Chicago Columnist Illinois Leader Political Strategist Analyst Business Advisor Entrepreneur Chicago Illinois Review

SEIFFE:  It's The Brand, Again 

Friday, March 14, 2008

By Ralf Seiffe

Eliot Spitzer’s political demise hooked most people’s attention this week but now that he’s resigned, things are returning to normal. Like rust, the Democrats never get off the offensive and this afternoon, their national and local operatives filled my mailbox, unabashed by events in Albany. I got a rant from the Democratic National Campaign Committee and another endorsed by Congressman Bill Foster. The coordinated message was that Foster’s victory is a harbinger of massive, inevitable Democrat gains this fall and that I should join the winners. These messages provide a devastating counterpoint to those I’ve received from my Illinois Republican friends about last week-end’s special election. Where the Democrats are positive and optimistic, our side is positively sulfuric. 

Depending on one’s vantage, losing the 14th Congressional District’s “safe seat” is explained by a candidate who didn’t measure up; consultants who were incompetent; Foster’s disingenuous advertising which worked or “suburbs that are trending Democrat”.  Regardless of your personal favorite among these excuses, each has a common root; the failure of the Illinois Republican Party as a brand.  If Republicans do not recognize the problem and fix it, there won’t be a “safe seat” left in Illinois. 

Let’s start with the definition of a brand.  Brands make promises to audiences they hope to attract and succeed when they actualize the brand’s promises with dependable products or services.  Brands become valuable when they do deliver because each transaction confirms the purchasers’ perception of their own judgment.  As these successful transactions continue to occur, the attachment between a brand and its consumers becomes stronger. Valuable brands develop relationships that allow introduction of new products or services because the consumers give the brand the benefit of the doubt.  This generates trial of new items and, if they meet consumers’ expectations, the new product succeeds.  Another notion is that most brands exist in competitive environments and branding differentiates one product from another, creating basis for consumers to make a choice. 

Using these elements as a guide, how should last week’s special election be analyzed?  The first and most important task is to identify the promise that should operate in a majority Republican district. Republicans, supposedly, champion small government, low taxes and individual responsibility.  This promise translates into a public perception of restrained spending but, as 2006’s election defeat illustrates, Republican politicians did not deliver on their promise and voters abandoned them. 

In the 14th, it’s hard to identify a concrete, credible promise made by the Republican candidate.  Granted, those who live outside the district were exposed only to broadcast advertising which made almost no branding promise.  Instead, the advertisements were designed to denigrate the other candidate, nearly exclusively.  One may blame the consultants for “going negative” but given Foster’s advertising, they probably had little choice.  If, however, the Republican Party had a strong identity, Oberweis could have relied on the party’s goodwill and positioned as the agent of those promises and made a case against Foster. 

Some observers fault Jim Oberweis as a candidate, designating him arrogant or lacking charisma.  That may be true but if either are disqualifiers, how does one explain Dick Durbin or Eliot Spitzer?  Durbin is embarrassingly arrogant and insulting yet is always an easy winner.  Spitzer, now revealed as anything but charismatic, captured some 70% of the vote in his run for governor.  True, New York is predominantly Democratic but so is the 14th Congressional District predominantly Republican.  The difference is a healthy party was able to supercede any specific candidate’s flaws and depend on party loyalty to put their nominee into office. 

In last week-end’s race, the Republican Party’s influence with Republican primary voters was so slight that Oberweis couldn’t convince even 15% of his primary opponent’s supporters to come his way.  This was not due to some great schism between the Republican candidates over philosophy and certainly either one would have proven far superior now-Congressman Foster.  Contrast that to the Democrat Brand—it provided some 20,000 more general election votes for Foster than he earned in the primary.  This, despite the Republican National Committee investing heavily in the Oberweis campaign, leads to the observation that the Democrat’s brand is the healthier. 

My favorite excuse is the claim that the “suburbs are trending Democrat” and that the effect will be a “Blue State” as far as the eye can see.   To support this position confuses cause with effect.  The suburbs are not “trending” to Democrats because Mike Madigan is a genius (although he may be); it is because Republicans are not making their case to their natural constituency.  People live in the ‘burbs and the exurbs because they want the freer lifestyle available there and have the wherewithal to do so.  What they want are good schools and efficient, inexpensive, small government that leaves them alone.  Which of the two major parties are aligned with these aspirations?   Despite that natural advantage, the Republican Brand cannot differentiate itself from the Democrat Brand because it has positioned itself as the junior member of “The Combine”.  This functionally prohibits the party from creating brand value because it cannot differentiate itself from the Democrats.  Illinois Republicans are doomed until we realize The Combine does not serve our interests, it permanently and positively pre-empts them. 

The effect of an under-developed brand in the supermarket or on the campaign trail is the same—they do not create a compelling reason to choose it over the other.  Think about our two baseball teams; they are positioned to be different and they promote passion among their fans—they ask you to choose to support them and reject the other. The same branding power operates in the voting booth.  Without differentiation and a compelling reason to choose the Republican brand, most will choose the other one. 

It may be time for a new generation of Republican leaders to rise and cast off the Hastert-Thompson-Edgar-Ryan governing paradigm of go along-get along.  These fresh faces will be men and women who understand that the existing system is destroying Illinois’ freedoms and living standards and that our party has been complicit.  It’s time to recognize the Democrats are the enemies of our traditional positions and challenge the Democrats, not compromise with them.  It is time to restore the promise of sovereignty for the individuals and the end of entitled government.  By making—and delivering--on a family of such promises, the Illinois Republican Party can restore, and then strengthen their brand.  If not, those Democrat emails arriving today will be remarkably accurate.

Ralf Seiffe advises business start-ups and product launches from Chicago, Illinois and is a political analyst and columnist for the Illinois Leader and Illinois Review.

Webmaster Contact:  Alynn Patzer alynn11111@aol.com