Since it's election day, let's play an election-themed guessing game. Each of the following screen shots is from the Web site of a politician up for election today. Can you guess their party affiliations?
Bob McDonnell, running for governor of Virginia:
Creigh Deeds, McDonnell's opponent:
John Corzine, up for re-election in New Jersey:
Chris Christie, Corzine's opponent:
Answers from top to bottom: Republican, Democrat, Democrat, Republican.
But it's not obvious, if you don't already know the candidates: None of these politicians make any direct mention of political party on their Web site. As Nate Silver notes, that's a canny move: After all, New Jersey and Virginia went blue in 2008, but independents will decide the races. The Democratic brand doesn't help much with independents; the Republican brand is positively toxic. The marketing and PR muscle which once drove both political parties is gone. Better to brand yourself as someone beyond party affiliation. And the first step is scrubbing your Web site of any mentions that you're a Republican or Democrat.
Now, there are a couple very subtle cues going on in the Deeds and Corzine Web sites: They both latch onto President Obama, without name-checking the Democratic party (of which they're both a part). As Silver notes, Deeds has a design basically lifted form Obama's own homepage, while Corzine has pictures of himself with Obama and Bill Clinton. In other words, they're trying to catch a little stardust from better-loved politicians, while leapfrogging their party associations.
But what are Republicans supposed to do next? They can't play the no-party game forever, and they're facing a profound lack of national leadership. Silver has an interesting suggestion:
You can actually make the argument--although maybe it's not a good one--that Republicans should in fact find a way to pull a Blackwater and switch their party ID when nobody is looking, from Republican to capital-C Conservative. This would probably involve at least some degree of bona fide structural change, and undoubtedly some near-term trauma: an orchestrated chaos. But the 'conservative' brand is just as powerful as it ever was in America, whereas the Republican brand is as weak as it has been.
Of course, as Silver implies, the Republican brand didn't spoil just because of the previous administration. Figures such as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are dragging the Republican base further and further from the mainstream on issues ranging from abortion to clean energy to health care reform. A rebranded "Conservative" party might be able to leave that Republican base behind, simply by peeling off moderates that are now wary of voting Republican.
[Read more at 538]
Related Stories: | Topics:Design, politics, branding, republicans, democrats, 2009 election, Innovation, Technology, Nate Silver, Creigh Deeds, Jon Corzine, Barack Obama, Politics |
Email
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Buzz Up!
LinkedIn
Recent Comments | 5 Total
November 3, 2009 at 2:40pm by Ryan Servatius
Excellent, it is about time the Republicans put their message on the web and more importantly the ever expanding mobile web where anyone, anytime can access their message...
--
Best Regards,
Ryan Servatius
Associate Broker, ABR, e-PRO, GRI, ILHM, R&SHS, USAA & Cartus designations
269-214-0636 Mobile
Info@CallRyan.com e-mail
November 4, 2009 at 10:30am by Daryle Hier
Oooh; not exactly evenhanded there on the reporting. I'm no fan of the GOP but "toxic"? And "Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are dragging the Republican base further and further from the mainstream"? Whose mainstream, yours? And from the results of the elections including locals, who's party is now more "toxic". Talking about branding in politics is interesting but when garbage like this, puts spin on the spins, it makes Fast Company look to be a leftist tool. But maybe you already knew that.
November 4, 2009 at 12:56pm by Greg Steggerda
I would suggest that the left wing of the Democratic Party is as far from mainstrean America as the right wing of the Republican Party. Most Americans are moderate, which is why the Democrats get so much mileage out of making talking heads like Limbaugh and Beck the face of the Republican Party. And why Independents decide a lot of races. It's worth remembering that Obama's voting record -- the most liberal in the Senate -- would likely have disqualified any other candidate. Hillary's pragmatic approach is much more representative of Democrats as a whole.
November 4, 2009 at 1:28pm by Gen Hendrey
Ha! I don't think the far right will tolerate the moderate right appropriating the word "conservative."
Maybe what's more likely to happen is that the far right peels *itself* off from the Republican party, and goes with the "Conservative" moniker.
Of course, as a progressive, that would fulfill a daydream of mine. A Conservative party like that might never control the Executive branch, and would be unelectable across large areas where fiscal Republicans have a shot. Just look at what happened in New York yesterday. The Republican party basically split up over moderate vs. right-wing differences, (<--Scozzafava | Hoffman-->), Palin and company arrived to stir the pot and inject "real" Americanism, and a very long-shot Democrat won in a district that had been conservative for over a hundred years!
The right wing of the Republican party is just terribly out of touch with how representative it is, as a whole, of "average" Americans. They honestly believe that Democrats are "scared" of a Sarah Palin candidacy, for example. They honestly don't believe that Democrats are *praying* for such a candidacy, since it's virtually guaranteed to go nowhere. They just act so over the top about anyone with a differing view point. For example, Michelle Malkin calls a REPUBLICAN candidate a "radical leftist" (http://michellemalkin.com/2009/10/20/dede-scozzafava-liar). Well, I get that Republicans cannot be happy with Scozzafava ending up endorsing a Democrat, but let's face it, she's not a "radical leftist." That sort of dialogue, if one can even call it that, is indicative of how the far right has completely lost touch with efficacious messaging. They seem to have no rhetoric remaining, but only polemics and hyperbole, which rarely appeal to anyone except the choir.
November 5, 2009 at 11:26am by Francesco Wesel
One year after the election of president Obama, the politics should actually have learned from what is often considered the biggest marketing triumph of all time. The magic formula was t Stick to a well differentiated brand message and using social media in the most effective way imaginable. More more on the subject, please read my bhttp://brandnewtimes.blogspot.com/2009/11/obama-branding-strategy-one-year-after.html Politicians should take it as a lesson when attempting to market themselves.
Francesco Wesel
Integrated Marketing Communication
www.francescowesel.com
www.brandnewtimes.blogspot.com