What Happened? My Take on the 2016 Election

One campaign gave us a political slogan. The other sold us a brand.

Pictue from Seattle Municipal Archives from Seattle, WA - Voting machine, 1971, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36833119

My office companion is an old Panasonic Radio turned to our local public radio station. Over the last couple of months this companion has, for the most part, talked about the 2016 election. Each day the inner sanctum of my office was invaded by talking heads giving their analysis of the campaigns and predictions about the outcome. With each conversation came the results of one poll or another, each telling me about Clinton's lead. And then came the day after the election when my tabletop friend changed its tune. Instead of telling me that Clinton would win my daytime companion kept asking, "How did she lose?"

There are a number of explanations for the end result of the 2016 election. Most likely the real answer is a combination of factors, including the misreading of the electorate by both the Clinton campaign and the mainstream media. If I may add my two cents, I suspect one of the biggest reasons for the outcome is the fact that one campaign was just that, a campaign. The other was something very different, based on doing what the candidate does best: selling a brand.

"Make America Great Again"

The Trump campaign made a promise to the nation in the embodiment of their campaign slogan. "Make America Great Again," was a promise to do something positive, even though I doubt anyone can actually define what that promise really means. But with polls showing large numbers of voters expressing a feeling that the nation is on the wrong path, the promise to do something likely resonated with a large voting block. As it did so the Trump campaign turned that slogan into a national brand. They sold that brand, clobbering their opponents with it one insult at a time.

On the other side of the aisle we had "Together," and "I'm With Her!" One presented a positive message of inclusiveness. The other seemed to express a commitment to a candidate without a commitment to the country. Both were decent political slogans but neither matched the promise implied by #MAGA. The Clinton slogans did what they were designed to do but they never became a brand.

One campaign gave us a political slogan. The other sold us a brand. Implied in that brand was a promise but it’s the packaging that drew in the voters. Are you surprised? You should not be. After all Trump makes a good amount of money selling his brand. He ran his campaign his way, a master pitchman selling his services to America. And whereas a Trump Steak costs a good chunk of change, buying into the #MAGA brand costs only the time to go to the polls.

In the end the political machine was no match for the branding machine. As a result, come January Trump supporters (and detractors) get to take the packaging off of what we have just been sold. Trump pulled off a major upset. As he sits for the next four years as the most powerful man in the world, we will see if this steak is more than just sizzle.

Do You Stand With or Against Kaepernick?

By Dbenbenn, Zscout370, Jacobolus, Indolences, Technion. [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

I am truly amazed at the hornet's' nest stirred up by San Francisco 49ers' quarterback Colin Kaepernick. His choice to kneel or sit during the playing of our National Anthem has made him a traitor in the eyes of many. The public backlash has made a major mountain out of this molehill. At one point there was even an article in which "anonymous" NFL executives spoke of how Kaepernick could never play for their teams. And while team GM's must do what they think best, how does exercising a constitutional right make a man a traitor?

For the record, I find Kaepernick’s actions disrespectful. The socks he tends to wear are an even bigger problem, sending the wrong message to children who see athletes as heroes. However I cannot argue with the impact resulting from one man taking a stand. Kaepernick has helped continue a conversation, doing so without the violence which all too often has found its way into our national consciousness about race. It is a conversation which, if handled properly, can only make our nation stronger by forcing us to face areas where we suffer so great a divide.

I cannot stand (sit) with Colin Kaepernick as I choose to stand with pride when I hear our national anthem. I stand to recognize his right to continue his protest into the regular season if he so chooses. I stand because the flag and country for which he refuses to stand allows us all to disagree. It is his right not to stand and to choose a loss of endorsements and perhaps even the loss of his privilege to play in the NFL (I doubt it. Worse locker room cancers have found roster spots.*) And while I will not sit with him, Kaepernick has earned my respect for being willing to take a stand.

One thing exercising his rights should not earn Kaepernick is the title of traitor. Being a free country means we do not always have to toe the line. Being free means some of us can choose to sit even while the rest choose to stand.

*Update 2020: Boy was I wrong about Kaepernick not losing his privilege to play in the NFL.

How Will Ban of Russian Athletes Impact the Olympics?

What teenager would pass up free food? I couldn't and in 1984, going into my junior year of high school, I did not. Thanks to McDonald's and an Eastern Bloc boycott of the Olympics, I ate very well for two weeks in August. I enjoyed watching the U.S dominate in a somewhat lopsided competition. And with each medal we ran to join the line under the golden arches.

The events leading to the 1984 boycott began in 1978 with a coup against the government of Afghanistan. Shortly after taking over the new government faced a number of insurgencies by anticommunist and mostly Muslim leaning groups. In response Afganistan called upon the Soviet Union which responded to its new ally by sending troops in December 1979.

In response to the Soviet Union's actions in Afghanistan, the United States and a number of other countries joined in a boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics held in Moscow. While the boycott was not supported by all western countries (France and Great Britain among others did not support the boycott) competition suffered. Meanwhile athletes from the U.S. and many other countries lost an opportunity to fulfill their Olympic dreams.

Four years later the Summer Olympics were hosted by the city of Los Angeles. Citing anti-Communist sentiments the Soviet Union claimed it was unsafe to send its athletes to the 1984 Olympics. Other Eastern Bloc countries followed suit. Without competition from the boycotting nations the United States won a record 83 gold medals. The nation’s very large medal haul would lead to very long lines at the nations’ McDonalds’ franchises.

That summer McDonalds' ran a promotion where each purchase came with an Olympic game card. Each card listed an Olympic event. If an American earned a medal in that event the cardholder received free food and another game card. That summer my friends and I, while attending a special summer science program in another state, lived on free Big Macs, Quarter Pounders and just about everything on the menu.

To my knowledge McDonalds' has no plans of repeating their Olympic promotion and has not done so since 1984. If any company were thinking of a similar promotion, this is not the year to do so. With allegations of tampering with drug testing results, a number of Russian athletes have been been banned from this year’s Olympics. The International Olympic Committee left it up to the individual sports federations to decide on suspensions for other Russian athletes. As a result a number of athletes will have to stay home.

I feel sad for the athletes who dreams may be lost due to the actions of those who came before them. At the same time I think it important to send a message. It is important that nations and athletes know that cheating will not be tolerated. It is also important, perhaps more important, that clean athletes know that the governing bodies of various sports support them in doing what is right.

As a parent I need those who are in charge of officiating sports to support the lesson I teach my children. In sports, while it is always more fun to win, cheating only ensures that everyone loses.