Seat at the Table

My first thought in the current "bitterness" debate was it was typical election year fighting.  But after reading Steve Lombardo’s analysis (disclosure: a former colleague at Edelman), I realized the problem the real problem may be that the Obamas are bitter.  While this may be more than a bit ironic given Obama’s reputation for being the positive candidate, there is a history.   Steve refers to the cues that keep coming from potential first couple.  She implies she was not proud of her country until recently, he remarks on bitter Americans, she remarks on not being able to afford piano lessons (a bitterness so many Americans would love to have).  The result is voters potential seeing a couple that if not elitist, one that is not backing up their message of being positive about the future.  In other words, the cues are not backing the message and that can be a problem.

That said, the only candidate I don’t think has a bitterness problem is McCain.  Clinton’s complaints about media and right wing conspiracies may show she has a similar bitterness problem.   McCain, on the other hand, has not given out such cues…or at least they haven’t been reported on as heavily (and if the media - including bloggers - are silent , it can be as if it hasn’t happened as far as the public is concerned).

Regardless, I’m still an Obama-Clinton-McCain supporter (in other words, I can live with all three of them) and  I still think the debate is a huge waste of air time as compared to less sexy but far more important issues to voters (how about a little more on the specifics of health care?). 

So why write about this?  Any senior executive that is consistently in the public eye should pay close attention.  Your words, attitude and stories give out cues on an ongoing basis.  Those cues can be as powerful, and sometimes more powerful, than the messages the communications team so carefully crafted.  So mind your Qs.