Parkies Presidential Politics
I like getting comments from James Tucker because he uses, as far as I know, his real name, and because he’s civil and likes to debate ideas. So, James, I hope you don’t mind my reprinting your comment to my earlier post about my support of Barack Obam
a, and my response to that comment. I apologize for the links not pasting here as they appeared, but interested readers can look back at James’ comment.
James Tucker @ May 12th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Sorry everyone, I have a policy about internet free weekends. I don’t particularly feel like defending John McCain, John Hagee, or the RNC at this time. However,
my comments about Hamas for Obama bumper sticker reflect a real world concern and shouldn’t be ignored by his supporters.
Here is a link to the original April interview of Hamas’ political advisor, Ahmed Yousef, by Aaron Klein
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/i…..geId=61631
Here is the audio of the interveiw in case you think the comment was taken out of context.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/a…..020315.php
This situation was further complicated by David Axelrod’s response to questions about the interview. He was “flattered” by the comparison to Kennedy, but didn’t distance Obama from the rest of the interview.
And some breaking news about Obama 08’s informal connection with Hamas.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com…..05411.aspx
http://www.suntimes.com/news/s…..11.article
I am assuming that the Robert Malley quoted in the April ‘08 article above is the same Robert Malley who just resigned.
In an effort towards full disclosure Obama and McCain have the same stated position towards Hamas.
My response:
James, why is Obama responsible for every supporter he collects? Is a celebrity responsible for his or her stalkers?
Presumably, the Log Cabin Republicans will support John McCain, but I haven’t seen any evidence that he supports them. Ron Paul received a donation from a well-known white supremicist, but that doesn’t make him a white supremicist. Rush Limbaugh has urged his listeners to vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries, but that really isn’t Hillary’s fault. Ann Coulter has said she would campaign for Hillary if McCain became the Republican nominee; a) I don’t believe her, and b) who cares? That’s Coulter’s problem, not Clinton’s.
And why are discussing this on a Park Cities blog? Because Park Cities residents vote in huge percentages.
Even John McCain has a pastor problem. John Hagee, whose endorsement was welcomed by John McCain is very anti-Catholic. From the Catholic League’s website:
“There are plenty of staunch evangelical leaders who are pro-Israel, but are not anti-Catholic. John Hagee is not one of them. Indeed, for the past few decades, he has waged an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church. For example, he likes calling it ‘The Great Whore,’ an ‘apostate church,’ the ‘anti-Christ,’ and a ‘false cult system.’
I think this has been a great series on the blog.
I am not a public relations specialist, but I do know a little about the subject. One thing that PR people do is to position a product, service or a candidate against something that people are more familiar with then the product, service or person. That positioning is above, next to, under, superior to, etc., the product, service or person. This is why candidates seek endorsements from opinion leaders. In Massachusetts people are more familiar with Ted Kennedy than Barak Obama. Ted Kennedy’s endorsement will help Obama in certain areas. People have certain feelings for a celebrity. When a celebrity endorses a candidate it is hoped that the feeling the public has for the celebrity will transfer to the candidate. When it comes to negative positioning the same is true. The candidate is positioned to a person or thing that creates a negative impression. In John McCain’s case, the left will try to position him as worse or the same as Bush (with his new 31% approval rating). The John Hagee/John McCain positioning has been going on as long as the Obama/Wright controversy has been going on. It was the Obama campaign’s attempt to counter Reverend Wright. The concept of positioning has been part of campaigning since the first PR person started working in politics. The newest trick is to position a candidate next to an unknown someone who has some negative characteristics, and then to educate the public about why they should have negative feelings about that unknown. None of us knew who Reverend Wright was before March. Now we know all about him. None of us remembered William Ayers. The right spent a lot of time educating us on who he was. The positioning of a candidate is one of the basics in campaigning. The only way to combat it is to know what is being talked about and do your best to reposition your candidate. I have thought that the Obama campaign should have admitted early that the Rush Limbaugh effect was real and that there was significant cross-over voting going on. If they were to have admitted that, and hung Rush around Hillary’s neck like a milestone it would have turned off some of her support on the left. Instead they, like the media, ignored it and hoped it would go away. It didn’t go away and has been one of the factors that has kept Hillary in the race.
Charles it might seem unfair but it is not going away. Both campaigns are going to use it and probably to great effect. I brought up the Hamas comment because that was the latest thing making the rounds on the conservative blogs. It is fun to look at both the left and the right’s blogs to get their perspective on the issues. Frequently, you will have the same issue spoken of in two completely different ways. Each campaign jockeys to get the airtime or blogtime to get their message of positioning or repositioning out. Who wins? I think the voter ultimately wins because the more information we can gather on candidates the better off we are. Sorry about the long-windedness of this comment and hope it is not to verbose. And yes that is my real name. If I am willing to say it in a public forum I should be willing to sign off on it with my name. IJS
James, I assume you aren’t including PC People as a blog of the left!
Maybe Obama will engage less in unfair positioning than others. Maybe he’ll do another “Not this time” speech. I wish.
As to pastor problems, the Religious Right’s hero, Reagan, knew how to avoid it: No pastor, no problem.
If we try positive positioning and print “Elitists for Obama” signs, do you think he could carry the Park Cities?
I’m all for it, anon. ! “Elitists for Obama. If you have to ask, you aren’t one.” It’s kind of edgy, but it just might work.
Actually anon. I do think that this blog leans to the left. The bloggers and the posts were about as giddy with excitement about the democrat primary in Texas as anywhere else in the country. Charles came out for Obama, Merritt and 1 or 2 of the other women came out for Hillary. The only blogger I have seen discussing a republican candidate was Tierny Kaufman (sp?) and she could have been doing that as part of her Society page job.
Charles,
Thanks for the compliment in the beginning of this post. I appreciate it. Your bumper sticker might have a positive PC effect, but you better get it copywritten fast. I suspect it would also work for the right on say a Rush Limbaugh t-shirt.