Has Commoditization Infected Politics?

Over on the FC Now blog there is a conversation on the flame-out of the Howard Dean campaign. That thread sparked a few thoughts within me about politics, marketing/branding and consumer adoption.

It would appear that Dean’s message and methods did not cross the chasm. Clearly, Dean ignited the passions of the innovators and began making inroads to the early adopters, but that is where his campaign stalled. In fact, it could be argued that his campaign stalled as it tried to move past the innovators to the early adopters.

It’s a shame that the politicians who survive the political battlefield of primaries and caucuses are those that are the least polarizing.

The brand called Dean is one that is passionate, seemingly authentic, and is able to connect with “consumers” on a one-to-one level. All attributes that a brand would love to own in the consumer marketplace. So, why doesn’t this branding approach work in the political marketplace? It seems as though politicians that have a distinct personality are too polarizing for the masses. Being too different and too unique in the political marketplace can be damaging if you want to cross the chasm to reach the masses.

Has commoditization infected politics? Are we supporting parity in political candidates? Because it seems as though when all is said and done and all the ballots have been counted, we choose the candidate that is least polarizing. Again I ask, has commoditization infected politics?

This perspective is coming from a registered Libertarian. In case you're interested, being a Libertarian doesn’t mean that I'm a kook, it just means that I believe steadfastly in four words – maximum freedom/minimum government.

Comments

[Chris]

I think the democrats are, to a certain extent, voting against Bush more than voting for any particular canididate. There is/was a widespread perception that the Republicans were thrilled at the prospect of Dean being the nominee. The commodititazation usually happens after the primaries, when both candidates drift toward the center to try and win the independent vote that ultimately decides national elections. I don't think anything different is happening, it just happened sooner than normal. Whether or not it was a conscious strategic decision by democratic voters, or maybe just another side effect of the faster spread of information, I don't know.

BTW, I'm a lower case libertarian, having got tired of party stuff a few years ago.