Of course, I am referring to Danny Mackey. But for some reason, whenever I hear his
name, I have to shift off the default setting of envisioning Andy Dwyer sporting an
FBI jacket and Special Agent shades.
By all accounts, he (Mackey) is running a relatively serious
campaign for the Board of Education. It
is important to note, from the outset, that I am not voting for him.
His campaign is worth writing about insofar as it offers a communications
case study in doubling-down on what is perceived to be a core attribute. In this circumstance – his youth.
That is a risky strategy for three main reasons:
1)
It is inward-looking. I know he is capable of discussing broader
systemic issues that actual voters are actually concerned about. But I think
too often his policy-focused narrative can be muffled by banging on about his
youth. Average voters, especially for
down-ballot races, usually focus on (at most) one or two characteristics and/or
policy stances for each candidate. This
can also occur with top-of-the-ticket campaigns. In 1997, if you knew that Jim Gilmore was running
for Governor of Virginia, you probably were aware that he favored “no car
taxes.” If you were particularly
attentive, you might have known that he also had a proposal to hire more
teachers. And that, for many VA voters that cycle, was about it. You don’t get many chances to
make an impression, and you want your most prominent messaging to be compelling
& memorable. If one were to develop
a word cloud featuring the words and phrases voters most often associate with
Mackey, “youth” would certainly be up there…and I don’t know how many voters
are going to cast their ballots based on that attribute alone.
2)
Mackey’s narrative, in some ways, draws him
perilously close to the positioning occupied by the Student Board Member. Some voters might not be swayed by a candidate
who is conveying the idea that he can best connect with students and their needs given that he,
himself, was fairly recently a student of the same school system. Isn’t the Student Board Member ideally
situated to be such an advocate? Some voters might think a student advocacy-centric
sounding narrative might be too limited in scope for a non-Student Board Member,
given the range of issues facing public schools.
3)
It invites the specter of having to explain away
the “inexperience” argument. In the
unfair-but-this-is-the-world-in-which-we-live-category, by talking about his
relative youth, some voters will wonder (sometimes aloud, sometimes not), is he
ready for the responsibility of holding such an office? Does he have the life experience
to prepare him adequately for the role? Given
the importance of our public schools within our community, voters may have
reservations about young candidates, no matter how knowledgeable they may be. Granted, we have had “elder statespersons” on
the Board who have been solid, mediocrities, and abysmal failures. That said, his lack of gray may be an obstacle
for some voters…particularly with a midterm electorate, which tends to skew
somewhat older compared to presidential election cycles.
There is little doubt that Mackey sees this messaging as a
primary point of differentiation from the other candidates. And he has tried to make it more resonant/relatable
by talking about “approachable leadership.”
For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that his youth inherently makes him
more “approachable” than other Board members/candidates.
And I do wonder what some students would think about his
political affiliation. Yes, some folks would
probably deem it a plus, but others would not.
If it was widely known, would that impact his “approachability” among
some? Perhaps. His pics alongside Hogan and Kittleman may
lead some to question his education priorities.
Bottom line: I think
Mackey’s messaging obscures his advocacy background. This is one of the primary
reasons why I don’t see him finishing in the Final Four in 2018.
Stay tuned, as more will follow.
Started receiving robocalls from Mackey today.
ReplyDelete