Running a political campaign at the local level requires the same attention
to big ideas and mainstream values that have worked well for Democrats
at the state and national levels. Successful candidates must have a clear,
compelling, and understandable message that addresses voters' broad concerns
and communicates a strong unifying sense of public purpose. Nowhere was
this more obvious than in John Hickenlooper's suprise election in the
recent Denver mayoral race.
Hickenlooper's campaign embraced traditional progressive values and advanced
them in ways that address changing times, focusing on genuine and relevant
reform. Articulated through visionary governing themes, his fresh, innovative,
and practical ideas championed the values and broad interests of Denverites.
His consistent "New Democrat" messages were on target with
voter priorities and appealed across constituencies: reviving a sluggish
economy, injecting entrepreneurialism into government, and solving the
city's significant budgetary problems. He emphasized spending taxpayer
money wisely and expanding opportunity through private-sector growth,
along with respect and tolerance for everyone. He favored a government
that empowers people, not one that takes care of them.
That winning message did not happen by accident. Before the campaign
started, Hickenlooper -- a brew-pub owner who had never held public
office -- comprehensively and methodically assessed the big challenges
facing the city, visited mayors across the nation to identify cutting-edge
ideas, and developed a set of innovative and practical Denver-specific
solutions.
Not intimidated by the pundits who called him a long shot, Hickenlooper
insisted that his message and ideas would drive everything else, including
fund raising, recruiting volunteers, and generating political support.
He distilled that agenda into engaging television ads that used clever
scenes to explain his candidacy, such as opposing a proposed parking meter
fee increase by feeding the meters himself.
Early on, Hickenlooper convinced voters that "business as usual"
approaches would not solve Denver's pressing problems. His opponent, City
Auditor Don Mares, sensing that sentiment, futilely tried to become the
"outsider," despite 14 years in public office, causing serious
damage to his credibility with the electorate.
Hickenlooper's background, on the other hand, reinforced his message.
Voters liked his track record as a businessman who created jobs and met
payrolls, and they empathized with his experience of losing his job in
the 1980s and then bouncing back. His work for nonprofit groups demonstrated
a commitment to the community.
Rather than a compelling and consistent message, Mares thought the keys
to his campaign would be his experience, his ability to get the endorsements
of traditional Democratic constituency groups and cause-oriented movements,
and surrounding himself with Democratic Party operatives. He never explained
how his experience would be an asset in solving Denver's present and future
problems. That resulted in an inconsistent, diffuse, and fragmented message
that rarely spoke to broad middle-class aspirations and values. Candidates
must define themselves by clearly articulating what they stand for, not
merely by the organizations or groups they stand with.
One of Mares' other strategies was fire-breathing populism. He accused
Hickenlooper of being a Democrat in Republican clothes who supported business
interests, not working families -- one who cared about downtown, not
neighborhoods. That strident "Old Democrat" message pushed Denver
Republicans away from Mares and especially alienated independents, who
disdain that kind of partisanship. It did not even help with rank-and-file
Democrats; one pre-election poll had Hickenlooper ahead by 11 percentage
points among Democrats.
Mares failed to recognize that Denver politics has changed dramatically
in the past two or three decades. Populism no longer resonates with an
electorate that is now more educated, more affluent, more middle class,
more centrist, more independent, more invested in the stock market, and
less unionized. The old message just pushes away key swing middle- and
upper-middle-class voters, who now largely decide elections.
Hickenlooper prevailed because he realized that majorities are built
around values and ideas, not narrow appeals to special-interest groups.
While Hickenlooper was speaking to the broad concerns of voters, Mares
was making very specific promises to attract support from city workers,
who, by the way, are fighting the very changes the electorate is demanding.
Tellingly, Hickenlooper helped to keep his message consistent by refusing
offers from independent organizations that try to help their endorsed
candidates. These groups usually emphasize a narrow set of issues they
consider important, often confusing their favorite candidate's message.
For example, Mares got help from the Denver Area Labor Federation with
mailings, but the literature focused on the priorities of organized labor,
not the broader concerns of Denverites. Regardless of its pros and cons,
public employee collective bargaining can never have the same broad appeal
as Hickenlooper's agenda of generating jobs and reforming government.
Even in Denver, the state's Democratic stronghold, a strong message will
always trump special-interest-group politics.
Today's politics requires understanding the everyday problems facing
people, articulating a clear, forward-looking vision, and advocating innovative
solutions rooted in mainstream values. Ordinary voters do not see the
debate in terms of liberal vs. conservative, but as a battle between those
clinging to the familiar past and those willing to embrace an uncertain
future with new ideas. They are seeking a new kind of public activism
that equips citizens, families, and communities with the tools they need
to solve their own problems. Winning the battle of ideas must become the
central focus. Voters want fiscally responsible solutions and progress
on those issues that affect them on a daily basis.
