I don't know exactly what's going on, but I'm beginning to wonder if the Lieberman campaign is in full collapse. The fiasco today, where it took hours for the campaign to say that he would not run as a Republican even as he's competing in a Democratic primary, suggests as much. If a campaign staff is so out of the loop on such a critical matter as whether he will run as a Republican, it means that the campaign is floundering badly. First of all, moves like this utterly destroy political goodwill among influentials who turn people out in primaries. If I were a local town committee member or a union official and I had endorsed Lieberman, I would NEVER stick my neck out to help this campaign. Imagine, you offer to crowd-build or do GOTV, and then all of a sudden the candidate implies, for six or seven hours or so, that he might run as a Republican, and you have to explain this to the ardent Democrats you just asked for help who are already skeptical of this man's loyalties. That is incredibly damaging to the credibility of local officials, and a very strong incentive to sit on one's hands. My guess is that moves like this are causing a lot of Lieberman's supporters to become "supporters" in air quotes.
If that's true, we know that the campaign simply can't rely on any local political help, because the politics is controlled so tightly by Lieberman's inconsistent and unreliable whims. His political director and field people are neutered by an indecisive candidate/boss, and unlike a Governor, a Senator doesn't dispense patronage, so he doesn't have the muscle to buy loyalty.
Still, why did it take so long to answer a simple question whose answer should have been obvious? Earlier this year, Lieberman did say that he would 'die a Democrat', so it's not like the campaign didn't have good background to go on. As for the issue itself, it's quite unlikely that Lieberman was ever going to run as a Republican. It's possible that it took so long to get an answer because the campaign leadership is now paranoid about answering questions like this. It's possible that Lieberman couldn't be reached. It's possible he checked out the feasibility of doing so. It's possible the campaign didn't think the question very important or time-sensitive. Or, most likely, it's possible that the staffer who took the phone call was scared to run it up the food chain, and took their time doing so.
Regardless, the fact is that it took six or seven hours to track him down and get an answer. That the campaign staff itself did not know the answer to the question and had to track him down shows that the Lieberman campaign leadership is increasingly disconnected from the candidate. A campaign whose communications staff does not know the answer to an obvious and sensitive matter, and one where delay is incredibly damaging, is a campaign tightly controlled by a candidate. That's a serious problem.
Working for a campaign can be incredibly difficult, because as a staffer you have exactly as much power as the candidate wants to give you, and not necessarily enough to do your job. With first-time candidates, this can be murder, because first-time candidates often don't let themselves be managed (because they don't have a trusted group to rely on) and won't allow the development of campaign infrastructure necessary to win. With candidates who haven't actually had to compete in a new era of politics, it can be almost as bad, or even worse. You see, even though Lieberman is an experienced politician, he has really never campaigned with something to lose in an environment with blogs and a 24 hour news cycle.
It strikes me that what's happening is that Lieberman's reverting to his basic instinct, which is to run like it's 1988. The 1980s saw the mass introduction of new computerized political technology, a combination of spreadsheets, television, direct mail and phone banking with professionally cut lists. This technology showed up in the 1970s, but it became much more sophisticated and routine when Lieberman was ascending in Connecticut politics. It was also funded by PACs and high dollar donors, and messaging was mostly local, negative, and explicitly anti-liberal.
Since the communication in such a campaign is one to many, this style of campaign centralizes all of the power in the hands of a few key decision-makers, who can shift strategy with a few clicks of a mouse and a few phone calls. With the advent of internet politics and a fast moving news cycle, the 1980s style of politics doesn't work anymore. First of all, Lieberman's 1980s campaign is slow, and that's hurting him. Second, Lieberman's campaign can't organize via the internet, because a tightly controlled campaign structure does not enable peer to peer communication and organizing. You have to distribute power to your staff and supporters, and the 1980s model of campaigns doesn't allow that. Lastly, Lieberman seems to have done what a lot of panicky powerful people do when confronted with a new threat; centralize power so that there's a perception of more control. This of course gives the candidate more confidence since he's now calling every shot, but like with Rumsfeld's micromanaging the military, it is devastating for the overall mission.
If Lieberman is operating with an extreme top-down and paranoid leadership structure where he is calling the shots, it means that he has forgotten how to be a candidate, and that he is not letting his staff actually manage a campaign. Lieberman now has no choice but to rely on massive TV advertising, mail, robocalls, professional phone-banking, and paid canvassers. Those are the only tools controlled by spreadsheets, and the only tools that allow someone like Lieberman a perception of total control over his future. They are also the political tools with which he and his consultants feel most comfortable.
I wonder whether the ability to use these tools and flood the airwaves and mailboxes with propaganda will work in a low turnout primary where a strongly liberal wind is blowing against him. If they work, it says something about how powerful broadcast top-down forces still are, and how money still does trump all. If they don't, it shows that there really is a new political age dawning.
Either way, Lieberman's meltdown is remarkable to behold.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 21 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
