Posted on 07/16/2002 9:40:03 AM PDT by John Jorsett
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:40:52 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
I agree the conventional approach has its poroblems to be sure. And that too often the establishment types really screw things up. But assuming that the most likey winning candidate will be a "mainstreamer", in this case, hopefully Simon as opposed to Davis, the fact is that the game must be played. Personal, grass roots support for Simon, conducted both independently and through Simon's campaign is the best approach, IMO. Personal contact, email, internet are all valuable tools. I have to disagree with your take on advertising. To sway the undecided middle to Simon, television is crucial to convince voters that Simon would do a better job. Whether that is accomplished by building up Simon's "positives" or focusing attention on Davis' "negatives" is debatable, although I think it is time for Simon to focus attention on his "positives" -- time to sell the "sizzle" as it were. And it does cost money, which is why contributions to the campaign are very important. Who else is going to advertise on Simon's behalf? WE know the Unions are going to spend upwards of $20M for Davis.
Second rate game. The way Reagan won, and won big, wasn't by playing to what the middle expected in a democratic sense, he instead successfully explained how what he intended was good for them. That's leaderhsip. People will vote for a real leader.
Personal, grass roots support for Simon, conducted both independently and through Simon's campaign is the best approach, IMO. Personal contact, email, internet are all valuable tools.
BUT, it needs to be a coordinated array of messages keyed to targeted opportunity constituencies. That isn't happening.
I have to disagree with your take on advertising. To sway the undecided middle to Simon, television is crucial to convince voters that Simon would do a better job.
You won't succeed with a new message without the ground work in the community. Else it's going to be the same old tired RINOCRAT centrist message. We'll never win with that in California because we will always be outspent by the left and flogged by the "news" media.
Whether that is accomplished by building up Simon's "positives" or focusing attention on Davis' "negatives" is debatable, although I think it is time for Simon to focus attention on his "positives" -- time to sell the "sizzle" as it were.
Sizzle comes later for those who can be persuaded with that alone. How about some meat first? Without interesting the leaders among their respective interest groups, forget selling sizzle alone (see media). Now is the time to try a few new recipies to whet the public appetite (to flog an analogy). Where are they?
And it does cost money, which is why contributions to the campaign are very important. Who else is going to advertise on Simon's behalf?
I am. I have an ad campaign in the works that I estimate has the capability to be exposed to 4-10 million people for a total cost of less than $5,000.
Beat that.
I for one am limited in my involvement in politics in general, but I do support the 'pubs in general and certain candidates in particular, including regional candidates throughout the USA. I generally go out of my way to educate those I meet on a day to day basis, as best I can, on conservative positions and candidates. Can't say that I have ever been involved in coordinating an advertising campaing as you described. You are right. Can't beat that. Best regards.
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.