Sunday, December 18, 2011

GOP Presidential Contestant Nomination: How’s Your Favorite Candidate doing?

Keywords or Terms: GOP Presidential Aspirants; US Tax Code; Facebook; Twitter; Emails; Efficacy of Social Media; Apolitical; FOX News; MSNBC; 24/7 Internet; Herman Cain; Rick Perry; Newt Gingrich; Voters’ Campaign Contribution; Republican Aspirants; Choices and Choices.

Party Presidential Campaigns and Nominations, are both blessings and curses for any aspirant and contestant for the highest office in the land. Aspirants need to have enough money in the kitty bank to go the length of the campaign period and probably the national election. Further, aspirants and contestants have to be ready for sleepless nights of road travels and a tough skin for criticisms from comic pundits and road show clowns. Notwithstanding, there is hardly no short list of aspirants or contestants for party nomination.

Personal, face to face and retail campaigns at the grassroots, including door gobbing, is getting some competition from social media, face book, twitter, emails and video-conferencing, among others in the GOP Presidential Nomination for 2012 general elections. GOP 2012 Presidential aspirants and contestants are introducing other outreach campaign strategies to garner votes for their aspirations, out of necessity. Some pundits are already proclaiming that non-conventional ways of reaching the voters are advisable considering the challenge of raising funds for Presidential campaigns in a tough economy; and, winning voters’ attention in a multimedia world of 24/7 Internet connections and cable television beaming, where voters’ attention is now considered precious as gold. Today, Republican aspirants who are short for time and low on campaign cash are resorting heavily to social media to accomplish the same objective of retail campaign; whether this strategy will bring home enough support for their candidacy is yet to be determined. The jury on the efficacy of using social media or other new outreach campaign strategies for garnering votes for Party Presidential nomination, is still out.

Until Obama 2008 Democratic Party Nomination exercise came along, using a combination of social media and retail campaign, fondly referred to as house parties or community organizing, was hardly a favorite for Presidential aspirants. The traditional lure for what has conventionally worked as a silver bullet, retail campaign, face-to-face, door to door, hand shakes and smile, was ingrained in the repertoire of political aspirants, nationally and locally. Obama’s 2008 Presidential candidacy challenged the status quo and brought into the fold more voters, especially minorities and young folks, who seem to have been disenfranchised in past elections. Newt Gingrich, the 2012 GOP aspirants for nomination and former speaker of the House, is said to be currently bulking the trend as well out of necessity; low funds and probably the most illiquid campaign office structure in probably half a century in Presidential Candidate Party Nomination.

In the past few centuries, Party Presidential aspirants relied on leaflets, travels for face to face campaigns in addition to various media, Newspapers, Radio and Television advertisements, to carry out their message of ambition. The revolution in communication technology, especially electronic technology, has made it imperative for politicians to seek votes and campaign contributions through alternative sources of contact; hence, you see a bunch of political questions regarding an aspirant on your Facebook Page; even when you are apolitical or hardly connected to a particular major party in America.

The new game in American Political Campaigns for office is to reach the campaign contributors and voters at all cost, with probably the minimal cost; or maximum impact, if possible. In fact, it is not a question of possibility; rather it is a question of survival in a contest, where money or size of campaign contributions can determine who reaches the finish line; and or, end up being the final nominee to face the opposing party's candidate in the general elections. GOP Presidential Aspirants for 2012 are increasingly weighing the tangibles against the intangibles in their effort to reach supporters and voters. Further, in a world of scarce monetary campaign contributions, GOP Presidential aspirants for 2012 are finding short cuts to meeting the campaign contribution shortcomings and the challenges of reaching voters with individual aspirant’s message.

Some GOP Presidential Aspirants for 2012 have cultivated new strategies for staying ahead of their competition, with press conferences and releases, face time on ‘talk-head’ Radio and television shows or programs on Fox and MSNBC. Interestingly, early measures of their expectations seem to be getting positive result or appreciative impacts. Valuable air time for some Republican aspirants on some informational and probably propaganda programs, supported by PAC or unidentified organizations on FOX Television has been identified as the reason why some GOP Presidential Aspirants for 2012 elections have remained point of reference with respect to other candidatures on the Republican band wagon. For example, Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 Tax plan received appreciable airtime and attention on FOX Television before the aspirant fizzled out; same is the bravado but pepper-weight aspiration of Texas Governor Rick Perry that nearly flamed out after a couple of debate performances for the GOP 2012 Presidential Candidate's Nomination.

What an aspirant is selling is important, but so is ensuring that the message gets to the voters. A simplified new tax code proposal hardly guarantees a vote for a candidature; that is why a front runner status for any candidate means practically nothing, until Americans vote. Even straw polls at party level in a state hardly guarantee a positive result come real nomination or election time. Ask Former Godfather’s Pizza Boss, Herman Cain and current Texas Governor Rick Perry? The former once won a Florida straw poll and the latter was considered the strongest GOP Presidential Nomination for 2012 until his lackadaisical debate performance on the circuit. The challenge seems not to be a change in tactics for how the message of a prospective nominee is carried out or straw polls result taken before the actual or final voting in a state, but the substance in the message and how effectively the candidate is committed to the message.

In a party presidential nomination contest and campaign, what is more important is that voters receive favorably the message of a candidate; and retain the potency of the message till state caucus voting; and hopefully, until the general election against other party’s candidature. Many candidates don’t get the message to the voters or fail to articulate the message in a way that is appealing to voters or campaign contributors. That is why the new tax proposal from some Republican candidates for GOP nomination is moribund while others are just a fly in the oil pan. You probably heard different variations of what it will take to straighten out the complex US tax code offered by Republican candidates for GOP nomination; however, what you get out of their advancement and discussions are untested and unwholesome proposals or sound bites that make you wonder if these candidates are realistic and aware of the underpinning problems with the existing tax code.

Many voters towards the primary level for the GOP Presidential Nomination are disappointed with debate performance of their choice candidate and sometimes with the ability of the candidate to articulate his or her message on the campaign trail. A peripheral assessment of the debate performances of some of the Republican candidates for GOP nomination has shown that some of them are poor communicators, some hardly understand the expectation of voters and campaign contributors in a candidate; and are probably playing to the perceived political consultant's market assessment of what voters will support come party nomination exercise in different markets or states. If you are a republican voter and your choice candidate is not panning out, never mind, you are not alone. Many Presidential aspirants for party nomination to general election fall into an illusion of how great their message is, without actually articulating the message or carrying forth the message in an appealing format to voters either at the party’s nomination or the general elections. A candidate’s nomination message must be crisp, structured or unstructured, formal or informal, but critical enough to muster a feedback from voters without it hurting the candidate’s chances at a party’s nomination and or national general election

While clearly defined message may be critical to garner the support of a few voters or campaign contributors, some not so clearly defined messages carry weights at the party nomination level but rather unappealing to voters in a general election. When voters and or campaign money contributors assess a candidate’s message, either at the party nomination or towards a general election, they are looking at whether the message speaks to them: does it speak to their finances or lifestyle; does it speak to their preferences or purses; does it speak to their state or community specifically or in general; and sometimes, though hardly spoken, to their race, age, gender, income group and sexual preferences.

A typical voter or campaign contributor looks at his or her immediate situation or circumstance; and, weighs the message from the candidate against his or her preferences in taking a voting decision. Will the candidate’s message conflict or create tension in a voter’s personal life and finances or not? Voters and campaign contributors go through a process of unawareness of what the immediate impact of the candidate’s message is, to an awareness of it's impact in medium term; and then in the long term. Though the voter may not have all the information regarding the long term impact of the message when initially voiced by the candidate in a party’s nomination bid; a contrast from the other party’s flag bearer in a general election often ultimately opens up the message for the voter, with respect to the long term impact of the message. This type of revelation can either turn the voter away or solidify his commitment to the candidate at a general election.

Even if something is missed in the process of general campaigns and debates between the two parties' flag bearers, voters or campaign contributors eventually understand where the nominee is coming from as campaign advertisements or other non-patrician groups offer the key to the misery in the candidate’s proposal. It is possible, as the voters and campaign contributors understand eventually what the candidate is up to in his or her message, to become apprehensive and dump him or his or her message. Whenever the voters or campaign money contributor(s) become disconnected or disenchanted with the details of the message or how it is being articulated, the candidate for nomination begins to loose support and may eventually loose out in public opinion polls to the extent that he or she drops out of the nomination process or looses the general elections. Similarly, a candidate’s past or perceived inadequacy may come to hunt him or her such as we recently saw with one of the high rising candidate for GOP nomination in the months of October and early November 2011. Mr. Cain can tell you a thing or two about his experience in his bid for the GOP Presidential Nomination. Often this last reference is an aberration or is weathered out by some aspirants; however, if the perceived atrocity is contrary to overwhelming public opinion, the candidate may end up loosing out. A similar frame of reference may begrudge or deluge the current front runner for GOP nomination, former House speaker,  Newt Gingrich.

Voters or campaign contributors have to start to do their own investigation and or assessment of the candidate’s fitness for the high office. You may want to look at the past performance of the candidate in a position of executive authority or legislation in congress, or his or her performance in non-public offices. Past behavior are often predictors of future performance. Individual personal characteristics, effectiveness and motivators may help the voter or campaign contributor make a better assessment of candidate’s fitness. Relying on campaign profiles and messages alone may not be enough to determine if the candidate is worth the occupation of the oval office in the White House. Since voters and contributors are not always privileged to have the prospective aspirant fill out a bio-data survey, a pre-employment questionnaire, a cognitive assessment based on figural reasoning content, as is possible in the employment of a worker for a position in your company, voters and campaign contributors must treat individual candidate and aspirant as a future employee; considering all the possible ramification of his or her employment as a President of a corporation with 360 million shareholders and a yearly operation budget close to 250 trillion dollars. Would you put a man considered a member of a secret organization, a former spousal cheat, a revisionist, an extremist, a poor communicator or flip-lopper in the job? Are you interested in someone with lack of candor or someone liken to be less astute in your values? The choice is up to you; al you need to do is to choose more carefully!

Post a Comment