The 2 Party System... Why?

Is anyone out there in marketing? After doing a little reading on the subject in support of our company's revitalized marketing and PR efforts (woohoo, positioning is fun!), I've made the startling realization that the 2 party system can be explained in marketing speak...

Everyone should go read 'Positioning' by Al Ries and Jack Trout.

Why do we really only have 2 parties? They are the two main competitors in the political marketspace. Both rely on constant advertising (direct and indirect) and public relations to jockey for position in the mind of the American. The majority of Americans can only name the two major parties - that right there should tell you that they are doing a much better job at marketing and positioning. This makes perfect sense, as they are the established market leaders.

The 'Instability of Equality' means that from time-to-time there is a major shift in alliance, where one brand inevitably gets the upper hand - that doesn't mean it won't be relinquished, but that it can and does shift. One rarely retains market leadership for a long period of time in the political space. Americans are fickle, and are more comfortable when there is a definite pecking order. When they are close, one will inevitably get the upper hand and then dominate for years to come - and then it as it gets close again, it will go the other way.

The leader can maintain their position by using their short-term flexibility to assure themselves of a stable long-term future - but do our political parties do that? Nope. Which is why they constantly jockey for position.

In order for another party to rise up and gain market share, one of the big boys would have to seriously screw the pooch, or the prospective 3rd party would have to practice some great positioning to weasel in - some of which means lots and lots of funding. If they find a major hole and fill it, they can be successful. However, they have to be careful when they play the positioning game against the market leaders - they have to find a truly unique position and do it better, otherwise they will simply spend tons of money and never really get anywhere...

Discuss... I have more to say, but I wanted to kick it off with this...

I agree entirely except with the assertion that gaining marketshare can only be done through monetary support. I feel viral marketing and grass-roots campaigning is highly underestimate and depressingly initiated (if ever). The first and foremost issue should be the development of a concise goalset along with practical procedures to implement and achieve the goalset (preferably something that can be simply understood by a majority of Americans). Unfortunately, the Libertarians and Greens spend far too much of their time playing themselves against the primary market holders rather than blazing their own trail. It will be important for a new party to address itself in terms of what the public already understands (ie Democratic/Republican ideals), but to attempt a coup as merely a distorted or improved reflection of one of the two parties currently in power would be to simultaneously degrade the issues and popularize the movements one seeks to defeat.

Create an ideology.
Create a communications platform.
Educate the public.
Maintain coherency and agile dedication to goals.
etc.

[Hey Bubu]

Originally posted by hyoomen


Create an ideology.
Create a communications platform.
Educate the public.
Maintain coherency and agile dedication to goals.
etc.

You need money for most of this, besides do not forget the one constant in politics, The masses are asses.
In keeping with the Marketing idea, how many ideas have you heard about that just didn't take off because of lack of funds. In order to educate and reach out to the masses channels of communications must be available first, these channels are the media which require money to enbable their services to people and organizations.

Study the non-violence movement in the Balkans over the past 10 years. I believe the group was Optor (or Otpor). Incredible bunch of people dedicated to the ideals innumerated by Gene Sharp.

PBS' website should still have a decent story on their modern triumph.

It can be done. Anything can be.

[Hey Bubu]

Originally posted by hyoomen
Study the non-violence movement in the Balkans over the past 10 years. I believe the group was Optor (or Otpor). Incredible bunch of people dedicated to the ideals innumerated by Gene Sharp.

PBS' website should still have a decent story on their modern triumph.

It can be done. Anything can be.

Oh while I don't doubt it can be done, we cannot compare what is done "marketing" wise in other countries to what will work here. Really there are quite a few variables one must assess before attempting something like this. My point was that money helps quite a bit specially if we are going the political route on a national scale. Take the pink party (I believe that's what it's called in San Francisco) I am sure they have a huge following there but I highly doubt most of their ideas, vision and misson statements would go over well in Texas. Anyway I'm digressing here, the monetary factor is an important role in any type of marketing. (I'm working on a marketing degree btw so I really like this topic )

While I think viral marketing can be effective in some instances, it is definitely NOT that effective in launching the type of campaign necessary to build a third party to the state where it would be as competitive as the other 2 main parties... Viral marketing is an effective supporting strategy, as are grassroots campaigns, but they simply cannot provide the sort of strategic visibility that a massive advertising and PR push can (which cost a lot of money).

The fact is that some of these other parties do have amicable platforms, IMHO, especially the Libertarians. However, they do suffer from being the #3, #4 or whatever. And, like I said, ask most Americans if they can name more than 2 political parties and you get stares...

So, what can these other parties do? Most of them have identified unique positions. They should exploit their unique positions and flood the market with PR and advertising. The should exploit their niche and practice positioning - find what the others aren't doing, and use it to their advantage. Re-position the competition where you can, and change the focus... it can be done.

Examples from commerce:

- the size gap was exploited by VW with the introduction of the Beetle in the US, while they COULD have chosen to minimize their weaknesses and maximize their strengths in the US market, they chose to focuse solely on size - and consequently, won bigtime.

- the high price gap has been exploited by Chivas Regal, Mercedes, and BMW. The classic example here though, is Michelob beer's launch (which AB quickly screwed up with the launch of another marketing campaign for Michelob, and consequently they lost market share).

- the low price gap has been successfully used by a number of enterprises

See, parties like the Libertarians and Greenies have a unique message - they have created their own gap to some extent. They just need some marketing saavy. They should play up the repositioning game, and they would reap the rewards - I mean, look at what Perot's campaign did! Perot was a very effective marketeer. He positioned his campaign well - where he fell short was in his comparative literature. You don't necessarily want to use comparative ads, literature, etc. to try and position yourself in the eyes of the American public - what you want to do is practice repositioning. If you say, "I'm better than the competitor", the American public instantly thinks it can't be true - it's wierd how it works, but it's been proven over and over again...

I think that in the future, we'll see someone come along with a brilliant marketing strategy that can bring an obscure party to the forefront... the American public is waiting to see it happen, but it won't make it happen. Someone's got to guide them along, and it all comes down to positioning...

[Hey Bubu]

Positioning and knowing your target audience.
You can market a similar idea in different markets but by way of different displays.
IE: How do you market a campain in California and how do you market the same campain in say Texas, are more conservative state. Most people like to be part of groups and that association is key for any political group.

A piece of brilliant marketing are those Truth commercial, while I think they are the stupidest things this side of the pond, the fact remains that wether or not you like the commercials you still remember them and quite honestly they are targeted
to younger more impressionable children.

They are the juggernauts that firmly entrenched themselves in the minds of the American people is why they still exist... they are the "established brands" if you will. When people think politics, they think 'Democrats and Republicans' for the most part, a very small majority think otherwise. It's not remarkable that they are still around at all to me - in fact, it's evidence that positioning strategy works.

[per1sh]

it doesn't help 3rd parties that funding laws are designed to keep them out. given their position the libertarians haven't done that bad. been around for about 30 years and with very limited funds compared to republicrats. in 2000 their House canidates received 1.7 million votes. not too shabby.

but like has been said, the major problem is money. the only way that most americans get information is via TV and newspaper, and advertising in these mediums is heinously expensive. the LP ran an anti drug-war ad in usa today and the washington times last year... full page ad, for 1 day, and it cost them around $70,000.

as far the "find your niche and exploit it" strategy...wouldn't this be an example? the pugs and the rats are both pro-drug-war as a general rule.