Watching Clinton and Obama argue about who has the most meager experience got me to thinking. If I were a political advisor what advice would I offer on how to formulate a plan to sway public opinion to my candidate's cause?
I think the fundamental rule of running for the Presidency, or any other office for that matter, is too assume that half of the American electorate is composed of fools and you will do well about half of the time.
The 50% or so that do not qualify have probably already made up their minds so they need to be addressed later once the nomination is attained and the nature of the race gets more granular as to policy differences. Talking details before the nominating convention should be avoided at all costs.
One can get great coaching for defending against the opposition's attacks by observing two year-olds and absorb their conflict resolution methods. Learn this well as it may be needed more so as the election draws nearer.
Do not fall into the trap of specifics. When cornered by questions that will reveal inconsistencies change the dialogue to generalities. Accuse the opposition of doing the same thing.
Use empty meaningless sucker phrases like Hope and Change to give the rubes something to focus their short attention spans on. Always rely on their ignorance of history. Each person will define these hollow phrases for what they think the candidate means. They will imagine that the candidate is thinking the same thing they are.
If using 'Change' as your sucker's word NEVER allow the voters to realize that change is one of the few constants in the universe. It is also a word that means different things to different people. Keep in mind that politics is like an infant's diaper, once change does happen in short order further change will be required.
If using 'Hope' as your sucker's word NEVER point out that we all have hope; you hope you get elected while others hope you don't.
If employing one's steadfast oppositon to a war that is being won against a proven enemy do not attempt to demonstrate one's toughness by suggesting we bomb our allies. Though the rubes will take this hook, line and sinker eventually it will come back to cause complications.
Avoid letting one's spouse speak on one's behalf. However, there are exceptions. If one's spouse encourages the people to "Feel, don't think" then there may be advantages to conveying this message often. Perhaps even consider it for a campaign theme.
Master the art of deflecting one's own faults onto the opposition. If one is devisive then accuse the opposition of being devisive. If one's closet is packed with bones of questionable international dealings, illegal financing, cohersion and perjury then point out the few bones in the opposition's closet.
Freely resort to time honored traditions of promising reforms on taxes, campaign financing, tort, social security, healthcare or foreign policy. These have been tested for many decades and have stood the test of time. This allows the media pundits to dust off their scripts from the last election and saves them from the expense of real analysis. It also deflects the public expectations of actually delivering on these issues where so many have been unable to do after attaining the office.
I think the fundamental rule of running for the Presidency, or any other office for that matter, is too assume that half of the American electorate is composed of fools and you will do well about half of the time.
The 50% or so that do not qualify have probably already made up their minds so they need to be addressed later once the nomination is attained and the nature of the race gets more granular as to policy differences. Talking details before the nominating convention should be avoided at all costs.
One can get great coaching for defending against the opposition's attacks by observing two year-olds and absorb their conflict resolution methods. Learn this well as it may be needed more so as the election draws nearer.
Do not fall into the trap of specifics. When cornered by questions that will reveal inconsistencies change the dialogue to generalities. Accuse the opposition of doing the same thing.
Use empty meaningless sucker phrases like Hope and Change to give the rubes something to focus their short attention spans on. Always rely on their ignorance of history. Each person will define these hollow phrases for what they think the candidate means. They will imagine that the candidate is thinking the same thing they are.
If using 'Change' as your sucker's word NEVER allow the voters to realize that change is one of the few constants in the universe. It is also a word that means different things to different people. Keep in mind that politics is like an infant's diaper, once change does happen in short order further change will be required.
If using 'Hope' as your sucker's word NEVER point out that we all have hope; you hope you get elected while others hope you don't.
If employing one's steadfast oppositon to a war that is being won against a proven enemy do not attempt to demonstrate one's toughness by suggesting we bomb our allies. Though the rubes will take this hook, line and sinker eventually it will come back to cause complications.
Avoid letting one's spouse speak on one's behalf. However, there are exceptions. If one's spouse encourages the people to "Feel, don't think" then there may be advantages to conveying this message often. Perhaps even consider it for a campaign theme.
Master the art of deflecting one's own faults onto the opposition. If one is devisive then accuse the opposition of being devisive. If one's closet is packed with bones of questionable international dealings, illegal financing, cohersion and perjury then point out the few bones in the opposition's closet.
Freely resort to time honored traditions of promising reforms on taxes, campaign financing, tort, social security, healthcare or foreign policy. These have been tested for many decades and have stood the test of time. This allows the media pundits to dust off their scripts from the last election and saves them from the expense of real analysis. It also deflects the public expectations of actually delivering on these issues where so many have been unable to do after attaining the office.
No comments:
Post a Comment