Political Marketing Wisdom: Beyond Polarization and Fear

We shall see how this plays out when the votes are tallied, but the difference between the female-appeal of the Obama and Clinton marketing pitches may demonstrate a gender-stereotype of the self-inflicted kind: Will women vote along purely gender lines, come November 2008?

Make no assumptions my friends.

Just as "all women everywhere" don't automatically respond to pink and flowers on retail web sites or product packaging, so, too, will "all women everywhere" not automatically vote for the token female in the 2008 presidential race. As a December 2nd New York Times article by Robin Toner pointed out, the Obama campaign is demonstrating a lot of female voter savvy in its approach, which may give the Clinton campaign a run for its money.

What's happening here? Voters are acting like the consumers they are, and reflecting their more sophisticated decision-making skills. We've certainly come a long way in finally having a female presidential candidate doing so well in the race, but that alone won't sway female voters. Instead, most people, male and female, are looking for the candidate who shares their values and approach, and who seems to live and understand life in a way that is closest to their own perspective. And, for the voters doing their homework, that person does not necessarily have to have the same skin color or be of the same gender.

As Toner wrote:

The Obama campaign is, in some ways, subtly marketing its candidate as a postfeminist man, a generation beyond the gender conflicts of the boomers. In the video released this week, Representative Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat of Illinois, says that Mr. Obama understands issues of concern to women "in his gut" and not as "a kind of pandering." The writer, Alice Walker, describes Mr. Obama as "someone who honors the feminine values of caring for all."

Obama strategists also highlight his leadership style - his promise of consensus-building and moving beyond the politics of polarization and fear - as especially appealing to women.

What happens if we don't label it a feminist pitch, per se, but a humanistic pitch? Let's leave off the references to female/feminine, using instead, in Walker's words: Obama honors the values of caring for all; and, as Obama's strategists say: with a promise of consensus-building and moving beyond the politics of polarization and fear.

Are caring for all, consensus-building and moving beyond polarization and fear campaign positions that only a woman can appreciate? I think not.

What I do think is that women may very much connect with those values and also be able to see that Obama is not pandering or changing his ways or words in any "feminine" way in order to make that connection. He is not forcing the gender issue by waving a banner that reads "I am all about women." Rather, as Toner's article suggests, he is living and speaking in ways with which voters with caring and consensus-building concerns can relate.

While Clinton may hold an edge with female voters in general, her female-ness may also be a drawback, and contribute to the perhaps more intense scrutiny of her actions and reactions by both men and women. Obama, on other hand, may be more free to express the care-giving and consensus-building values that are appreciated by many of today's voters - and, as such, will continue to be able to do so in a more authentic manner. No one will say he's just acting like he cares because he's a woman, obviously.

History is being made in and around this election cycle, no matter the outcome. The fact that a sophisticated "marketing to women" pitch absolutely must be employed by each and every candidate holds great cultural significance. How the presidential candidates approach the female voter, either by pandering or by serving more genuine, universally acknowledged humanistic values, will be a reflection of just how far we have come.

Comments

[Kirby]

I'm so glad that the term "pandering" is being used more and more these days with respect to what political people can do to not only get elected but to stay in office and receive further electioneering funds, in addition to drawing speaking engagement fees from corporations where they can give a speech, all aiding them in their lifestyle. Yes, "pandering" explains alot in American politics, and it has made a sham and a shame out of a once great democracy.

Wake up, America, and take back your government out of the hands of the people who bleed you for their foreign interests, inimical to the best interests of our American People.

[janmB]

There is nothing wrong with WOMEN supporting WOMEN who deserve it.
If women do not support other women then why would they expect to be elevated to positions that men have held in politics, church and the workplace.
Some woman are proud of the fact they hate Martha Stewart & Hillary Clinton and apparently just for being successful. Some women are afraid of supporting Hillary cause they are afraid some will think its only because Hillary is a woman too.
If men say they don't understand women---I can fully see why.

[Tellmethetruth]

The choices for women are not between Clinton and Obama. Women who want an intelligent person with experience in actually (not just dreaming or promising - but reality) has passed more legisltation that benefit women than any other person in US History is Joe Biden. Biden who was on the Judiciary Committee when Anita Hill made history - has gotten past into law the Crimes Against Women Act in 1994, legislation that involves rights of women in the work place, protection of children against pedophiles, health care for women, breast cancer, etc.

Please check out his site: http://www.joebiden.com/issues/?id=0021

Joe Biden's first wife and children were killed by a drunk driver in the 1970's and for five years he was a single dad raising two small children before his second marriage of 30 years. As a result, he has joined Mothers against Drunk Drivers, and passed more laws empathetic to single mothers raising children alone.

Women in America has much to thank Joe Biden for as he has made it safer for women against murders and domestic violence. The leading cause of death of women in the work place is murder by someone they knew and thought loved them. Joe Biden has stepped in to chance that and organized 100,000 lawyers nationwide who volunteer to represent women in crimes of violence.

He's the real deal.

[Tellmethetruth]

Very good article Andrea - and a good pondering. Are the corporate interests who have given heavily to his/her candidate going to market their particular candidate to women they way detergents and cereal have been marketed to women and children in the past, assuming that "code words" and "subliminal messages" "catch phrases" "labels" and "slogans" can cause women, like sheep that respond to bells vote in numbers for the candidate with the best advertising?

This seems to be the approach of Obama and Mitt Romney at this point in time.

A marketing campaign is not the same as a "movement" where people rise up, organize, and demand a change, such as worker movements, the civil rights movements, the woman's movement, etc. The difference is advertising is bought and paid for by corporate interest marketing a product, in this election, the product marketed are certain candidates. Social movements are historical movement that come out of necessity and respond to a need for change. Whether any candidate reflects the need for change from a corporate funded candidate to a candidate funded by public funds and popular support - it's hard not to root for the underdogs. Could an "honest Abe" ever get elected in this corporate controlled society, where the media is just a method of advertising and telling us what behaviors we need to have to consume the products were are sold for the benefit of the interest of the small number of wealthy. Dare any women dream a candidate might represent the interest of the common woman working and struggling in this society? Are women independent enough to resist a candidate marketed to them by corporate America?

Clearly America is in need of change, if nothing else, to change it's energy consumption as a matter of necessity.

[msinfo]

This country has been in a dynasty since 1980. Before it was a Reagen/ Bush dynasty- now the Clintons have been added to the "family". Check on how Poppy and Bill have become BFF's in their "humanitarian work" (an oxymoron for a Bush). Clinton is just another Corporate Dynast with female organs.
Just because it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, doesn't mean she's a duck.

[abluevoice]

Stop picking sides and nit picking hillary versus Obama. Go after the Republicans.

[JaseAllen]

At least 50% to 51% of the voting population doesn't care about results as evidenced in the last two presidential elections. As long as some dolt tells them what ever it is they want to hear, they don't really care about real actions. Let us not forget about the majority of Americans, who can't be bothered to vote.

Our country's political landscape has become a heaven for greedy corporations and the carpet baggers and thieves who feed off them. Our own citizens are largely to blame.

[Truthortradition]

Obama may act like a woman, but he's not the real thing.
Obama may act like he's a good American Christian boy, but the fact remains, his dad was a Muslim and obama is a Muslim name. A muslim is a muslim is a muslim.
Just like after Pear Harbor, a person with a Japanese name, or a Japanese Dad had NO chance of getting in the WHITE HouSe, neither does Obama. It's not his race that will keep him out of the White House, it's his Muslim heritage. Face It!!!!!!!!!!1
In Politics, perception is everything and fortuanately, Hillary is the real thing. A woman, an American and a great leader.

[YankeeCanuck]

The words "political" and "marketing" are depressing when used together. But perhaps it has come to this. The campaigns, overstuffed on funding from corporate and special interests go on a marketing spending binge. In the process, substance gets the short end of the stick. Let's not forget how much obligation comes with all that money.

There are more than two candidates. Some have already contributed greatly in public life to the issues that concern women.

We will think for ourselves, I hope, and not fall for the blandishmets of marketing.

[DenverCurmudgeon]

boadicea posted: "Andrea, as someone who has spent 4 years studying cultural anthropology, I agree. Obama is definitely post-feminist, and that is why our youth are so drawn to him -they are also post-feminist."

It is exactly this quality (being able to indentify with and motivate young people) in Barack Obama that makes him the most electable of the Democratic candidates.

I am amazed at the level of organization the Obama '08 campaign has reached at this stage of the race. The Denver office is well staffed with enthusiastic young volunteers and headed by a seasoned pro,Fredrico Pena, the former mayor of Denver and Secretary of Transportation under Pres. Clinton.

[musetta]

It takes more than just talk to show you honor anything and that is all Obama is - talk and empty rhetoric.

[lakelobos]

Obama as a shoe salesman is an apt metaphor. He is a fraud and bait and switch artist who lists not opposing the Iraq war in 2004-5 and claiming otherwise, proposing an anti Iran statement in the Senate and then opposing Kyl Lieberman, proposing a partial health care solution and claiming that it is full, running for president since his early 20s and denouncing HRC for running for a long time.

It's a pity that so many intelligent left wing people support a true centrist and a complete fraud for president.

[Qbear]

I wonder if having the first woman candidate with a real shot at the White House, and the first African American with a real shot at the White House...cancels out the excitement either would have generated, if the other wasn't happening in the same election?

Maybe it's the individuals, but I imagined when the first woman or first Black became president...I'd be happier.

[Qbear]

"Mr. Obama as "someone who honors the feminine values of caring for all."

I guess my disagreement is more with Alice Walker than with your thread. Barbara Bush, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter are exhibits A, B, and C...that this is total CR*P!

As for Obama caring for all, after hiring McClurkin to SPIT on me and every LGBT person in America...that rings hollow too.

One interesting thing about Alice Walker and Obama...on his Obama for President site, Ms. Walker has a video link only on the African American section, she isn't represented in either the women's section or the LGBT section. A similar gaffe is World AIDS Day is announced ONLY in the LGBT section, not in the African American section, women section, student section, Latino section.

[RalphB]

Funny because my own feelings are opposite of this post in that I don't think Obama is anything except marketing. Clinton inspires confidence in her competence while Obama makes my skin crawl.

Here in Texas I watched W Bush run against the marvelous Ann Richards and then the 2000 campaign against Gore with keen interest. Obama is running Bush's 2000 campaign and I just hate it.

A 'reformer, with results', a 'uniter, not a divider' sound familiar? Compare that to Obama.

It seems to me that if Obama is elected we'll have another W from the other side. Inexperienced and incompetent but with a damnable sense of personal certitude. An absolute disaster for the country.