What I've learned in 7 years as a political activist
ILLUSTRATED: Keep this straight and you'll be a keen observer (or better yet, actor) in politics
The core values of the ideologies
Liberals: Human Rights, Equity, Justice
Conservatives: Property Rights, Efficiency, Order
The essence of politics:
Interests and passions
There are three parts to democratic government. You need to understand all three and master at least one:
Getting power (electioneering): You must understand the American people, their locales, their history, and their interests.
Wielding power (legislation and bureaucracy): You must understand how the legislature and mechanics of the government and court system work.
Effecting power (public policy): You must understand the theory and practice of governing.
The quality of mind of a good political strategist:
The ability to think outside of your interests, and empathize outside of your passions
At a conceptual level, a campaign is a contest in value systems. When you hear "popularity contest," it really means which candidate has created a persona that represents the way of life of the majority.
At a human level, a campaign is a head game between the candidates.
The real way to learn what the two parties stand for is NOT speeches, literature, or commercials. Look at judicial rulings from Democratic and Republican appointed judges.
Electioneering is objective(adj) because there is an objective(noun) on a specific date.
Social activism is subjective, and amorphous.
The skill set to do one, is not the skill set to do the other. Electioneering mostly uses the left brain, and social activism mostly uses the right brain.
In a Primary with at least 5 serious candidates, it is better to be well known to 20% of the electorate, than to be known well by 80% of the electorate.
When dealing with a political figure, know when someone is fundamentally an agitator or fundamentally a politician. Per Richard Hofstadter, agitators (eg Sharpton) raise issues and are not responsible for policy. Politicians (eg Clinton) form a consensus and cannot be moral absolutists. Both are critical in public life. Whether they hold public office or not, know what kind of figure you are dealing with.
When running against a primary opponent who is running "just to make a point", there is a value to what they are doing and their extreme positions. There is also a modicum of fraudulence, because they are agitators pretending to be politicians. If you must engage them, essentially pretend to take them literally, and then focus on the absurd consequences of their policy proposals.
What I call the "Agitator's Dilemma" is that an agitator has to be somewhat shrill and crazy to get attention to their issues. But they cannot be too shrill and crazy since the populace will associate their cause with craziness. Remember the messenger is part in parcel with the message.
The reason to be "diplomatic" and "respectful" is to earn trust. Whether dealing with superiors, colleagues, partners, subordinates, or adversaries, if they trust you in your motives you will be most effective.
If you are shrill and offensive with others in the political arena, you may or may not be effective in getting your message out and winning support. But you will fail to be effective in the negotiating room. That goes from neighborhood activism to international diplomacy.
Leadership: 1) Having a vision, 2) taking personal ownership of that vision, 3) persuasively communicating that vision, and 4) executing the steps toward that vision.
As for execution, the key balancing act is delegating according to the comparative advantages of your subordinates' talents, but personally overseeing the few make-or-break decisions.
The trait of the greatest leaders:
The ability to tell the whole truth in a way that is understandable and props up morale
(Think of Lincoln and Churchill)
The best test for leaders:
The ability to say as much as possible in the fewest number of words.
(A note on this point, "integrity" is the expected answer. I think there are lots of honest leaders who simply cannot articulate the whole truth without losing morale. So they tell half truths. Communication ability is paramount.)
The best test for intelligence:
The size of your vocabulary
The five most powerful words in the English Language:
“I was wrong, I’m sorry”
(only people strong enough to utter those words should be in positions of power)
The sixth and seventh most powerful words
“Thank you”
On Accountability: subordinates follow orders.....orders follow superiors.
When you give an order, you own it. Never hang a subordinate out to dry like a pawn.
The most courageous acts for political figures are when they take on interests in their own party's power base.
The Leader of an organization is 90% responsible for the culture.
The values of an organization are determined by how it allocates resources (the budget) and the character of the people it promotes within.
Good policy makers have a high IQ
Good politicians have a high EQ
Legislators, executives, and judges must be under the rule of constitutional law
When negotiating with an opponent you do not trust...
Don't listen to what they offer in private,
Only listen to what they defend in public.
(Adapted from something Tom Friedman said)
The key to branding a candidate and a party:
Get the majority of the population to trust your side to handle the issues according to their values
The key to political communication:
Translate law and policy prose into campaign poetry that resonates with people’s values. If your communications director is not doing this, replace them with someone who will.
(i.e. With Health Care, say to liberal audiences that it is a right all must have access to. With conservatives tell them about the efficiencies of scale that help businesses)
The key to an effective speech: When written and delivered, the intellectual points should be hit when the emotion of the audience is peaking.
Legal and Academic Communication: Spell out every nuance of your reasoning.
Political Communication: Say as much as possible in the fewest number of words. (eg Change, Yes We Can). Less is more!
Being a charismatic or dynamic speaker does not mean you will be an effective stump speaker. That is why most elected politicians are not great orators, namely George W. Bush. A good stump speaker is disciplined and repeats a few things. Compare a jazz bass player who plays the same few notes all night, with Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, or Eddie Van Halen. Walking out of a jazz club everybody has the same beat in their heads. Not so with a virtuoso guitar concert.
Speechwriters, pry off the semicolon button from your keyboard. Sentences should be crisp.
Beware of ghastly hyperbole. Politicians and activists use words like "slavery, plantation, Nazi, holocaust, rape, genocide" etc. Generally a bad idea. Speakers use it for shock effect or to spill out every grievance they have. All it does is jar the audience and make them associate you with an uncomfortable feeling.
Enacting a sustainable policy initiative requires a political narrative that is intellectually honest from the beginning.
When speaking, know your real audience. If you are speaking to a grassroots group, and there is a mega-fundraiser in the room, (s)he may be your key audience. If you are at a big rally with live tv cameras, speak to the tv audience.
There is really no such thing as "off the record". There is only one reason to talk to a reporter and that is to get inside information out.
Softball reporters who think they are hardball reporters ask stupid questions to an intractable issues in order to spur a 5 minute discussion. Such a question might be "How can we afford this health care program?" Deal with it by breaking down the underlying premises and defining the issue. Such as "The cost of health care to the government is great, the opportunity cost of not doing it is much greater to the economy."
Per the previous question, a TV/Radio host out for spin and quotes will try to interrupt you as you define underlying issues in a lawyer-like way. The best media guests are not distracted and stay focused on getting the audience to understand the real issues.
The key to political fundraising:
The relationships you already have with people.
Quoting Mark Halperin, "relationships are more important than transactions." In other words, at an event, talk to people and find out their political interests. Build a rapport and send courtesy emails even if they give a small amount. You can go back to them at a later election.
“Thank You” notes are the most important tool in a bundler’s arsenal.
In other words, the people who will raise the most money in 2010, are the people who send the most Thank You cards and Holiday cards in 2009.
Be aggressive, but never let solicitations get in the way of your existing friendships.
Never over-promise to the finance director how much you can raise.
The best sources of money are the people who have already given.
The key to organizing:
Recruit (pay highly if you have to) talented people in key positions
A campaign office should be run like business. It is NOT a community center where people hang out.
A well managed office does not look busy. Until the final days of a campaign, there is no reason to have people sleeping in the office, and wearing clothes from yesterday.
Q: What do you call a campaign manager who constantly said "no, that's not in our agenda", "no that's not in the budget", and "no, while we're sympathetic, that's not in our message"?
A: Most people call that person a &%$#*@! I call that person Transition Director and incoming Chief of Staff. Because that is the discipline that wins election campaigns.
Authority and control of the campaign organization should reside locally with the campaign manager, finance director, and communication director. The proper role of outside consultants is to spice it up with new ideas and technical expertise.
With campaign volunteers, 10% of people who sign a sign-up sheet actually show up to something else. And 10% of those will become a leader or a dedicated volunteer. This is the magic 1%.
With major supporters, never spend money on them when stroking their ego will do.
On the issue of telecampaigning, local campaign workers who are networked socially with voters are best. Campaign foot soldiers from elsewhere who present themselves in a culturally appropriate way are better than nothing. Campaign foot soldiers who present like outsiders are worse than nothing. I call those foot soldiers "campaign suicide bombers" since they turn off more voters than they attract.
On the touchy issue of out-of-state phone calls from people with regional, foreign, or ethnic accents, I say this: people respond to those who look and sound like them to an extent. But people also respond to authentic passion. If you believe in the candidate, that passion will manifest itself in your voice and you will be very effective.
For a campaign manager or field coordinator, the hardest month of the entire campaign is the month after the primaries end and you have to absorb supporters of losing candidates from your own party. Often they have a less than positive attitude.
With organizing and fundraising, the phone is ultimately more effective than email.
With persuasion phone calls, they should only be done by a trained group of selected volunteers. Otherwise it is a complete waste of time and resources. It is THE most difficult thing to do in a campaign.
The most commonly wasted opportunity I see on campaigns is failing to have a process for glomming onto talented people who volunteer to help. Treat their sweat equity and intellectual capital the same as a donor, before and after the campaign.
If you are running a campaign meeting hijacked by blowhards, end the meeting by saying "those who want to commit to four hours a week to the campaign, come meet me at the end."
When starting a grassroots non-profit organization: 1) Get talented people. 2) Focus on doing one or two things well. 3) Money follows success. 4) Then you can scale up.
As an epilogue to the previous post, doing grassroots organizing teaches the meaning of the phrase "no good deed goes unpunished". Your organization can only do A and B, and perhaps dabble in C. The representatives of interests D, E, F, G,...and Z will get jealous and criticize you. Stay focused.
The key to campaign innovation is to align new technology and techniques with classic principles of communication and organization
What a candidate hopes for/fears the most is organized money coming into the district from elsewhere to influence their election.
When arguing with an academic, bring them to reality with concrete examples. Remind them that they generate ideas in an elite setting, they are not accountable for leading a populace.
When debating a demagogue/talk show host/agitator, remember they are not accountable for the implications of policies. Lay them out, and hold them in their position, from which the try to slither away. You are like a fort (standing for something), they are like mobile guerillas lobbing mortars.
Most people, even professional politicians, do not see beyond the interests and passions of their power base. Study each politician you deal with, then you know what they hope and fear.
When a dogmatic person is speaking in absolute, uncompromising terms, there is still almost always an application relevant to a group they are sympathetic with. For example, when explaining to a conservative military wife the importance of public employees having defined benefits, I simply asked her what would happen if the military did away with defined benefits.
Similar to the previous comment, when someone is advocating PROCESS (ie states rights vs federal supremacy) almost always there is an ulterior motive about SUBSTANCE. Pick an example of hypocrisy and call them out on it.
In a Primary, criticize your rival, but do NOT say anything that suggests they are not qualified for the office.
Intra-party debates are healthy. But after a primary, we rise and fall as a party. Everything starts with getting your party into power.
When talking to a base constituency, remember that while people like to hear the truth, they don't like to hear the truth about themselves. Carefully craft any "reformist" speech. Don't give a "Sista' Soulja" speech cussing out your base until after you have your party's nomination.
Never let an attack go unanswered. Even if you are not a senior person on a campaign, you can comment on blogs or call into talk radio to clear the air.
There are two kinds of smart people: those who think they know everything, and those who realize the scope of how little they know.
The two most important people in someone's life are the person(s) who signs their checks and the person(s) they sleep with.
Many people in politics have small minds, but big egos.
Not withstanding the previous comment, it does not matter how big your ego is. What matters is that you are in control of it.
Political sophistication does not merely mean erudition. It means the ability to size people up, individually or as groups, and 1) empathize and 2) communicate through their frame of reference. Sophistication is not a simply seeing the global map, it is like a zoom and pivot function on an internet map.
Being well networked is not the size of your rolodex nor is it the status of its people.
The effective size of your network is how many of those people return your calls and emails.
Be prepared for the bubble of hot air your opponent will blow. Be ready with a “pin prick statement”, a concrete statement that spurs critical thinking.
At gatherings dominated by the ideological types, the biggest applause lines are not those that attack the other party. They are those that attack the moderate wing of their own party as soft.
Dogmatists and centrists (“ideological fusionists”) need to respect each other. The hard core people represent legitimate values about what the party should stand for. The moderates are the gateways for bringing in new voters, and keeping our policies current.
For Democrats: Follow Mark Warner's example. First prove you are fiscally responsible and a good manager. Then, the American people are willing to fund programs in the public interest.
For Democrats: Beware of scientific fundamentalism taking over the party like religious fundamentalists have the other party. Make a moral argument for things like: bioethics and life issues, obesity and wellness issues, and environmental stewardship issues.
For Republicans: Face facts, the Nixon coalition is dead. Go libertarian on social issues, outrace Democrats to win over the growing ranks of the self employed.
For Republicans: As of this writing in the summer of 2009, your party has been taken over by extremists. Per Dick Morris in his book "Power Plays", Division does not necessarily lead to Conquest. Jettison the nut jobs from your new coalition, they are more drag than thrust.
Never underestimate the change one person can effect. A small group of talented, passionate people is even better.
If you are selecting a candidate to support early ask:
Who is your favorite Supreme Court justice?
Give an example of taking on an interest in your own party?
What is the proper role of government, and what shouldn't it be doing?
The best place to look for the absolutely perfect candidate: your mirror.
Last and perhaps most importantly....
Avoid supporting candidates who are moralizing and self righteous. Just like in real life, these are usually dark souls.
Support candidates whose careers and lives show a pattern of moral work. Also surround yourself with these people in life.
Strategy
The core values of the ideologies
Liberals: Human Rights, Equity, Justice
Conservatives: Property Rights, Efficiency, Order
The essence of politics:
Interests and passions
There are three parts to democratic government. You need to understand all three and master at least one:
Getting power (electioneering): You must understand the American people, their locales, their history, and their interests.
Wielding power (legislation and bureaucracy): You must understand how the legislature and mechanics of the government and court system work.
Effecting power (public policy): You must understand the theory and practice of governing.
The quality of mind of a good political strategist:
The ability to think outside of your interests, and empathize outside of your passions
At a conceptual level, a campaign is a contest in value systems. When you hear "popularity contest," it really means which candidate has created a persona that represents the way of life of the majority.
At a human level, a campaign is a head game between the candidates.
The real way to learn what the two parties stand for is NOT speeches, literature, or commercials. Look at judicial rulings from Democratic and Republican appointed judges.
Electioneering is objective(adj) because there is an objective(noun) on a specific date.
Social activism is subjective, and amorphous.
The skill set to do one, is not the skill set to do the other. Electioneering mostly uses the left brain, and social activism mostly uses the right brain.
In a Primary with at least 5 serious candidates, it is better to be well known to 20% of the electorate, than to be known well by 80% of the electorate.
When dealing with a political figure, know when someone is fundamentally an agitator or fundamentally a politician. Per Richard Hofstadter, agitators (eg Sharpton) raise issues and are not responsible for policy. Politicians (eg Clinton) form a consensus and cannot be moral absolutists. Both are critical in public life. Whether they hold public office or not, know what kind of figure you are dealing with.
When running against a primary opponent who is running "just to make a point", there is a value to what they are doing and their extreme positions. There is also a modicum of fraudulence, because they are agitators pretending to be politicians. If you must engage them, essentially pretend to take them literally, and then focus on the absurd consequences of their policy proposals.
What I call the "Agitator's Dilemma" is that an agitator has to be somewhat shrill and crazy to get attention to their issues. But they cannot be too shrill and crazy since the populace will associate their cause with craziness. Remember the messenger is part in parcel with the message.
The reason to be "diplomatic" and "respectful" is to earn trust. Whether dealing with superiors, colleagues, partners, subordinates, or adversaries, if they trust you in your motives you will be most effective.
If you are shrill and offensive with others in the political arena, you may or may not be effective in getting your message out and winning support. But you will fail to be effective in the negotiating room. That goes from neighborhood activism to international diplomacy.
Leadership
Leadership: 1) Having a vision, 2) taking personal ownership of that vision, 3) persuasively communicating that vision, and 4) executing the steps toward that vision.
As for execution, the key balancing act is delegating according to the comparative advantages of your subordinates' talents, but personally overseeing the few make-or-break decisions.
The trait of the greatest leaders:
The ability to tell the whole truth in a way that is understandable and props up morale
(Think of Lincoln and Churchill)
The best test for leaders:
The ability to say as much as possible in the fewest number of words.
(A note on this point, "integrity" is the expected answer. I think there are lots of honest leaders who simply cannot articulate the whole truth without losing morale. So they tell half truths. Communication ability is paramount.)
The best test for intelligence:
The size of your vocabulary
The five most powerful words in the English Language:
“I was wrong, I’m sorry”
(only people strong enough to utter those words should be in positions of power)
The sixth and seventh most powerful words
“Thank you”
On Accountability: subordinates follow orders.....orders follow superiors.
When you give an order, you own it. Never hang a subordinate out to dry like a pawn.
The most courageous acts for political figures are when they take on interests in their own party's power base.
The Leader of an organization is 90% responsible for the culture.
The values of an organization are determined by how it allocates resources (the budget) and the character of the people it promotes within.
Good policy makers have a high IQ
Good politicians have a high EQ
Legislators, executives, and judges must be under the rule of constitutional law
When negotiating with an opponent you do not trust...
Don't listen to what they offer in private,
Only listen to what they defend in public.
(Adapted from something Tom Friedman said)
Communication
The key to branding a candidate and a party:
Get the majority of the population to trust your side to handle the issues according to their values
The key to political communication:
Translate law and policy prose into campaign poetry that resonates with people’s values. If your communications director is not doing this, replace them with someone who will.
(i.e. With Health Care, say to liberal audiences that it is a right all must have access to. With conservatives tell them about the efficiencies of scale that help businesses)
The key to an effective speech: When written and delivered, the intellectual points should be hit when the emotion of the audience is peaking.
Legal and Academic Communication: Spell out every nuance of your reasoning.
Political Communication: Say as much as possible in the fewest number of words. (eg Change, Yes We Can). Less is more!
Being a charismatic or dynamic speaker does not mean you will be an effective stump speaker. That is why most elected politicians are not great orators, namely George W. Bush. A good stump speaker is disciplined and repeats a few things. Compare a jazz bass player who plays the same few notes all night, with Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, or Eddie Van Halen. Walking out of a jazz club everybody has the same beat in their heads. Not so with a virtuoso guitar concert.
Speechwriters, pry off the semicolon button from your keyboard. Sentences should be crisp.
Beware of ghastly hyperbole. Politicians and activists use words like "slavery, plantation, Nazi, holocaust, rape, genocide" etc. Generally a bad idea. Speakers use it for shock effect or to spill out every grievance they have. All it does is jar the audience and make them associate you with an uncomfortable feeling.
Enacting a sustainable policy initiative requires a political narrative that is intellectually honest from the beginning.
When speaking, know your real audience. If you are speaking to a grassroots group, and there is a mega-fundraiser in the room, (s)he may be your key audience. If you are at a big rally with live tv cameras, speak to the tv audience.
There is really no such thing as "off the record". There is only one reason to talk to a reporter and that is to get inside information out.
Softball reporters who think they are hardball reporters ask stupid questions to an intractable issues in order to spur a 5 minute discussion. Such a question might be "How can we afford this health care program?" Deal with it by breaking down the underlying premises and defining the issue. Such as "The cost of health care to the government is great, the opportunity cost of not doing it is much greater to the economy."
Per the previous question, a TV/Radio host out for spin and quotes will try to interrupt you as you define underlying issues in a lawyer-like way. The best media guests are not distracted and stay focused on getting the audience to understand the real issues.
Fundraising
The key to political fundraising:
The relationships you already have with people.
Quoting Mark Halperin, "relationships are more important than transactions." In other words, at an event, talk to people and find out their political interests. Build a rapport and send courtesy emails even if they give a small amount. You can go back to them at a later election.
“Thank You” notes are the most important tool in a bundler’s arsenal.
In other words, the people who will raise the most money in 2010, are the people who send the most Thank You cards and Holiday cards in 2009.
Be aggressive, but never let solicitations get in the way of your existing friendships.
Never over-promise to the finance director how much you can raise.
The best sources of money are the people who have already given.
Organizing
The key to organizing:
Recruit (pay highly if you have to) talented people in key positions
A campaign office should be run like business. It is NOT a community center where people hang out.
A well managed office does not look busy. Until the final days of a campaign, there is no reason to have people sleeping in the office, and wearing clothes from yesterday.
Q: What do you call a campaign manager who constantly said "no, that's not in our agenda", "no that's not in the budget", and "no, while we're sympathetic, that's not in our message"?
A: Most people call that person a &%$#*@! I call that person Transition Director and incoming Chief of Staff. Because that is the discipline that wins election campaigns.
Authority and control of the campaign organization should reside locally with the campaign manager, finance director, and communication director. The proper role of outside consultants is to spice it up with new ideas and technical expertise.
With campaign volunteers, 10% of people who sign a sign-up sheet actually show up to something else. And 10% of those will become a leader or a dedicated volunteer. This is the magic 1%.
With major supporters, never spend money on them when stroking their ego will do.
On the issue of telecampaigning, local campaign workers who are networked socially with voters are best. Campaign foot soldiers from elsewhere who present themselves in a culturally appropriate way are better than nothing. Campaign foot soldiers who present like outsiders are worse than nothing. I call those foot soldiers "campaign suicide bombers" since they turn off more voters than they attract.
On the touchy issue of out-of-state phone calls from people with regional, foreign, or ethnic accents, I say this: people respond to those who look and sound like them to an extent. But people also respond to authentic passion. If you believe in the candidate, that passion will manifest itself in your voice and you will be very effective.
For a campaign manager or field coordinator, the hardest month of the entire campaign is the month after the primaries end and you have to absorb supporters of losing candidates from your own party. Often they have a less than positive attitude.
With organizing and fundraising, the phone is ultimately more effective than email.
With persuasion phone calls, they should only be done by a trained group of selected volunteers. Otherwise it is a complete waste of time and resources. It is THE most difficult thing to do in a campaign.
The most commonly wasted opportunity I see on campaigns is failing to have a process for glomming onto talented people who volunteer to help. Treat their sweat equity and intellectual capital the same as a donor, before and after the campaign.
If you are running a campaign meeting hijacked by blowhards, end the meeting by saying "those who want to commit to four hours a week to the campaign, come meet me at the end."
When starting a grassroots non-profit organization: 1) Get talented people. 2) Focus on doing one or two things well. 3) Money follows success. 4) Then you can scale up.
As an epilogue to the previous post, doing grassroots organizing teaches the meaning of the phrase "no good deed goes unpunished". Your organization can only do A and B, and perhaps dabble in C. The representatives of interests D, E, F, G,...and Z will get jealous and criticize you. Stay focused.
Tactics
The key to campaign innovation is to align new technology and techniques with classic principles of communication and organization
What a candidate hopes for/fears the most is organized money coming into the district from elsewhere to influence their election.
When arguing with an academic, bring them to reality with concrete examples. Remind them that they generate ideas in an elite setting, they are not accountable for leading a populace.
When debating a demagogue/talk show host/agitator, remember they are not accountable for the implications of policies. Lay them out, and hold them in their position, from which the try to slither away. You are like a fort (standing for something), they are like mobile guerillas lobbing mortars.
Most people, even professional politicians, do not see beyond the interests and passions of their power base. Study each politician you deal with, then you know what they hope and fear.
When a dogmatic person is speaking in absolute, uncompromising terms, there is still almost always an application relevant to a group they are sympathetic with. For example, when explaining to a conservative military wife the importance of public employees having defined benefits, I simply asked her what would happen if the military did away with defined benefits.
Similar to the previous comment, when someone is advocating PROCESS (ie states rights vs federal supremacy) almost always there is an ulterior motive about SUBSTANCE. Pick an example of hypocrisy and call them out on it.
In a Primary, criticize your rival, but do NOT say anything that suggests they are not qualified for the office.
Intra-party debates are healthy. But after a primary, we rise and fall as a party. Everything starts with getting your party into power.
When talking to a base constituency, remember that while people like to hear the truth, they don't like to hear the truth about themselves. Carefully craft any "reformist" speech. Don't give a "Sista' Soulja" speech cussing out your base until after you have your party's nomination.
Never let an attack go unanswered. Even if you are not a senior person on a campaign, you can comment on blogs or call into talk radio to clear the air.
The Reality
Most people, most of the time, prefer preaching to teaching. Meaning, they would rather hear a charismatic speaker validate their worldview and value system, than have an intelligent speaker expand their world view.
Whenever you speak thoughts that are out-of-the-box, or explain the perspective of the other side, a lot of your own partisans will distrust you because you are not conforming. Sad but true.
To reform a political party: 1) take disparate groups and form a platform intellectually, 2) translate your policy goals into a message, 3) raise lots of capital in large chunks and small bits, 4) organize, 5) find a messenger.
Ignore polls about the education of voters supporting certain candidates. Formal education has little to do with whether you are 1) an out-of-the-box thinker or an orthodox thinker or 2) if you make decisions based on analysis or emotion.
Most people don't like to think critically. You have to craft your speeches and talking points to connect with people's existing schemas. Use real parables to communicate.
An honest person cannot properly function in a corrupt system. And, this is the kicker, a corrupt system cannot properly function with an honest person who refuses to conform. That is the theme of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" and "Serpico".
"Elitist" means you have an Ivy League degree and have a cool persona. It is a divisive term to define an other. People use it when you force them to think critically. If you are charged with it, say you are about "excellence", and call them a "mediocrist".
The biggest difference between being a business leader and a politician is that a politician must suffer fools.
Fools vote. Politically organized fools are no joke.
Governments with developed political and legal systems are preoccupied with markets.
Governments without developed political and legal systems are preoccupied with controlling their people.
Most people, most of the time, prefer preaching to teaching. Meaning, they would rather hear a charismatic speaker validate their worldview and value system, than have an intelligent speaker expand their world view.
Whenever you speak thoughts that are out-of-the-box, or explain the perspective of the other side, a lot of your own partisans will distrust you because you are not conforming. Sad but true.
To reform a political party: 1) take disparate groups and form a platform intellectually, 2) translate your policy goals into a message, 3) raise lots of capital in large chunks and small bits, 4) organize, 5) find a messenger.
Ignore polls about the education of voters supporting certain candidates. Formal education has little to do with whether you are 1) an out-of-the-box thinker or an orthodox thinker or 2) if you make decisions based on analysis or emotion.
Most people don't like to think critically. You have to craft your speeches and talking points to connect with people's existing schemas. Use real parables to communicate.
An honest person cannot properly function in a corrupt system. And, this is the kicker, a corrupt system cannot properly function with an honest person who refuses to conform. That is the theme of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" and "Serpico".
"Elitist" means you have an Ivy League degree and have a cool persona. It is a divisive term to define an other. People use it when you force them to think critically. If you are charged with it, say you are about "excellence", and call them a "mediocrist".
The biggest difference between being a business leader and a politician is that a politician must suffer fools.
Fools vote. Politically organized fools are no joke.
Governments with developed political and legal systems are preoccupied with markets.
Governments without developed political and legal systems are preoccupied with controlling their people.
Face to Face Campaigning*
The general approach is: 1) Start a friendly conversation, 2) observe the voters attitude, 3) offer empathy, 4) help clarify the situation with your candidates policies eg "so perhaps an affordable health care risk pool might help you start a business," and finally 5) ask for their vote.
Concretely what you do is:
-How do you decide how to vote? (Don't ask about issues since most people don't understand the issues)
-Listen to their feelings
-Ask about the implications of those feelings. eg"So your factory closed...do you expect the private sector to re-train and re-educate you?"
-Be relevant up to the point to hitting a hot-button issue and getting the voter too emotional.
-Don't judge people, take them as they are and improvise.
*Many of these pointers are from Dr. Katherine Forrest's seminars.
2) Wonks and lawyers formulate a policy.
3) It is then winnowed down to key recommendations and a message is formulated.
4) Citizens and professional lobbyists go to work.
5) Legislators go to work. Most bills fail.
6) Regulators try to implement
Effective advocates have two things: a realistic objective and a clear message.
Figure out the right level of government, the applicable executive agency heads, the applicable legislative subcommittees and staffers.
Before you contact the officials, get the private coalition organized and on message.
Study each key legislator. What are their pet issues? What are their ambitions? What is the nature of their district? Who supports their campaigns?
Contact the legislator ahead of time, and be respectful to all staffers always. Ask for the staffer who deals with that particular issue, unless you already have a personal relationship with the legislator.
Offer to "help" by being a source of statistics and information. You can never have too many lines of argument. But most importantly, personal stories move legislators (who are people after all).
Use the media wisely. Do not embarrass the legislators you have to work with.
Concretely what you do is:
-How do you decide how to vote? (Don't ask about issues since most people don't understand the issues)
-Listen to their feelings
-Ask about the implications of those feelings. eg"So your factory closed...do you expect the private sector to re-train and re-educate you?"
-Be relevant up to the point to hitting a hot-button issue and getting the voter too emotional.
-Don't judge people, take them as they are and improvise.
*Many of these pointers are from Dr. Katherine Forrest's seminars.
Lobbying/Advocacy
1) Commercial groups, interest groups, grassroots groups identify a problem.The lobbying process:
2) Wonks and lawyers formulate a policy.
3) It is then winnowed down to key recommendations and a message is formulated.
4) Citizens and professional lobbyists go to work.
5) Legislators go to work. Most bills fail.
6) Regulators try to implement
Effective advocates have two things: a realistic objective and a clear message.
Figure out the right level of government, the applicable executive agency heads, the applicable legislative subcommittees and staffers.
Before you contact the officials, get the private coalition organized and on message.
Study each key legislator. What are their pet issues? What are their ambitions? What is the nature of their district? Who supports their campaigns?
Contact the legislator ahead of time, and be respectful to all staffers always. Ask for the staffer who deals with that particular issue, unless you already have a personal relationship with the legislator.
Offer to "help" by being a source of statistics and information. You can never have too many lines of argument. But most importantly, personal stories move legislators (who are people after all).
Use the media wisely. Do not embarrass the legislators you have to work with.
Miscellaneous Tidbits
There are two kinds of smart people: those who think they know everything, and those who realize the scope of how little they know.
The two most important people in someone's life are the person(s) who signs their checks and the person(s) they sleep with.
Many people in politics have small minds, but big egos.
Not withstanding the previous comment, it does not matter how big your ego is. What matters is that you are in control of it.
Political sophistication does not merely mean erudition. It means the ability to size people up, individually or as groups, and 1) empathize and 2) communicate through their frame of reference. Sophistication is not a simply seeing the global map, it is like a zoom and pivot function on an internet map.
Being well networked is not the size of your rolodex nor is it the status of its people.
The effective size of your network is how many of those people return your calls and emails.
Be prepared for the bubble of hot air your opponent will blow. Be ready with a “pin prick statement”, a concrete statement that spurs critical thinking.
At gatherings dominated by the ideological types, the biggest applause lines are not those that attack the other party. They are those that attack the moderate wing of their own party as soft.
Dogmatists and centrists (“ideological fusionists”) need to respect each other. The hard core people represent legitimate values about what the party should stand for. The moderates are the gateways for bringing in new voters, and keeping our policies current.
For Democrats: Follow Mark Warner's example. First prove you are fiscally responsible and a good manager. Then, the American people are willing to fund programs in the public interest.
For Democrats: Beware of scientific fundamentalism taking over the party like religious fundamentalists have the other party. Make a moral argument for things like: bioethics and life issues, obesity and wellness issues, and environmental stewardship issues.
For Republicans: Face facts, the Nixon coalition is dead. Go libertarian on social issues, outrace Democrats to win over the growing ranks of the self employed.
For Republicans: As of this writing in the summer of 2009, your party has been taken over by extremists. Per Dick Morris in his book "Power Plays", Division does not necessarily lead to Conquest. Jettison the nut jobs from your new coalition, they are more drag than thrust.
Your Place in Politics
Never underestimate the change one person can effect. A small group of talented, passionate people is even better.
If you are selecting a candidate to support early ask:
Who is your favorite Supreme Court justice?
Give an example of taking on an interest in your own party?
What is the proper role of government, and what shouldn't it be doing?
The best place to look for the absolutely perfect candidate: your mirror.
Last and perhaps most importantly....
Avoid supporting candidates who are moralizing and self righteous. Just like in real life, these are usually dark souls.
Support candidates whose careers and lives show a pattern of moral work. Also surround yourself with these people in life.
posted by Teka Thomas at 2:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home