So Deval Patrick’s video chastising Chris Gabrieli hit the news yesterday. The video is obviously a little contrived — hey, do those busy volunteer worker bees behind him realize he’s filming an ad? Neato! Don’t they know they’re on TV? No “Hi Mom”, or “We’re Number 1!” gesticulating? But I digress.
The video is a little bit of inside baseball; Patrick is clearly speaking to his crowd only. But I wonder about the emphasis of it: Does the anger at Gabrieli interfere with the kind of on-the-ground, one-on-one persuasion, on which the Patrick campaign is clearly depending? We’ve obviously seen a lot of friction here — but this is a blog, after all, and it’s still mostly populated by declared partisans of one campaign or another.
There is no political fuel like anger. And to be sure, the appeal of Patrick’s “hopeful” campaign is made that much stronger by a political environment in which people are pissed off. But I wonder if anger works better in a media-driven campaign — wherein one is trying to reach a more distant and therefore desensitized audience — than a grassroots type of campaign, where the volunteers are leaned upon heavily to be micro-evangelists for the candidate, on an interpersonal basis.
Anyway, it seems to me that Patrick would do well to use that anger with caution. We’ve seen it among some of our netizens here, and it could be dangerous!
I watched the video. It didn’t really seem all that angry to me – I thought the tone was more one of disappointment and annoyance. Both should be used sparingly, to be sure, but he’s not exactly foaming at the mouth.
<
p>
More generally, it seems pretty clear to me that Gabrieli made a big mistake with his “15.36 million” move. What he wanted to do was give himself the ability to spend as much as he wants, and also make a joke out of it. Obviously, the joke is about as funny as the proverbial turd in the punchbowl. Most people don’t know what the numerical reference is, so they just see it as a huge amount of money. And the few that do get the reference don’t seem to be laughing. It’s to be expected, and it’s perfectly legit, for Gabrieli’s opponents to use the $15.36 million number against him. Gabrieli did this to himself, and he must suffer the consequences. If he had set a high but reasonable number, like $5 million, no one would care very much.
<
p>
Finally, by both starting and ending the video on a subject other than Gabrieli, Patrick takes some of the “negative” sting out of it. To me, the video comes off as less about Gabrieli and more about “the kind of campaign I want to run,” and it uses Gabrieli as a foil – as “here’s what I don’t want to do.” Not a bad strategy, IMHO.
Patrick usually does a fine job at modulating his tone, and no, he doesn’t seem nutty or harsh. My question is how his intended audience reacts to the email and video, especially in light of some of the bad blood coming out of the convention.
My thoughts are posted on demredsox posting.
<
p>
I just wanted to comment on the poor editing in the very beginning when you hear the camera person say, “Anytime your ready”. I mean, you can edit that out of home videos and they’re sending this thing out to thousands of people?!
<
p>
Because it was in the very beginning I felt I was watching a segment of “Wayne’s World”
Speaking of editing, FS 🙂
<
p>
Well, maybe it’s on purpose, like MSNBC’s mic-ing of producer’s directions at the transitions: “Pan out … cue logo” etc. You know, that You Are There kind of hustle.
… and I agree, Deval could have left out the air guitar solo to “Crazy Train”.
I’m the target audience. I liked it. Patrick’s opinion is similar to mine, and knowing that he’s not fazed by Gabrieli’s high limit reassures me that I should keep on talking to people in my precinct, promoting Deval’s message of people-powered politics of hope.
Good message discipline, there, Joel.
Totally meta, dude. 😉
Where exactly do you see this anger you speak of in your furious, vitriolic, red-eyed balls-clutching post 😉
<
p>
Seriously, I thought the message was focused, to the point, and actually exactly right. The only danger to Patrick was that he might come off as a whiner, which he did not.
<
p>
He hit Gabrieli with a body blow.
…but wrong messenger? It seems like DP’s argument would have more force if it were coming from Reilly instead. It is hard to get genuinely pissed off about a wealthy guy having to tap more of his own personal wealth so that he can keep up with the other wealthy guy’s campaign.
For Reilly’s huge campaign bank account…I know that’s limited, but so’s Patrick’s wealth, especially when compared to Gabrieli’s!
<
p>
Frankly, I was happy to see Reilly opt in to public financing, despite his large donation collection of the last few years. It upped my respect for him a bit.
You are really plucking at straws. There was absolutely nothing in this video that even slightly resembles your post. But it is a good dig a painting people powered politics as A_N_G_R_Y. To which my point is… why aren’t you.
<
p>
We all saw Kerry’s “Nice” convention and “Nice” campaign against Bush… however, he won the primaries by having the most humorless angry mean supporters ever…
We also saw Gore, Dean, and even Shannon O’Brien run angry “people versus the powerful” campaigns that flopped.
<
p>
Kerry didn’t run a “nice” campaign; he ran a bad campaign.
Kerry went to EXTREME lengths to “Play Nice” at the convention… Sharpton had to slip in a dig about Bush and Carter as an elder statesman spoke his mind regarless of what Kerry wanted.
<
p>
What was the result… at the GOP the delegates ran around in “Purple Heart” BandAids mocking Kerry’s war record and that of every American wounded vet.
<
p>
If Kerry had played one fifth as mean and nasty as he did in the primaries… remember the Iowa “Dean bin Laden” ad… perhaps he would have made a substantial win…
<
p>
The real adversaries are people power (angry or therwise) vs. corporate establishment interest.
Thanks.
<
p>
Every time I have heard a politician use this kind of phrase, it makes me wonder if I am an “us” or a “them.” When coupled with positions often espoused here and in other liberal circles (for instance, in this discussion on this board relating to real estate taxes, or perhaps health insurance mandates) that define me as “extremely wealthy” because I am an exployed professional, the “people vs. the powerful” phrase starts to sound like “We’re going to tax you into penury and regulate your livlihood until you weep and beg for mercy. Take that!”
<
p>
IMO, angry, populist, “people versus the powerful” rhetoric makes moderates and independents vote Republican.
<
p>
Kerry didn’t lose because he wasn’t suficiently mad at Bush, he lost because he ran a dreadful, lethargic campaign. One of the incredible secrets of the 1992 preseidential campaign, a secret that was somehow lost on the previous two candidates from our Commonwealth, is that when your opponent swings, you duck. And swing back.
<
p>
There is no need for anger in that process. Indeed, anger just makes you look like a lunatic, as it did Dean.
of the solidly upper middle class are just as put upon as the poor and lower middle class!
<
p>
I once heard a stat that something like 50% of Americans think they are in the top 10% income bracket.
<
p>
Frankly, we need to start talking like this: The middle class was a result of strong Democratic policies. Income redistrubution from the extremely rich helps not only the poor, but the middle class as well. I went to college on the Democratic principle of government student loans and grants. We’re losing that under the Republicans – have you heard how much more it’s going to cost the middle class to send their kids to college with the student loan rate increase?? And that’s just one example.
<
p>
So “populist” includes the middle class and even the upper middle class, who are losing their purchasing power and carrying more of the tax burden proportionately than the super rich.
What I find interesting is how this media was executed.
<
p>
First, the ad was sent to his supporters via email, posted on his website, and the blog, a few days ago (along with the transcript). Secondly, closely following that was an email from Reilly expressing similar sentiments about financing. (As a side note, interestingly enough, neither candidate when speaking about opponents mentioned the other (Deval or Tom), only Gabrielli…)
<
p>
What I find frustrating is what this video email highlights about “The Source.” “The Source” is just becoming a video archive of Deval’s speeches and videos–not commentary from supporters, a place to discuss Deval’s policies, etc. I had hopes of something more, but seems like the DP “blog” fell flat.
Honestly, every time I see Deval speak I like him. He seems like a “good guy”.
<
p>
The video however is a good example of why I believe he will lose. Deval is absolutely right about Gabs $15 million. It is obscene. And the joke shows how out of touch some really really really rich people can be. This country is experiencing a chilling and dangerous result of this attitude right now in George Bush et al.
<
p>
Negatives
<
p>
He wanted canvasses. That was obviously the point of the video. He should have come out and said so first. He waited way too many minutes to ask. He lost many canvasses because of that and surprised non volunteers who are watching it for whatever reason. Attention span of his target audience. That’s basic.
<
p>
The volunteers behind him represented all people of Mass? Or something like that. Not sure. But to an adult it was a room full of kids who they could not relate to.
<
p>
The message should have been more or less something likeâ¦.
<
p> âHey Kids! Weâre havinâ a ball getting our message out across the state and having more and more voters commit to us. This Saturdayâs a big day and with your help and thousands of other young horny pot smokinâ beer drinkin volunteers weâre gonna get the word out and then youâre all gonna get drunk and have a good shot at gettinâ laid. Capiche? (thatâs for the ethnic vote)
<
p> âBefore I tell you where and what time let me tell you why Gabs not only sucks, heâs dangerous.â
<
p> Perception is reality.
<
p> Deval wanted to rally troops for some campaign project. Deval wanted to make a statement regarding Gabsâs $15 million. Deval tried to do both at once. (Perhaps by trying to do it on the cheap he is really a poster boy for unlimited spending) The result was fewer troops rallied than other methods and message could achieve. Not the best vehicle to get the message out that you wanted the voters to hear. Why? Because it unconsciously leaves the subtle impression that the kids sittinâ behind pretendinâ to work (how very slacker like) represent MA voters. This is what joe and mary six pack, as they say, may leave with after seeing parts of it on the news. More and more of these subtle and not so subtle that Deval is the darling of the state democratic far left progressive Dukakis, whatever will have its effect over time play into guys like Ernie Boch III who bust balls about Kool Aid drinkers.
<
p> I think Deval is getting bad advice.
erniboch3@hotmail.com
“with your help and thousands of other young horny pot smokinâ beer drinkin volunteers weâre gonna get the word out and then youâre all gonna get drunk and have a good shot at gettinâ laid.”
<
p>
Now THERE’S a political campaign I could get behind. Why doesn’t anybody run on the “get drunk and get laid” platform? The Young Democrats always waste their time talking about things like health care and affordable tuition. Whatever.
Knowing who you’re talking to when there’s a camera in front of you reminds me of the Howard Dean Scream. It was for his volunteers in the room, and they probably loved it. But it was broadcast nationally live, and it looked unhinged, at least in contrast to ordinary campaignspeak. Shouldn’t have been a big deal, though, but the pundits pounced.
<
p>
This is an issue for Deval. Gabrieli is clearly speaking to the electorate in all his public communication. Deval is very often speaking to the true believers. OK so he needs them to get out and win votes for him. But, as much as this kind of campaign is supposed to be more authentic, it also creates the public perception of a filter between the candidate and the public, a club that you have to join before you can vote for Deval.