Forwarding the Conversation

Is it possible for a candidate to run a campaign that both gets him/her elected AND provides a mandate from which to govern effectively? That is the question I will be tackling in the coming days.

Reframing the Purpose

What is the purpose of a political campaign? This isn’t a hard question to answer; quite clearly, the purpose of a campaign is to get a particular candidate elected to a particular office. If that candidate does not get elected to the office they seek, he or she does not get to serve. The idea of the political campaign is rather simple because in our system – when you run for office – you either win or lose.

The idea of the political campaign becomes more complicated when you dig deeper. How negative is too negative? What principles are you unwilling to compromise on, and are the costs of compromising on core principles? What type of tactics are you willing to resort to in order to win? These are just some of the questions each candidate should ask themselves before forming a campaign committee.

Some questions for you before proceeding: how would you answer the questions above? How would you like your elected officials to answer these questions?

I think that we can all agree that particular campaign rhetoric and tactics are damaging to our democratic process. Negative ads that resort to name-calling and the spread of rumors and half-truths are just a few examples. Campaign rallies where elected officials use demagoguery as a means to anger a group of people, or pit one person against another, are more examples of damaging campaign tactics. Policy proposals that are specifically designed to divide the electorate are more subtle, but equally as damaging. These campaign tactics are a reality in our system, and I’ve heard both friends and colleagues rail against them. As a former and current political operative, I can say that these tactics are employed because they are effective. When you are running a campaign that holds victory as its central focus, you will do whatever it takes to win.

My proposal is that we, as an electorate, hold our elected officials accountable by forcing them to run principled campaigns that focus on victory as a means to govern, rather than victory at the expense of governance. What I mean is that our current political system often rewards those who demagogue, divide, and conquer. As I discussed in a previous post, this puts the elected official in an electoral box. In essence, by pandering to the extremes of their party, they find compromise – once elected – an impossible task due to fear of being un-elected in the next campaign cycle.

Furthermore, candidates for public office should adopt a strategy where they run to govern. I believe that when candidates think about the dynamics of governance during the campaign, the paradigm shifts and many tactics that were once attractive become ineffective. While I was not present during John McCain’s first run for President, back in 200, I believe there is evidence that his campaign was run with governance in mind. The “Straight Talk Express” became the image that embodied his bid for President. He promised the American people that he would tell it to them straight, whether they wanted to hear it or not. That initial run thrust him into the national spotlight and gave him the platform to be the Republican Party’s nominee in 2008. While McCain’s strategy changed in the 2008 campaign, I think it is fair to say that his “Maverick” streak is what the American People found so attractive about him during and after the 2000 campaign. Therefore, I argue, that the American People actually crave this type of leadership.

The American People would rather see a candidate who can be trusted to stay true to themselves rather than someone who agrees with them on all the issues. Politics is a blood sport, and nobody is going to agree with you all the time. As a candidate it’s easy to resort back to the idea that “I can’t change anything unless I get elected,” but I would retort that some folks who get elected aren’t able to change anything because of the way they get elected. By focusing on the campaign as a means to effective governance, I believe that candidates will be forced to think about the consequences of their campaign’s actions on the electoral climate of the country.

Over the next weeks I will focus attention on drilling down into the campaign structure to highlight some ways that campaigns can be changed to incentivize more effective governance and a healthier democratic process.

Until next time… stay classy democracy

How to Win in the Age of Obama:

Inspired by “How to Beat a Republican” by Rahm Emanuel

Start with Your Plan and Stick to it…

After eight years of George W. Bush in the White House, the American people are ready for a different type of leadership. People are tired of “divide and conquer” politics and rigid adherence to ideology. In the midst of one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression, the American people are looking for solutions that work.

Barring another terrorist attack on American soil, the next four years are all about the economy. Anyone who can coherently link their ideas/issues with job-creation and economic growth will be successful. Partisan games will not be tolerated. Right now there is a four-year window for ambitious overhauls of arcane institutions and social programs. The American people have lost faith in their governing structures, and are ready for their leaders to make a major investment in the long-term health of this country.

On issues ranging from infrastructure to healthcare, social security to education people are worried about their children’s future. This desire for solutions translates to an electorate with no patience for partisan rhetoric or negative campaigning. There will always be candidates willing to tap into people’s fears and biases to get elected, but in the Age of Obama practicality trumps the status quo.

A Winning Roadmap.

No two districts or races are the same. Be wary of comparisons to races of the past because you are running on the present and future. Meet voters where they are both physically and mentally. Always stay within yourself by knowing who you are and who you are not.

Always Look Forward. Always keep proposals, solutions, and rhetoric forward-looking. Stay away from the arguments of yesterday by always looking for new ways to frame the issues.  Instead of “restoring” Medicaid cuts, talk about cutting costs by tapping into new investments in promising technologies. You will never please everyone, but people respect “common sense” solutions.

Use Common Sense. Everyone wants what is best for the country, and most individuals subscribe to a particular ideological framework. Use your opponent’s record of partisanship as leverage to contrast your record of finding real solutions for real people. Nobody will vote for the Democrat or Republican who toes party-line when a proven reformer is on the ballot. When dealing with systemic issues like education or healthcare reform leave all options on the table. Use a “whatever it takes” approach to solving problems.

 Listen. Meet people where they are and give them a voice in the campaign. Invite input and feedback by giving voters access to all members of the staff and the candidate. Once you have gathered voices use them in the formulation of strategy and policy.  Once you have figured out what you want to say, tests it out. The key is listening; people want to feel like they are a part of something. Listening is an invitation to possibility.

Be Inclusive. Barack Obama takes office with approval ratings in the high 70% range because of his willingness to work with whoever shares his vision. Democrats, Republicans and all those in-between have different solutions to problems, and it is vital to make sure that all are included in the process. Remember that people are looking for solutions and neither party has all the right answers. Take the best ideas from both sides of the aisle and make them your own.

Utilize Technology. Do not simply adhere to the Obama technology/organizing model. Add to that model by taking advantage of new technologies and tactics. Know your own strengths and weaknesses; Obama’s campaign was partly successful due to cult of personality. In your online organizing know that what worked for Obama may not work for you.  Find creative ways to use existing online networks to spread your message and engage people. Remember that it’s important to invite people into your process.

Select a Committed Staff. Even with the best campaign plan there is no replacing committed, hardworking, campaign staff. Beware of high profile consultants. They may have a lot of interesting ideas, but in most cases they will not be around when the rubber meets the road. A committed group staff will be there for you through good times and bad. They will make some mistakes, and by the end of the campaign they will reward your investment, in them, with loyalty – one of the scarcest commodities in politics.

Run to Govern. Always remember that once the campaign is over that you have to govern. Know what you want to achieve before you even begin the campaign. This will give you a clear picture of the campaign that you want to run. Never do anything on the trail that will jeopardize you or your opponent’s ability to govern. Always remember you are running to be a public servant. 

Why Should I Vote for You?

The election of Barack Obama will inspire individuals to run for elected office who will unsuccessfully try to replicate his campaign principles and structure. Most will miss the major lessons by focusing on organizing techniques, methods, and style. This leaves a lot of space for candidates who truly understand the basic conceptual framework of the Open Campaign, which has been described above.

The basic question that voters will ask is ‘why should I vote for you?’ Everybody can see that the structures that have governed us for the last 40 years are beginning to crumble. You need to show people that you understand their struggles. Respond to challenges by showing that you have the mental flexibility and acuity to respond to the new challenges just beyond the horizon.

Written by: Ross D. Rocketto

In this TedTalk Noah Feldman argues that both religion and politics are a form of technology. Since this talk took place around the beginning of the Iraq war it provides an interesting perspective now, in 2008. As you watch this think about some of the following questions:

• Barack Obama is not a muslim. Why do people who think he is a Muslim find that somethnig that would disqualify him from being President?
• Where do people get these types of beliefs? How does our society find a way to permit such beliefs?
• What does this talk mean in 2008? How is it different from what it meant in 2003?

This week as Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke made their way to Capitol Hill to argue for the passage of their estimated 700 billion dollar package designed to stablize the financial markets what did we hear from our presidential candidates?

Who cares how many cars John McCain owns and what the hell does mum mean? We are in the midst of a financial crisis and all the campaigns can do is air negative ad after negative ad. Last week the Washington Post published a story titled “Recent Obama Ads More Negative Than Rival’s, Study Says.” The article goes on to explain that 77% of Obama’s ads were negative the week after the Republican National Convention while 56% of John McCain’s ads were negative. So, Obama airred more negative ads than John McCain. In total, 30 million dollars was spent between the two campaigns on ads with and it’s possible that almost 20 million of those dollars went to negative campaign advertisements. For me, it doesn’t matter who is airring more negative ads because a few weeks before the Democratic Convention it was the John McCain campaign who was tossing the bigger mud pies.

What matters right now is that in the midst of a financial crisis both campaigns have decided to pummel each other into the ground. At a time when America’s President is publicly taking a back-seat role to a member of his cabinet the only thing that the two men running for the highest office in the land can do is resort to petty attacks. America needs leadership and neither candidate is showing that they are capable of leading. This morning Obama made the statement that he may not even go to Washington to vote on the 700 billion dollar financial package if it looks like it’s a sure thing to pass. Senator Obama might not go to Washington to vote on what could be one of the most significant bills in United States history? What does that say about the way he will lead as President? John McCain has not yet committed to being in DC for the vote? What would it say to the country if neither Presidential candidate went to DC to vote on this bill?

At the same time that these ads are running Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York, went on Meet the Press to talk about the crisis. As I watched I found myself saying to myself “man, he sounds presidential.” After I finished watching I went online to watch the latest statements from both candidates and was dissapointed. Neither sounded like a President attempting to address a crisis, they sounded like fools trying to figure out how to fill a sound-bite without saying anything at all. Bloomberg projected an heir of calm detachment. He seemed confident and at ease with the questions and he didn’t sugarcoat the problem. 

As I watched Mayor Bloomberg I couldn’t help but wonder why can’t our Presidential candidates talk to us this way? Maybe that’s not what we, the public, is demanding or maybe it’s something else. All I know is that at the end of the day one candidate will win and be faced with cleaning up this mess. My sincere hope is that the performance goes better than the auditons.

So, as many of you know I have been posting the more prominant convention speeches from the Dems and Repubs under the Convention Highlights . In addition to posting the speeches I’ve watched each of them just to see what is being said. I was particularly disheartened last night by the speeches. In my opinion the tone of the speeches were caustic including blatant insults that went beyond simply criticizing the actions of Senator Obama. Before I continue though, I do want to say that the Democrats are not innocent in this. While the tone of the Democratic convention felt less mean-spirited some of the speeches and Democratic organizations like the DNC, DCCC, and DSCC have certainly said their fair share of unfair things.

Getting back to last night, I cannot help but feel that the tone was both divisive and unbecoming of political discourse. I am not here to thrash Republicans or Democrats, I am writing about this because I want to encourage individuals, no matter what there party affiliation, to denounce the type of rhetoric that came out of last night’s convention. Send letters to your elected officials, political parties, etc to say that you’re not interested in hearing Democrat or Republican bashing. As I was watching the speeches last night I got angry at the fact that the crowd responded so readily and loudly to such negativity. The same happened at the Democratic convention. I’ve been thinking about this for awhile and it finally came to a head last night as I was watching the speeches because I found them PARTICULARLY disrespectful and unbecoming of those who claim to wear the mantle of “leadership.” True leaders don’t need to resort to damaging rhetoric to get their point across.

Last night’s speeches also upset me because Democrats are not always right, Republicans are not always right, Green Party, Libertarians, etc. Everyone has a piece of the solution and we need the power of all those ideas at the same proverbial table if we really want to move our country forward! These conventions could have been a venue for bringing ideas together and really having a conversation about what direction our country should go in. Instead, the conventions were about bashing the other side of blatant political gain. Parents tell their children to “play nice” in the playground and encourage them to work out their differences without using force. Why cannot we, as adults, do the same? 

This generation has the opportunity to be judged by the breadth of our accomplishments and the steps that we took to collectively solve the world’s problems. We have the ability to write our own history through our deeds, accomplishments, failures, and through the ability to bring imagination into reality. We will never get there if we don’t begin to expect and demand that our leaders act as such. I am including videos of Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Governor Sarah Palin’s speeches from last night to use as examples of what we cannot continue to accept in our political discourse.

Rudy Giuliani’s Speech

Sarah Palin’s Speech

This is an incredibly interesting video. New Gingrich has an organization called American Solutions. This video is about e-government solutions. This is a really interesting website. It’s a non-partisan organization that is designed to provide real solutions to our country’s issues. You may not agree with everything, but what makes this cool is that you can send in your solutions to problems and organize around topics, themes, etc and then start being proactive to get things done. Very interesting and here’s the video…

Getting Government to Work