manny villar's "itik" tv ad - a good lesson in continuity errors, itik or no itik

on january 26, 2009, we posted at 2010 presidentiables villar's ad at youtube that had a continuity error - villar at the middle of the ad was shown wiping his dirty hand on his shirt but at the end of the ad, villar's shirt turned miraculously clean. continuity is a very basic production and editing watch out. committing it is a mortal sin.

this version has the continuity error and is proof of what can happen if you don't do a comprehensive and exhaustive pre-production meeting.



they have now revised the ad to correct the continuity error. read about it here : http://2010presidentiables.wordpress.com/

political ads: small banners that think small a big waste of money

you can't miss it, every city has it. actually every city has lots of it - these ubiquitous small banners with the faces and names of current barangay (smallest town unit), city and provincial officials. depending on certain months, congressmen and senators get into the act. well, ok actually almost everyone in government does it.

but do they work? do they have a marketing and advertising value?

looking at these ads, you can say there is an advertising campaign being followed here, complete with a copy rotation plan and an annualized media plan. the copy rotation and media plans follow events during the year - christmas, new year, graduation, valentines (yes, even that), summer, fiestas and anniversaries just to name a few. on those alone, we are looking at minimum 7 executions in a year or an average of something new every two months.

that number does not yet include ad-hoc campaigns announcing the govt officials specific programs for his/her constituents, plus the occasional barangay hall repainting or free inoculation activities.

from 1 mayor, 1 vice-mayor, add half a dozen to a dozen councilmen, 1 or two congressmen and 1 barangay captain per barangay - we're talking of a gazillion (that's an exaggeration) officials releasing their own small banner ads on every other street corner and every other empty wall. whew!

looking at copy - these ads are no more than just name and face recall. they really don't contain much in terms of content. to say it positively, they are minimalist in messages. they are usually just the face of the local government official and copy that says "Happy Fiesta To All" if its fiesta time or "Happy Valentines To All".

given those, the ads do nothing more than generate just face and name recall. oh wait, it does more - it irritates us and it uglifies the city! we are of course assuming that people who live in the city actually look at any of these small banners. (i doubt it, though.) and also assuming, people who live in that city do not know the names of their local government officials and they do not know how they look like. that also assumes the local residents did not vote them in the last elections.

that's exactly the point - these ads are nothing more than just irritants. we doubt if these small banners with a minimalist message really do anything to endear these officials to the electorate. from an advertising standpoint, many of these ads just duplicate what is already existing. they were elected by the people, i'm sure all those who elected them into office know their names and their faces. come on now, do they really think voters will say anything like this - "Wow, Mayor de la Cruz greeted me "happy valentines", i'll re-elect him in the next election!"???

if these small banners don't do anything to the likability of the local officials, what do they achieve? one sentence - they uglify the city and a true blue WAWAM.

srah palin voted for barack obama

that surpised me, too. in fact i was shocked when i read what sarah palin said. she apparently voted for barack obama!



this is what sarah palin said when she arrived at her alaska office:

"I think the Republican ticket represented too much of the status quo, too much of what had gone on in these last eight years, that Americans were kind of shaking their heads like going, wait a minute, how did we run up a $10 trillion debt in a Republican administration? How have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration? If we're talking change, we want to get far away from what it was that the present administration represented and that is to a great degree what the Republican Party at the time had been representing,"

source : http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h21ZbzgPbTVRftcJPT5vkHkonY5QD94CMR0G0



read WAWAM! discussion here : http://the-wawam-file.blogspot.com/2008/10/president-barack-obama-winning.html

Palin said in a story published Sunday.what palin said is EXACTLY what barack obama has been saying during the campaign, in fact way back starting from the primaries until the end of the election campaign. "change" is obama's number 1 winning marketing strategy and palin gave a very good summary of the core marketing positioning of obama. part of the short list of obama's winning marketing strategies.

i wonder if palin was aware of what she said and it's significance. from that statement, it looked like palin voted for obama. you hear essentially the same words when ordinary voters are interviewed on tv. they give essentially the same answer when asked why they voted for obama.
with palin as a running mate and with that kind of thinking, it's no surprise obama won the electoral college votes by a landslide. palin is lucky that she said those words after the election. what she said would have been great material for obama ads.

help me out here -- is palin smart for realizing those things, for realizing that's what american voters want or is palin really dumb for not realizing that's exactly the marketing positioning of obama? from a mccain presidential bid campaing standpoint, sarah palin is a definite WAWAM!

PDI headline : black in white house

what a headline!

brilliant move on election day : starbucks, ben & jerry's and krispy kreme

free product sampling on election day - brilliant marketing.

this election will bring in record numbers of voters. it is also one of the most talked about and most watched election in the history of the US. the interest in this election is unprecedented.

giving product samples during election day is just a brilliant idea. the brands will get optimum brand awareness and build very strong affinity with the voters.

Starbucks, Ben & Jerry's, Krispy Kreme offer voters goodies


Coffee, doughnuts and ice cream are being offered up in election day giveaways by Starbucks Coffee Inc., Krispy Kreme Doughnuts Inc. and Ben & Jerry's Homemade Holdings Inc.

But Starbucks' giveaway may violate state and federal laws because it specifically targets voters, according to the attorney general of Washington state.

Seattle-based Starbucks (NASDAQ:SBUX) said it is giving away a free "tall" 12-ounce cup of coffee to anyone who votes.

North Carolina-based Krispy Kreme (NYSE:KKD) is giving away star-shaped doughnuts and Vermont-based Ben & Jerry's is offering free scoops of its ice cream Tuesday. But those companies aren't requiring people to say they voted to get their treats.

Despite the alleged election law problem, a spokesman for the Washington state AG said the office didn't plan to press charges, according to a report from the Associated Press.

Ben & Jerry's said in a statement that it had considered a promotion similar to Starbucks' but changed plans when it learned of the possible legal complications. Instead, all customers at its shops between 3 p.m. and 5 p.m. on Tuesday will be given free scoops.

Krispy Kreme is only requiring that customers at its 85 company-owned stores mention its promotion to get their free doughnut. Some of its 145 franchisees will also participate.


http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2008/11/03/daily23.html

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.

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!

vp palin - haste leads to marketing blunder?

the honeymoon is over on palin.

there is a part here that bothers me very much --- a presidential candidate chooses a vice president partner when they hardly met? not so much as talked face to face? is it that easy to get the job of US Vice President? and the job of US Vice President can be taken that lightly?

the miss universe beauty contest seem to take the no. 2 position more seriously than mccain did. in every miss universe contest we always hear the announcer say how important the runner up position is. but i don't see that resolve on this matter.

that leads me to think that palin seem to have been chosen purely on the basis of being an excellent marketing strategy. obama did not choose hillary, a female, so get one over the democrats by choosing palin. obama chose biden, a man older than obama, so why not get one over the democrats by choosing a much younger woman than mccain. mccain made a big deal of obama's inexperience, so why not get palin as VP, who has no experience and contrast that to biden who has a lot of experience.

the best marketing strategies are those that clearly differentiate versus all others in the same category. it's not only clarity, it is also discrimination and uniqueness. and those seem to be the overriding consideration in choosing palin.

as predicted, the next few weeks will be the most interesting and exciting time in the US presidential elections and that is not because it will be tight race. WAWAM! can't wait to see which marketing strategy worked the best.


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

Disclosures on Palin Raise Questions on Vetting Process

ST. PAUL — A series of disclosures about Gov. Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain’s choice as running mate, called into question on Monday how thoroughly Mr. McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.


On Monday morning, Ms. Palin and her husband, Todd, issued a statement saying that their 17-year-old unmarried daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant and that she intended to marry the father.


Among other less attention-grabbing news of the day: it was learned that Ms. Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state’s public safety commissioner; that she was a member for two years in the 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.

Aides to Mr. McCain said they had a team on the ground in Alaska now to look more thoroughly into Ms. Palin’s background. A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice. The campaign was still calling Republican operatives as late as Sunday night asking them to go to Alaska to deal with the unexpected candidacy of Ms. Palin.


Although the McCain campaign said that Mr. McCain had known about Bristol Palin’s pregnancy before he asked her mother to join him on the ticket and that he did not consider it disqualifying, top aides were vague on Monday about how and when he had learned of the pregnancy, and from whom.

While there was no sign that her formal nomination this week was in jeopardy, the questions swirling around Ms. Palin on the first day of the Republican National Convention, already disrupted by Hurricane Gustav, brought anxiety to Republicans who worried that Democrats would use the selection of Ms. Palin to question Mr. McCain’s judgment and his ability to make crucial decisions.


At the least, Republicans close to the campaign said it was increasingly apparent that Ms. Palin had been selected as Mr. McCain’s running mate with more haste than McCain advisers initially described.




New Yort Times photo and article, parsed, read complete story here : http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/us/politics/02vetting.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin

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!

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

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?