Saturday, January 17, 2009

Part 2: Joining the Chess Club:Understanding Obama-style Campaigning

Traditional conservative pols apparently cannot grasp that the world and voting values have morphed over the past several years. Young Americans, those under 40, simply live in a safe, multicultural, politically correct and “green” world. Those may be naïve views, but generally the point of view of voting America. So, how does conservatism thrive in this environment?

By first understanding that arguing issues is not the way to communicate with younger voters. Conservatives need to understand that young voters HATE confrontation. They have been acculturated to stifle dissent first by self-censoring, then by seeking collaboration and mutual solution. American political action increasingly is becoming a national quality circle, where ideas are welcomed and no one is ridiculed for their contributions to a solution.

Americans have been progressively sensitized to feelings and increasingly strive to be inoffensive. Competition is unseemly, as is openly grabbing leadership. They’ve been taught school years of “conflict resolution” to counter the playground bully and reduce interpersonal frictions.

The real political ineptitude is that of Republican leadership, which along with their consultants, have lost their electoral mojo because they have not adapted to the style demanded by increasing numbers of the electorate.

Ask former Senator George Allen...who was snared in a “not appropriate behavior” trap and lost his seat and any national political future. Ask Trent Lott about how he lost his leadership position for wishing a centenarian "Happy Birthday" – it was for the same reason. These two, and others, hadn't learned the new political etiquette, nor learned how to frame opposition as an idea for the electoral collective to consider as a solution.

It's also why President Bush fell to near record low approval ratings – he was “the decider” who wouldn't appear to listen to alternatives. Colin Powell provided the necessary “social proof” of Bush's intransigence when he walked away – and later endorsed Obama.

Polling shows 20 percent of self-identified Republicans voted for Obama, and that these were “young” Republicans. You dismiss the concept at your political peril.

It's apparent that Americans now dialogue and compromise rather than argue or confront. No longer is there support for anyone’s right to say or do anything disagreeable.

Ask Don Imus where his powerful friends went after his broadcast remarks about the championship womens basketball team. Such is dismissed as “not appropriate” and followed with louder howls of the same, demands for apologies, and disbarment from further discussion.

Inappropriate talk or behavior evinces competition, thus representing a “distraction” from collaboration worthy of immediate dismissal because its motives are self-serving. It’s the wrestling team versus the chess club – and American voters increasingly identify with the chess club!

Opinions are largely formed based on personal social context. Don't you want to feed the children, save the whales, drink clean water, breathe clean air, live in peace, and create a world of brotherhood? Of course you do – we all do. This agreement is the slippery slope if one is not careful. Politically, conservatives have not been careful, acting primarily as a perceived obstacle to achieving Utopia, and easily portrayed as living in the past.

When have conservatives been most politically successful in recent years? I would point to the 1994 election, when Republicans took control of the House of Representatives for the first time in nearly two generations. Why were they finally able to win a majority? The “Contract with America” was artfully conceived and presented. It was not so much a declaration of opposition, but a plainly worded promise to open American government, to increase dialogue, and to end corruption.

Shift to '06 and '08 and the Republicans found themselves on the opposite side: A party portrayed as increasingly corrupt, mean-spirited, self-serving, and running out of ideas. Political victory today is fueled by ideas and dialogue, not legislative or policy obstinance or arguments. Hypocrisy is punished only when presented as unacceptable violation of the dialogue. Otherwise, it's just pols acting like pols...everyone does it!

The lesson is to learn how to build, frame and present political views within the new American political discourse idiom. It's like learning which fork to use at a formal dinner – a faux pas is, well, a social turnoff and a marker that follows one away from the dinner table.

More Tomorrow -

4 comments:

  1. At first, it seemed the posting was implying the need to be PC. Quite the contrary. Style IS everything. Look at mainline churches that try to minister in a manner meant for 1950's culture. Declining and seen as irrelevant. But look at the ones that have changed in order to reach and influence the culture (not BE the culture). They haven't changed or diluted their message, but changed HOW they went about it and people are flocking to them. Isn't that what Jesus did? The Pharisees and Saducees were the GOP of religion at the time. (Please don't think I equate politics to faith, this just seems to be a a useful analogy). The churches that are diluting their message to appeal to masses are losing in masses. People want a strong, succinct, appealing message of REAL hope and REAL change (not Obama's empty promises - he had the style without the meat).

    The GOP must do the same. The principles are timeless and they need to be framed in a manner that shows they are the best ideas for the time. What HOPE do they bring? What GOOD will these principles do? Are the people promoting them today going to have a spine to promote and support them tomorrow in an unwavering manner? (unlike the Republicans of 94 that strayed away and almost seemed embarrassed by the Contract with America ideas as time went on?)

    We CAN take a lesson from the church (the relevant, growing ones).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brian, I agree with almost everything you wrote.

    The sad part for me is that your sentence: "A party portrayed as increasingly corrupt, mean-spirited, self-serving, and running out of ideas" IS the way the party is perceived. But in most instances, it has been believed by the general public, and young people in particular, BECAUSE of the way we're portrayed by the MSM.

    Your example of Trent Lott is a good one, but if a Dem had said it, it never would have gotten any coverage. Hypocrisy abounds.

    Now that doesn't negate anything that you said, and the hard part is how to implement and learn how to communicate that conservative ideas and principles are better for "everyone."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brad: Thank you for pointing out that crafting our communications is not "PC" nonsense. It's marketing, and conservatives may think their truths are self-evident. I will assure you they are NOT to a generation. We can't persuade if we can't engage. Conservatives need to learn about "whiteboarding" ideas in the public quality circle.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tom: Thanks for your comments. Yes, Lott and other scandals are hypocrisy gone wild. And i suggest it's because conservatives are more honest about themselves in less oblique fashion than Libs. The problem is that conservatives cry foul - and young Americans say "You do it, too." What one must do is take a lesson from Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama - Go for the jugular slowly in language that connects with a growing number of people. One first calls the behavior "not appropriate" and "unproductive", then explains why it is so. The idea is to stop any further discussion - not start an argument...so, what if Stom was 100 years old? And what was George Allen thinking????

    ReplyDelete