-friendly 527s spent a record $250 million (or more) on this election cycle. Does anyone have any idea how much money that is??? That’s more money than Sony U.S. spends marketing its products in a year. It’s almost as much as Burger King spends in a year, and significantly more than Taco Bell, KFC, Pizza Hut, Subway, Domino’s…Yet by all accounts the recall rates of all that advertising were abysmal. It was obviously unsuccessful in persuading enough people to vote for Kerry. After all the ads, the speeches, the talking-head spin-room appearances, the voters still didn’t feel they knew who Kerry was and what he stood for. Whereas they do believe Saddam Hussein had WMD’s and something to do with 9/11…
Auto manufacturers, some of the most sophisticated marketers going, do a lot of research–just like pollsters and politicians. But they don’t simply determine that drivers want better brakes, stick slightly better brakes in their cars, and hang up a sign that says “New and Improved: Now with better brakes!!!”. Unfortunately, I think this is about the level we’re at with Democrats today…
An auto manufacturer, by contrast, starts by identifying safety as a critical touch point on the car-owning consumer’s psyche, and uses that to back into features it can lead with as selling points. R&D spends real money making real improvements to the brakes, product managers create names like “anti-lock brakes”, and then they roll them out with sophisticated, repetitive messaging that communicates whatever combination of fear, vulnerable children, family camaraderie, and classical music they think will nudge their target audience one point closer to buying the safe car with the important safety features they are now confident will keep their family safe.
Take that understanding of marketing, combine it with a bold agenda and a flat-footed opposition, and you’ve got a winning recipe. The best example from recent history is the Republicans’ 1994 Contract with America:
Those who embrace its value as a political tool argue that the contract led to a swing of 10 million votes in favor of the Republicans between the 1992 and the 1994 U.S. national elections…
[It] was marketed with the tag line, “If we break this contract, throw us out. We mean it!”…By avoiding the use of political or bureaucratic lingo, the contract as presented was easily digestible..[the Republicans chose to publish it in] TV Guide…because the publication, while widely read, is outside the universe of U.S. electoral politics…
Running together on the contract’s commitment to eight major congressional reforms on the first day of a new majority and to bring 10 pieces of legislation to the floor for a vote by the end of the first 100 days, the GOP engineered the largest transfer of power in the history of the House of Representatives: The GOP picked up a net of 52 seats on Election Day…
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich…said it gave the GOP the metaphorical “battering ram” the party needed to overwhelm Washington’s political old guard long enough for the GOP to come to power as a governing majority.
The Contract with America was bold, but Bush has gone to a new level – he’s as bold as brass. His approach to environmental issues is a good example. He served the interests of polluters with his promotion of the cleverly marketed “Clear Skies” initiative, which actually rolls back environmental protections in the existing Clean Air Act. The “Healthy Forests” initiative is a similar story. Bush knows he won’t win over environmentalists with his plans, but he figures he can neutralize an issue where the Democrats are strong, and advance an industry-friendly agenda at the same time.
The lesson here for the Democrats is not dishonesty. As I mentioned before, most Americans agree with the Democrats on most issues, so unlike the Republicans they don’t need to craft messages that mask the real goals of their agenda. But they do need to learn to speak the modern language of marketing and branding, which the Republicans already have well mastered. They need to frame their issues in a bold manner and reshape the nation’s political dialogue, rather than continuing to fight and lose on the Republicans’ terms.
Up next: some ideas on how to do it.
