A failure to communicate

by | Oct 20, 2021 | Editor's Blog, Politics | 8 comments

When I first started working in politics in the mid-1990s, Hal Malchow was one of Democrats’ top political strategists. He was a direct mail guru who built a highly successful firm and wrote the first book on microtargeting before computers revolutionized the practice. About ten years ago, Hal abruptly quit the business after research showed that direct mail, as it was used by campaigns, was largely ineffective. He told me a few years ago that he couldn’t in good conscience continue selling something he knew didn’t work. Since he left the industry, he’s been trying to change the way Democrats communicate.

A couple of weeks ago, Hal wrote an article for The Hill critical of the way Democrats communicate and highlighting what he sees as a huge missed opportunity. He believes that the Party should be spending more on a branding campaign, both touting Democratic successes and punishing Republicans’ bad behavior. Hal believes that the communication vehicles of the party should be spending money in real time, talking to voter when events happen.  As he says, “Tying ads to events currently in the news adds credibility to the messages delivered. Instead of heavy-handed ads that tell the voters what to think and what to believe, we need to simply add information to events already in the news.”

In particular, Hal believes that Democrats should have better exploited the January 6 insurrection. In the wake of that incident, voters’ preference shifted almost 10 points to the Democrats because of Republicans’ insistence that the election was fraudulent and they supported, or at least condoned, the attack on the Capitol. Yet the Democratic Party and its allied SuperPACs have spent very little effort to keep the narrative alive. 

For decades, political consultants and strategists within the Democratic establishment have hammered home the idea that campaigns are won within the final two months or so of the campaign. They’ve also made campaigns candidate centric, a relic of a time when we had more swing voters. With very few truly independent voters, Democrats should be trying to influence behavior throughout the election cycle, not just at the end. 

He also believes we should move away from heavy-handed ads that are ineffective and work to better inform voters by giving them information and trusting them to make their own decisions. He cites a study that compared three ads. The only one that moved voters was one that compared candidates’ positions without endorsing either. Ones that used bold headlines and photos proved ineffective.

I think Hal is largely right. We need to move away from the over-the-top language of political ads and start treating voters like adults. Give them information and choices instead of scary images and ominous music. Campaign year-round, spending war chests as needed instead of at the end of a campaign when most voters have already chosen a side. And recognize that persuadable voters make a very small portion of the electorate. Campaign budgets should reflect a balance between field operations and persuasion campaigns.  

8 Comments

  1. cocodog

    I forgot to mention, do like that scene from “Cool Hand Luke”. Very little doubt as to the message being conveyed.

  2. Norma Munn

    I agree with Mr. Malchow. Those voters whose minds are made up by the tag (GOP or DEM) are far fewer than 25/30 years ago. Even if one has a preference based on party label, getting someone to actually vote depends on what that vote will cause to happen in Congress or a state legislature. I am tired of the drama and infighting. It is a display far too often of personal vanity, which is definitely not a winning strategy. Give me information so I can make a reasonable decision. In short, treat me as an adult with a modicum of intelligence.
    I also agree with Ms. Watt that the diversity within the Democrat Party can lead to disfunction but it can also be reassuring to see people who work together to overcome differing views. However, the Dems often carry their differences like a battle flag and either do not compromise or do so only after months of internecine fighting. By that time, the moment to convince the undecided has passed. Finally, it is just plain boring to see the same arguments day after day and very little about what the serious content.
    Finally, I blame the press for much of this. Very few of those who are regularly on TV (which is the source of more and more or our daily input of news) actually ask pertinent questions about real content. It is headlines and who said what to XYZ. Reporting on who disagrees with who followed by a 30 second sound bite about the argument is not giving me real information.

  3. cocodog

    Educating the voter??? Really, when 66 % of Republicans believe the election was stolen from Trump and some believe that Trump will be returned to office after the internet ninjas recount is completed! I do not believe we are talking education. That ship has sailed or sunk in the harbor. The real issue is the ability to think critically using the facts at hand. Some folks call that common sense.

  4. Richard Bilsborrow

    sounds like an excellent idea, though putting out the contrasting facts about candidates and policies they promote in the last 2 months of the election cycle should also be done, if only to counteract the deluge of lies that always come from the other side.

  5. Thomas Beckett

    I hope Hal is heard by the right ears.

  6. Linda Watt

    When I consider the differences between how Republicans and Democrats approach strategy, I keep coming back to the fact that Republicans are singularly focused on winning elections, even if it means accepting gravely flawed candidates and positions. Democrats are focused on issues, including acting with the intent to change hearts and minds regarding social ills. Democrats tolerate (encourage?) the voicing of a variety of opinions from centric to radically progressive. As we see in Congress today, this leads to disfunction and impedes Democrats from being able to enact legislation even while controlling both houses of Congress. I suggest that this tendency, for which there is probably no easy solution, also creates confusion and mistrust among the electorate and makes it less likely that swing voters will vote Democratic. Perhaps we Democrats consider this as noble and necessary to bring the country to a better place, as indeed it might be. But I don’t think it is necessarily the best way to win elections.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!