Obama

The numbers for the Barack Obama campaign have been released and contrary to what some critics have been claiming . . . Obama raised a whopping $55 million last month. The fact that he was able to raise so much money is not the point at hand but the way he is implementing this money is what is worrying some folks on the right.

Obama has taken an aggressive approach to this November’s General Election. Instead of the typical wasteful spending usually attributed to the battleground states, Obama has decided to challenge McCain in states that Democrats usually do not bother to visit. Is this foolish? Has Obama lost his mind? Why would he not use his money wisely?

Actually, this is a clever approach and McCain will understand quickly. Money spent elsewhere would be money saved right? Well, this approach will devastate the McCain war chest. Instead of allowing the McCain camp to decide the battle ground states, the Obama camp has taken the offensive and made the McCain camp play catch up.

This could change the way political campaigns approach battleground states in the future. Of course, that candidate should be able to raise money at about or the same rate as his competitor. This has not backfired for Obama. In states that would normally be “givens” for Republicans, Obama has slight leads or is just behind McCain. The McCain camp now has to redistribute its funds in order to compete with Obama thus weakening his overall strategy. To put it simply . . . Obama is the cool kid at school that McCain is trying to emulate.

Thus, no matter how hard he tries; McCain will not be able to catch up Obama or at least that is the idea. Obama is doing well in some Red States. McCain now has to spend money on Virginia, Missouri, Alaska, Colorado, New Mexico, North Dakota, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina and of course on Hispanics. Not only does McCain have to spend extra money on these states  . . . he will have to spend time. Time is a limited resource that candidates most use wisely. Unfortunately, McCain cannot be in every state at the same time. Obama has taken the bold and aggressive approach in this campaign and is calling the shots. This will no doubt put a strain on the McCain by further limiting his money and resources on the General Election.

Sam Wang and Sandra Aamodt wrote an interesting piece in The New York Times on how our brain lies to us. They introduce the topic by stating that 18% of Americans believe the sun revolves around the earth. Thus, it should not be surprising that 1 in 10 Americans believe Obama is a Muslim when in fact he is Christian.
They go on to explain how those lies become statements that render themselves “true” for some reason.

Wang and Aamodt claim, “A false statement from a noncredible source that is at first not believed can gain credibility during the months it takes to reprocess memories from short-term hippocampal storage to longer-term cortical storage. As the source is forgotten, the message and its implications gain strength.”

Repetition of a half-truth becomes the truth after a while because one forgets the original reason and context of the information learned. Think of commercials and their jingles or slogans . . . after a while their claims seem credible.

Obama recently set up a website to counteract any rumors that may surface during his presidential bid. Wang and Aamodt warn that “by repeating a false rumor, they may inadvertently make it stronger.” A better approach they claim is to counter the rumor by dispelling the information at hand with a claim that emphasizes the truth. So, for example if Obama is labeled a Muslim, he should claim that he is a Christian. In other words, Obama and any other candidates facing similar dilemmas must take a proactive approach in the matter but should not repeat the false information at the same time. It becomes tricky in the world of politics when candidates have a limited time frame to fight off any attacks. A rumor during the final stretch of the race may be detrimental to Obama if his campaign does not prepare itself.

This is a great short read on how the brain processes information and can end up lying to itself over time. Candidates and publicist may want to look into this topic a bit more in order to better market and represent themselves or clients.

It is officially over for the former first lady and current New York Senator Hillary Clinton. Her attempt to become the first female president in the United States has come to end. In an email to supporters she states, "On Saturday, I will extend my congratulations to Senator Obama and my support for his candidacy."

This should come as no surprise as the Democratic primaries have ended and she was behind in the delegate count. Feeling pressure from fellow Democrats she has bowed out to let Obama to assume the role of presumtive nominee. Clinton claims, "My differences with Senator Obama are small compared to the differences we have with Senator McCain and the Republicans." This should serve as a reminder to Clinton supporters and delegates that McCain is the enemy and he comes no where close to sharing the ideals and beliefs of the Clinton Campaign.

Clinton fought a hard battle and for the first time in a long time, there were to qualified candidates that our country deserves to be lead by. She notes, "I will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise. "

I agree. I supported Clinton in the March Primary in Texas. I will endorse Obama and do all that I can to see that he is the next President of the United States. Hillary Clinton, thank you for your public service and dedication/determination to become the Democratic nominee. The United States would have restored its greatness under your leadership . . . Obama shall restore it but history will not forget the historic primary that both candidates participated.

Hillary Clinton should not quit the race. I made this argument last month but this time I will entertain it with a different approach. Mark Leibovich of The New York Times wrote a great piece on this perspective arguing that Obama has benefited from the Clinton rivalry.

Obama’s campaign has been tested and prepped for a challenge from McCain (if Obama is the nominee) in the Democratic Presidential nomination by Clinton. Over the past weeks many have claimed that Clinton has had a negative impact on Obama but most importantly the Democrats opportunity to take back the White House in November. The negative ramifications imposed include but are not limited to prolonging the Primary debate and weakening Obama’s chances of beating McCain. I beg to differ. Obama has been trained by the best rival in order to overcome the GOP opponent this fall.

The challenge that Clinton has posed has made Obama stronger and a more formidable candidate. Obama has held his own against Clinton, helping him prepare for what ever McCain will bring for the Presidential election. Clinton is and was not an easy candidate to compete with. Obama has been able to establish his own base and support to garner the support to edge out Clinton. Obama has learned a lot and this was all due to his opponent. I recall advice from a high school coach that recommended I always train with people that are better in skill than me in order to improve my own skills.

Clinton has legitimized the Obama campaign. For the first time in countless years, Democrats have had two strong candidates to choose from. This has caused both Clinton and Obama to work harder to attract and retain voters that they would otherwise not seek if challenged by weaker opponents. Whoever ends up with the nomination, the other will benefit from the voter support garnered due to the Primary.

The Wright Effect should be non-existent in November. Obama should benefit from the Wright issue being an issue during the Primary season then in November. This has allowed Obama and company to prepare and orchestrate an effective damage control strategy should it come up in November. The McCain camp would be foolish to bring up an non issue again in November but if they do, at least Obama will be prepared.

Obama has indeed benefited from Clintons challenge. Let’s not forget though, Clinton has done a tremendous job in order to compete with Obama. Even though she was a favorite at the beginning, Obama was the populist once the Primary season began. One may claim that Obama was the underdog but it was Clinton who had work harder to get the support and funding for her campaign. Clinton has been scrutinized and under a microscope as the presumed nominee by the media. Clinton has had to overcome many obstacles in order to stay float with Obama. Obama like McCain may have benefited from a love affair by the media. Clinton has also had to distinguish herself from the former President Clinton and shine by herself. Whatever the outcome this June, one thing is for sure . . . the Democratic nominee will be better prepared for the general election than McCain.

The decision that John Edwards publicly commits 24 hours before what I speculate to be the last stand of this years Democratic primary will favor Obama. Edwards has been courting both hopefuls since his early departure in February but that does not mean that he has not been following the ongoing transactions.

Edwards would be a great resource for either candidate but because his views are more in favor with those of  Obama, I suspect that he will endorse him the day before the primary in order to deliver the  coup de grâce and end Clinton's hopes and campaign.

This is Clinton's last stand and her demise will commence after the election is over. There are no "big" states left and I predict that she will fight until early June. Bill Clinton may step in and sway her to call it a loss but I would not be surprised if Democratic big wigs step in and officially endorse Obama. Pelosis but in particular Gore would offer the most influence.

This is of course if Edwards supports Obama . . . if he ends up endorsing Clinton then expect this race to get tougher, nastier and more vital for either candidate. 

Tomorrow is the Clinton campaigns last stand. This is it! The Primary season will end tomorrow . . . if and only if Obama is able to pull out a win but not just a win, a devastating win. Just one month ago, the Clinton campaign set its sights on Pennsylvania and why shouldn't they have . . . they had a generous lead in the double digit realm. According to recent poll numbers, that lead has been diminished in some point out that Obama has a slight advantage. It does not matter what is the real case, the important item to note here is that Clinton was not able to protect that lead and at the 4th quarter of the game . . . it looks like she will lose the game.

 So what happens if she wins? If Clinton is able to sneak by with a close win then she gives herself enough life to hang around until May 6 when North Carolina votes. This is where the Democratic Primary shall end if it does not end tomorrow. I speculate that Edwards will give the nod to Obama and North Carolina overwhelmingly will give their vote to Obama. Indiana will play a role but the number of states remaning that are hosting elections is dwindling and playing catchup is futile now.

As I have claimed in the past and even Obama has stated, Clinton should entertain the nomination as long as she deems it fit. For some reason though, Obama may have stated that fact only because he was confident of his coup in Pennsylvania. When it comes down to it . . . if Obama does win tomorrow, the Clinton camp will have a hard time explaining how they lost after having such a commanding lead . . . and that folks is why I predict that tomorrow will be Clinton's last stand.

Ellen McGirt of Fast Company wrote an interesting article "The Brand Called Obama” in the April issue of the magazine. It is funny because I wrote  “Why Obama is Connecting” last month that briefly touched on the subject. Nonetheless, I enjoyed this article because it entertained the impact of this approach not only on politics but on business.

There is no secret that Obama has branded himself quite well. "Barack Obama is three things you want in a brand," says Keith Reinhard, chairman emeritus of DDB Worldwide. "New, different, and attractive. That's as good as it gets." It seems to be working since he has mobilized a segment of the population that was deemed apathetic to politics after the 60s. Obama though has not only succeeded in attracting these new voters, he has also transcended various social demographics to gain support for his campaign. That is something new to politics since most campaigns rely on a niche to give them the push for the win. This new approach is common in business marketing campaigns.

As I have mentioned many times, the internet is revolutionizing the way the media handles politics but more importantly the way candidates and voters interact with one another. Candidates become a bit more accountable in this new age. It is no secret that Obama’s greatest strength is his web presence. It  does not surprise me now that his strength with the youth and social networks may be due one young man’s role.

24 –year-old Chris Hughes may be no one to many folks in the political scene, but if you were to be enlightened that he is the co-founder of Facebook then your opinion on his impact changes. Hughes is new to political campaigns but it does not mean that he does not know what he is doing. As a consultant to the campaign he has become priceless, as he has been able to deliver so far. It is evident of his impact since Obama is dominated the web scene and has slick “web 2.0” design and functionality.

Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist.org, offers his opinion on why Obama is connecting. He claims, “I see him as a leader rather than a boss." A leader, he notes, gets people to do things on their own, through inspiration, respect, and trust. "A boss can order you to do things, sure, but you do them because it's part of the contract." These comments struck a chord with me. I realized that the difference between Obama and Clinton were that clear. Many folks seemed to be picking up on that notion. "Obama and Clinton make an interesting contrast in brands," says Professor John Quelch, senior associate dean at Harvard Business School and coauthor of Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes for Better Democracy. "Obama communicates that he loves people, and Clinton communicates that she loves policy." It seems that when you side with Obama is for the experience versus Clinton who is the substance and when it comes down to it, people side for the experience over the substance. That’s how you can have successful retailers that offer something unique to the customer-business relationship even though the product is not inherently superior in the marketplace.

At the end of the day what Obama has accomplished in this past year is extraordinary. The viability of an African-American candidate for President was unheard of just 1 year ago that is until Obama threw his hat into the ring. Clinton as female has also done the same, the difference though is that one candidate has accomplished this through new means. Whatever happens in Denver or in November, one thing is for sure . . . Decision 2008 will be a turning point for America.

I do not care much for Karl Rove, the former Bush adviser since he is a wicked man that would do anything to achieve his goal. His mentality of the ends justify the means is and has been detrimental to American domestic and foreign policy the past 8 years. Nonetheless, as the saying goes, "Keep your friends close but your enemies closer, one must not totally dismiss him because he is clear cut of his agenda.

In a recent GQ interview, Rove speculated that the "flag lapel controversy" may come to bite Obama if he were to get the nomination. Rove is a skillful master at marketing and branding. It takes a genius to turn a Vietnam Purple Heart Veteran into a weak flip-flopper that perhaps never went to war in Vietnam. Although I am speaking of Kerry and the Swift Boat Veterans ruthless attack, the main point is that it worked.

Rove claims, "There are Democrats, particularly blue-collar Democrats, who defect to McCain because they see McCain as a patriotic figure and they see Obama as an elitist who's looking down his nose at 'em, which he is." That last tidbit, "which he is" is his spin on the topic. He plants these ideas in the media and it is this type of attack that turns into those wacky day long topics on cable news networks that entertain "Is Obama Patriotic?" feeding into the hysteria.

Obama claims, "I'm less concerned with what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart. You show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those ones who serve." This is the reason why he opts out of wearing the pin. I think this debate over such a trivial issue speaks great lengths on how desperate the GOP has become. There is no legitimate way to attack Obama on his positions that they have to resort to attacking his character. Furthermore, they do not attack his morals per se, but attack decisions that do not have an impact on the position he is trying to win. It will be intresting to see if these attacks do any damage during the general election.