Campaign Ends, Governing Begins

November 6, 2008 at 11:53 am

That felt like the longest presidential campaign in the history of presidential campaigns. It literally started right after the 2006 mid-term elections and culminated on Tuesday night.

I’m still recovering from working 35 of the first 57 hours of this week. But I’m starting to wrap my brain around what the election means or will mean, now that the task of governing begins.

1. Barack Obama ran a vastly superior campaign than John McCain. This might seem obvious, since Obama won the election, but objectively speaking, on paper, McCain was the better candidate — more experienced and more well-known. Obama harnessed all kinds of resources to win, including running a 50-state strategy that effectively turned a lot of red states to blue. He tapped into the power of the Internet to mobilize people. His message control was fantastic. Bottom line — he created a culture more than a campaign. Back in April 2008, Fast Company had a piece by Ellen McGirt in which Keith Reinhard, chairman emeritus of DDB Worldwide, described the Obama brand as, “New, different, and attractive. That’s as good as it gets.”

2. The Republicans deserved to lose. The debacle of the 2006 mid-term election should have been a wake-up call. The base of the GOP craves things like smaller government, a strong national defense, and fiscal responsibility. None of those have been banner issues in the last two years. Bush has grown the government, bungled the war, and spent like a drunken sailor. Republicans have also forgotten how to take care of their base. None of the frontrunners in the primaries — McCain, Romney, or Huckabee — had a clear grasp of the core conservative principles that got Bush elected twice.

3. Palin was mishandled. Regardlesss of what you think of her, she was put in a terrible spot by the campaign. She clearly wasn’t ready for the big time, and yet, there she was talking to Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson with little or no preparation. She’s clearly not a stupid woman. She understands what makes Republican voters excited. She’s got great personality and can connect with people. The campaign didn’t fully exploit her strengths and, too often, let her weaknesses define her. If she wants it, she can position herself for a strong run in 2012.

4. The GOP needs a bench. One of the huge lessons from this election should be that gaining power takes time. The Democrats enjoyed the culmination of four years of heard work on Tuesday. Obama has risen to power from an obscure Illinois state legislator to the highest office in the land in about five years. His party understands how to recruit and support candidates who can win elections. Look at the map. They picked up seats because they had a bench. The only GOP presidential candidate who was really prepared for the long-haul was Mitt Romney. McCain was broke in the middle of 2007. Huckabee was pretty much tapped out before he won Iowa. Fred Thompson could have been a force had he really wanted to be there. Rudy Giuliani should have been stronger, but he put all his chips on Florida and busted.

Now, who are the leading Republican candidates for Congress in 2010? For the White House in 2012? Where’s the bench? Where’s the fresh young leadership? Anyone? Anyone?

1 Comment »

  1. Good post! After the 2004 election, I shook my head at the Democrat party and said “what were they thinking? They need to get their act together.” And they did. One of the (many) reasons why I voted the way I did is because I’m hoping that the GOP will take a bench as you say, regroup, and come up with something much much stronger than what we’ve been seeing recently. I don’t want to vote Democrate for the rest of my life!

    Comment by Catherine — November 6, 2008 @ 2:43 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Copyright (c) 2008 thegimmick