The Republican brand problem
We did a survey of more than 1,200 U.S. voters (conducted by our research arm Edelman Berland), showing them a series of 14 words and phrases (positive brand attributes) and asking them to tell us which party – Democrat or Republican – the phrases better described. The results are stunning. The Democratic party “won” on 13 of 14 attributes. Even more importantly, they won 12 of 14 among independents. And on some of the attributes it wasn’t all that close. The Democratic party emerges as far stronger than the GOP on several key attributes, including: “offers a hopeful vision of the future,” “cares about people like me,” “clearly explains how its actions will benefit me,” “understands issues facing the middle class,” “works to bring about change,” “honest and ethical” and “smart and innovative.”…
Note the highlighted words in each of these phrases. It would take a brand planner two minutes to conjure up a creative brief for the Democratic brand using these key words: hopeful, caring, beneficial, understanding, changing (for better), ethical and innovative. These are the brand signals that are currently owned by the Democratic party. They form the core of its brand identity. And thinking about what we said earlier about the types of attributes, our data shows that the GOP scores much better on the rational attributes we tested, while it fares far worse on the emotional ones…
All of that being said, the Republican party is not in a death spiral. But it does have a significant brand problem. And while the demographic challenges facing Republicans have gotten more post-election play, the party’s brand image issue may be more central to its recovery.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Pretty impressive considering Independents voted Republican by 5 points in this past election.
Funny how easy it is to have a “brand” problem though when the media has less of a capacity for shame than Paul Joseph Goebbels himself.
Gingotts on December 11, 2012 at 6:50 PM
They don’t punch other people in their faces.
Schadenfreude on December 11, 2012 at 6:50 PM
Gee, a survey asking about “me”, “hope”, and “change”…who’s gonna win that?
Hot Gas on December 11, 2012 at 6:59 PM
We’re talking about *Republican* branding on the day the most loyal Democrats showed their brand=violence???
Bizarro world.
bluealice on December 11, 2012 at 6:59 PM
The full stuff here: http://www.edelman.com/post/the-republican-brand-problem/
Pretty sad showing by the GOP. And none of it surprises me.
Stoic Patriot on December 11, 2012 at 7:00 PM
After having Romney as our standard bearer we find out that he destroyed the brand name and did not even have to do it from the oval office.
YOU.WERE.WARNED!
astonerii on December 11, 2012 at 7:01 PM
Jim DeMint should be able to fix this by 2016. He’s a marketing genius, and all the GOP needs is a rebranding.
sauldalinsky on December 11, 2012 at 7:03 PM
no it doesn’t. The GOPe have a significant TRUST problem. People just don’t believe the lies anymore. The GOPe run on conservative values then when they get in power they act like crony capitalists/liberal lites to feather their own nests. They reward their big donors with sweet heart deals and screw the voters that elected them. And yes while the dems do the same thing they will at least drop some crumbs for those that voted for them to keep them hoping for more. Obama gave the liberals 2 liberal SCOTUS the GOPE gave us judges that we can’t count on being conservative when the chips are down like ROberts and Obamacare. The liberals reward their voters with things like free healthcare the GOPe instead of cutting spending, increases it. Instead of holding the line on tax increases the GOPe caves at the first wiff of conflict. Instead of protecting life the GOPe increases funding for planned parenthood and on and on and on.
The GOPe is learning that they can “say” the right words but if those words are not backed up by actions those words become meaningless very quickly.
That isn’t a “brand” problem that can be fixed with the “right” message. It’s a trust problem that can only be fixed by actions and standing behind what they sell to the voters. Think about it if a car dealership listed a Benz for $6,000 and you show up and all the dealership had were yugo’s for $5,000 you just wouldn’t shop there anymore.
unseen on December 11, 2012 at 7:04 PM
Sounds like part of the problem.
I am also wondering how many conservatives even bothered to answer the questions.
astonerii on December 11, 2012 at 7:12 PM
The last GOP president — who won twice, convincingly — and who happened to be middle class, was Ronald Wilson Reagan. Bush I, Bush II, McCain, and Romney were all from the GOP aristocracy of the well-connected.
And I’m not surprised the consultants like these well-connected, rich, and aristocratic candidates that they stump for in the media during a primary. The same candidates have lots, and lots, and lots of money with friends who have even more money which the consultants like.
And after singing the praises of said rich candidate on Morning Joe or elsewhere, these consultants then go on to paid gigs working as retainers for the candidate while bleeding him dry for their “advice”. It’s a total scam that enriches the Consultant Class; enriches the Beltway Establishment of which they are a part;
and in the end it elects more Democrats who keep Washington and the property values of the Beltway Establishment growing and rising.
It’s a total scam from start to finish.
So no more aristocrats, GOP. Find a conservative middle class guy or gal who can relate to, you know, your base and most of the country. Oh, and boot the Consultant Class.
Punchenko on December 11, 2012 at 7:19 PM
De-vorce, De-friend and De-employ all the Democrats in your life. Time to separate ourselves from these communist/nazi bastards. Libertarians and conservatives need to just live our lives Democrat-free.
ericdondero on December 11, 2012 at 7:21 PM
Leave the class warfare to the leftists. It sounds weird to hear that stuff on hotair.
sauldalinsky on December 11, 2012 at 7:28 PM
The main problem with the Republican “brand” is that party leaders never responded effectively, if at all, to the demagoguery, lies, and slander for that past decade.
Jurisprudence on December 11, 2012 at 7:32 PM
Which is why I was practically begging Romney to make his case to the people about how specific Obama policies negatively impacted the economy and the voters – personally. How Obama’s policies failed, not that they just didn’t fix Bush’s failures. And how Romney’s policies (whatever the hell they were – who knows), would positively impact the economy and the voters – personally. Couldn’t be bothered. But I guess if he just hugs the Dems close on policy and runs as a good manager (who couldn’t even run an effective campaign), he’ll be a shoo-in when the voters have had enough of Democratic malfeasance sometime around 2050.
besser tot als rot on December 11, 2012 at 7:36 PM
LOL, over the past decade (11 years) they have been in bed with progressives, that is their reply.
astonerii on December 11, 2012 at 7:38 PM
Leave the stoopid to the GOP, Saul. It sounds weird to hear more GOP stoopid on Hot Air — most especially when GOP stoopid cost us another election.
See, some of us want to win elections going forward. Some of us realize that very wealthy northeastern politicians who are from political dynasties have a very hard time winning elections.
For some odd reason, people in places where we have to win don’t want to vote for them. And after the election, we find out those people we need — who are middle class — vote for the party that talks about the middle class, caring, blah, blah, and more blah.
They also vote for the guy who can talk about coming from the middle class. And even more bizarre, they vote for the guy who is more like them. It’s crazy, I know.
And guess what? They win the election.
But please, continue running politicians from established political and military dynasties who have a very, very hard time talking to voters they need to win the election.
Punchenko on December 11, 2012 at 7:45 PM
If given a choice at work would you vote for your boss to be your boss or the shop foreman? Not many people likie the boss. Mitt reminded many people of thier boss who send their job to China.
And that’s the problem The GOpe is full of “bosses” The reason people voted for Reagan was because he offered something different than the typical boss. Reagan offered people to “work from home” to be their own boss.
Mitt offered more of the same just a different boss.
unseen on December 11, 2012 at 7:53 PM
Punchenko on December 11, 2012 at 7:45 PM
Not sure what point you’re ranting about. Any number of middle class conservative candidates would be great for 2016… Rand Paul, Scott Walker. Middle class RINOs (Jindal, Rubio) would lose in 2016 because conservatives don’t do class warfare and liberals would rather vote for their Marxist candidate than a Dem Lite.
sauldalinsky on December 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM
Of course the GOP brand sucks. The only good things populism-wise coming out of the GOP are the Tea Party and the GOP is too afraid that joining with them would make them look bad to the liberals whose good opinions they crave. The GOP elders allowed the Tea Party to be demagogued and marginalized because it was an existential threat to their continued power. A smart GOP would have tried to help the TP get as popular as possible, and then let that popularity shine on the party as a whole. But GOP elders, like many in the rank and file, believe that principled conservatives make them look bad, crazy and “out of step” with “reality”/”science”/whatever faux-objectivist metric bien pensant media types thought up this week. Ask anyone who’s ever run for office, and they’ll tell you that policies and ideas mean little in politics. You have to get the voters to like you first before they’ll even give you a second look. And we act like it doesn’t matter if we’re likeable, we’re competent! Obviously, likeability matters.
So when you’re left with a party rump that sees nothing really wrong about the Bush years, and the nation as a whole hated the Bush years, and you actively work against the people on your side who also hated the Bush years and want to try something different, you have a serious problem. Call it “brand” or “image” or whatever, you’re not part of a group that people want to join.
alwaysfiredup on December 11, 2012 at 8:20 PM
The rant, as you described it, was me educating you on who wins and who loses elections. GOP country club aristocrats who hail from political or military dynasties, and who sit on a heap of cash, lose elections. The only one who managed to pull it off, narrowly, was George W. Bush.
With that said, running middle class candidates, who understand middle class concerns, and who can offer up policies that promote upward social mobility, is not “class warfare”, Saul — it’s good politics that wins elections.
Exactly.
Part of Palin’s appeal — and her threat to the Democrats — was that she was a middle class woman who liked to hunt, raised a big family, loved nature, and lived out in the wild.
Reagan’s appeal was similar with the ranch, horses, ruggedness, and the authenticity coupled with a great rags-to-riches story. It works and beats the George H.W. Bush and Mitt Romney candidates every time.
Punchenko on December 11, 2012 at 8:32 PM