PDI headline : black in white house

what a headline!

obama's wining marketing strategies, strategy # 3 : down-home presence

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 3 of a series and we have added point number 3 here. read parts 1 & 2 here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/Obama%20Winning%20Marketing%20Strategy

------------------

1. Consistent, consumer-meaningful message from start to finish : Change. the obama campaign is on the "time to change" theme from the very beginning, on day 1, as early as the democratic primaries. the core message was, enough of the 8 years of the bush-led republican years of managing the country be that the iraq war across other issues, specially on the US economy. consistency in message across time allows the audience to focus and the candidate to build consensus. marketing tells us a brand needs to stand for something and the obama campaign has done a most admirable job at standing for "change". it is not only consistency that is important ans where the obama campaign has succeeded, it is also in relevance or in WAWAM! marketing term - "consumer-meaningful". being consumer-meaningful and consistency are both required to be there to succeed, they are like twins where having only one in the end will not amount to anything. while both are critical, finding the right message that is consumer-meaningful is a much more difficult task. it is here where most campaigns and brands fail at. you can be consistent but if you do not have the right message, the effort will not amount to anything. consistently delivering the weak message is very much like garbage in-garbage out, repeated many times over.
2. High-ground brand character that was strongly defended, upheld and consistently applied across all aspects of the campaign, again from the very start, during the primaries to the end till the presidential contest. The most telling application of this high-ground brand character is the stubborn refusal to do negative campaigning. Not only did the campaign refuse to do negative campaigning, it called out the Mccain campaign each time their opponent did negative campaigns.

3. Down-home presence - the Obama campaign probably has the most extensive organization and system at getting to very specific voters right in their homes. This also requires very sharp and specific targeting of the voters. If this was a consumer brand, we will call this superior down-scale distribution where the brand is made available and sold in the smallest types of retail outlets, retail stores right beside the homes of consumers. It's a grass-roots organization where many face-to-face interaction occurred and this was done not only once, but in many states, specially the battleground states, it occurred a few times during the election campaign period. Face-to-face selling, specially by a neighbor or a friend is much more compelling and and excellent follow up to the dominant media campaign the Obama campaign ran. For consumer brands, poor or weak distribution usually spells failure.

The Obama's down-home organization is to die for. Their organization was a magnet for large scale number of volunteers, many of them involved in such a campaign for the first time. And these army of volunteers reached not only the Democratic faithful but first time voters, young voters and previously uninvolved voters. The Obama campaign knew it was a strength that they have asked voters to vote early and it worked. Data from many states show that a much higher percentage of democrats voter early versus republicans, in many places 2 is to 1 in ratio.

Of course this kind of strategy is something you can do when you have a lot of funds to execute it. And the Obama campaign has no problems at all with funds. This campaign will most likely come down as one of the richest in US presidential election history.

the mccain losing strategies - strategy # 1 : personality

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 1 of a series on the Mccain campaign.


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

-----------

If there is a winning strategy, there is certainly a losing strategy. In marketing though, ts not as tough and iron clad as in other things like sports. In sports, once a losing strategy, it is always a losing strategy. Applying the same will not to reault to anything else but a loss.

That is not the case in marketing. In marketing, a strategy may not bring the desired result for one brand in one category but the same strategy can succeed for another brand in a different category.

One example is pricing. People might find it strange that very low pricing may work well for shampoos but that might not necessarily work for certain brands of cars for example. Yes, that is strange but that is how it goes in marketing.

The Mccain campaign employed certain strategies that in my view were losing or within the spirit of the above, weak strategies that did not work well for them.

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.

The Mccain campaign has spent perhaps too much time on making a point on personality issues on Obama, like for example his being inexperienced. This started early on but they keep bringing it up throughout the campaign when it seemed convenient to them.

They also contrasted that with a personality pitch for Mccain - his being war veteran, spending 5 years in vietnam as a prisoner of war, Mccain as a maverick.

His choice of Palin, we believe was also based on a choice based on personality - either as a balancing or counter choice to Mccain's personality and the fact that Palin was female and even a desire to present Mccain as a maverick, a personality trait.

Most recently, the Mccain campaign hit on Joe The Plumber, again consistent with the personality core strategy. While we agree that Jot The Plumber was a success, it does build on the point we are making here. Joe The Plumber was not much of a speaker nor was a real draw but it certainly got a lot of press and attention. His contribution to driving desirability, however is uncertain.

While personality may get a lot of recal in the press, it did not seem to matter much to the consumers or the voters. The voters were faced with real life national issues like the Iraq war at the start of the primaries to the economic collapse towards the middle and last part of the campaign. Apparetnly, the American voters are very much issue oriented rather than personality oriented.

On the other hand, the Obama campaign was very much an issue oriented campaign. While the Mccain campaign was enjoying the ride they got with Palin, Obama unveiled his economic plan, something that the Mccain campaign forgot to do. The Mccain campaugn eventually unveiled their own economic plan but it was about 2 weeks late and that was the time when the US stock market was about to take it's most devastating loss.

Contrasting this to the Obama seem to be pointing to that classic marketing question - should we go on form or on content. In this election, content seem to be the key driver.

president barack obama : the winning marketing strategies. Strategy No. 2 : High-Ground

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 and we have added point number 2 here. read part 1 here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/Obama%20Winning%20Marketing%20Strategy

1. Consistent, consumer-meaningful message from start to finish : Change. the obama campaign is on the "time to change" theme from the very beginning, on day 1, as early as the democratic primaries. the core message was, enough of the 8 years of the bush-led republican years of managing the country be that the iraq war across other issues, specially on the US economy. consistency in message across time allows the audience to focus and the candidate to build consensus. marketing tells us a brand needs to stand for something and the obama campaign has done a most admirable job at standing for "change". it is not only consistency that is important ans where the obama campaign has succeeded, it is also in relevance or in WAWAM! marketing term - "consumer-meaningful". being consumer-meaningful and consistency are both required to be there to succeed, they are like twins where having only one in the end will not amount to anything. while both are critical, finding the right message that is consumer-meaningful is a much more difficult task. it is here where most campaigns and brands fail at. you can be consistent but if you do not have the right message, the effort will not amount to anything. consistently delivering the weak message is very much like garbage in-garbage out, repeated many times over.

2. High-ground brand character that was strongly defended, upheld and consistently applied across all aspects of the campaign, again from the very start, during the primaries to the end till the presidential contest. The most telling application of this high-ground brand character is the stubborn refusal to do negative campaigning. Not only did the campaign refuse to do negative campaigning, it called out the Mccain campaign each time their opponent did negative campaigns.

This brand character also fits Obama very well as a person. It reflects his demeanor and views on politics. You get the impression it comes from within and not just a political message. The eloquent speeches also fits within that brand character.

Not only does having such a brand character help drive up desirability, it also removes potential negatives. It would have been tougher for him as an african-american to adapt a brand character other than that. A tough and aggressive brand character would have fed right into the stereotypes. Being the exact opposite of the stereotypes made sure race cannot be used in any form.

The good guy image and the relentless pursuit of the high-ground brand character was so powerful that it could have changed american politics forever. The accepted principle is that negative campaigning, though seen by many as ugly and not right, do work in american politics. Poll results during this election point otherwise. Mccain's ratings were hurt because of the negative campaigning they launched when things got too tough for them.

But that does not mean the Obama campaign only does positive campaign materials. They do not do negative campaigning but they are competitive and aggressive. Another key difference is that the Obama campaign has not done that kind of campaigning on a national level but limited to pockets of states where it was needed. This is unlike the Mccain campaign where we hear Mccain and Palin launch negative speeches on the national stage.

For brands that run for elective post, brand character is very important. Having a bad one spells disaster, having a good one at minimum removes a potential negative. But for Obama, it has dome much more than removing potential negatives, it has built his desirability.

read Strategy No. 1 here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/Obama%20Winning%20Marketing%20Strategy

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

obama's november surprise vs mccain's november surprise

obama and mccain share the same two things - one, now is the time when both of them don't have time anymore. while they share the same thing on that part, the end result of that they need to do are very different. and both, this is the 2nd thing, need to pull out a november surprise. while they share the need to pull out a november surprise, obama will pull out his to close the deal for good. mccain on the other hand need to pull out his november surprise to reverse the trend and win the election.

both camp's november surprises are the sort of things these candidates need to do trampoline their campaign to get to the results they want. for obama, a strong, clear and emphatic close for the win. for mccain, it is not just to recover lost grounds but more importantly to overtake obama. it's obvious mccain has a tougher job to do than obama.

obama's november surprise - get colin powell to do a political ad endorsing obama. or at least make an apearance in two to three states where the polls see a tie between obama and mccain. powell has been asked that question but his answer was he was not planning on doing it as he is not a politician. recernt polls show there are around 4% tp 5% undecided voters specially in battleground states. that figure is equivalent to most poll's margin fo error. that means the candidate who will get the undecideds will move his poll numbers away from tie to a significant win. and powell is the man to do this for obama for the simple reason that most of the undecideds are republican holdouots. powell is a well respected and highly regarded republican who obviously has the power to get the undecided republicans to move towards obama, a phenomenon that has occured in a few states that used to be solidly republican but now has chosen obama.

mccain's november surprise - is his hail mary pass play, pull out the race card. we have talked about this previously in WAWAM!. mccain actually said he does not think race will not be a factor in the election. he said it's just going to be a "tiny, tiny" number of people who will vote on the basis of race preference or race fear. but the polls show otherwise. some polls show that for some of the holdouots, race seem to matter. if the mccain campaign finds itself in a tight corner, playing the race card can be their hail mary pass play. will mccain do it? or will he not do it for fear of a backfire.

both november surprises have the potential to be powerful and truly game changing. but one is a high risk one while the other is a sure thing. will any of the campaigns do it? the only time to do this is this weekend. we will wait and see.





read all posts on obama and mccain here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/US%20presidential%20elections

president barack obama : the winning marketing strategies. Strategy No. 1 : Change

last october 15, 2008, we posted in WAWAM! our prediction that barack obama will win the US presidential election on the strength of a brilliant marketing effort and a marketing blunder of the mccain campaign.

(read in full here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/2008/10/barack-obama-wins-us-presidential.html)

we also said that the point of no return will most likely occur right after the 3rd debate. our analysis of the 3rd debate was that mccain was unable to rock our world. mccain's task was to not only to do well in that debate but to do so well that he needs to reverse the trend to his favor. while he did well than the first 2 debates, mccain unfortunately did not do well enough to reverse the trend that was not in his favor.

we also posted on WAWAM! a few factors that has the power to reverse the trend of an obama win. since that time, none of the factors listed occurred, thus we concluded, also posted in WAWAM! that obama is on track to win in this election.

(read in full all posts on barack obama here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/barack%20obama)

just about 8 days before the election, we are posting here what we think were the core marketing strategies that both campaigns employed that resulted to obama winning the presidency and mccain losing it.

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.

we will be posting this in a series.

1. Consistent, consumer-meaningful message from start to finish : Change. the obama campaign is on the "time to change" theme from the very beginning, on day 1, as early as the democratic primaries. the core message was, enough of the 8 years of the bush-led republican years of managing the country be that the iraq war across other issues, specially on the US economy. consistency in message across time allows the audience to focus and the candidate to build consensus. marketing tells us a brand needs to stand for something and the obama campaign has done a most admirable job at standing for "change". it is not only consistency that is important ans where the obama campaign has succeeded, it is also in relevance or in WAWAM! marketing term - "consumer-meaningful". being consumer-meaningful and consistency are both required to be there to succeed, they are like twins where having only one in the end will not amount to anything. while both are critical, finding the right message that is consumer-meaningful is a much more difficult task. it is here where most campaigns and brands fail at. you can be consistent but if you do not have the right message, the effort will not amount to anything. consistently delivering the weak message is very much like garbage in-garbage out, repeated many times over.

at the start of the primaries, bush ratings were on all time lows and on a continuous decline. the key issue at the time was the iraq war and most specifically on the solutions that america was supposed to apply to it. more and more americans were increasingly withdrawing their support on the iraq war and they felt the end game solutions were unclear at best to wrong at worst.

then as of late the failing US economy has been the key focus. and that while largely unpredicted by the obama campaign (no one else was able to predict it), it fell quite nicely, very snugly into the "change" theme and core strategy.

we can argue that the obama campaign was very lucky that the US economy failed towards the last months of the presidential campaign and towards the very last part when nothing can be done to reverse the trend given the short period of time.

with american voters disappointed with bush on the iraq war at the beginning of the primaries the US economy failing became a double whammy to mccain. add to that the fact that obama stands to be the first black president in the history of the US, the meaning of "change" takes on a very different, almost cosmic meaning. when obama wins, it will be a real "change" in the US in very many ways, in very many aspects of american life and most specially the american psyche.

new american brand launched : Brand "Joe The Plumber", the metaphor for the main street american

there is a new main street american - Joe The Plumber unveiled yesterday during the 3rd and last debate between obama and mccain.

he is now a celebirty. we are just wondering, with his new celebrity status, will mccain eventually owe Joe The Plumber an apology or will joe thank mccain?

After Debate, Glare Of Media Hits Joe
Plumbers Union, Tax Collectors
Notice

By Robert
Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 17, 2008; Page

"The real winner" of Wednesday night's debate, John McCain said yesterday at a campaign stop in Downingtown, Pa., "was Joe the Plumber."

That might depend on the definition of "winner."

Joe the Plumber, a.k.a. Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio, is suddenly (sort of) a household name, featured in a McCain ad and sought after by networks news anchors and newspaper reporters.

McCain would like to meet him in person this weekend, but Wurzelbacher's got a date on Mike Huckabee's Fox News show and might not have the time.

But the emergence of Joe has allowed the state of Ohio to locate the man it says owes nearly $1,200 in back taxes. His motives for confronting Sen. Barack Obama at a campaign stop in his neighborhood earlier this week are the subject of intense Internet speculation. The city of Toledo is preparing a letter to his employer seeking to determine whether he is violating city codes, and the plumbers union is on his tail.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/16/AR2008101603614.html

obama-mccain 3rd and final debate : did not rock our world, obama on track to win election!

largely a boring debate. conclusion : it did not rock our world which means obama 's winning the presidential election is on track.

key points:

• mccain did much better than the previous two debates.
• but it was not earth shaking enough that he was able to turn the tides to his favor. mccain was not supposed to just be better, he was supposed to do an earth shaking performance that he can reverse the trend. that did not happen.
• obama held his own. no catastrophic blunders.
• we got to see in some areas sharp differences between the two. that's good for the voters.
• obama seemed cool and collected, unaffected and confident. he was able to answer all the attacks well - either killing them dead on its tracks or making it sound not very relevant.
• mccain though obviously more aggressive this time seemed unsure on how to pursue the attacks. the biggest weakness of mccain i think was that he did not have a clear and solid plan on how to manage his attacks. while making "joe the plumber" memorable in the debate, he really needed much more of those types. there were numerous attacks but they were hardly eloquent and hardly stinging. i think the weakness is on a weak line of attack and failure at eloquence.
• the ayers and acorn things were brought up but no fireworks there. it did not hurt obama. mccain did not score points. in fact in some ways that might have hurt mccain for bringing up some things that were really of no consequence.
• the race card was not brought up. not that we expected it. we also do not think if ever they want to bring out the race card, it won't be done in this debate at all.
• no miraculous economic recovery occurred during the time the debate was on. in fact wall street lost 700 points during the day.
• obama was not complacent and he answered the attacks levelled on him. the debate however became a little more personal than previous.
• obama did not blow-out. neither did mccain break-out.

given the above, this 3rd debate will favor obama on the whole and will do nothing to very little on mccain's standing. we are near the point of no return, obama is still trending for a win.







source of photo : http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-15-analysis_N.htm

what can derail obama's win of the US presidency?

we are 3 weeks away from the actual election - in a presidential campaign where anything can happen in a day, that is an eternity.

the point of view that obama will win the election is based on the trending as it appears as of today. some pollsters are saying obama's lead are solid, with very little changes occurring. while poll results may change day to day depending on what has happened just before the poll has been taken, my jurasic estimation is that this will continue to an uptrend.

the other major part of this point of view is based on the marketing and communication strategies and approaches both campaigns have employed. they are political moves or decisions to the campaigns, but to me as a marketer, i view them as marketing and communication strategies and tactics. those are the things i am reading mostly and the basis for the point of view that obama will win.

more on the above next in WAWAM!

for now, let me just enumerate a few things that might derail obama winning the US elections:

• catastrophic blunder - the uptrend on obama to me seem to be on a constant uptrend. what can derail that is any one catastrophic blunder from obama from now until election time. i don't know what that is, but for the trend to change course in a dramatic way that it will favor mccain, it will take one huge blunder on the part of obama. if obama stays the course and stays "clean" for the next 3 weeks, then obama's lead will grow and will ensure election in 3 week's time. obama should take lessons from john kerry on this one.
• race card - the fact is obama is an african-american, the first black presidential candidate of both parties. that in itself is already historical. mccain's campaign is getting nowhere, it not only has lost steam, it really was unable to reach any level of any meaningful threat to obama. depends on how desperate mccain may feel, but if it's crunch time, mccain may look for a hail mary pass and that can be the race card. the republican voter base are conservatives and middle america who may still be moved by the race card. the only problem there is its really hard to determine the impact the race card will have. will it take voters away from obama or will it backfire against mccain.
• US economy miraculously recovers - we don't think this will happen in the next 3 weeks. not even in the next 3 months. even the next 3 years is not a sure thing. the US economy on a tail spin seem to be favoring obama. more problems on the US economy seem to push more voters towards obama. mccain's chance on winning this election is therefore hinged on the US economy recovering to the tune of an economic miracle within 21 days.
• complacency - having it your way - the mccain campaign has already started the mud slinging strategy. when it got too hot, the obama campaign answered them. but on the whole, the obama campaign has ignored a lot of it. the obama campaign should continue this strategy of largely ignoring the mud and the negatives and being selective in what to answer strongly. they should not allow anything to get too out of hand.
• 3rd debate blow-out or break-out - this 3rd debate is important for both campaigns. we think the point of no return will be reached a few days after the 3rd debate. both candidates will need to avoid blunders in this 3rd debate. it is however easier for obama - at minimum obama simply needs to do more of the same. it is tougher for mccain because he needs to do try harder and be more aggressive. the window for errors is wider for mccain than for obama. if obama does not do a blow-out, he will be fine. but mccain needs to do a fantastic break-out to change the poll numbers to his favor.

compared to the marketing of brands, the marketing of presidential candidates is a much more volatile one. changes can occur often and from anywhere. also, compared to presidential campaigns, the marketing of brands seem to be on slow motion. but the marketing principles and what moves preferences are the same for both.

brands and presidential candidates both have brand equities. both use marketing and communication. one important difference though - once elected, voters are stuck with that presidential candidate for 4 years while consumers may see improvements or changes in their brands as quick as once a year.

more on this next in WAWAM!

barack obama wins the US presidential election - on the strength of a brilliant marketing effort and a marketing blunder by mccain

let's put things on the line here : i am calling it a barack obama win in the US presidential election. based on trending, it's no longer a question of "if" but a question of by what margin - a strong finish or a landslide.



looking at the presidential elections from a purely marketing standpoint, obama's win will be delivered through brilliant marketing and brilliant communication by the obama campaign and marketing blunders by the mccain campaign.

james carville was "The Man" during the bill clinton presidential campaigns, now i want to know who the marketing dude is of the obama campaign. the picture of this obama strategist whoever he is, deserves to be posted here in WAWAM!

james carville

geez, the election is 3 weeks away and we are already calling it an obama win. if obama does not win, well it's not the first time we have failed in our analysis.
just hope that readers of this blog will appreciate the courage of calling a winner this early. calling an obama win is based on an analysis of marketing and communication strategies and execution. and that is next here in WAWAM!


posted : october 15, 2008 12:32 pm manila time

answered : marketing blunder or brilliant marketing - the sarah pailin vp choice

on august 30, 2008, we posted this question on sarah palin - "sarah palin vp choice - brilliant marketing move or biggest blunder?" (read posts here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/search/label/US%20presidential%20elections)

since that announcement, the answer to that question had its peaks and valleys --- there were times it showed it was a brilliang marketing move, and yet there were times it looked a big blunder.

with just a few more weeks to go in the elections, it is nearing the point of no return. we think that will be just around the time of the 3rd presidential debate next week. this point of no return will be reached at the latest a day or two after the 3rd debate.

in WAWAM!, we have reached a conclusion and we have the answer to that question we posted - was sarah palin as vp choice a brilliant marketing move or marketing blunder? that is next in WAWAM!

palin as republican VP - brilliant marketing move or biggest blunder

are we confused? yes we are.

we are looking at this as a purely marketing move, in fact within the realm of strategic marketing – palin as the republican vp partner of mccain in the presidential election.

are we confused? yes, we are. oh, i said that already.

palin as republican vp is either a brilliant marketing move or a big marketing blunder.

it's brilliant as for now, all the good things that were with the obama campaign - obama being an african american, hillary as a strong contender, and all the goodies that went with that, specially the one on hillary and the great convention that just ended have just evaporated and moved over to the republicans.

this choice for now has stolen the thunder away from the democrats. "stunning" is a word often used to describe the choice of palin. i agree wholeheartedly.

that leads us to downside. she is an unknown, at least for now but we will get to know her very well in short order. and that is where the other part comes in -- it can turn into the biggest marketing blunder made in political history.

while we do not know palin much, we do know hillary very well. hillary, the other woman candidate is very much a known candidate, almost the opposite of palin. while we may not know palin yet, it's almost a sure thing that hillary would have a longer list of accomplishments and credentials.

it's possible mccain just took in the weakest leak in his campaign.

while we do not know yet if palin as vp choice is a marketing blunder, we did know before and we are much more certain now that obama not choosing hillary as vp is a marketing strategic blunder. pailin in the mix reinforces and makes obama's non-choice of hillary as a much bigger and more obvious mistake. (read posts in WAWAM! on biden as a good choice but choosing hillary a brilliant move : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/2008/08/obamas-vp-choice-biden-is-great-but.html).

as of this moment - the US presidential election is in a flux. much more interesting days ahead. take your seats!

democratic convention - quick points for brand differentiation

• bill clinton was the best of the whole lot. he had power, he made sense, he had charisma and was the clearest and sharpest in delivering the differences between the two, Brand Obama and Brand McCain. he delivered a long list of quotable quotes. his whole speech was crisp and highly engaging from the first word to the last.


• what's with al gore? there was no drama in the way he delivered his piece. did he forget to go to the bathroom before he spoke and was in a hurry to get it done and over with? he had a lot of substance but the delivery killed the points.


• hillary is the up and coming. she can be forceful and interesting. her prospects for the next bid for the presidency are pretty good.


• joe biden underdelivered. or was that a case of over-hyping before he spoke?


• obama covered a lot of ground, the full breathe of what he was supposed to. but i missed the high soaring rhetoric. i thought it was not necessary for him to lose what he has been very effective with in the past.

over and above the performances of the main speakers, history was made today - the first african-american is running for the presidency of the USA. that alone puts the democrats in the win column.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Barack Obama hits McCain, sets tone for campaign with historic speech ---- read it here -->

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/08/28/2008-08-28_barack_obama_hits_mccain_sets_tone_for_c.html

the democrat's denver rage party - the challenge of delivering messages on a multi-level stage

what is happening in denver for the democrats is much like a rage party - people from different persuasions, mostly dressed alike but faces with different stripes and inside looking for different things and everyone hoping that after an all nighter, everyone will come out of the door happy and everyone had a night of wild fun to remember.


or, is it?


political speeches and political party events are both very different and the same to that of marketing events for brands and a brand manager's speech in a product launch.


it is the same in the sense that both need to deliver one theme and one message. you want the troops to rally to a specific point. that point is usually where you want everyone in the room to be standing at exactly before take off outside the convention hall or the hotel ballroom to start battle the competition.


it is different in that in a political speech and a political event you not only worry about the people inside the convention room (that's similar to product launches), but you have to worry about what competition can do to you as soon as that tv camera beams its broadcast on tv.


in political speeches and events, it is a must to always operate in multiple levels in everything. messages need to be looked into always from the perspective of many more levels beyond the convention floor.


whatever you say and in this case even what you do not say in the convention will be devoured by the republicans and their strategists and will definitely do something with what they get. that is a range of multiple options - hurl them back at you as an attack or expose a weakness, cause loss of confidence among your supporters or retool their own message in their own convention which will happen in a few week's time.


and that is just the republican side. there is a bigger beast, a more ferocious one out there called the media and analysts. their job is to look at the details, deconstruct and reconstruct what is said and not said to expose both the real message and the one you missed.


it might look easy on the surface - deliver messages that (a) differentiate yourself from competition, (b) define your own solutions well, (c) inspire the faithful, (d) take the high ground, (e) and move the faithful to action.


and all of that need to reverberate and take other forms that will prevent competition from finding something to use against you or the media and analysts finding a weakness that they can highlight. it is always wise to be aware of the two things at the same time -- the good and the bad.


the convention started on a reality check - it is a divided democratic party. and that in many ways define the task obama has in his hands. his acceptance speech need to be a blockbuster, 10 times more inspiring than the speech he delivered when people noticed him. everything should fall into place and get everyone on the ready to go after obama's acceptance speech. too much at stake here that it's a necessity that it lights the whole convention and the nation but not burn down the house.










an interesting article:
----------------



Three Democratic Clans Mix Uneasily

By PATRICK HEALY



DENVER — Neither family wanted it this way, neither the Kennedys nor the Clintons. But the opening of the Democratic convention on Monday brought a stark contrast: a bittersweet public celebration of the life of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, who is suffering from brain cancer, and an embittered private drama about the terms on which the Clintons would yield the party to Senator Barack Obama.Mr. Kennedy, who endorsed Mr. Obama in January, had hoped to lead a hearty, full-throated night of anointing the next generation. Instead, the tribute to him took on the weight of a farewell to the last of the storied Kennedy brothers, with an intensity that rivaled the excitement around Michelle Obama’s speech about the Democrats’ next standard-bearer, her husband.

As one political dynasty was celebrating its legacy and ceding the political stage on Monday night, the other dominant family of the Democratic Party was struggling to protect its legacy and accept its own exit from the spotlight. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Clinton had once hoped this convention would be theirs, an exultation of past and future Clinton White Houses. Instead, they were coming face to face with shrunken, supporting roles.




article parsed, read in full here : http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/us/politics/26assess.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

obama's vp choice - biden is great but clinton would have been brilliant!

biden as the vice president for obama is great, it's a perfect compliment to barack. biden is THE guy for foreign policy to obama's seeming weakness in it. he can also be the ferocious attack dog that people like listen to, a great compliment and yes a needed arsenal to obama's charm and over-all goody-goody charisma.

it's a great choice, specially in this time that we live in where teamwork and volume of work that needs to be done sometimes bring down even the best of us.

it's a well-studied choice, but it is not inspiring. and that is its greatest weakness. to me, that is a great disappointment for a candidate like obama whose strength and winability seem to be largely based on inspiration.

obama from the very start kept surprising us. he was not even in any spotlight just a few years ago, until that speech that he made. then he was the reluctant president wanna be. then became the pied piper of young and newbie voters during the primaries. then that charm and charisma. all of those and each point punctuated with inspiration.

biden is a great choice, but its a ho-hum choice.

hillary clinton as vp would have been just a stroke of political genius and yes, since WAWAM! is a blog about marketing and advertising, it would have been a stroke of no less than marketing genius!

going in, clinton already has great political capital. she did give obama a scare in the primaries. the democratic primary race was both historic and electrifying not only because of obama but also because of clinton. obama as candidate for president and clinton as vp would have had the same impact and effect to the general voting population as it had with the democratic party.

clinton already has the built in advantage of being a political icon who almost made it. with her, obama starts his presidential run on a level of strength and advantage. that gives the democrats an unbeatable tandem.

obama choosing clinton would have had an immediate unifying effect on the democratic party and it's supporters. with clinton out of the loop, unity is now clearly an issue instead, one that needs to be addressed.

an obama-clinton ticket is the dream team of US politics. it will siphon in hordes of new voters, women, minorities and ensure working class america stays democratic.

choosing clinton would have clearly defined obama as a true statesman and a brilliant strategist that can easily be used to catapult them to victory and more importantly re-position mccain as a has been and would clearly cement him as old, stodgy and without imagination.

for someone who electrified the country and specially the democrats as inspiring, its a surprise his choice of vp wasn't at all inspiring.

mccain's obama attack ads - speed and strategy

i think mccain's advertising ad campaign is being run very well - very professional, admirable speed, highly consistent and well thought out strategy.

they are able to come out with tv ads within 24 hours of a new development on the barack obama side. we have seen two ads aired, one within 24 hours, the other within 48 hours of obama's announcement of joe biden as his running mate. and these are no oedinary tv ads, i think they are very effective and very well thought out ads.

this speed to airwaves is definitely creating momentum for the mccain candidacy as it is effectively removing steam and power from the obama campaign. polls show the mccain and obama numbers are getting much closer and that's because obama's numbers are slowing down if not shrinking while mccain's numbers have not changed or slowly improving. that may show the impact of the attack ads that the mccain camp has been releasing - they are chipping away on the strength of obama and slowing it down.

the ads are also very consistent on one strategy - the message of inexperience, lack of skill, lack of ability and weak leadership message the mccain campaign is portraying obama to be.

it's also interesting that the mccain ads are delivering that strategy and messages through a very effective way - the use of what the other candidates like clinton and biden have said previously about obama. it's very tangible and clear and creates a solid question in the minds of the voters about obama.





it is no surprise that these two ads carry the same message, they are on the same ad strategy that the mccain camp has decided to adapt for the attack ads.

it also builds very strongly and i would say very effectively on the split that occured within the democratic prty brought about by the long drawn, bitter and highly passionate campaigns waged by clinton and obama. to this day, the clinton supporters are still clinton supporters and continue to be obsessively so. now, obama is saddled with an extra task of winning over clinton supporters within his own party on top of the the general voters and going against mccain voters and supporters. he has some extra baggage to get over with.

if obama loses the election, it is very possible that clinton's dogged determination to stay in the democratic nomination process will be tagged as one of the key reasons for it's failure to win. clinton held on to it too long and too strong. it was the fear many were saying then and it's possible that its effects are now showing.

the convention in denver will put into the arena new messages and bring out new arenas, it will be interesting to see just how much power mccain's attack ads truly have in this election.

next in WAWAM! ---- what can the obama camp do?

mccain's "we're number 2, we try harder" gambit or why the paris-obama-britney threesome should just be a fantasy

this tv spot by mccain reminds me of many things, a couple of which are - the threesome fantasy with paris and britney. and that makes me hate obama. oh, wait a minute, it didn't really happen, they just appeared in the same ad. oh, well, i hate him just the same.

another thing is this ad campaign by avis many years ago that became some kind of a textbook discussion in the ad industry where avis, being the 2nd largest brand in the market had the ad campaign that was based on "Avis, we're number 2, we try harder" selling line.

in some ways that is what the mccain tv spot does - mccain admits his opponent is hugely popular. like what the article below says, obama is not just a celebrity, he is a rock star in politics

going through this route is asking the audience to go through a long and round about way to get them to conclude this rockstar is not as good as he actually is. aside from it's a round about process, the dangers one faces in trekking through a long route is what most of us fall into - we can get lost and not reach the destination at all.

in my mind, it's simple - why put a powerful and strong thought into the ad, that of obama being a rockstar, then spend the rest of the ad to remove it or discredit it? why not dispense with the first half and just go straight into the last half?

that wasn't the first time that mistake was made in this ad.

the second time was the threesome reference to paris and britney. and the tragedy of it is that it happened at the beginning of the ad.

paris and britney appeared in the ad just a few seconds, 2 to 3 seconds for both of them and yet that is what most of us remember. the press and tv certainly remember that part very well, it's played up and written about in all reports on the matter. in other words, britney and paris' 3 second inclusion in the ad became the issue, not the rest of the 27 seconds of the ad.

it's a tragedy that it happened in the first third of the ad because my guess is most people who watched it got so shocked by their inclusion into a political ad, that the brains stopped processing anything that was said or shown in the ad after seeing their two faces. who wouldn't? a threesome with paris and britney will make hearts stop pumping blood or pump more blood, depending on the gender of who owns the heart.

the point is - you get so confused, so disoriented that you miss the whole message of the ad.

look, a threesome in any ad will get my vote, but not in this kind of threesome. and as mccain, a non-entity to obama's rockstar status, will know, trying harder in this way just might get him in the number 2 spot during the election in november.

i don't think the inclusion of paris and britney in the ad added anything or made a single contribution to the sale. all it did was put a polarizing element in the ad.

there is a third point here, one of irony. with this mccain ad, the presidential election in the US just became real ugly and the irony of it is, it was ushered in by two beautiful faces of hollywood. makes you wonder - maybe perhaps that is the reason why mccain is number 2?!


===============

The celebrity backers of Barack Obama say they are not like Paris and Britney.
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
7:04 PM PDT, July 31, 2008

TO HOLLYWOOD it smacked of desperation.That's why the reaction to a new John McCain ad attempting to portray Barack Obama as a kind of mindless celebrity -- likening him to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears -- drew collective yawns and shrugs of irritation from politically active members of the entertainment industry.

"I didn't think McCain could look silly," mused Norman Lear. "But that ad diminishes him and makes him look silly."Just for a start, industry types say the ad is wrong: In the Hollywood lexicon, Obama is not a celebrity. He's a rock star. (Note to McCain strategists: That's the difference between Jessica Simpson and Bono.)

Then there's the small inconvenience that Paris' parents, Rick and Kathleen Hilton, are supporters of McCain's Republican presidential bid. According to federal campaign records, they gave the maximum $4,600.No word on their plans for the general election, but this much is certain: Their daughter has never paid to attend an Obama campaign fundraiser. (It's unclear whether she's even met the senator, or whether she's even registered to vote. The same goes for Spears.)


read the whole article here :
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-et-cause1-2008aug01,0,4172463.story

john mccain's threesome tv spot of obama + britney + paris, woohoo!

this IS an IQ test : after viewing the ad, what do you remember?

ludacris - barack obama's vice president?

ludacris just released a new rap song that will very unlikely win any music award in the US but is now getting a lot of press in the US.


it's an interesting new advertising format even in the widely open and free world of US politics. the lyrics aren't at all poetic like many great rap songs, in fact some of the lyrics don't even make sense (rap makes sense???) , but it has a good number of excellent sound bites that is getting printed in the press and i'm sure said in many tv news shows, including the beep! word.


among the few great spin words, that caught my attention was - "make me your vice president". that is an application form sent to barack for the vacant position of vice president, right?


political ads, specially in the US, if i may borrow a word from ludacris' song is, can be a real a bitch! (beep!) this new advertising format of ludacris proves that point. o'reily must have not slept last night with excitement and oprah must be livid! but that's how it is the world of rap and US politics - some sleep well at nights, most don't.


what was ludacris thinking? did he release that song because of his strong desire to express himself as an artist? maybe there are lines in that rap song that he found magical which of course none of us mortals could get. he wants to win another grammy for it?

did he think he was doing obama, his bud, (yeah!) a favor? he must be thinking that from now on this rap song of his will be played as background music when obama strides into a stage to speak, like make it the obama theme song. perhaps ludacris saw a rerun of rocky and thought he should make music similar to the rocky theme song.

we need answers.

aside from that, there is a lesson to be learned about friendships from this whole episode - you have to choose your friends carefully.

ludacris', whose songs barack said had intensive play in his ipod, intent is to support his man in the political race. what other reason is there?

but barack most probably got a call about this new rap song in his cell phone early morning, and right after the call, got his ipod, connected it to his laptop and deleted certain songs in them, and now barack's "my favorite" list is 3/4 empty and the most played songs re-organized.


-----

Grammy-winning rapper Ludacris' new song is called "Politics: Obama Is Here."


In the tune, he tears down Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Sen. John McCain.


But he gives props to Sen. Barack Obama, whom he asks to make him his vice president or give him "a special pardon if I'm ever in the slammer."


According to CBS News, Ludacris, who has previously railed against Fox News' Bill O'Reilly and Oprah Winfrey (huh?), uses irreverent language in the rap song and encourages black Americans to propel Obama to victory and "paint the White House black."
The rapper saves some of his harshest critiques for McCain: "McCain don't belong in any chair unless he's paralyzed."

Wow. Thanks a pantload, Ludacris. I'm sure Obama's camp is just thrilled by your support and your divisive and offensive song. Just what his presidential campaign needed.
Naturally, the Obama folks are already slamming the Ludacris song.


Obama spokesman Bill Burton says: "As Barack Obama has said many, many times in the past, rap lyrics today too often perpetuate misogyny, materialism and degrading images that he doesn’t want his daughters or any children exposed to. This song is not only outrageously offensive to Senator Clinton, Reverend Jackson, Senator McCain, and President Bush, it is offensive to all of us who are trying to raise our children with the values we hold dear. While Ludacris is a talented individual, he should be ashamed of these lyrics."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/2008/07/ludacris-boosts.html

--------

read more here :

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/07/30/politics/horserace/entry4307796.shtml

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0708/Obama_camp_condemns_song_Ludacris_should_be_ashamed.html?showall

new advertising format in US politics - ludacris' "politics : obama is here" song released

'Politics: Obama Is Here'

by Ludacris



Lyrics:

I'm back on it like I just signed my record dealyeah the best is here,

the Bentley Coup paint is dripping wet,

it got sex appeal never should have hated you

never should've doubted him

with a slot in the president's iPod Obama shattered 'em

Said I handled his biz and I'm one of his favorite rappers

Well give Luda a special pardon if I'm ever in the slammer

Better yet put him in office, make me your vice president

Hillary hated on you, so that bitch is irrelevant

Jesse talking slick and apologizing for what?

if you said it then you meant it

how you want it have a gut!

and all you other politicians trying to hate on my man,

watch us win a majority vote in every state on my man

you can't stop what's bout to happen,

we bout to make history

the first black president is destined

and it's meant to bet

he threats ain't fazing us,

the nooses or the jokesso get off your ass,

black people, it's time to get out and vote!

paint the White House black

and I'm sure that's got 'em terrified

McCain don't belong in ANY chair unless he's paralyzed

Yeah I said it cause Bush is mentally handicapped

Ball up all of his speeches and I throw em like candy wrap

cause what you talking I hear nothing even relevant

and you the worst of all 43 presidents

get out and vote or the end will be near

the world is ready for change

because Obama is here!

cause Obama is here

The world is ready for change because Obama is here!