Posts for March 12th, 2008

To every New Yorker and to all those who who believed in what I tried to stand for, I am sincerely sorry.

– Eliot Spitzer, March 12th, 2008

You know, when I was on the campaign trail in 2006, I had to set up various meetings with my candidate and then-Attorney General Spitzer, a man who entered with grace and style, who had come up from Brooklyn and made a name for himself. When we met, he was confident and ready for change, as the idea of “bringing passion back to Albany” was his key to future success.

The last three days has been heart-breaking; to watch the press continually hammering on his indescretions, and to see a man who once represented hope and change in New York politics, be brought low by this act. And, as with many people commenting on the limited visuals that have been presented, I was struck by Mrs. Spitzer and how this must be weighing on her.

“Don’t Always Stand By Your Man”

I was reading politico.com this morning and came across the following post by Laura Nicols on how it is demeaning and difficult to watch a strong, good woman stand next to their husband as they self-flagellate in front of a nation-wide and world-wide audience. Laura makes some good points (IMHO) where she says:

The only possible explanation for doing what Silda Wall Spitzer did Monday and others have done before her is the age old classic: It’s for the children. But what does her decision to appear aside her husband now teach the Spitzers’ three daughters about taking responsibility for their own mistakes? In this case, Gov. Spitzer allegedly broke the law, broke his public trust, broke his marriage vows, broke his children’s hearts and may well have exposed their mother to unsafe sex to boot.

For once, I’d like to see a political spouse not stand by her man. Stay with him if you choose. But for the sake of the kids, let’s teach them that there are consequences when you screw up this badly. You have to stand alone because of the mistake you alone made. Teach them that there is a shred of honor in owning your mistakes, in facing up to them with no one at your side, in sparing your devastated family a single second of rehearsed fortitude at their saddest hour. Show them you respect their sadness so much there will be no forcing, coercing or expecting that your family will share your very public humiliation on the stage you’ve always sought.

To Mrs. Spitzer, I also extend my heart out to her and her family. A strong woman who has dedicated her life to building a family with her husband and her three daughters - it is truly for the children that is the focus of a family. Watching her on the stage with Eliot has been heart-wrenching. One thought I kept having was “Why does he not face the issue head on, without the “required” support from his wife?” He brought the actions upon himself and (inadvertently) his family. He should take responsibility for his actions, not to include his wife in the scurrilous issue.

As I listened to NY1 commentators explaining the reasons for Mrs. Spitzer being at his side, I recognize and also understand that there is a political “team” between Eliot and Mrs. Spitzer. And in some situations (e.g. Pres. Clinton and Sen. Clinton, State Senator Rod and DeeDee Smith), I can agree. In politics (and campaigning), it is not one person, but two, that are behind the candidate. But, I still think that it is a tough part to play for the wife, when the husband is the cause of the scandal.

We each have a choice in how we live our lives - choosing on a daily basis along the ranges of high honor and integrity to duplicity and scandal. No one is perfect in the world, and as the technology continues to erode our privacy, we have to become more aware that the past that we thought would evaporate into the ether is only a google search or audio file retrieval away. As members of the electorate, we have to evaluate our measure of who we wish our politicians to be, and to act - now, in the past, and in the future.

No one is perfect. But no person should have to endure more than they should for the mistakes of others…even if they are family. Family matters are simply that - family matters. Dishonesty with the people who elected you, that is another matter.

Tags: Eliot Spitzer, honor and integrity, ethics in politics

As I went for my snack of cashews this evening, I took a glance at the newest Rolling Stone and saw the cover that graces this post. Underneath the “A New Hope” title, I saw the subtitle that I had been waiting for, “The Machinery of Hope“, covering the process story that I wondered if it would ever see the light of day.

I got a little guff from some other posters out there about my article on whether or not would social networks impact the 2008 election, and I think that the premise of my argument might have got lost in the translation. Simply, the idea that social networks like Facebook, MySpace, Bebo, hi5, MyYearbook and the other 100+ social networks that currently line the Internet landscape would not seriously impact the election if the campaigns did not apply resources to the problem of virtual canvassing.

What pleased me in reading this article from Rolling Stone was the fact that the campaign married online engagement with offline activities and vice versa. Never a campaign event went off without capturing people’s email addresses, zip codes and names as they came to the event. Never a chance was forgotten to drive engagement both online and off - using the MyBO site to drive involvement and community. I just pulled out of one of my (many) proposals to campaigns from prior to the 2006 elections where I request the candidate and their campaign to:

The goal of any campaign is to convert uninterested persons into avid supporters – developing a relationship with these supporters over the course of the campaign. Migrating supporters along this path is an art, rather than a science – since the details of conversion are often considered nebulous at best (e.g. like his looks, his stance on taxes, his wife’s cookie recipe), but the steps are almost always the same – and evidenced in any involvement effort.

Physical Events – fundraisers, rallies, field events

At these events – the two most important actions are the acquisition of email addresses by the staff at the event, the branding of all candidate merchandise with the campaign URL and finally, the candidate mentioning the website URL in his speech and other opportunities.

The conversion ratio (number of emails that become active supporters) is always highest through this method – they have self-selected by coming to the event, and they have expressed an interest by signing the form/giving a business card.

Driving the point home that getting involved with the campaign is all at the website will drive interested activists to the site and signup.

Follow up is key – as with any effort – a thank you note with information regarding the candidate allows the supporter to see the campaign values their time and offers the supporter a chance to “get involved” in other ways. The conversion rate of confirmed supporters goes up with just this simple gesture.

This concept was brought home to me over the years whenever I would see how the people we met at events would be more enthusiastic that the people who just gave their email or money over the Internet. The simple lesson is: if they care enough to spend some of their time to come out to an event, they more than likely will do more for you beyond just listening and cheering.

A chance to build up some “social capital”

Additionally, the article in Rolling Stone discusses the marriage of old-school shoe leather campaigning with “new-era” technology - which can be simply read as opening up the supporter database. To credit David Weinberger with his request from the 2004 Politics Online Conference, he asked why didn’t the Dean Campaign let the grassroots run with the campaign? Because, unlike this cycle, training and organizing of the grassroots was not supported by the campaign.

Read the rest of this entry »