Positioning the Candidates

Kos' and theoria's stories on defining and positioning the Democratic party contain and generated plenty of good ideas. In 2004, however, is the Democratic party is going to be defined by our candidate for President, not by anything we have to say.

Given that reality, it's important to understand how the candidates are positioning themselves and their campaigns. Their message may vary day to day Based on their audience, news developments and the activities of other candidates. Nonetheless, there should be an underlying positioning that is used to provide some overall direction to their messaging.

The announcement speeches of the candidates are good starting points for understanding their respective positionings. These speeches are ideal forums for defining a candidacy, and most were made fairly recently. For the 6 major candidates, the following statements seem to best describe their intended positionings:

Wesley Clark: "And together, we're going to march forward. Forward with a new vision. Forward to bring our children and grandchildren into a future, brightened by hope, courage, and our determination that we can do better. We will do better. And we will do it together."

Howard Dean:"We seek the great restoration of American values and the restoration of our nation's traditional purpose in the world. This is a campaign to unite and empower people everywhere."

John Edwards: "America deserves a president who understands the people of this country, works for the people of this country, and will stop at nothing to create opportunity for all the people of this country. That's the great promise of America -- a fair shake for all, a free ride for none."

Dick Gephardt : "We can build an America where we grow together, instead of being pulled apart -- where our economy's strong, because all our families are secure -- where nobody's left out or left behind."

Joe Lieberman: "I am confident that we as nation have what it takes to meet these challenges and renew the American Dream... But that will only happen if our leaders are ready to lead, willing to fight for what's right for the American people, and able to rise above partisan politics to put our country first."

John Kerry: "I am running so we can keep America's promise - to reward the hard work of middle class Americans and pull down the barriers that stand in their way and in the way of those struggling to join them; to restore our true strength in the world which comes from ideals, not arrogance; renew the commitment of our generation to pass this planet on to our children better than it was given to us."

I personally think that Dean and Gephardt have the best-stated positionings. Both articulate a positive vision for the country that can serve as an umbrella for their positions, and differences from Bush, on a variety of issues. It's probably not a coincidence that these, in the opinion of many, are the best-run campaigns.

The Edwards and Lieberman statements have some good elements, but they need to say less about themselves and more about the direction they want for our country.

Clark's statement is generic -- he mentions a new vision but does not define what that is. Hopefully he has done better in more recent speeches.

Kerry does not seem to understand the difference between policy positions and an overall positioning for himself.

•  Re: Positioning the Candidates

  I think one of Dean's greatest attributes, seen here, is that he so rarely talks about himself.  The CW is that Dean doesn't offer anything but anger, and has no vision for America.  But he almost never talks about anything but a vision, and when he does blast Bush his anger stems directly from Bush's disruption of that vision.
  

  by strannix on Fri Nov 21, 2003 at 01:15:31 PM PDT

  •  Re: Positioning the Candidates

    I agree, and that should help him against Bush if he gets the nomination.

    by KeithH on Fri Nov 21, 2003 at 01:28:19 PM PDT

•  Re: Positioning the Candidates

  Call me cynical, but I skip the fluff bits that you quoted and I think most voters do too.  Key proposals and positions, as well as personal biography define a candidate's image than the fluff of an annuncement speech.

  Gephardt is the experienced, working man's candidate of labor, protection for American industry, an international minimum wage, and a single payer system.

  Dean is the straight talking, nobisse oblige grass roots candidate who opposes the war, balances budgets, got health insurance for Vermont, and passed a civil unions bill.

  Lieberman is the devoutly Jewish ex-VP nominee who is hawkish in the Middle East, opposed to porn, in favor of environmental laws and in favor of most moderate Democratic positions.

  Edwards is the son of a mill worker trial lawyer who favors civil rights and education.

  Clark is the former general from Arkansas whose newly acquired Democratic party ideology closes matches the party line.

  Kerry is the Bostonian establishment Vietnam Vet who can't make up his mind on the war and voted for lots of liberal stuff while he was a Senator.

  by ohwilleke on Fri Nov 21, 2003 at 01:33:34 PM PDT

  •  Re: Positioning the Candidates

    These positionings are, or should be, statements of the overall philosophy that is behind a candidate's positions on the specific issues. You're right that it IS fluff if not backed up by substance, but it is important for the candidate's to have an overall philosophy, and for voters to understand this at some level.

    Few voters will agree with candidate on every position, but they'll be more forgiving of specific disagreements if they understand, and buy into, the candidate's overall vision.

    Your candidate summaries suggest that you see Dean and Gephardt standing for something positive beyond their policy positions, while the others have let you define them rather than defining themselves.

    by KeithH on Fri Nov 21, 2003 at 01:50:42 PM PDT