Here's a safe bet about the 2012 presidential election: either Barack
Obama or Mitt Romney will lose. And here's a bet that's nearly as safe:
whoever the loser is, he will explain his loss this way: "the other guy
told a better story."
We hear it after every election cycle. In 2004, the Kerry campaign complained that while they had controlled the facts, Bush controlled the story. After the 2008 election, McCain's consultants bickered over the narrative he should have crafted but couldn't commit to. Even Obama, as if predicting his own defeat before the 2012 campaign began, lamented that his greatest regret thus far was failing to create a compelling narrative for the American people. (Perhaps we should have predicted his uninspiring performance in the first debate after all?)
Campaigns built around a coherent and compelling narrative have a huge advantage over those that continually fall back on their numbers, complicated policy proposals and of-the-moment attacks. Both camps know this, though in the fog of war, it's easy to forget. But with the margin between the candidates now razor thin, forgetting this core truth is a luxury neither campaign can afford. Here's why:
Stories are enormously important in helping us human beings make sense of our world. The more uncertain and complex the times are, the more we tend to turn to stories. They order our experience, defining clear heroes who are leading the way to a better future and obvious villains who stand in their path. They don't replace facts — they contextualize them. They teach a core truth — a moral of the story that aligns with the values of the listeners. And the best stories — the ones that have always built evangelists and rallied followers — show audiences how they can take on a starring role, stepping up as the heroes themselves.
So which candidate is doing a better job of telling a story? The sad reality is that while both Romney and Obama have at times defined a core story for their campaigns, neither candidate has been disciplined or focused enough to defend it effectively. It's a far cry from 2008, in which Obama's breakthrough narrative of citizen power, racial healing and a new beginning for America turned the election into a national referendum to define the story of our nation's past and future. Still, the narratives for each candidate are there just waiting to be leveraged, waiting to deliver this election to the candidate willing to put down the policy jargon and smears and tell a great story.
Romney's Story
The story Romney's been trying to tell needs to be understood in terms of the "Myth Gap" he's offering to heal. A Myth Gap is a cultural moment in which key explanations no longer make sense. For generations, the American Dream has been a core story at the heart of the American experience. Work hard, build up wealth, get ahead — it was simple and for many, very true. In 2008, that story came into serious question for millions of Americans who had indeed worked hard and built up wealth only to see it disappear.
When a significant Myth Gap opens up, a story that heals it is usually gobbled up. And Romney, indeed, has such a story. The American Dream, Romney's story goes, is as true as ever, but there's an evil force trying to squash it — a government obsessed with its own power and misguided policies of interference, embodied of course by Barack Obama and his administration. We are living through a time of deep failure, the story continues, and we need a white knight, a turnaround guy to come in and rescue the small business owner in distress. Who better to protect us than a strong father of five sons, a loving husband, a man who's rescued failing businesses wherever he found them?
Romney's narrative borrows from common conservative themes of small government and self-reliance, but, at his best, he adds a positive twist: his vision of America is not a collection of rugged, angry individualists wanting to be left alone but of optimistic small-town shopkeepers, taking care of their communities, their families and themselves.
Romney's story is not without its liabilities. First and foremost, he makes himself the absolute hero. If marketers have learned anything these past 50 years, it's that the best campaigns make the audience the heroes. If Romney can't adjust his narrative in that direction, simply returning to it may not be enough. And speaking of returning to his story, the more exclusively Romney harps on America's failed recovery these past four years rather than painting a picture of a desirable and deserved future, the further his story slips away.
Obama's Story
Obama's story was also defined at his convention with the counter-theme of "We're all in this together." It's a softer version of Yes We Can but plays on similar themes. Here we find clear heroes: American citizens working in joint purpose, sacrificing together for the good of the whole. But his story has now taken on a heavy dose of Occupy Wall Street anger and that's changed its tone. Where in 2008, the story was all about healing, Obama's 2012 story is about a determined charge forward in the face of villainous greed, inequity and corruption. It's extremely resonant, and not just with the small slice of America that showed up at Occupy encampments.
It's harder to sell a story of hope and change of course when you're in power, but at its best, Obama's story casts this campaign as the continuation of a rebel journey that has only just begun.
Like any name-brand, Obama has created an indelible and unshakeable story for himself. The American public will always associate him with his breathtaking 2008 story. The more he chooses to defend it and update it, the more he can build off of his greatest assets.
Unfortunately for his campaign, he hasn't told that story with much conviction since the Democratic Convention. And that gives voters the feeling that perhaps he himself is running out of hope, even as the results of the last four years have been far from a disaster in the view of many Americans.
So, who will strike first? Who will return to the big themes and stories before election day is upon us? I hope both do. The beauty of our democracy is that every four years, we have the chance to debate, as a nation, what our story is and should be. When our candidates refuse to carry that responsibility, we all find ourselves on the losing side of an election season.
We hear it after every election cycle. In 2004, the Kerry campaign complained that while they had controlled the facts, Bush controlled the story. After the 2008 election, McCain's consultants bickered over the narrative he should have crafted but couldn't commit to. Even Obama, as if predicting his own defeat before the 2012 campaign began, lamented that his greatest regret thus far was failing to create a compelling narrative for the American people. (Perhaps we should have predicted his uninspiring performance in the first debate after all?)
Campaigns built around a coherent and compelling narrative have a huge advantage over those that continually fall back on their numbers, complicated policy proposals and of-the-moment attacks. Both camps know this, though in the fog of war, it's easy to forget. But with the margin between the candidates now razor thin, forgetting this core truth is a luxury neither campaign can afford. Here's why:
Stories are enormously important in helping us human beings make sense of our world. The more uncertain and complex the times are, the more we tend to turn to stories. They order our experience, defining clear heroes who are leading the way to a better future and obvious villains who stand in their path. They don't replace facts — they contextualize them. They teach a core truth — a moral of the story that aligns with the values of the listeners. And the best stories — the ones that have always built evangelists and rallied followers — show audiences how they can take on a starring role, stepping up as the heroes themselves.
So which candidate is doing a better job of telling a story? The sad reality is that while both Romney and Obama have at times defined a core story for their campaigns, neither candidate has been disciplined or focused enough to defend it effectively. It's a far cry from 2008, in which Obama's breakthrough narrative of citizen power, racial healing and a new beginning for America turned the election into a national referendum to define the story of our nation's past and future. Still, the narratives for each candidate are there just waiting to be leveraged, waiting to deliver this election to the candidate willing to put down the policy jargon and smears and tell a great story.
Romney's Story
The story Romney's been trying to tell needs to be understood in terms of the "Myth Gap" he's offering to heal. A Myth Gap is a cultural moment in which key explanations no longer make sense. For generations, the American Dream has been a core story at the heart of the American experience. Work hard, build up wealth, get ahead — it was simple and for many, very true. In 2008, that story came into serious question for millions of Americans who had indeed worked hard and built up wealth only to see it disappear.
When a significant Myth Gap opens up, a story that heals it is usually gobbled up. And Romney, indeed, has such a story. The American Dream, Romney's story goes, is as true as ever, but there's an evil force trying to squash it — a government obsessed with its own power and misguided policies of interference, embodied of course by Barack Obama and his administration. We are living through a time of deep failure, the story continues, and we need a white knight, a turnaround guy to come in and rescue the small business owner in distress. Who better to protect us than a strong father of five sons, a loving husband, a man who's rescued failing businesses wherever he found them?
Romney's narrative borrows from common conservative themes of small government and self-reliance, but, at his best, he adds a positive twist: his vision of America is not a collection of rugged, angry individualists wanting to be left alone but of optimistic small-town shopkeepers, taking care of their communities, their families and themselves.
Romney's story is not without its liabilities. First and foremost, he makes himself the absolute hero. If marketers have learned anything these past 50 years, it's that the best campaigns make the audience the heroes. If Romney can't adjust his narrative in that direction, simply returning to it may not be enough. And speaking of returning to his story, the more exclusively Romney harps on America's failed recovery these past four years rather than painting a picture of a desirable and deserved future, the further his story slips away.
Obama's Story
Obama's story was also defined at his convention with the counter-theme of "We're all in this together." It's a softer version of Yes We Can but plays on similar themes. Here we find clear heroes: American citizens working in joint purpose, sacrificing together for the good of the whole. But his story has now taken on a heavy dose of Occupy Wall Street anger and that's changed its tone. Where in 2008, the story was all about healing, Obama's 2012 story is about a determined charge forward in the face of villainous greed, inequity and corruption. It's extremely resonant, and not just with the small slice of America that showed up at Occupy encampments.
It's harder to sell a story of hope and change of course when you're in power, but at its best, Obama's story casts this campaign as the continuation of a rebel journey that has only just begun.
Like any name-brand, Obama has created an indelible and unshakeable story for himself. The American public will always associate him with his breathtaking 2008 story. The more he chooses to defend it and update it, the more he can build off of his greatest assets.
Unfortunately for his campaign, he hasn't told that story with much conviction since the Democratic Convention. And that gives voters the feeling that perhaps he himself is running out of hope, even as the results of the last four years have been far from a disaster in the view of many Americans.
So, who will strike first? Who will return to the big themes and stories before election day is upon us? I hope both do. The beauty of our democracy is that every four years, we have the chance to debate, as a nation, what our story is and should be. When our candidates refuse to carry that responsibility, we all find ourselves on the losing side of an election season.
No comments:
Post a Comment