the maccain losing marketing strategies, strategy # 2 : sarah palin

WAWAM! will be looking at exactly the same things that a political analyst or strategist will be looking at in analyzing the campaigns. but WAWAM! will look it at from the eyes of a marketing and advertising man. these strategies and analysis can be written into marketing plans of brands and it will make sense and most likely work.

This is part 2 of a series on the Mccain campaign, we added strategy #2,.

read about the Obama Winning Marketing Strategies here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/Obama%20Winning%20Marketing%20Strategy

read about the US presidential elections here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/US%20presidential%20elections

read about sarah palin as vp choice, brilliant marketing or biggest marketing blunder here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/palin



------

1. Core strategy of 'Personality', pursued from the start appearing in different forms across the campaign period. The Mccain campaign was loudest on making personality as a key campaign issue be that of their opponent, Mccain himself and even in his VP choice. At some point towards the latter part of the campaign, they were so stuck on it that they missed an important opportunity that they allowed the Obama campaign to preempt them on it.

2. Sarah Palin as VP choice is a marketing blunder. We wondered if Palin as VP is brilliant marketing or a marketing blunder. We think the choice of Palin as VP running mate was intended to be a strategic choice but turned out to be a poor tactical move. It was strategic in the sense that it was consistent with the campaign's core strategy of "personality", but it did not produce strategic benefits, only very tactical ones. Palin was to compliment Mccain, as a counter weight but turned out to be just a pretty decor on the wall. They wanted to exploit the void that they thought was created when Obama did not choose Clinton as his running mate. They were hoping that choosing a young female as VP will be able to capture the Clinton's supporters who were clearly disappointed by the Obama move. The key problem with that choice is that they didn't seem to consider that Palin may not be equal to Hillary. They are similar only in one aspect - being a female and on all other things, Palin suffers in comparison to Clinton. None of the above was delivered by Palin.

Not being able to deliver the strategic benefits of choosing Palin as VP, it instead I think distracted the Mccain campaign from the strategic imperatives it needed to deliver for a win. The choice of Palin gave the Mccain campaign a boost specially at the first few days of the announcement. It was so left field that nobody really understood the choice nor did anyone know who Palin was. This rush to know Palin more gave the Mccain campaign the boost but it eventually waned and the weakness of the choice showed it's ugly head after the honeymoon period. That rush could have given the Mccain the wrong impression the campaign was doing well.

America so it seems is not in the mood for tactical things during this campaign. The issues of the Iraq war and the economy are just too real for tactical efforts.

Now, polls are saying that some voters are questioning the choice of Palin and has made that as a reason for voting for Obama. We know that even Colin Powell himself has mentioned that is one of the reason he is supporting Obama.

The learning here is almost a carbon copy to the lesson in marketing consumer brands --- it is a marketing blunder to think that tactical moves will result to strategic benefits.