Not So Famous Last Words

by: michael r. shannon | published: 01 29, 2010

This weekend I’m going to be at Carter Hall in Millwood, VA presenting a lecture on message development for candidates and elected officials. It’s part of the University of Virginia’s Sorenson Institute for Political Leadership.

The Institute is a high–minded outfit that “seeks to improve political leadership in Virginia, thereby strengthening the quality of governance at all levels of government.”

I’ve always wondered why Sorenson risks damaging its reputation by associating with a disreputable character such as myself, but after looking at the my day’s agenda, I suspect I’m comic relief brought in to liven up the proceedings after a few hours of lectures on campaign finance and ethics.

Media consultants can always rely on video to recapture the audience’s attention, even if you have to speak during the after–lunch siesta that has been my slot for years.

The Sorenson sessions are a genuine bipartisan gathering brought together by an extremely tolerant executive director, Marc Johnson. Meaning I have to watch what I say so as to only mildly offend the Democrats in attendance.

This is not all that hard, even for me. Message development — as opposed to actual messages — concerns the process of constructing a message rather than any particular content.

One of the most useful segments for Republicans and Democrats is the section on the 7–Step Message Filter. When applied correctly the steps should result in a message that resonates with the public and results in victory.

Of course the first six are useful enough, but number seven is absolutely crucial: do you have evidence the message is effective?

There is always room for operator error in any political communication operation, but I’ve always thought this point would be obvious. If the message is not working, it’s time for a new message.

At least among my Sorenson alumni, this is not a controversial observation.

But this concept does not appear to be the prevailing opinion in the Obama White House, where they are preparing to double–down on Obamacare.

The President believes three consecutive defeats for Democrat statewide candidates by conservative Republicans — in states that voted for him last year — is no reason to consider sending his health care “reform” to the nearest death panel.

Although I will admit it was difficult to make out his exact words over the roar of Democrat House members overturning the furniture as they fled for the exits.

In an effort to reinforce the dissemination of a losing message, he’s brought back David Plouffe, his 2008 campaign manager, to advise his communications shop. Plouffe wrote Sunday that the key to winning in 2010 for Democrats is voting for Obamacare and holding your breath until you pass out.

Oxygen deprivation could be a useful strategy compared to Obama’s actual plans. In an interview with ABC, he declared, “The one thing I’m clear about is that I’d rather be a really good one–term president than a mediocre two–term president…there’s a tendency in Washington to think that the job description of elected officials is to get re–elected. That’s not our job description.”

Translation: I’m holding a suicide pact signing party and I expect all the Democrat House and Senate members to join me.

It is difficult to think of a more discouraging motivational speech for your closest supporters unless it’s Joseph Goebbels offering to share his pills with you in the Führerbunker.

Often after a defeat you’ll hear a candidate complain, “we didn’t get our message out.” This at least recognizes there was a defeat, but Obama isn’t even doing that.

It’s growing increasingly obvious that Obama has never had to deal with real adversity, particularly at the hands as someone as insignificant as voters. Rather than admit that his Obamacare message has been rejected, he claims the defeats were caused by voters angry about failure to enact the plan, so they vote for a Senate candidate who has pledged to vote against the plan.

This is delusional thinking.

Now it appears Obama and the rest of the White House staff consider themselves and their drive to pass Obamacare analogous to Dutch Resistance fighters in WWII. (He prefers international debacles to the domestic analogy.)

They are modern–day heroic little Dutchmen bravely preparing to dynamite the dikes and flood the landscape with heath care bureaucrats in an effort to create a political terrain the dreaded Nazi–GOP will be powerless to clear.

The only downside for his party is the flood will also wash a great number of fellow Democrats out of the House and Senate this November.

I don’t know how you reach a group of Ideologues so firmly committed to their own destruction. Maybe I should ask the Sorenson folks to offer them a seat in Millwood.

add a comment