Posted on 11/07/2008 8:04:58 PM PST by FocusNexus
Obama's defeat of the heir apparent in his own party and his victory over the much-vaunted Republican machine is a remarkable achievement that owes a lot to his instinct for marketing
When the book is written on this election, it should not be titled "The Making of a President," but "The Marketing of a President." Barack Obama's campaign is a case study in marketing excellence.
True, it was always going to be a Democratic year. An unpopular war, an incumbent Republican president with rock bottom approval ratings, and many Republican incumbents retiring from Congress as a result all meant that change was in the air. Add to that the economic meltdown that decimated millions of 401K retirement plans and undercut any Republican claim to be the better steward of the economy.
But, even so, for an inexperienced single term African-American senator tagged with the most liberal voting record to defeat the heir apparent in his own party and then go on to hold off the much-vaunted Republican machine is a truly remarkable achievement. Much of it has to do with Obama's instinct for marketing.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
The author is clearly an obamabot, so ignore his admiration for Obama, but the specifics are worth contemplating -- Republicans could learn marketing for the next election from this.
I really think that youthful attractive looking Romney would’ve gotten more of the vote from the under 30 crowd.
Unyielding principles IMO. The dems are toast when there are multiple issues.
Marketing skill or raising more money despite lies about sticking to public funding?
bump for tomorrow
all abouthow you frame your argument in the land of Obama.
Hmmm, so in 4 years he wouldn’t be a good candidate, then?
The MSM did all the marketing for bambi - he is neither charismatic, charming, smart, or a good public speaker. Barry is a media creation.
You describe the physical aspects of your candidate and wonder why he’s not there?
The real issue is the RNC who wasn’t prepared to win. Obama was groomed from the day he gave that speech in 2004, the RNC bench was almost empty and they didn’t do squat.
How many Republicans can even name the head of the Republican Party?
Obama ran a near perfect campaign, and despite the Clinton influence was able to command record financial support.
McCain emerged in most peoples mind as the best of a bad lot, and the Republican donors sat on their wallets, with the results we see today. The good news is, we now have Palin, Jindal, and a few other rising young stars and a part that has only one choice in direction if it is to escape extinction.
An 8 to 1 funding advantage does buy better marketing.
Well said. That is the bottom line.
And I’ll take it a step further and add that the media gave us McCain. Every other candidate was ignored or demeaned during the primaries.
IMO, it was a very well orchestrated coup.
Yeah, 3/4 of a billion dollars buys a helluva lot of “marketing”.
Marketing excellence? Geez, he had academia, the unions, Hollywood and the MSM actively and freeley campaigning for him.
The candidate should avoid the strong temptation to tell voters outright that his/her mission statement refers to the more specific platform items; let them see that for themselves.
I am NO fan of Obama, but he did what I have just recommended very, very well. The 'hopey/changey' theme actually said very little (this was deliberate, IMO), but it obviously resonated with many voters who defined it variously by whatever they wanted from a presidential candidate.
McCain message, in contrast, was totally horrible. It was weak, variable and fragmented, and therefore, there was no possibility of a good-quality, summary, catch-phrase to tie it all together and use consistently throughout the campaign on promotional materials. I can't even remember whatever it was, but I will not forget Obama's. I believe McCain's message problem stemmed, in large part, from his apparent lack of personal, political, unifying principles. Obama clearly has a core of strongly-held, leftwing political beliefs. It seems clear to me that McCain, just as clearly has no clear, consistent beliefs. Anyway, we're all gonna pay for it for a long time to come.
The Ayatollah Hussein IS NOT the President elect yet, and may never be. We will see what the Electors decide mid-December about supporting an illegal alien as President of the US. McCain may yet win.
Of course it would have. How obvious was that? Did anyone really think that young voters 18-35 would vote for a 72 year old McCain over Obama? This group knows little about our history, and less about politics. It’s all soundbytes and attractiveness I’m afraid.
I remember when Gary Hart had to drop out because of an affair. Kerry lost because of the Swift Boats. Barack had a multitudes of scandalous associations and he still won. (scratching head)
I still think there was MASSIVE voter fraud. Acorn had four years and lots of money to prepare for this election.
I agree with your post.
The McCain Campaign chose the slogan “Country First”—Not a bad slogan but it really was never incorporated into the campaign. Every message they sent out should have included this and it rarely did. Even the tag line at the end of his commercials should said something like, “Always putting my country first. I’m John McCain and I approved this message”
Whoever ran the campaign missed some great opportunities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.