 | irishgit (138)
05/20/2008 | Develop a core message with a few sidebars. Test it hard, then test it again. When the campaign is satisfied stay with it, and resist the urge to go down other paths. They will likely turn out to go places you'd have been better staying away from.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Gentle Jude (23)
09/19/2005 | This is good because it doesn't hurt to stick with what you know. But this shouldn't inhibit the need for innovation and change. Because sometimes, the audience will change and cultures can change and so the core needs to adapt. Maybe if the core of the script isn't working now, it is worth taking a risk and to come up with a different approach. Growth occurs when someone is willing to take the risk. But sometimes, changing the script doesn't always work, but I suppose that's why it is called a 'risk' (changing the core).
(0 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | abichara (60)
10/17/2004 | I know a lot of people (myself included sometimes) complain about the complete dearth of substance in campaign rhetoric, but the reality is that in politics, the less you say, the better. A good example from this year is John Kerry, who has a tendency of being rather longwinded at times. Rather than sticking a core message, Kerry expounds on and on about nuance. The result of this is that the opposition will take a small part of the speech and take it completely out of context. Bush, for all of his faults, knows how to stick to a core message that's appealing to his supporters. He'll cite a few facts that support his message and then end it on sincere note. They're a very disciplined campaign team--that's why despite events, Bush is still going relatively strong.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
