Democratic Presidential Primary 2008: It May All Come Down to Communication

by Anita S. Lane

After losing ten straight presidential primary contests to Senator Barack Obama, Senator Hillary Clinton moved on to Ohio, seeking to appeal to voters in this now “must-win” State for her. “What we’re trying to do here is not easy and it will not happen overnight. It is going to take more than big rallies. It is going to require more than rousing speeches. It will also require more than policy papers and positions and websites. It is going to require something more…” These are the words of Hillary Clinton, right? No. These are the words Senator Barack Obama after his decisive win in Wisconsin, speaking to a crowd of 19,000 in Houston, Texas.

Demonstrating his ability to take on the Clinton campaign’s criticisms head-on, Obama didn’t defend but actually embraced Clinton’s most recent talking point. Clinton stresses that this election is about more than speeches, but solutions. Obama doesn’t disagree.

Strategically, Hillary would like to back Barack into a corner that defines him as the naïve, all-talk and no solutions candidate. However, the power to do that is taken away when Barack himself makes the same argument. At that point, are the two really on opposite sides of the issue? What are we really arguing about? Do we really even disagree?

So there you have it. Obama is once again subtly stealing Clinton’s thunder. He’s already begun encroaching on her base—increasing his votes among the middle class, women, white men, Latinos and lower income voters. Now what? Will he also take away her main talking point? While it may not constitute plagiarism (as Clinton may wish) it does constitute good strategy.On

Tuesday night, Obama had every reason to stroll onto the stage “fired up and ready to go” (which by the way is a phrase Clinton stole from Obama), but instead, he took a decisively direct tone that spoke to the mechanics of what comes next in this primary election and what he will need from the voters if he wins the nomination and the general election.

“I need your help,” was Obama’s resounding theme. “We will need you to fight for every delegate it takes to win this nomination. If we are blessed and honored to win the nomination, we’re going to need your help to win the election in November. And if we win that election in November, then we are going to need your help and your time, your energy, your enthusiasm, your mobilization, your organization and your voices to help us change America over the next four years,” Obama told the Houston crowd. But this is the speech Hillary Clinton should have given. She should have been the one talking about the work it would take, and more than anything else, she should have been directly saying “I need your help…”

Instead, Clinton says, “If we pull together, I know we can do this,” and “I hope you will support this campaign because it is your campaign.” Clinton, don’t you remember English 101? You’re speaking in passive voice. Passive language is never as persuasive or motivating as active language.

Instead of dancing around the issue, if you lose, admit it. If you need help, ask for it outright. Yes, people want solutions, but they also want a straight-talker who’s not afraid to say the difficult thing and ask for help when he or she needs it.

Clinton’s loss was public. Her congratulations to Obama should have been public as well. Instead, she made a private phone call to Obama congratulating him. Perhaps she didn’t want a concession to dampen her rally in Ohio. But let’s be honest, the primary contest is slipping away from Clinton, and if she doesn’t do something to recapture her momentum and votes, she will miss this opportunity all together.

But let Hillary tell it, she knows exactly what America needs. “I know what’s happening in America. People are struggling...” That’s true. And it explains why at this point in time, Americans are drawn toward inspiration. Americans need and desire solutions, but we are also starving for inspiration. And to many Americans, Obama offers hope plus solutions—a definite winning combination, as well as a crucial skill set for any potential presidential candidate.

The reality is that much of the contest for the presidency lies in one’s ability to put forth the right message, relate to people, communicate effectively, collaborate, influence and persuade others. Clinton might suggest that the campaign should only contain solutions. But then again, are "solutions" outlined on paper really enough?

Don’t we need a president with the type of insight to rightly pinpoint what’s on the heart of the American people, as well as identify the right solution on critical issues? Don’t we need a president who can truly connect with the people whom he represents? Don’t we need a president who can communicate effectively with and lead his executive team, his cabinet, the legislature and other world leaders? Don’t we need a president who has the ability to not only communicate but also inspire and influence others around the world to aid America in taking on tough challenges like climate change? Don’t we need a president who is persuasive enough to press past gridlock in Congress? If there was a detailed job description for the presidency, certainly these characteristics would be listed.

Hillary Clinton may want to focus only on solutions, but without the right combination of insight, communication, collaboration and influence, how can we really expect to solve anything?