Salience, Relevance, Differentiation and The Polling Booth point of sale
The NHS, Fairness, Immigration & People, Brexit and an end to Austerity. Are the Relevant and Salient issues I get from the Data.
Applying An analysis with the lens of Lynton Crosby’s 4 Elements in Campaigning, Namely;
1. Salience, ( Is it out there)
2. Relevance ( Do the people Give a Shit?)
Is it personally Relevant?
3. Differentiation ( They say That Too.)
Political Differences, Wheres the change, why change?
4. The point of Sale Execution (WTF?)
(Making the Lies Stick, Connect the policies to the Party.
Crosby says “if in Doubt Believe in something”, if your losing
then get someone else to do the Dirty work for you.
Surrogates. Negative Campaigning.
Candidates must carry
( The figures are Video Timings for direct Quotes)
5:28
the positive messages talk about what
5:30
they want to achieve and so forth and
5:32
then the campaign itself maybe the
5:34
literature that’s put out or what or in
5:36
what they call in the United States
5:38
surrogates in the US you know Obama had
5:41
lots of surrogates who are attacking
5:43
Mitt Romney all the time of values
5:46
wealth decisions he’s made in the past
5:48
they should carry the sort of more
5:51
negative messages tone is very important
5:53
when you’re executing we should be
5:56
executing anybody when you’re executing
5:58
when you’re executing a negative
6:00
campaign and certainly candidates
6:04
should overwhelm when we only ever
6:05
communicate a positive narrative
6:07
suitable towards the end of the campaign
6:09
for people to report all of us being
6:10
this surge in the SNP that Scottish
6:13
Nationalist Party and that’s you know
6:15
upsetting the dynamic for labour the
6:18
first time we picked that up was in
6:19
November of 2014 when in discussions in
6:26
focus groups people said Ed Miliband’s a
6:29
very weak man if the SNP do really well
6:32
and he relies on them to govern they
6:36
will push him around who knows what we
6:39
would get and that was the word
6:42
that was from the mouths of voters well
6:44
before anybody had picked up this sense
6:46
so we, you know started building on that
6:48
then we didn’t wasn’t something that
6:50
came late in the campaign it came late
6:52
in a lot of people’s realisation
7:38
when you’re running a campaign you have a particular
7:41
objective and that is you know to get
7:44
your side over the line to help them
7:49
win in in the right way not breaking the
7:54
law consistent with your values and all
Fattening the Pig For Market,
“You Can´t Fatten the Pig on market day, you have to do as much as possible in advance”.
with the limited resources you have you
9:38
need to ensure that they are focused on
9:40
where they will yield the most return so you
9:44
start by locking in your base you then
9:46
move to the swing group and focus your
9:50
resources on you know that’s a core vote
9:52
strategy well if you focus just on your
9:53
base you’re never going to win it comes
9:56
down finally to Labour and the Liberal
9:58
Party of conservatives and the
9:59
Socialists basically but the principle
10:02
remains you need to know who is your
10:03
base who is your swing and who is your
10:05
aunty and sometimes this is attributed
10:09
to me in the UK media but it didn’t come
10:13
from me, it came from John Howard who is
10:15
Prime Minister of Australia the
10:17
The statement,
“you Can’t Fatten a Pig on Market day”
Boris Johnson Parroting Crosby.
” what Lynton
will tell you is that you can’t, he can’t
fatten a pig or market day”.
“so it’s very
important that you understand,”” you can’t
Fatten a pig on market day,”” you’re going
to do as much as possible in advance”
Four Elements.
7:55
of those things and they’re really four
7:57
four elements to political issues that I
8:01
look at political issues support for to
8:04
satisfy for tests to work out whether
8:06
they’re relevant for us in the campaign
8:08
context the first is is an issue
8:11
generally salient that is it out there
8:13
and sort of makes sense the people that
8:14
you’re talking about it
8:17
secondly they’re personally relevant
if
8:20
it’s not generally salient and you start
8:21
talking about people think what on earth
8:24
are, you know where he or she can
8:26
become what are they talking about you
8:27
know there’s no connection many rivers so
8:29
it needs to be that general salience but
8:30
then you need to have personal relevance
8:32
people need to see how it relates to
8:34
them in their lives or relates to
8:37
something that’s important to them
8:40
they’re the first to test the
Third test
8:43
is, it’s got to be capable of being
8:45
politically differentiated
8:48
you’ve got to set it you’ve got to set
8:50
yourself apart from your opponent
8:51
otherwise, why would people if they voted
8:54
for them, last time and you’re offering
8:55
the same there’s no political
8:57
differentiation well why would they
8:58
change to you so it’s there’s got to be
9:01
political differentiation and then
9:03
finally, your the issues that you pursue
9:06
have to be capable of a point of sale
9:08
execution what I mean by that is they
9:11
have to relate to how people behave in a
9:15
polling place and people have to
9:20
know the connection after that over I’m
9:21
going in to vote when I vote I’m doing
9:26
this is the consequence of me doing this
9:28
which is a positive consequence in some
9:31
way to produce a leaflet whatever it is
9:35
with the limited resources you have you
9:38
need to ensure that they are focused on
9:40
where they will yield the most return
Salience, ( Is it out there)
Relevance ( Do the people Give a Shit?)
Is it personally Relevant?
Differentiation ( They say That Too.)
Political Differences, Wheres the change, why change?
The point of Sale Execution (WTF?)
Making the Lies Stick, Connect the policies to the Party.
Crosby´s Core Objectives.
Lock in base then, move to the swing Group.
Who is your base?
Who is your Swing? and
Who is your Anti?
Applying Lynton Crosby’s Method to the Following Video Transcripts, Last Nights Battle for No10 interviews on Sky and the previous Leaders Debate on Sky, What is Salient, What Is is Relevant, Where is differentiation required and What is Lynton USP his positives for the Candidates and the Negatives for the Surrogates?
“ensure that they are focused on
where they will Yield most return”
Here is the Tag Cloud I generated from Last Nights Battle For No 10 Program.
Here are the Issues Survation asked its polling audience to rate.
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Final-GMB-GE2017-IV-Tables-260517TOCH-1c0d0h9.pdf
Here are the trend Lines in the Polling which Mr Crosby will no doubt take note of in the instructions for his army of Surrogates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2017
Will Mr Corbyn asking politely if he could refer to the figures as he wants to give an accurate figure, is construed in a negative light when the surrogates go to work? Mr Corbyn I would suggest Made a connection with the Audience, Differentiated the Labour Policy for negotiating Brexit and showed the relevance and salience of the different approach of Labour 2017 from the Strong and Stable “Nasty Party” and the proudly self-identifying “Very Difficult Woman” from “The Nasty Party”
Mrs May is known in less Charitable circles as May Bot. I suspect Mr Crosby is preparing a stunt double for Public appearances as Mrs May´s cold metallic touch “”There are many complex reasons for Food banks ´´, is not people friendly and People and Immigration, The NHS,Fairness and the clear evidence that Post 2008 and after the 2010 Coalition, “WE” were definitely not all in the Austerity Shit together.
Here’s the tenor of the debate on my Facebook Timeline a group of musicians in Bristol UK, of varying political stripes.
If anyone is listening to radio 4 right now Corbyn has just made the biggest Faux pas going – when challenged on the figures on education costs in his manifesto he was unable to quote his figures……. 4.8 billion plus 2.4 billion which was quoted by the radio presenter ……. poor interview and very damaging …….
The following 3 data presentations are what you will make of them. I carried out the analysis for my own curiosity as to whether the political debates ever touch on Ideology or Ethics. What it is to be Liberal, Conservative or Progressive.
In the 2015 debates Leanne Woods, Nicola Sturgeon and Natalie Bennet stood out for me as the most politically pedagogical as they all mentioned Austerity and Cuts and Woods and Sturgeon have even identified explicitly the Ideology of Neo Liberalism in their interview appearance that campaign.
Draw your own conclusions of course.
In 2017 Brexit was the early runner and of course, the position of the 3 Female leaders who showed up all being remainers did not find it convenient to draw the attention of voters to the hopelessly Neo-Liberal and embedded Austerity positions of the EU, with Austerity baked into trade deals and institutions alike.
The neo liberal Ed Milliband missing out on the Anti Austerity and decidely anti-Neo-Liberal 2015 group hug.
United Kingdom general election debates, 2010
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The debates ran without a break for 90 minutes and were broadcast weekly by
ITV,
BSkyB and the
BBC over three successive Thursday evenings starting on 15 April. They were moderated by
Alastair Stewart,
Adam Boulton and
David Dimbleby respectively. The first half of each debate focused on a particular theme (domestic, international and economic affairs), before general issues were discussed. The questions were not disclosed to the leaders before the debate.
Debates were also held in
Scotland and
Wales and
Northern Ireland, due to the devolved nature of various aspects of government in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In Scotland and Wales, representatives of three main parties were joined by respective nationalist party representatives who stand MPs only in Scotland and Wales, while in Northern Ireland, due to the main parties having no seats, debates were held between the four largest Northern Irish parties. The arrangements for the UK-wide leaders debates were criticised for being restricted to the main UK parties excluding other national minor parties and nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales, for covering many domestic matters which are devolved from Westminster, and also for being held in three locations solely in England.
United Kingdom general election debates, 2015
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The term “
United Kingdom general election debates” of 2015 refers to a series of four live television programmes featuring the main political party leaders that took place in March/April 2015 in the run-up to the
general election. After various prior proposals and arguments over which parties should be represented,
[1][2] there was a single
debate between the leaders of seven
British parties:
[3]There was a second debate involving the “challengers”, those in the above list who were not members of the outgoing coalition government. There were also two programmes – one with Cameron and Miliband; one with Cameron, Miliband and Clegg – in which the leaders answered questions but did not debate head-to-head.
Following the result of the election, a survey of 3,019 people, carried out by Panelbase, found that 38% of voters considered the debates to have influenced their voting intention.
[4][5]
created at TagCrowd.com
United Kingdom general election, 2017
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
12345
http://tagcrowd.com/pdf/1495187524_cloud.pdf
1234
The Video below is My Critique of Paul Johnsons Ìnependant´expert view on the BBC Reality checks of the Tory and Labour Party Manifestos.
facts are not important to religious
15:46
ideologies and neoliberalism is a
15:50
religious ideology I suggest that this
15:55
independent expert on the BBC is a
15:58
priest of neo- liberal ideology and what
16:02
we actually see is that in the current
16:04
constitution of the British state and
16:07
and the European state and really
16:11
within the Washington Consensus is
16:14
actually, a religious doctrine embedded
16:20
in government
Theresa May launched her party’s general election manifesto with promises of more money for services such as the NHS and schools, but where is the money coming from?
40:58
measure that both labor and the Lib dems have promised
41:01
of course is an increase in
41:03
income tax not the Torys
(TALKING HEAD) ´´ you look at this
41:07
manifesto and whilst there is
41:09
little actually promised not to increase
41:11
income tax and national insurance and so on
41:14
what you’ve got is a pretty modest set
41:16
of proposals which probably aren’t going
41:18
to require terribly much
41:20
in the way of tax increases´´
one big conservative
41:25
promise in the Cameron years was the
41:27
triple lock on pensions under which the
41:29
state pension rises by the rate of
41:31
inflation average earnings or 2.5%
41:33
percent whichever is the highest Theresa May Wants
41:36
to scrap that losing
(David David Speech Brexit.)
“the
43:13
negotiations are about to begin with the
43:15
European Union won’t be easy they will be
43:19
challenging and at times they’ll be tough
43:26
Britain has a prime minister with the
43:27
strength to lead Britain through these
43:29
negotiations and make a success for the
43:32
future”
Narrator.
but the outcome of those
43:35
negotiations over the next two years is
43:37
deeply uncertain at the moment the
43:39
manifesto reasserts that the Conservatives
43:41
think no deal is better
43:44
than a bad deal so the union
43:46
negotiations will probably be more than
43:48
anything else in the next parliament to
43:50
determine the health of the British
43:51
economy and the chances for any
43:53
political party to put their promises
43:56
into practice
so that was the conservative
44:06
reality check so-called reality check
44:10
and here is the so-called labor
44:13
manifesto reality check
Jeremy Corbyn unveiled pledges costing £48.6bn in his party’s election manifesto. Reality Check correspondent Chris Morris crunches the numbers.
46:00
labour says it can finance all its
46:02
current spending plans through changes in the tax
46:05
system forty eight point six billion out
46:08
-
-
billion in so does that add up
(TALKING HEAD SAME AS TORY video.)and
46:11
they’re suggesting a fifty billion pound
46:13
increase in tax which if it were to
46:16
be implemented by the way would take the
46:18
tax burden of this country to the highest level
46:20
its been in about seventy years but
46:23
actually I think theres an awful
46:25
lot of uncertainty about whether you
46:26
could actually raise that amount of tax
46:29
they’re talking about very very large
46:30
increases in taxes on companies which
46:33
would likely reduce the amount of
46:35
investment that they do so I think the
46:37
actual amount you could get from these policies
46:39
certainly runs into the tens of
46:41
billions but probably doesn’t reach
46:42
the fifty billion that labor are
46:45
claiming”
Narrator
so that’s tax but there are
46:48
also big plans for investment spending
46:50
all those nationalization plans you’ve
46:52
heard about water companies the Royal
46:54
Mail and so on labour says it will
46:56
borrow money to pay for future
46:57
investment it’s talking about national
47:00
transformation fund of 250 billion pounds
47:03
but there’s no detailed costing of
47:06
those nationalization plans in the
47:08
manifesto that will be the source of
47:10
controversy and political debate but
47:13
labor does make one bold promise it
47:15
says it’s committed to ensuring that the
47:18
national debt is lower at the end of the
47:20
next parliament than it is today
.png)
97.jpg)
.jpg)
LikeLike