1. Thoughts on Email Smears and Robo Calls

As the final days before the 2008 election approaches the email smears, robo calls and the like are sure to reach their peak. Their prevalence has sparked several thoughts to share with you.

Anyone who has ever engaged in some kind of competitive activity has heard a coach say something like, “You play like you practice.” If you practice poorly, then you play poorly. Consider playing basketball. In a one-on-one pick up game, an easy way to win is to turn your back to your defender and back in to the basket. With that approach you can get so close to the basket your chances of making the shot will be terrifically high. The only problem is you can’t play that way in a real game with 8 other players on the court. If you turn your back to the basket for more than a moment, then someone will come up behind you and steal the ball.  Consequently, if you’re using that method in your pick-up game, then you are not preparing yourself for the real game when it counts.

Aren’t email smears, robo calls and the like the political equivalent of backing into the basket during a pick up game? How are email smears and robo calls preparing you to govern? If you win an election, then how will your ability to send smears and innuendo help you deliver the policies needed to achieve the goals you have? Why would you resort to smears and innuendo if your goals and policies were superior to your opponents’? Or would you rather voters make their decision based on smears and innuendo? That way you don’t have to worry about voters remembering what policy proposals you made and judging you by how well you implement those proposals.

Some of this focus on personal characteristics may stem from a feeling existing in the country that the wrong person was picked four years ago. There may be some truth to that feeling, but more accurately the wrong pick was philosophy and policies. The question is, thought, how can a voter accurately compare philosophy and policies when the focus is on smears and innuendo?

One of the variations on this theme for this election seems to be the, “We’re just regular people like you. Don’t vote for those people who look down their noses at you.” Some of the most popular television shows in history have been based on this theme. The Beverly Hillbillies, for example, was about the superior common sense of the Hillbillies showing up the stuck up city slickers week after week. That may work as the theme for a television show, but usually not in reality. This last election a President was elected many people said they’d like to have a beer and some barbecue with. Given the results, a different criterion would seem to be required.

If you’re feeling perplexed about why people seem to prefer this negative methodology for picking candidates, you’re not alone. My own approach has been shaped by the fact so much of my life, when I picked a President I was considering my vision of that person as Commander in Chief. I was picking my Boss. That approach was further refined by my second career in sales and sales management. Sales taught me not necessarily to look for people like me in terms of appearance or thought pattern. Sales representatives need to be able to relate to a whole host of people and not just people like yourself. The real question is this: Can and will they do the job? Will they do the job better than the other candidates you’re considering? The same criterion applies to elected officials.

Nevertheless, there are people who look to the negative approach as they make their decision. In fact, they prefer the negative. Why is this? Do they lack intelligence? The answer would seem to be no. Chances are you’ve had some of the negative stuff passed on to you by college graduates and people in positions of authority and responsibility. Somehow, they seem to prefer this approach. Even when confronted by third party refuting of the smear, those who prefer the negative approach are more likely to dispute the third party’s credibility rather than give up their reliance on the smear.

Is their preference psychological? The likely answer is yes. A voting decision, like any other kind of sales decision is an emotional decision later justified by logic. Whatever the reason, the reality is these types of voters exist. Unless and until some means can be found to eliminate the use of these negative methods, candidates must find a way to win with the voters vulnerable to those methods participating in the electoral process.

2. Things of Note on My Blog and Elsewhere

Again this week I want to call your attention to some current and future Blog entries of mine I did not have space or time for here. They include:

Andrew Sullivan’s Top Ten Reasons for Conservatives to Vote for Obama

An entry I will post shortly about my questioning of a local Congressional candidate.

My Kiwanis Club is hosting several Russians here in Omaha to observe our election. I’ll be speaking with them next Wednesday and providing feedback on the Blog afterwards.

Monday, Nov 3, I will be on the radio with Tom Berryman of KDTH of Dubuque, IA. The station serves Iowa, Wisconsin and Illinois.

I want to recommend again my Top Ten Tips for Independent Nonpartisan Voters.

My thanks to Jan Kaiser of the Des Moines Public Library for having me speak Wednesday night, as well as to Mollie Cooney and Channel 8 for having me on their noon program.

Finally, I urge you to vote, no matter who or what you intend to vote for. Don’t dishonor the memory of those who sacrificed to give you the right to vote by not exercising it.