How Marketing Won the 2010 Midterm Elections
I’m not going to take political sides in this post, but rather make a few observations about the power of marketing to influence our decisions. Nowhere is marketing so blatant as the weeks and days preceding an election. The 2010 midterm elections were no exception.
In Pennsylvania, republican Pat Toomey was up against democrat Joe Sestak for the seat of long time senator Arlen Spector. Both were supported by ads that included gross misrepresentations of the facts and pulled every marketing trick in the book to influence voters’ decisions. First up, Sestak used ads showing him in military garb. He was trying to get you to associate your feelings towards our soldiers with his campaign. Not to mention in the ads he’s always around small children. This is a common tactic used in advertising, trying to transfer your feelings from one object to the product.
Sestak’s ads didn’t stay sunshine and puppy dogs for long. His supporters used the association tactic in brutally negative anti-Toomey radio ads. In an ad framed as a call in talk show, they claimed Toomey supported murder of women who had abortions and said he was an “awful lot like Sarah Palin.” Unfortunately for Sestak, Palin’s recent media exposure has been much more positive which may have backfired on him.
Things got uglier from there. Toomey’s ads were misleading and used influence tactics as well, just better than Sestak’s did. Knowing that people are influenced more by what they stand to lose than what they have to gain, Toomey used a very powerful tactic. He focused his campaign ads on how Sestak and the government was “taking your money and wasting it.” He even went as far to say Sestak voted for the bailout to hurt the economy (it was more likely in attempts to help the economy). But the message was clear, Sestak aims to take your hard-earned money.
Toomey’s radio ads also rarely mentioned healthcare. They used the term “Obamacare,” which is never used with a positive connotation. I have to imagine millions were spent on the fight for this senate seat. But Toomey squeaked it out, I believe because he had better marketing which influenced the decisions of many voters. Toomey’s key message, “he’ll take your money” was ultimately more effective than Sestak’s “he’s just like Sarah” message.
Got an opinion on how marketing shaped the recent election? Post your thoughts in the comments.
{sharethis}
