 |
| Image via Wikipedia |
I'm not likely to vote for a 3rd Party at this point in my life. It's not that I think any one of the 2 mainstream parties is perfect, it's more that I'm not convinced 3rd Parties are really ready for prime time. Here's why, and here's what I think 3rd Parties and their supporters need to do to change the minds of people like me
4 Things 3rd Parties Need To Do NOW
Long Term StrategyForget 2012. Forget 2016. Forget 2020, 2024, and 2028. Focus on 2032. Seriously. You might already be behind for that presidential election. The public perception is that 3rd party candidates pop up out of nowhere, have almost a cult-like following of weirdos(usually when voter dissatisfaction is high) and then disappear between elections. Where is the green party? I haven't seen anything out of them in years. The answer, by the way, to that question is NOT "you should keep up with the green party". Why? The GOP and Dems don't make me go looking for them. They're in my face all the time. They make it easy to say "Yes" to them, they're constantly getting booked on talk shows and news shows spreading their name, their party, and reinforcing their ideas. They are constantly building momentum for their candidates and party. It took 200 years for us to have a black president, we're overdue for a female president. 3rd Party supporters, you're starting very behind, and you're not going to catch up by focusing on one election or one candidate. You need to think long term. As past efforts have shown, you can't show up the year before the election and trounce the 2 party system. A real solution, a lasting solution, needs to be a long-term solution. It's like theatre companies in Chicago. Lots of them start up in Chicago every year, many of them fail in the first year. Why? They lack long term strategies and goals. They put all their time, their effort, and their money into their very first show, whether it flops or is a sensation, they have given zero thought to long term goals and long term strategy. Their next few shows RARELY live up to the hype of the first one. They exhaust themselves with their first go round, and it's impossible to live up to that. When they fail on the first show, they give up. 3rd parties face the reputation of showing up out of nowhere, losing an election, and disappearing into the background almost as quickly. It confirms with voters that they weren't really dedicated, and didn't really have a viable movement or candidate. Whether or not that's true, that's the perception. The public needs to see, needs to know that you're in it for the long haul.
Build Momentum With Smaller Races3rd parties have a chance in smaller races. They don't need as much money, and they can get more hands-on with the voters, winning trust, creating a buzz, and building their brand and their campaign on that scale.For example: the green party should strive over the next 3-6 elections to get a green party candidate elected in every state. Governor, Senator, Representative, even Mayor is a good position if it's a larger city like Chicago, NY, LA, Atlanta, Boston, etc. Those elected officials need to strive to get their face in front of a camera, their mouth in front of a mic, and their message in the public space as often as possible. Daily is ideal. Weekly is okay. Monthly is almost invisible but better than nothing.
Build Brand RecognitionThe other day I was arguing with a 3rd Party supporter and I said, "I can't think of any current 3rd party governors/senators/or representatives, and I doubt most people can." He immediately pointed out Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Awesome. Now I've heard Bernie's name batted around for about a year, but this exchange is the FIRST time I found out he wasn't a democrat. This was an assumption, of course, because he matches my perception of the democrats, but I got to that assumption without being challenged for more than 12 months. That's a branding problem. He's an independent, which is almost political agnosticism, ie there's no official colors, mascot, slogan, platform. People need a flag to rally around. Even if you want to be different, you still need some sort of branding for people to rally around. Political Parties are very much a product, and products need branding, icons, logos, mascots, catch-phrases, taglines, mottos, things to identify themselves and their followers. Not because it's the "right" way to market, but because it works. The iPod wasn't the first, and certainly isn't the best music player, but did anyone escape those dancing silhouettes that were EVERYWHERE for YEARS when the iPod launched? Apple doesn't make the best products, but they absolutely KNOW their shit when it comes to marketing. Now, they wouldn't be anywhere if their products were total crap, but do any of you know who Creative Labs are? They had a music player called "the nano" a year before Apple launched the "iPod Nano", but if you had a box of electronics and asked some random person to find you a nano they'd hand you an iPod before they'd ever come close to handing you the Creative Labs product.
Distinguish Yourself From Other PartiesThere are lots of folks who make chocolate milk. The taste is basically the same no matter who makes it. If the 3rd Party candidate is basically the same as the GOP or Dem candidate they're running against, 3rd Parties are asking voters to choose the off-brand they've never heard of before, or know very little about. If it's a choice between Nesquik and store brand at the same exact price, I'm going with Nesquik because I know what Nesquik tastes like, and the brand recognition is a factor. The makers of Nesquik would never try to sell their drink by saying "it's not the other guys!". That's not a selling point. They leverage the taste, the vitamins, even the stupid bunny mascot. If your candidate can't leverage his or her uniqueness, if she or he can't differentiate themselves from the other candidates, people are just going to go with the other candidate. If you seem redundant to voters, YOU ARE redundant to voters.
6 things That Always Fuck Up 3rd Parties
Blaming Other VotersYou didn't lose because nobody else would vote for your candidate. You lost because you didn't give them a good enough reason to vote for your candidate. You didn't build a relationship with the voters, so they didn't pay any attention to you. Perhaps it was your smugness, or your attempt to shame people into voting or blaming them in advance for the loss, none of which changes hearts or minds or wins elections.
Political HipsterismDo you want to feel good about your vote or do you want to win the election? I find that most 3rd Party supporters are more focused on the former than the later. They'd rather lose an election voting for someone they believe in, than win with someone they don't really like as much. It's fine to feel that way, but expressing that as a valid point for your voting decisions comes across as smug, self-indulgent, and insane. It doesn't win support for your candidate. It turns off potential voters. Don't be political hipsters. It's as much about YOU and your party as it is about your awesome candidate. A great candidate can be dragged down by awful, awful supporters who make the general public uncomfortable.
Circular ReasoningThe usual argument 3rd parties are up against is the fact that voters think a 3rd party can't win. The response to this argument SHOULD NEVER EVER BE "he won't win because you won't support him, if you supported him, he'd win!" That's circular logic, and it's invalid. It assumes an impossibility, that everyone could or would vote for your candidate. It comes across as an attempt to shame someone into support, and it NEVER works. Miracles like that only happen in movies.
Voter Laziness > Voter DissatisfactionLocally you may get dissatisfaction to overcome laziness, but on the national level it never does. Voters may be pissed off at the two party system, but they'll keep coming back for more because they're lazy. Combine that with all the points previously mentioned and the rest below and you've got people pulling the lever for the two party system more often than not.
It's Better the Devil You KnowYour candidate may be the best one. He or she may be exactly what this country needs, but people are as afraid of change as they are of the unknown. A well-known candidate who is less-than ideal will do better than a perfect candidate who is unknown. With the well-known candidate they at least know what they're dealing with. The familiar is more palatable, even if we don't like it. 3rd parties are new, unknown, largely untested as far as the public perceives them. That's why branding and long-term strategies are important. You need to turn your unknown party that everyone presumes is a one-hit wannabe into a known, familiar party.
Make it Easy to Say YesGet rid of the hipsterism. Quit with the shaming, the circular reasoning, the pleading, the insistence that your candidate will fix everything, or has the best ideas, don't be smug or condescending, or dramatics(one person told me that the choice between GOP and Dem was a choice between swallowing razor blades vs swallowing rusty nails -not convincing) and realize that you can't win today, or tomorrow---but you very well could win sometime in the future if you're willing to work for it. You are facing down a lazy, low-information public that's scared of new parties. They're hungry for change, sure, but you're not making it easy for them to say "Yes". In fact, you're doing A LOT that turns them off. Incremental change is the most lasting change. Nothing worth having is easy. We live in a society that demands instant satisfaction, but politics runs in cycles, it's long-term, and you need to work within that framework if you want make any real strides for your party. The other two parties are in it for the long haul, they have long-term goals and strategies that go beyond this election. You're trying to change the system, and you can't do that if you can't build the infrastructure, the recognition, the support, the familiarity needed to make a difference.
I know you get frustrated with the two party system, but being smug, being holier-than-thou, calling people "sheep" and blaming the slim chances of your candidate on other people just alienates the very people you want to win over. At the end of the day it isn't about who has the best plans, it's about who wins. If you're content with moral victories and electoral defeats, completely ignore my advice, but if you actually want to change things, if you actually want to win, if you actually want to move away from the 2 party system, then you have to start being more strategic and thinking long term.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder