Washblog

You are correct in assessing the lack of a compelling narrative at large in the Democratic Party, and in our current  local congressional race.

John Kerry and Al Gore ran campaigns of policy,  to the doom of our party. Our liberal values have not found the frame needed.

Darcy's campaign is an interesting example. There is indeed an inherent narrative in her background, which juxtaposes well with Reichert's "I'm the Sheriff" iconography. However, that narrative has yet to find its needed distillation.  

Yes, I am arguing for a Hollywood-esque "brand" that is as pithy and evocative as "I'm the Sheriff."

That brand is needed right around last week, as this campaign will indeed be decided around structure of feelings, which don't change much once they are found.

I remember doing this for a Mayoral race in PA and I must have gone through six completely different versions before I even got a bio that worked. The temptation is to try and simplify it: Write a resume, find popular issues in the community - but the task is much harder.

I think of it this way, there is the candidate: her story in all the different ways it can be told, and the issues in all the different ways they can be ordered. The person has to make sense with the issues. Her representattion of an issue has to relate to something about her. The arc of her personal story (both her history and the story her manner and language tell whenever she meets someone) has to be a story of why she makes sense.

The terrible mistake that's made is the assumption that the story of the person is one thing and the issues are another. That's a disaster. People like Reichert have an advantage: the story of his previous career dovetails easily in to his present career.

Darcy Burner will have to create the narrative. The best story to use is how she got into politics. Then, I think, you take the events in her life that are unavoidable and the language that she tends to fall back on no matter what and start building a story for the person whom all these strangers will see for such a short time. You carefully cull from profiles that are written about her. And most of all you build those arcs within larger arcs that tell stories.

Darcy Burner is who she is and you have to start there. People will only see a part of her, but that part they see must makes sense to them.

Darcy Burner: Our future, our America

mcjoan, armando, ... have all been discussing this on dailykos far better than I'll accomplish this weekend.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/17/94529/2888

so, unfortunately, our local candidates can't rely on can't do messages and can't fight backs dlc parasite consultants.

my concern about any progressive candidate is probably not the concern from many progressives -

will the candidate have the chutpah to have the fight back message, or have the people with the fight back message?

Nothing wrong with being above it all and noble and smart and all the great stuff, BUT, if you don't have someone knocking heads you don't belong in politics.

rmm.

(btw - since I think organizations which rely on human goodness, human selflessness, and the kindness of strangers for success are a waste of time - most progressives probably don't want me over for dinner anyway. )  

http://www.liemail.com/BambooGrassroots.html

Yes, she MUST contrast herself with George Bush. Yes, she MUST tell voters she will help them with certain things they care about but those things fall into place when you have a sense of how to tell the story of the political woman.