The Campaign Company Blog

McCain and Ming and the age thing..

I am sure that this will have been written about and I've missed it but what is the explanation for the trashing of Menzies Campbell(aged 66) and the lionisation of John McCain (aged 71) on the basis of their age?

Is the demographic profile of the US and UK so different? Are the US media just biding their time before turning on McCain? Is there genuinely a more mature(!)attitude to ageing in the US?

And doesn't it appear that in the UK that far from becoming more enlightened about the role of older people in public life etc, attitudes are actually moving the other way?

Jonathan(aged 53)

Was it turnout not tears wot won it?

As people digest the results of the New Hampshire Democratic primary, it is is clear that Hillary Clinton benefited from the higher turnout of women voters over the age of 40 as well as a squeeze on John Edwards who was expected to poll over 20% and instead got 17%.

The combination of both does not necessarily indicate that tears made the difference, but it certainly implies that good polling day organisation did.

The impressive volunteer automatic telephone dial up system that she employed, requiring just a phone and no computer, which enabled her supporters from across the country to contact New Hampshire voters, was evidence of the strong organisation of the Clinton campaign.

Obama may have made a stronger emotional pitch to voters, but the strong organising by the Clinton machine made a crucial difference on the day.

The Comeback Kid 3 - Morning in America?

Whilst the big story today will be about the comeback of Hillary Clinton, arguably the bigger comeback was by Republican John McCain.

A few months ago he was perceived as dead in the water and was laying off staff.

Whilst New Hampshire has helped Hillary Clinton's campaign it has saved John McCain's.

Most importantly it showed his judgment of skipping Iowa was correct and voters may start to notice this narrative. Now the pressure will be on Rudy Guiliani and his judgment to skip the first two nomination tests and wait until the Florida primary.

If the election now boils down to McCain v Clinton will he later style himself as a reassuring figure like Reagan in 1984 and appeal to the centrist voters inspired by Obama's campaign?

The Comeback Kid 2 - The Babyboomers Strike Back!

She did it! Was it the appeal to emotion or was it the effective Get Out The Vote operation? As yet it is hard to tell. However Hillary Clinton's victory in New Hampshire pulled out the traditional Democrat coalition of women, older voters and the less well off.

Whilst the story today will be her comeback, the danger for all the Democrats is to avoid the narrative becoming that of Mondale v Hart in 1984, where the more experienced candidate beats the challenger, but then fails to reach out beyond the core vote and loses to an older reassuring candidate?

If Hillary Clinton now wins, she faces the first big decision that will define her and possibly her presidency. Received wisdom dictates she should appoint a southerner like John Edwards as her Vice President. However like Hart, Obama draws support from many centrist voters nowadays tired of the division in Washington.

Obama's gracious congratulation of Clinton's victory will require some recognition later, but will she take the risk of making him her Vice Presidential candidate?

Or is the combination of a woman President and a black Vice President a step too far, just as Geraldine Ferraro's candidacy was in 1984?

Go negative in 2008?

The American primaries have begun. It is around that time that some UK political commentators will start to pontificate over the Americans for their negative approach to campaigning. Many politicians in this country abhor negative campaigning and that is why it doesn't happen here to the same degree. Not because it doesn't work – it does.

 

However perhaps the language to define it is wrong?

Every politician I worked for stood for election because they have a vision about how their community, society and country should be. However in order to realise those aspirations first you must get into power and to do that you need to define your opponents, hold the executive/opposition to account and have dividing lines

 

Doing all this has been classified “negative”. It should probably be termed “effective”.

 

There are 3 myths about negative campaigning that need to be debunked

 

1) “I don't like negative campaigning and neither do the voters"

No body does - neither do I. We don't base our campaign around enjoyment otherwise we will have a joke box in every leaflet, dress up in clown suits and play our favourite tunes on a loud speaker. Everyone will like us but no one will vote for us! Everyone likes small babies and fluffy kittens but you wouldn't put them into public office. You don't campaign for your own enjoyment. If you do, get a hobby! You don't campaign for the voters pleasure, they get by just fine without it! You sound like a small child saying “I don't like baths”

 

2) "If we are more positive than the opposition people will choose us"

No, no, no! People in many cases base their most important decisions on negative reasons. "I won't leave my job because I have nothing better to go to." " I will not move home because the housing market in unstable". You need to understand what motivates them and talk in a language they understand.

 

3) "If we are more positive people will believe our message"

You are a politician. People do not believe you when you promise the world. But ensure the record of other politicians is held to account and people will believe that because they also regard you in low esteem.

Many people who get into politics do so for negative reasons - to stop something they don't like. Think about your own motivations. Then get on with it.

Are Americans still looking for a place called Hope?

The results of the Iowa Caucuses at the start of the American Presidential Election process seem to have shown a desire for change.

Barack Obama's victory in the Democrat caucus have led to many newspaper headlines speculating not only of a Democrat victory but of the election of the first black president.

In an earlier Blog I referred to the book The Political Brain which talks about the need for political candidates to reach out to people's emotions through engaging narratives. Whilst the books refers to politics the idea can also be equally applicable to public, private and voluntary organisations and the relationship they have with the people they serve. Indeed this Blog is a way for TCC to express its view and create a narrative to the work we do and the environment and context we work in.

The Political Brain was written as a critique of Democrat Party politics, so what are the core narratives of the principle candidates in the Democrat primaries?

Barack Obama: There are no red states, no blue states, just the United States! It is time to unite this country and rekindle the hope that will make it the great country we know it is.

Hillary Clinton: This country needs change and a candidate with the experience to make that change from day one.

John Edwards: We need a little more backbone to take on corporate interests and give this country back to the forgotten middle class.

So far the message of "change we can believe in" expressed by Barack Obama seems to have caught the American imagination, but were Iowans sending a general message to all the main candidates at this stage or was this a specific rejection of certain candidates? Commentators have pointed out that Obama appeals to the emotions whilst Clinton appeals to peoples logic. According to the Political Brain Obama should do well against her. Thus the primary process will become a practical test of its theory over the coming months.

The Political Brain was also written in response to the failure of the Democrats to establish a compelling alternative reframing of the Republican narrative that they had established since 1980 on cultural and economic issues and since 2001 on security issues. Could it be that the whole public narrative has shifted on to terrain more favourable to the Democrats?

The Democrat turnout was twice that of the Republicans in a state which in the last 15 years has been a Democrat/Republican marginal. It was also double the number who took part in 2004. This seems to indicate the motivation of the Democrats and the fact they are drawing in support from those who class themselves as Independents and even some 2004 Republicans.

Republican Iowa winner Mike Huckabee comes from the same town of Hope in Arkansas as Bill Clinton comes from. He not only appeals to his supporters on religious grounds but also has an appeal to them over their economic security similar in some ways to John Edwards. Like Obama, commentators have also referred to his emotional hold on his supporters. Whilst in Iowa he was supported mainly people from the religious right, he is now trying to reach out to a wider group of Americans. It is possible the Iowa result was a partial rejection on the political right of Mitt Romney due to uncertainty over whether to support a candidate of the Mormon faith. Iowa showed was more of an internal debate for the Republicans whilst the Democrat's seemed to reach out to a wider group of voters. Whilst Huckabee is likely to not do so well in Hew Hampshire, people will be looking to see whether he gets some kind of bounce in his result there as a result of Iowa. In some ways the pressure will be on John McCain who polled 49% there in 2000 with the support of Independents who may now lean to Obama and is currently polling around 31% with a narrow lead over Mitt Romney.

Barack Obama did better than predicted by the polls overwhelmingly winning amongst young voters and beating Hillary Clinton amongst women voters who comprised 60% of those voting in the Democrat caucus. It was interesting to watch his Iowa victory speech. If anything his attempt to define a big tent reminded me of Tony Blair when he was seeking the UK premiership in 1994-97. His strong showing will now find him coming under stronger scrutiny from the media. This will be the test of him and his campaign in the coming weeks.

John Edwards poured most of his resources into Iowa and beat Hillary Clinton into third place to keep his campaign on the road. What the media have not mentioned is that he polled nearly 2% lower than in 2004 when he was a very clear second to John Kerry following the self-destruction of the Howard Dean campaign. He polled 12% in New Hampshire in the 2004 primary and is currently averaging about 19% in the latest batch of polls there. However if he falters he has reached out to many in the Democrat core vote and is probably in a strong position to be a vice presidential candidate, with high name recognition (similar to Al Gore in 1992) to either Obama or Clinton.

Hillary Clinton did worse than expected. Did she make an error in fighting Iowa and should she followed the same tactics as Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani in waiting for the larger states where her organisation and resources would be strongest? Only time will tell. The danger for her was that in Iowa those initially supporting minority Democrat candidates either went for Obama or Edwards under the 15% rule for each caucus. If the selection is just between her and Obama, will Edwards supporters switch to Obama?

Is she suffering from a public rejection of the continuation of the Bush/Clinton duopoly (or as one blogger acidly put it: "the Bush/Clinton spin cycle") that has run the country since 1988 and has in the last 15 years actually created the current concept of the red and blues states? Is Obama's rise a reaction to that perceived division? What can she do in the coming weeks to respond to that, because if that becomes the public narrative she will then lose as part of the wider rejection of George Bush? Is she therefore in the position George Bush senior was in during 1992 as the candidate of experience, with Obama in the Bill Clinton role as the man expressing a yearning for change and hope?

In 1992 Bill Clinton used a good runner-up spot in New Hampshire to save his faltering campaign and become the "Comeback Kid". Will Hillary Clinton secure a result there that puts her back on track for the nomination?

What are the implications for the UK?

Firstly I think there are differences. The 2004 presidential election was before the disillusion over Iraq. In the UK the 2005 General Election was the Iraq election. Michael Howard was too much a throwback to the past to be electable, so we instead saw an increase in the vote of the Lib Dems and others who opposed the war. Gordon Brown has signalled enough of a shift in foreign policy for that to be less of an issue now than it is in the US.

It is possible that David Cameron will attempt to position himself to be the voice of change and hope. He has already attempted to make overtures to the Lib Dems and other smaller parties. Whether he can pull that off is something we will watch with interest over the coming year. In the Observer today former Labour adviser and practising therapist Derek Draper suggests Brown should show more of his quirks to create a narrative around that. That may prove difficult for someone who has traditionally been reticent to do this.

With less cultural issues than the US, the similarities between the UK and US will be over issues of the economy, economic security and immigration. They are probably the areas to watch in both countries over the coming year.

In a few days we will know the results of the New Hampshire primaries and we could of course see a move back to more establishment candidates from both parties. In the meantime the momentum is with the outsiders!

In 2008 who will use their Brain?

Over the next few weeks there will be a lot of coverage of the American Presidential Primaries. To set the scene for what will be a fascinating contest I would recommend you read what was arguably the most interesting political book of 2007 - The Political Brain.

Whilst it is about American politics and written by a Democrat strategist in response to the two presidential election victories by George Bush, it has many insights relevant not just to the UK but for any democracy.

Its an investigation into the role of emotion in determining election results and rejects the dispassionate assumptions of how voters cast their vote held by cognitive psychologists, political scientists, economists and campaign strategists.

It argues that people simply don't vote through simple self interest or weighing up the issues - when reason and emotion collide, emotion invariably wins.

Before looking at the implications for UK politics, it is only proper to look at where the UK differs to the United States.

Much of the book is specifically applicable to the culture wars in the US: abortion, gay rights, church state separation, guns etc which has less salience in the UK. It could be argued that the UK (and the rest of the European Union and Canada) is predominantly "Blue State"  and the political debate is in many ways carried out within blue state norms. The nearest approximation to "Red States" we do have in the UK are perhaps some of the views argued by some who support The Countryside Alliance, however this is nowhere is as strong as the 60 million plus in the US rural areas which due to the large number of small mid-western states are disproportionately over represented in the US electoral college. In addition the US religious right comprises perhaps 20% of voters and there is no similar-sized equivalent in the UK.

However that is not to say there are not culture wars in the UK. It could be argued that a political view based around opposition to: political correctness, migration, impositions on motorists, any tax on inheritance etc is the UK cultural equivalent. Nevertheless it is clear that they are a broadly secular set of issues compared to the values held by many on the right in the US.

The book is unforgiving at the inability of the Democrats to put across a credible alternative narrative and pays tribute to the coordinated effort the Republicans have put into this.

I think the Democrats suffer from the fact that unlike the Labour Party in the UK they did not have the equivalents of Labour's 1994 Clause 4 moment. Labour were fortunate in being able, during a period of serious Conservative Party weakness, to clearly set out where they stood in terms of values and principles. Unlike the Democrats, Labour were able, through the entire 1994-2005 period, to consistently neutralise the tax, crime/security issues with tough policies and through being seen to reject the views of certain interest groups in these areas.

However there are now new challenges. The public, having previously supported extra investment in public services, are now less clear as to whether they get enough value for money for what they pay in taxes. Immigration is also a much stronger issue than before. It will be interesting to see whether a new narrative emerges that seeks to show how the public sector is changing to meet personal needs as well as making the case for the economic benefits of immigration whilst reassuring the emotions of those who feel threatened by it. TCC have worked with public sector bodies on community cohesion and recognise this is a sensitive and challenging area, however there are some emerging themes that are perhaps best covered in another blog posting in the future.

The Conservatives in the UK have over the last 13 years faced the sort of problems that Democrats have faced since 1980. Having lost their defining economic competence tag on Black Wednesday in 1992 they have not been able to reassert a new narrative which is why the UK public when asked still say they are not yet clear what the Conservatives stand for. That point was also made by Andrew Rawnsley in the Observer newspaper this week. Whilst Labour's 1994-2007 narrative of modernisation is perhaps weakened as a result of global trends, it still exists and the Tories have not come up with anything compelling to replace it.

What is fascinating is how for a period the Democrats got it right by stressing the need to modernise, to reform public services like welfare and to be seen on the side of hard working families. Clinton's victory in 1992 was looked at in awe by many political strategists in the UK who sought to learn the lessons. Who now remembers the debate over the Clintonisation of the Labour Party in early 1993? The irony is that Labour learned from Clinton in 1992 and still applies it whilst the Democrats under Gore and Kerry seemed to forget the lessons of 1992. Labour seemed to learn the skills so well it was able to sustain them through the shift to a post 9/11 security agenda. The Democrats did not build on the Clinton era and fell back - also showing what being in opposition does to you! Indeed Gore's campaign was perceived as ignoring or repudiating the administration he was a member of! It will be interesting to see what lessons Gordon Brown draws from Gore's 2000 campaign.

In the UK the centre ground consensus now seems to be much larger than it currently is in the US. UK political narrative development needs to create compelling stories that appeal to the conflicting mental networks that compete in that crowded centreground.

When I was first studying politics I was always told how much there was cross-party voting in the US congress and party allegiance were weak. Nowadays there seems to be more political consensus in the UK with the decline of debates over economic ownership. In the US a mix of culture wars as well as the interesting way US House of Representatives seat boundaries are apportioned seems to have reduced the centre ground. In addition our political news media is predominately "beltway" with a much broader secular and centrist economic and social liberal consensus compared to the situation in the US with its vast shock-jock Talk Radio network. These differences seem to have been to the Democrats disadvantage. I have no doubt a bigger centre ground consensus would probably benefit them as the New Deal consensus did from 1932-1980.

Martin Kettle wrote in the Guardian last week as to how American exceptionalism in its politics compared to Europe continues even so far as to be a reversal of previous perceptions.

Where the Political Brain is very relevant to the UK is over its general points about developing narratives - the book Don't think of an Elephant is also good for this - and specifics such as Tax and security (crime, terrorism, immigration) issues. It can also be applied to other issues not covered in so much detail in the book. A good starting point is to examine how the narrative in the UK has changed over the last 50 years over Inheritance Tax - from Death Duties to Death Tax! In some way its mirrors how the debate over right to buy rose up the political agenda in the 70's-80's. People's views over taxation may be changing and this could be the key challenge for politicians of all parties in the run-up to the likely 2009/10 General Election.

Americans are running while we stand

It is time to grow up about how we pick our candidates. In this country political parties seem to choose their candidates on the criteria that they won't embarrass us and they can read and write and that they have complied with the Party's check box criteria.

Nothing more is required as no one wants to offend many people by saying "you are not good enough." There are appeals and hassle. Easier to stick to them through. Easier but wrong!

What about being able to inspire, think on your feet, keep people interested, handle pressure and being able to break down complex information.

It's the important criteria that never seems to be applied.

In the US however a much wider audience selects the candidate.

In the UK, understanding the rules, knowing who the key influencers in a constituency party are and the ability to count votes. These are the skills necessary to win a nomination for a safe seat. Nothing that actually makes you a good politician.

In the US the primaries sorts the good from the bad much more quickly and involves more people.  I have a problem with the quantity of money expended in the US but the principle of testing your candidates in the real world rather than just by choice of the faithful is a correct one.

Start running!

Live from SDP HQ - Zagreb

Readers of this blog will be aware of the training work that TCC has done with the SDP in Croatia on message development and political communications. Our Managing Directors, David Evans and Jonathan have worked with the SDP for a number of years to help with the organisational development of the party.

Today it is is General election day in Croatia and the culmination of years of work by the hardworking team at SDP HQ. By this evening the SDP under the dynamic leadership of Zoran Milanovic and with a strong prime ministerial candidate in Llubo Jurcic, will hopefully be celebrating an historic victory.

I am very honoured to blogging live from SDP HQ in Zagreb having been along to a polling station this morning to see the voting.

If "Making Democracy Work" means anything, watching the quiet determination of the voters of Zageb to exercise their right to vote is a moving experience.

Earlier this year the the previous SDP leader Ivica Racan died. I was also privileged to meet him shortly before that. A SDP victory tonight would be a fitting tribute to the work of Racan as well as ushering Croatia into a new future.

Why Democracy?

Yesterday's Observer newspaper reported on a unique global project, Why Democracy? - whose centrepiece is 10 powerful TV films - which aims to find some answers to the question posed. Initially developed by broadcasters in South Africa, from Saturday, BBC2 and BBC4 will show the films worldwide. They will air in 200 countries to a potential audience of more than 300 million.

The Observer also posed 10 questions to leading thinkers, politicians and activists. They were:

• Are Dictators ever good?
• Are women more democratic?
• Who rules the world?
• Is Democracy Good for everyone?
• Can Politicians solve climate change?
• What would make you start a revolution?
• Who would you vote for as president of the world?
• Can terrorism destroy democracy?
• Is God democratic?
• Why bother to vote?

The films and the questions should stimulate debate on blogs across the world.

In the UK we can sometimes take democracy for granted but in South Africa they have only had it for 13 years. In Croatia, where we have worked with local politicians they have only had it for 17 years. In Burma of course the people are still struggling for it.

Therefore projects like this are still important to show why the "least bad" system of government still should be argued over and why there is still much to do to make democracy work.

The future was Orange - Snap elections called in the Ukraine

On 30 September 2007, Ukrainian voters will again go to the polls (the third time in as many years) in a pre-term parliamentary election to elect 450 members of the Parliament (Verkhovna Rada).

The elections follow a prolonged political crisis that has roiled Ukraine ever since the ‘Orange Revolution’ of 2004. The next parliamentary elections were not scheduled until 2011, but in spring 2007, President Victor Yushenko dismissed the parliament and called for new elections in response to a perceived attempt by Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych to convince MPs to cross the floor to his coalition bloc. It was considered that Yanukovych was aiming to form a majority of 300 members; a critical figure, as this is the number of votes needed to initiate constitutional amendments and impeach the President.

The confrontation between Yushenko and Yanukovych dates to at least 2004 when they faced each other in a presidential election. Yanukovych was initially declared the winner, however, after reports of significant fraud by domestic and international observers the election was invalidated and the subsequent re-run was won by Yushenko.

The international media may have been quick to proclaim an Orange Revolution but Yushenko was never able to hold together the parties that supported him and the country became increasingly polarised. In particular, the regional divide between the ‘orange’ pro-Yushenko, pro-Europe forces in the West of the country and the ‘blue’ pro-Yanukovych, pro-Russia forces in the East and South remains pronounced.

TCC Project Officer – Richard Lappin – has been deployed to Ukraine as an OSCE (Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe) Long Term Observer. OSCE observers are tasked to monitor the preparations for Election Day, the campaigning of political parties, media coverage, the pre-election administrative procedures, and the voting, counting and tabulation of the results themselves.

Richard is based in the region of Sumy, located in the north of the country (approx. 350km from Kiev) on the border with Russia. The region has an area of 23,800 square metres (3.9% of Ukraine), a strong agricultural sector and is the birthplace of President Yushenko. Administrative preparations for the elections are now underway in Sumy, with campaigning also visible in the major cities. At present, campaigning can be largely described as positive, focusing on social issues rather than the foreign policy objectives that have so-often polarised the country in the past.

Richard will remain in Ukraine until after the elections and will continue to post updates as the campaign develops and the future political direction of Ukraine becomes clearer.

Richard Lappin, Sumy - Ukraine, 9^th September 2007

Presidential Candidates look to Facebook and MySpace

Presidential candidates for the 2008 election are using social networking Web sites as a new tool to do everything from generating support among undecided voters to raising money. Democratic Senator Barack Obama and Republican Representative Ron Paul are not leading all national polls, but their use of social networking Web sites beats their presidential rivals.

Obama has more Facebook and MySpace "friends" than the other presidential contenders - about 100,000 more than his main Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, who leads in traditional voter polls. Almost every major Democratic and Republican candidate has personalized Facebook and MySpace profiles. But will online success mean election success? While gauging a candidate's success in online fund raising is possible, predicting whether having the most online "friends" will translate into electoral support is still in question.

Facebook has recently added a mechanism that allows users to build applications, or new features, on their profile pages, potentially expanding candidates' ability to contact supporters.

Campaigns seem to be approaching social networking differently. Obama appears to be taking it rather seriously, using it to attract and organise supporters. Paul, on the other hand - who has become known for his strong online support - takes a more relaxed approach. His profiles are reportedly maintained by his grandchildren in order to add a personal touch. His campaign also tries to respond to each message but doesn’t try to organise, target a specific audience, or use the number of friends as an indicator of voting patterns.

Meanwhile, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a leading Republican candidate, is trying to raise funds via social networking sites. His director of online communications recently said that the campaign is banking on users learning about the former governor and then making an online donation.

So what do you think - will online enthusiasm translate into off-line action and result in votes and funds… and will it work on this side of the pond too?

Pobjeda 2007 - Part 2

David Evans and I were back in Croatia over the weekend to work with our friends in the Croatian SDP to review the training we had done with them in January.

The original plan was to train the trainers to train 1,500 members. I'm pleased to report it was so popular it led to 2,800 members being trained - a significant proportion of their activist base.

The Policy discussion tools we worked with them on additionally assisted them in the production of a recent key policy document for members.

The weekend was also an opportunity to discuss further co-operation between the SDP and TCC which no doubt we will report on in future postings.

Towards the end of the trip we held further discussions with senior SDP HQ staff to continue to review the training and they showed us press coverage of our visit.

All in all a productive opportunity for those concerned as we now move to within a few months of the Croatian General Election where the SDP hope for victory or as they say in Croatian: Pobjeda!

For a better Croatia - try Zoran!

It's not just the Labour Party in the UK that are having a leadership election at present.

Our good friends in the Croatian SDP have just elected their new Party President following the sad death of Ivica Racan which we have previously reported on.

Zoran Milanovic was elected over the weekend after a very participatory contest involving debate amongst the entire SDP membership.

Both David Evans and Jonathan Upton at TCC have met with Zoran in previous visits to Croatia (see photo below) and they and the rest of us at TCC offer our congratulations both to Zoran and to the SDP on a successful conclusion to their leadership election process!

MySpace or HisSpace?

US media has recently reported that Barack Obama and his presidential campaign team have taken control of a MySpace site listed under his name, created by a fan.

Originally set up by 29 year old Joe Anthony after being impressed by Obama's keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, the page boasts a friend list of 160,000 members – way more than any of the other hopefuls. After Obama officially announced his intention to run his campaign worked with Anthony to provide content and share access to the friend list, however the campaign is now reportedly concerned about an outsider controlling content and the responses going out under Obama's name. It has also been reported that as Anthony increased the time he spent working on the site he eventually asked for some renumeration, which the Obama campaign has not paid.

MySpace eventually reluctantly stepped in to settle the dispute and decided that Obama should have the rights to control the page. The rights to the 160,000 person network however were given to Anthony, so now the Obama campaign is busy trying to re-build it from scratch – at time of posting he is almost up to 78,500 friends – check out his page here

A disgruntled Joe Anthony has written on his personal blog that:

"Apparently, the message here is, as an individual if you have too big of an impact you're just a liability.

This is how Obama lost my vote, and one of his strongest supporters."

With (MySpace) friends like that….

Ivica Racan

The Campaign Company has worked with the Croatian SDP on training events and David Evans and Jonathan have a long-standing relationship with senior members of the SDP.

We were therefore very sad to learn of recent illness of Croatian SDP president Ivica Racan that eventually led to him passing away this week.

It is a tragic loss for his family, the SDP and for Croatia.

I was very fortunate to meet him on the first weekend of the training courses we held for the SDP in January.

Whilst talking to SDP members at Bjelolasica I drew some comparison with Croatia's independence and the Republic of Ireland. 

In my life I have met two Irish prime ministers, Albert Reynolds and John Bruton. However meeting Ivica Racan was for me the equivalent of meeting Ireland's Michael Collin's - a founder of his country.

Whilst there are still political divisions in Croatia over the way it was founded, I believe that in the fullness of time all will recognise the greatness of Ivica Racan as a true father of his nation.

It was an honour to meet a great man who did so much for his country.

Global Cool

‘Global Cool’, a new 10 year environmental initiative was officially launched earlier this week. The idea of the campaign, says its founder Dan Morrell, is that:

‘Over the next 10 years the solutions-based campaign of Global Cool will be launching a series of educational and entertaining programmes, and inspirational and upbeat global events, aimed at empowering individuals to make a difference.’

The campaign is backed by a host of celebs who plan to ‘bring entertainment to the environment, put on shows and make programmes and send you playful texts and generally sing to you and tell you stories and tease you until you care.’ The website’s quite fun – particularly like the ‘CoolTube’ video section.

Pobjeda 2007!

How can spaghetti and marshmallows contribute to winning an election!?

Well, they make great props for an entertaining quiz round, but more importantly also add to team building over what were two weekends of intense political training and debate for the Croatian SDP that

TCC

helped to facilitate.

This Blog has previously reported of our ongoing work with the SDP and the weekends entitled Pobjeda (Victory) 2007 were a key element of that. Over the first weekend (12-14 January) a team of 5 led by

David Evans

were present and over the second weekend a team of 6 led by David and

Jonathan Upton

helped to complete the training.

Both events were held in the winter sports and Olympic training centre at Bjelolasica. Whilst all the pictures of the site, showed it covered in snow, a remarkably mild January meant that you could walk around outside without a jacket for much of the day.

The aim was to support the training of the SDP’s own trainers and thus roll out a wider training programme across the party. In order to implement this, we conducted a range of training activities that included:

• Developing a Political Message
• Voter communication techniques
• Media Communications
• Training Skills

There were plenary sessions and practical workshops as well as sessions for those in electoral districts to plan their work over the coming months.

These activities illustrate the wide areas of work that

TCC

covers in its mission to Make Democracy Work and explain why

David Evans

said “je nesam spin-doktor” (I am not a Spin Doctor) in a recent Croatian newspaper interview about the project.

The event also allowed for leading SDP politicians and political experts to present policy papers across a wide range of issues.

As well as the many hours of serious debate, there were five a side football competitions and a quiz night along with the conversations, networking and music, singing and dancing in the bar, showing the best of generous Croatian hospitality.

All of these activities have contributed to team building in what will be a very busy election year. The SDP have told us that early feedback from participants in the training has been positive.

We look forward to continuing our work with the SDP in the coming months.

Blogging all over the World!

An article from the cutting edge technology magazine Wired shows again that Blogging can act as a powerful advocacy tool.

The article refers to the work of Sami Ben Gharbia who is the creator of the Tunisian Prison Map which instead of showing government figures on crime, displays where the government was imprisoning political dissidents for daring to speak out.

It then goes on to talk about the work of Global Voices Online, an international citizens' media group that held its second annual summit in India last weekend.

The website was launched in 2004 as a way to get people talking to one another across cultural and lingual divides. A project of The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, it is described in the article as a kind of Reader's Digest of noteworthy or interesting blogs from non-Western countries. It's mission statement says it is: committed to developing tools, institutions and relationships that will help all voices everywhere to be heard.

Whilst Blogging started off in the west, Global Voices shows that new media technology can increase dialogue across many different cultures and act as a form of social glue that makes us all understand the similar challenges we face, whilst being able to celebrate the differences that add to diversity.

My son at Christmas.............

Just recieved this email from my son Matthew who is volunteering at an orphanage on the Thailand/Burma border:

Hi Dad,

Will ring tonight to talk but this is a small plea for funding for anybody you can think of that might want to help. The website address of the organisation i am with is below.

http://www.childlife-maesai.org/

The english version is out of date (eg there are 128 children at the

shelter now) but is still roughly accurate.

Below is a short extract, from the website and from me along with a photo you can choose to print or not.

'Childlife is a non-government funded organization, whose mission is to help children at risk through intervention, accommodation, and education, and to prevent child labor, human trafficking, and commercial sexual exploitation of children by increasing public awareness.

Childlife, "Baan-Nana" in Thai, was founded in 1999 and is located in the far north of Thailand in Maesai, at the border to Myanmar (Burma). Childlife cares for all children in need, regardless of ethnicity, nationality or religion.'

Hello. I am currently volunteering in Northern Thailand on a project providing shelter and education for children, either orphaned or unwanted. A large proportion of the childrens parents are dead or addicted to opium, a problem endemic in the 'golden triangle' area. Most have come to Childlife after being forced to beg, as young as 2 years old, to feed their parents addictions.

The shelter is a fantastic place where the children receive the love and attention they so desperately need and as Christmas is approaching, it would be fantastic to give them an experience they will never forget. The project itself receives no direct government funding so money is extremely short. Anything you can give would be much appreciated and I will be taking lots of photos so you can see directly, the impact your money will make!

Thank you

Matthew

Thanks dad, speak to you soon and  you dig into your pockets.....

Spin-Doktors??

News of our work with the Croatian SDP features in the latest print edition of the Croatian political weekly Globus.

Making democracy work in any country clearly involves the activity associated by the media with Spin Doctors, but it is about much more than just that!

It is also about enthusing political activists with a strong message, training them to make the most of that and through them engaging voters by way of a range of campaign techniques.

This is the unique range of skills that the Campaign Company bring to the table compared to other organisations.

In the new year we will be conducting further work for the SDP.

In the meantime, as they say in Croatia, "sretan bozic, sretna nova godina!"

Another chance for justice lost

This may be a bit out of date now, but no one has commented on our blog on the death of Pinochet this week from a heart attack.  Chileans have been in various stages of uproar, mourning, celebration and pessimism since the announcement, about a dictator who was never brought to justice, and who lived the final years of his life in comfort in a country house south of Santiago.

In many ways he was a typical dictator; brutal with over 3000 deaths under his regime and up to 20,000 disappeared.  He also had assets worth at least $28 million in overseas bank accounts, was responsible for plummeting unemployment and misery during the 1980s in Chile, and was never brought to trial for his crimes.

So once again, another despot dies peacefully, after living a fruitful and full life.  Why is it that such people are allowed this luxury and freedom, when their victims, and family and friends of those victims, will continue to suffer for generations? 

World Aids Day

There will be a lot of people sporting red ribbons for World Aids Day today, so i thought i'd pin a virtual ribbon to the blog as well in the form of this slideshow. It demonstrates the reality of living with HIV in Ecuador, Cambodia and India, and the photography exhibition is currently showing in my home town of Brighton so I'll be checking it out over the weekend.

Blogging in the Balkans...

This is a first-a posting from outside the UK! David and I are back in Croatia working with our friends from the SDP helping them with their preparations for elections in November 2007.Whilst there is much that is different from the UK - it's still a relatively new democracy, it has PR and a list system,coalition politics etc. there is so much more that is the same.Principally the need to (in the words of Ivica Racan former Prime Minister and Party President) "Moramo biti sposobni odgovoriti na pitanje ne samo kako pobijediti na izborima, vec i zasto pobijediti na izborima"  - "we have to be able to answer the question ,not only how to win the elections but also why."

TCC will be working on a Training programme over the next 12 months looking at campaign message strategy and communications.www.sdp.hr

For more photos, view the gallery by clicking here.

Remember when August was a quiet month...

Time was, that August was the opportunity to sit back and relax, and think about the previous months' hard work and autumn's challenges.

No longer!  This week sees TCC undertaking a major consultation exercise in Cumbria, working in London with the Department of Work and Pensions, Ministers and a collection of young people from all over the UK developing strategies for combatting child poverty and undertaking focus groups for the Bakers' Union in Guisborough and laying the foundations for a Democracy Wall in North Yorkshire.

Look out for regular updates on all of these in the blog!

in your facebook.com

It started with college students, then it spread to high school, and now politicians are trying to get in on the action... With election season approaching, candidates in the US are frantically looking for ways to appeal to the elusive 18-24 year old age group. Now thanks to the explosion of Facebook.com (a social networking site created by some Harvard students a couple of years ago and now has 8.5 million members) politicians have finally found a place where two-thirds of college students - whether avoiding homework or hoping to find romance - are likely to hang out. Related article

What do you think - could it kick off here with politicians canvassing British youngsters online via Bebo, MySpace and the like? Or indeed is anyone aware of it happening here already?

YouTube Critical to US Election Campaigns

As the midterm election campaign season heats up in the USA, YouTube has become critical to many political campaigns and could well make or break some of them. This week the site made one of its most crucial political broadcasts with a video of Senator George Allen referring to an opponent's volunteer, who is of Indian descent, as a "macaca" during a campaign event in Virginia. A macaca is a Southeast Asian monkey. The Wikipedia entry on macaca has already been updated to include the controversy and that video has been one of the most-viewed clips on YouTube, with more than 70,000 viewings. view the video here

Democracy Dialogues

Democracy Dialogues - US website calling itself a 'global conversation about democracy'. Addresses specific topics of democratic governance through interactive public forums, readings, videos, photos, and historical documents, with a new topic introduced every two months. These resources inform regularly scheduled dialogues sponsored on the site as well as independent activities throughout the world. The Dialogues include a range of perspectives and national experiences to promote informed reflection and debate about what makes for healthy democracies.

Vlogmap

One for Jonathan - Vlogmap.org is a website mapping over 1,000 video bloggers and podcasters worldwide. The site includes a video blogging handbook for new vloggers, community forums and chats, news from the vlogging world and much more!

Grassroots Videos

Just heard about this through Netpulse - Grassroots Videos is a non-profit, non-partisan volunteer organization with a mission to provide a medium for local citizens in Silicon Valley to publicly broadcast their opinion on local issues. It seeks to achieve this objective mainly through visual "letters to the editor" in the form of video-taped programs aired on the local Comcast cable channel.

Not quite, but kind of like our www.videoqube.co.uk

Blogging for Democracy

Sort of related to David's post about the democratisation of publishing, Mary Joyce, a digital activism advocate and creator of www.demologue.com, is currently in Chile investigating the country's vibrant digital activism culture and blogging her findings at her blog, DemoBlog. She describes how ordinary Chilean citizens are using internet-based tools like blogs, websites, and photo-sharing programs to raise awareness about social causes, organize protests, and form communities of action-oriented citizens. She is also profiling leading figures in the Chilean blogosphere and posting translations of digital activism campaigns and manifestos.

Indian Government ban Typepad

Listening to the BBC World Service last night there was a report that the Indian Government have banned two blog service providers - one is this one and the other is 'Blogspot'.  The reason being that they hosted some blogs that were in their opinion promoting the views of the people behind the Mumbai bombings.

Interesting issue that the democratisation of publishing that blogging entails can also give a platform to people with unpalatable views.  In this case the Indian government seem to have got it totally wrong.  But it does make you think about both the philosophical issues (and I am from a 'no platform for fascists' backgound of the 1980s (youngsters look it up)) and the practical ones - how can you intervene without making an arse of yourself in the process?

Respect: Biggin' Up Black History

Last year whilst grocery shopping in Croydon Market I was stopped by some very nice people from Croydon Council brandishing a video camera and microphone. They asked if I could spare a couple of minutes to talk to them about the war. Having recently been one of those people vox-popping at a Videoqube event myself, I empathised and happily agreed. Several months on, enjoying some afterwork drinks with colleagues in the Warehouse I was approached by a familiar face – Jenny – one of the interviewers who gave me a copy of the DVD, including my 15 seconds of fame! The film is really interesting and follows six teenagers from Croydon as they learn about World War II, undertaking research and conducting interviews to gain a better understanding of the sacrifices made by servicemen and first generation immigrants from India, the West Indies and Guyana. You can get a taster of it, and learn a lot about the men and women from the Commonwealth who served during World War II and helped the rebuild of the UK on www.bigginupblackhistory.com

Targeting Young Voters - examples from across the pond

Some websites aimed at targeting young voters from US and Canada:

US sites:

www.campaignyoungvoters.org

www.mtv.com/chooseorlose

www.kidsvoting.org/index.htm

www.youth04.org

www.vote-smart.org/index.htm non just for young voters, but a nonpartisan political site collecting a range of information, e.g biogs, voting records, campaign finances and issue positions, on US congressional candidates.

www.Atthetable.org - site hosted by the Innovation Center for Community and Youth Development (USA), designed to provide resources and information about how to involve young people in decision-making.

Canadian sites:

Election information for Canadian trade union members www.betterchoice.ca

CUPE's election page - http://election.cupe.ca/

alternative views at Rabble - http://rabble.ca

ApathyisBoring.com www.apathyisboring.com Aims to use art, media and technology to revolutionse democracy

student vote 2004 - www.studentvo