2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Atlantic: Don't Underestimate Bernie's Brand
Sanders displays the classic strengths of new entrants taking on dominant playersand the world of marketing sheds light on his path to success.
Nigel Hollis 8:01 AM ET
Like many new and different brands, Bernie Sanders has a message that resonates with supporters. But just as big brand managers make the mistake of dismissing new competition, the media has discounted Sanderss chances of nomination. Indoctrinated by years of business as usual both groups assume that history will repeat itself; they assume that the frontrunner has the upper hand; they assume that the parameters of success are fixed and what has worked in the past will work in the future. The real challenge when forecasting future successfor brands or politiciansis to test existing assumptions, not simply to accept them at face value.
Detractors of Sanderss campaign often write off his early popularity by contending that his supporters are little more than a grumbling and ultimately powerless economic minority. This group, according to critics, may make a lot of noise in the beginning, but it has neither the staying power nor the voter turnout to truly impact an election. But Sanderss early success is far more indicative of a serious disillusionment with the American Dream and a discredited political mainstream. The cultural and economic context does not merely allow for Sanderss popularity; rather; it gives grounds to his resonance.
Sanderss message of economic and social fairness is resonating with Americans in exactly the same way that many successful brands doby addressing societal tensions. Sanders, for example, tapped into a public that felt trapped after the Great Recession. Similarly, Doves Campaign for Real Beauty succeeded by addressing the idealized portrayal of female beauty in popular culture that many women found unobtainable and demeaning. IBM has found success with its promise of making the world a Smarter Planet through technology, and Chipotle is appealing to those who may not agree with the practices of big agriculture.
On a recent NPR segment, David Brooks of The New York Times questioned why Sanders did not challenge Hillary Clinton during the Democratic debate if he truly wanted to be president, suggesting that he had raised the white flag of surrender by not using Clintons email controversy against her. His statement reflects a mindset indoctrinated by decades of increasingly aggressive political debate. But Americans are looking for a president who has a clear sense of purposean ideology, if you willrather than one who merely indulges in character assassination to win power. Sanderss message and tone are so different that they simply do not compute for punditsbut they resonate with voters.
...
The media is flummoxed by the forces that are fueling Sanderss widespread and growing support simply because it cannot see that it is not business as usual, just as executives at Nokia wrote off the threat of the iPhone by seizing on its apparent weaknesses and ignoring its inherent appeal.
The evidence suggests that, like other successful brands, Sanders has already built up a loyal following. Now, Sanderss big challenge is to take his message and make it meaningful and salient to as many voters as possible. Its a difficult task, but it may not be as insurmountable as the media would have us believe.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/what-marketing-trends-say-about-bernie-sanderss-success/413959/
LWolf
(46,179 posts)YES.
And this, too:
"The media is flummoxed by the forces that are fueling Sanderss widespread and growing support simply because it cannot see that it is not business as usual..."
So are many establishment Democrats.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)People are longing for substance and neither party is giving it to them, the Dems are somewhat better than the Republicans but that's a bar that you'd need an excavator to even find.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)yet some are still suggesting that there is something wrong with insisting on it.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)are willing to overlook her failures and the very clear signs that she holds allegiance to big money. Those people side with the 1% because they've been taught all their lives to go with the biggest bully and they'd be safe. It's a good thing our founders didn't have their attitude or we'd still be under British rule. Some are willing to sacrifice their freedoms for the weak promise of security.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Hillary has had many more success than a Senator from
very small state.
I don't want an ideologue running this country like Sanders,
I want a leader that knows what she is doing and cares about
working for the American people.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)What specifically in his ideology do you disapprove of?
Did you ever come out against big money running our government? What do you think now about that question?
If you want to see the poverty rates decrease you shouldn't align with the candidate that is the favorite of those that put profits before people.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)scary?
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The same goes for those that spew hatred for the "far left", but they never can tell what distinguishes the far left from the left.
I think most of Clinton's supporters are terrified to stray from their comfort of the status quo. Never mind the 50 million living in poverty, just hand on for dear life to the status quo. They've been brought up to never make waves. It's good that our founders were like that.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)for Bernie that isn't showing up in the "likely voter" polls.
I know what I see and hear is anectodal, but I honestly see Bernie stickers all over town on all sorts of cars - old cars, new cars, trucks, SUVs, etc. - but I've only seen two or three HRC ones. Nearly every single Facebook friend I have who is a Democrat is a Bernie fan (I may have one or two who like Hillary) and my friend list is pretty diversified in color, background and income (I was a reporter for 13 years and then in PR for the past 13 - I know a lot of people by working directly with the community for years).
I agree with you that many of her supporters are afraid to move out of the status quo, but I think there are also a lot of people who are sick and tired of it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I fear for Sanders safety. I agree that there are millions supporting Sanders that are doing so because they want to strike out against the corruption of the status quo of big money. They will not be happy if the big money unfairly push Clinton into the WH.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Also telling people that have money in banks, that he
is going to destroy the banks, with no plan to replace
them:. It's crazy, especially to the middle class with their pensions
deposited in the Banks
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)the meaning. It was conservatives that helped elect bush. Rich conservatives, the same ones that are trying to elect Clinton.
Sen Sanders believes in freedom and liberty and not straddling the 99% with a huge defense budget.
I will ask again for you to explain what about Sen Sanders' ideology is bad.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Ideologues are only interested in consistency, and foolish
consistency dangerous, leaders have to live in the real world;
and try to get done what can be done.
Politics is the art of the possible! Not the art of the Prefect
merrily
(45,251 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)The money, time and the people that wasted their votes,
would have served their country against the GOP. Instead
the Nader people self indulged at the expense of the nation.
Sanders is losing because the people are rejecting him, and Hillary
is winning because she relates to the American people.
You are going to have to come to terms with the fact most
American's are middle of road people.
merrily
(45,251 posts)1You need to google the definition of fact.
Besides, your Nader shibboleth is inapposite. Nader did not run as a Democrat in the Democratic primary. You are conflating challenging Hillary in a Democratic primary with running third party in the general. Very imprecise. Poster up!
You are going to have to come to terms with the fact most
American's are middle of road people.
No, you need to come to terms with the fact that the vast majority of Americans are much more left that you want to believe.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12777036
Be sure to click on each link. Enjoy!
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)What polices, what ideologies does he support that you consider so dangerous. Simple question.
By the way, an ideologue "An advocate of a particular ideology", isn't necessarily bad. There are good and bad ideologies.
But you are trying to use it as a pejorative. It isn't.
Sen Sanders' ideology is way more favorable to We The People than Clinton's. Clinton's ideology is supported by the neocons because she likes to push American Exceptionalism via war.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)ideology that includes wars for oil, a big defense budget, etc. Tell me what you disagree with Sen Sanders.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)invade Iraq? I don't want that kind of ready. I want someone that isn't supported by billionaires.
Democrats don't like corrupt politics influenced by big money.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)Unions are backing Hillary, they are not part of the 1%:
unions are the middle class.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)I find the use of super-capitalistic terms to describe Bernie's rise enjoyably ironic. (Yes, I know his version of socialism is not really anti-capitalism, but it still struck me as funny.)
appalachiablue
(41,131 posts)and branding reduced to two thimbles is something I hope to achieve.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Lazy stereotypes replace research and reporting, like " a socialist can't win elections in America". "Republicans know best when it comes to the economy and foreign policy."
Catherina
(35,568 posts)& not that this one is by the numbers by any means but well, just had to share it with you. Check out this amazing art!
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Definitely not paint by numbers!
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Great art!
Catherina
(35,568 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)alcina
(602 posts)Oh my! I just went to the artist's website and looked at his recent work (http://www.sirtomfoolery.com/recent-work.html). Wow! Thank you for introducing me to this artist.
Now back to the regularly scheduled topic....
Catherina
(35,568 posts)lewebley3
(3,412 posts)The PTB really don't get it.
SandersDem
(592 posts)A little more food for thought.
Why do new brands emerge? Well for starters, in business if you are not willing or looking to constantly change and redefine yourself, eventually you are going to die. Why? Because as we learn more and people change, if we fail to tap into that not only through authentic and real change to products and/or services somebody else will.
After the fact it becomes obvious, but there are indicators along the way. In addition, other changes get harnessed and incorporated into messaging and product development. Think the Internet of Things and Social Media, changes that are having profound impacts not only on products but on services. Why wouldn't these have an impact on politics as usual too?
Today, we have more resources as individuals to do our homework on candidates and share that information quickly. Attacks can rapidly be debunked and lies exposed before a single vote is cast, almost up to the last minutes before polling opens. Records are broken wide open and examined by thousands, then tens of thousands and finally the tipping point is reached and the adoption of new ideas take hold.
We have evidence based on previous elections that third way thinking is failing...and failing rapidly. If we as a Political Party ignore this and continue to embrace this school of thought, we not only lose our Party's soul, but we risk breaking it in two. The opportunity to develop a new brand and philosophy emerges and as it does, we put ourselves in danger if we don't react and adopt NEW Thinking.
So what are the positives about Bernie Sanders Brand? First, it is striking how consistent he has been on the issues over the years, with a very real record demonstrating that honest brand of political philosophy whatever you wish to call it. That record is there, unlike many other candidates who have "evolved" over the years. It's great that they are evolving, but isn't a brand better when it is consistently good over time? The answer to that is yes, of course because quality matters. That is how brand trust is earned, not with the marketing, the marketing there is to supplement that because while in the short term it is very easy to put lipstick on a pig, over time people are just going to recognize a pig wearing lipstick.
Refusing to take PAC money. This is a BFD as a significant part of Bernie Sanders Brand. Why? Because voters trust that his decisions are not going to be influenced by large contributors. The ability to do this has only recently happened in the History of this Country. Why? It is a side effect of the development of the internet, the IoT and Social Media. It includes forums like this where intraparty people are challenged by new truths. Not taking PAC money helps cement Bernie's Brand as being Trustworthy.
Hunger. People are hungry for something different. People want to believe in honest politicians, but don't. Why that's because so many simply aren't. Something to consider as well is that people who would not normally vote for someone based on some ideals, may cross over simply because of the brand, the brand being personal and not Party, the brand of honesty and consistency over time. "At least I know what I am getting when I vote for Bernie, I am not sure what I am getting with those others" You can see that in some of Bernie's crossover appeal in some early Republican polling and that gives Bernie an edge going into the General.
Early Adopters. Early adopters are critical to new things emerging. These are the people who are open to trying something new first. They were the first to jump at buying ipods or getting the next best thing in a tablet. They want to know about it first and they are HARSH judges. If Bernie Sander's record did not back up his message, his early adopters would not last. And yet they have, and they (we) are vocal about good things. We have to tell our friends to check him out. We like what he has to say, his Brand has SUBSTANCE and it (he) does exactly what he says it does, consistently. That leads to the next point.
Quality. Long lasting brands do so because their product or service beats all others. If it is affordable, EVEN BETTER! Quality brands are not always first in the market, in fact many times they are much slower to market. Why? because they won't rush out inferior goods or services before they have them functioning at the highest level. Companies that do this traditionally lose market share early, but once their product is right and they release it to the public, the lesser quality brands that captured early share diminish quickly simply due to dissatisfaction and on the advice of those early adopters who tell their friends, Hey look what I got and how neat is this? So up next...
Early Polling. One of the clients I represent has not come to the market quickly with a very popular product. Competitors have been taking share in this segment of their business over the past 2 years. However, my client is just launching an item that will become the industry standard early next year and it is likely to be in every home in the US over the next 5 years. This product is technologically better than anything on the market now and it is cheaper. This company is a top ten worldwide brand. It has been consistent throughout its history of producing quality products and services and it is a top tier trustworthy brand. They have ZERO concern about being behind in share (POLLS) right now. Why? Because they know what they have is better than anything else and it is going to dominate the marketplace for many years to come. They know that there will always be a small segment of competition, competition is good...but nobody can touch them. This is why NO Supporter of Bernie Sanders should have any concern about the polling right now. So what should we be concerned about?
Early Adopters.
Let's go get them!
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)It's not like we don't have a ton of OPs here with far less substance..
Catherina
(35,568 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)Thank you, SandersDem!
On edit: Yes, please make this an OP. Lots of interesting discussion and ideas can be generated from your insight!
Bernie has the quality product that more and more people are discovering, now he needs to demonstrate the superior technology and what that technology can do to make everybody's life better.
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)Bernie will shock many here when he is sworn in.
?w=345
forest444
(5,902 posts)If Bernie actually makes it to the White House - over all the media chicanery, over all the dirty money, over all the Wall Street threats, and all the intrigue - all I could say is:
This is YOOGE.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)kristopher
(29,798 posts)Thanks for posting it.
Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)for the article and SandersDem post!
merrily
(45,251 posts)Thanks, Catherina. Nice OP.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Like here - vote for her - work for her
But
If you do not like many of the core ideas that Sanders talks about I have to wonder your core values.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)of denying her obvious integrity problems and ties to the 1% that has driven us to this point. They may have good solid Democratic core values, but they are over ruled by their need to follow a tough authoritarian leader. If you could get one to be honest about how they feel about fracking, they might tell you they recognizes the dangers to our drinking water, but they will vote for HRC anyway. The need to follow, blindly a tough appearing authoritarian leader.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to try to distract people from issues. The Racist Lies, the Sexist Lies, the Commie Lies which Brock got caught trying to plant in the media and all the other lies they are trying to tell.
It must be costing them a fortune, and it's not working. But I'm fine with them wasting all the Citizen's United money Hillary says she opposes if that's all they have to do.
Bernie just keeps forging ahead, they know it, and all they have are their lame expensive talking points.
Uncle Joe
(58,355 posts)Thanks for the thread, Catherina.