http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/09/17/stuart_stevens_romney_strategist_to_blame_for_campaign_missteps_staffers_tell_politico_.html
http://themoderatevoice.com/160337/the-points-romney-should-make-to-court-independents/
The above articles, as well as Colin's Hartford Courant column call attention to the importance of political strategy in winning elections. It seems that a team is assembled to decide how to portray the candidate so s/he is most palatable to the greatest number of voters. The plan is tweaked as necessary, largely in response to polls, as the election season progresses.
I imagine that the Presidential candidates of the 19th century, for example, had no such teams. Perhaps candidates relied more heavily on their "personalities" and skills in communicating ideas via speeches to small groups in the towns and cities they visited. Maybe voters back then, despite the dearth of media (except for newspapers) were better able than we to obtain an accurate picture of the candidate and his intentions because the team didn't get in the way.
No comments:
Post a Comment