Friday, January 25, 2008
Kucinich Doesn't Have the Stickiness Factor
So Dennis Kucinich joined Thompson yesterday in Presidential candidates to drop out of the primary in the week preceeding Super-duper Tuesday. As Macolm Caldwell would say in "The Tipping Point," Kucinich lacked the stickiness factor. I look back at his campaign and the one "sticky" (pardon the pun) was the grottiest cuts to his attractive, young, red-headed, tongue ring pierced wife in the debates. If only the Daily Show were not on re-runs for much of his campaign...maybe in four years the stars would align better.
Well to that point, I did want to discuss one criticism I have with Gladwell's book. Beyond the fact that I find it overly simplified, it doesn't consider how "the perfect storm" plays into an epidimic. The Baltimore STD epidimic, that he uses as an example, is clear that it was not simply the diffusion of citizenry to different communities that spread the epidimic, but it was the combination of that coupled with the reduced funding of clinics and various other tangently components.
I agree that a campaign or any product can reach the tipping point through a little act but I feel that Baltimore and Hush Puppies are an exception to the rule; and not the rule. Viral marketing can just happen. The "Obama Girl" video can take off because of the spread of it through appropriate connectors but the motivation to create the video by a PENN and Temple university student had nothing to do with the connector and its stickiness. It wasn't just the attractive actress lip-singing the song, but it was a combination of the sexuality; the cleverness of the lyrics; the timing of the release; the luck to reach the appropriate connectors; the technology of YouTube; the charisma of Obama; the demand by the U.S. popolous for change; and untold other elements that worked together to make its success. To that point, the sequels to the video have not been as successful because they lacked the formula and the "x-factor" that made "Obama Girl" an Internet success.
Kucinich also lacked that. As did Thompson. Kucinich will be an after-thought for '08, but Thompson (like Dean) will be heralded as an important loser. Like Dean, whose momentum ended up bringing his demise, Thompson's rhetoric as the "conservative candidate" couldn't hold up once he joined the big leagues. Maybe if he never ran than he would of won the nomination...do I hear "write in candidate" (::cough cough Michael Bloomberg cough cough::). But what Thompson, Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, Tencredo-ado-ado, and all the other would-of/could-of candidates didn't achieve wasn't Gladwell "little thing" but a combination of things.
Huckabee's recent success isn't because of a little thing. It's because he's charismatic, smart, funny, likeable, or the fact that he played the guitar on Jay Leno on his first night back from the strike. It's not because he wants to ammend the constitution. It is because he is a dynamic candidate. He is well-rounded. He will not win, but he will give McCain and Romney-the-Robot a scare.
To the dynamism point, my man is still Obama. I am part of the 1,000,000 (or 400,000 at this point) behind Obama on Facebook. The man is more than just the rhetoric of a change-agent. He is honest, smart, new, decisive, charismatic, positive, and is not afraid to work with Republicans to get the job done. And if you didn't mention, I didn't characterize him at all in there as an African-American. I have plenty of adjectives to describe him well before I think of him as a minority. Whether I am representative of Joe or Jane Voter, I doubt it, but nobody can tell me that he is not honest, smart, new, decisive, charismatic, or positive. But beyond that, he is a Midwest Senator. And that region is kinda Redish so even though Hillary will win California, New York, and a couple other of the big electorate states...the candidate that energizes me, Obama Girl, and a great part of America has potential and momentum. That is no little thing Mr. Gladwell.
I want to get on my horse (aka rent a zipcar) like Paul Revere and drive down Pennsylvania Ave screaming. I will not be pronouncing the British are coming because frankly I'm going to the UK this summer to study at Oxford, but I want to scream Obama is coming. Whether it is the Law of the Few and I am a connector, maven, or door-to-door sales man, people will listen to that message. They will listen because they already have a predispotion to that message -- like Revere's message -- and because the Secret Service would flag me down in about 3 seconds flat for screaming in front of the White House.
Although I'm only about half-way done with "The Tipping Point," some of Gladwell's points do have a stickiness with me. I appreciate and agree with most of it but I just think things are much deeper than what he makes it out to be. I look at the three types of people he outlines and respect that he said some people fit in more than one candidate but I think its deeper than that too. I want to look at it as venn diagram where mavens, connectors, and sales-man can overlap with each other. Thus instead of just three types of people there are actually seven different types of motivators:
1) mavens
2) connectors
3) sales-man
4) mavens/connectors
5) mavens/sales-men
6) connectors/sales-men
7) mavens/connectors/sales-men (aka Obamas)
And God forbid that their would be different levels of each person. What about instead of a maven/connector its a connector with hints of mavenism (is that a word???). Since this post is about politics, I should admit that I am a Democrat, but I don't just bleed blue. I am a moderate democrat, with liberal, progressive, and libertarian views. I support Huckabee's consumption tax plan because it's unfair for the most educated/richest to "game the system" when those that need the most social services and support are ignorant to how to get them. I also think the government is too big and the world is hyperglobalized so we should listen to Ron Paul. But, I have no problem paying federal taxes if I support what its going to...gladly take more money out of my pay-check if it's going to improving public school education but don't dare give it to the DoD. I support our troops and I admit that I did support the War in Iraq at its onset, but not for the reasons the President and the media gave me. I didn't believe Sadame had WMDs, but I knew he had rape rooms in his 21 palaces and had commited acts of genocide. For humantarian reasons, I wanted to over-throw the dictator to spread democracy and improve the plite of the Iraqi people. I congradulate George W. Bush for doing that. But how did the Army allow a man with a cell-phone to video tape the hanging...it's the freaking Internet, it's every where. That is not a little thing. The war is not a little thing. The failures in Iraq are not little things. They are machines that take socio-economic, political, and cultural complexities and cannot be simplied down to a couple "hip" kids in the NYC club scene wearing hush puppies. Well this paragraph has become too long and I feel like I am venting (may have been the second glass of wine I drank after the symphony tonight) but this is blog and I don't think anyone is going to read it so might as well say it all.
Well to that point, I did want to discuss one criticism I have with Gladwell's book. Beyond the fact that I find it overly simplified, it doesn't consider how "the perfect storm" plays into an epidimic. The Baltimore STD epidimic, that he uses as an example, is clear that it was not simply the diffusion of citizenry to different communities that spread the epidimic, but it was the combination of that coupled with the reduced funding of clinics and various other tangently components.
I agree that a campaign or any product can reach the tipping point through a little act but I feel that Baltimore and Hush Puppies are an exception to the rule; and not the rule. Viral marketing can just happen. The "Obama Girl" video can take off because of the spread of it through appropriate connectors but the motivation to create the video by a PENN and Temple university student had nothing to do with the connector and its stickiness. It wasn't just the attractive actress lip-singing the song, but it was a combination of the sexuality; the cleverness of the lyrics; the timing of the release; the luck to reach the appropriate connectors; the technology of YouTube; the charisma of Obama; the demand by the U.S. popolous for change; and untold other elements that worked together to make its success. To that point, the sequels to the video have not been as successful because they lacked the formula and the "x-factor" that made "Obama Girl" an Internet success.
Kucinich also lacked that. As did Thompson. Kucinich will be an after-thought for '08, but Thompson (like Dean) will be heralded as an important loser. Like Dean, whose momentum ended up bringing his demise, Thompson's rhetoric as the "conservative candidate" couldn't hold up once he joined the big leagues. Maybe if he never ran than he would of won the nomination...do I hear "write in candidate" (::cough cough Michael Bloomberg cough cough::). But what Thompson, Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, Tencredo-ado-ado, and all the other would-of/could-of candidates didn't achieve wasn't Gladwell "little thing" but a combination of things.
Huckabee's recent success isn't because of a little thing. It's because he's charismatic, smart, funny, likeable, or the fact that he played the guitar on Jay Leno on his first night back from the strike. It's not because he wants to ammend the constitution. It is because he is a dynamic candidate. He is well-rounded. He will not win, but he will give McCain and Romney-the-Robot a scare.
To the dynamism point, my man is still Obama. I am part of the 1,000,000 (or 400,000 at this point) behind Obama on Facebook. The man is more than just the rhetoric of a change-agent. He is honest, smart, new, decisive, charismatic, positive, and is not afraid to work with Republicans to get the job done. And if you didn't mention, I didn't characterize him at all in there as an African-American. I have plenty of adjectives to describe him well before I think of him as a minority. Whether I am representative of Joe or Jane Voter, I doubt it, but nobody can tell me that he is not honest, smart, new, decisive, charismatic, or positive. But beyond that, he is a Midwest Senator. And that region is kinda Redish so even though Hillary will win California, New York, and a couple other of the big electorate states...the candidate that energizes me, Obama Girl, and a great part of America has potential and momentum. That is no little thing Mr. Gladwell.
I want to get on my horse (aka rent a zipcar) like Paul Revere and drive down Pennsylvania Ave screaming. I will not be pronouncing the British are coming because frankly I'm going to the UK this summer to study at Oxford, but I want to scream Obama is coming. Whether it is the Law of the Few and I am a connector, maven, or door-to-door sales man, people will listen to that message. They will listen because they already have a predispotion to that message -- like Revere's message -- and because the Secret Service would flag me down in about 3 seconds flat for screaming in front of the White House.
Although I'm only about half-way done with "The Tipping Point," some of Gladwell's points do have a stickiness with me. I appreciate and agree with most of it but I just think things are much deeper than what he makes it out to be. I look at the three types of people he outlines and respect that he said some people fit in more than one candidate but I think its deeper than that too. I want to look at it as venn diagram where mavens, connectors, and sales-man can overlap with each other. Thus instead of just three types of people there are actually seven different types of motivators:
1) mavens
2) connectors
3) sales-man
4) mavens/connectors
5) mavens/sales-men
6) connectors/sales-men
7) mavens/connectors/sales-men (aka Obamas)
And God forbid that their would be different levels of each person. What about instead of a maven/connector its a connector with hints of mavenism (is that a word???). Since this post is about politics, I should admit that I am a Democrat, but I don't just bleed blue. I am a moderate democrat, with liberal, progressive, and libertarian views. I support Huckabee's consumption tax plan because it's unfair for the most educated/richest to "game the system" when those that need the most social services and support are ignorant to how to get them. I also think the government is too big and the world is hyperglobalized so we should listen to Ron Paul. But, I have no problem paying federal taxes if I support what its going to...gladly take more money out of my pay-check if it's going to improving public school education but don't dare give it to the DoD. I support our troops and I admit that I did support the War in Iraq at its onset, but not for the reasons the President and the media gave me. I didn't believe Sadame had WMDs, but I knew he had rape rooms in his 21 palaces and had commited acts of genocide. For humantarian reasons, I wanted to over-throw the dictator to spread democracy and improve the plite of the Iraqi people. I congradulate George W. Bush for doing that. But how did the Army allow a man with a cell-phone to video tape the hanging...it's the freaking Internet, it's every where. That is not a little thing. The war is not a little thing. The failures in Iraq are not little things. They are machines that take socio-economic, political, and cultural complexities and cannot be simplied down to a couple "hip" kids in the NYC club scene wearing hush puppies. Well this paragraph has become too long and I feel like I am venting (may have been the second glass of wine I drank after the symphony tonight) but this is blog and I don't think anyone is going to read it so might as well say it all.
Labels: Barrack Obama, Dennis Kucinich, Presidential Elections, U.S. Politics
// posted by Jason Langsner @ 11:29 PM 
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
