(no subject)

[leftyjew]

Sadly, from a marketing perspective, I think McCain won last night's debate. Not Palin (she sucked a lot) but McCain's name was used more. Also, it's a sharper name than "Obama," which disappears into the soft vowels of the English language (I wonder if Palin lowered her voice when she said it), so it has to be said less often to be effective. But Biden was treating McCain as a real competitor - someone with a long record - almost as if he were already the incumbent. That has advantages - people hate the incumbency. They don't like their situation. But it doesn't matter. Words (especially sharp words) are stickier than images or thoughts.

But Palin treated Obama as a afterthought. This is very clear from a word cloud of the speeches. Look what words were used most often! I still have the words ringing through my ears. It's a really really good technique that the Republicans were using. Notice that the same technique was used during the RNC - Palin NEVER mentioned "her competitor," Barack Obama. She used the word "he" or "the other candidate" or "some people." If you don't think this is effective, look at commercial marketing. How often does Coke mention Pepsi in their ads? Even when it's something bad about the other brand, a company will make it a point to say "our competitors" or something.
You can show a picture of a bottle of Pert shampoo or a Pepsi logo and then start talking about "other companies" - the same message gets across. Just don't SAY anything about them. Don't let your ad be an ad for someone else.
Joe Biden failed that.

Comments

[eyelid.livejournal.com]

I don't know. That actually might be a good thing. I just read a commentator discussing how the election used to be a referendum on Obama - questioning his record, experience, can you trust this man, etc. Now, suddenly, it's a referendum on McCain - and he's not looking so good.

[leftyjew.livejournal.com]

You're right. He's tying McCain into the administration and framing him poorly, but you can do that without using his name all the time. That way the concepts are important, and you're left with negative feelings about "the other guy" and positive feeligns about Barack Obama.
There were a bunch sentences which were long and complex and you lost the subject. Obama and McCain were both mentioned, and it gets confusing. You just heard bad things coming from Biden's mouth, and you (or at least I) assume he's talking about Obama. It took me too long to figure out that he was talking about McCain. I shouldn't have to think about that kind of thing....
Campaigns are not about policy - they're about marketing and framing. Policy can (and should) be an integral part of your marketing, but Rove understands that it's the marketing is important - short, succinct, to-the-point sentences peppered with your candidate's name (facts don't matter as long as you can bring in relevant emotions). Democrats are still using long sentences with lots of facts, figures and ideas. Sure, there are emotions, but it's drowned out by numbers.
Obama doesn't do that - he's a Kennedyan/Clintonian feel-good guy - but Biden (a powerful Senate debater) does. Biden was arguing against McCain. Palin was advertising for McCain... and Obama was hardly in the room.
Since the RNC, all the media buzz about Obama has died. Palin and McCain (in that order) are everywhere. Biden isn't even mentioned. Media attention is free advertising ("earned publicity"), and Obama lost it. McCain wants out of the debate, McCain is drafting economic policy, McCain chose a stupid VP that gets SNL attention. Maybe Obama can get it back on his next debates, but there were probably more people watching this than the presidential debates.

I guess we'll see. It doesn't matter until we see what the artificially contrived electronic vote totals with polling irregularities two days after November 4th.

[smokingredmoon.livejournal.com]

I agree with.. however in terms of commercials.. is also, I think, illegal to mention competitor's names.

incumbency

[nosockstorock.livejournal.com]

incumbency almost always has a positive effect- even if things are going poorly. so making mccain seem like an incumbent is not good for biden, not that i think that's what he did.