How to win an election
I wrote the following because I believe there’s a deeper truth we’re missing:
You can’t outsmart feelings.
Or dismiss them.
Trying harder on each will only deepen the divide.
I don’t often comment on politics, but I can’t ignore what I’m seeing.
Hopefully it can help light a path forward that others will want to follow.
(It’s also applicable to marketing, leadership, well, actually communication in general.)
Please share it with anyone who needs to read it. There’s also a PDF version to download and forward.
—
How to Win an Election
Imagine you’re playing chess.
And you’re winning. Every move seems perfect.
But at the ceremony, you find out that the prize isn’t awarded to the player who checkmates the other.
Instead, the audience decides the winner. The crowd gets to vote. They are allowed to choose based on any criteria they want.
And … they choose your opponent.
That’s roughly what elections feel like when you believe you’re the good guy.
You think you’ll win when you just play by the “rules”. You think that all you need to do is to outsmart your opponent on the chessboard:
→ Exploit bad moves.
→ Counter their attacks.
→ Point out where they broke the rules.
But …
That’s not how the game is won.
Because: Every single voter is free to choose their own rules.
They’ll cast their ballot for whoever resonates with them. For whatever reason.
Their rules aren’t your rules.
In fact: For voters, there’s no rule except to choose.
That’s how Trump won.
Democrats pointed out where he broke the rules. They flagged it whenever he was
→ unfair,
→ dishonest,
→ wrong.
But they never seemed to ask the critical question: What criteria do people actually use when they vote?
Democrats were obsessed with Trump’s flaws. When they should have been obsessed with people’s feelings.
Their fears.
Their hopes.
Their worries.
…
Whenever they attacked Trump, they attacked people’s feelings.
You can’t beat someone with a mass following by focusing on why that person is wrong.
The only way to beat that person is to understand why their supporters support them.
I mean truly understand. Why do they support them?
Assume that there’s a good reason. Even if you wholeheartedly disagree with it.
Then: Dig deeper!
Understand how on Earth they could come to that conclusion.
Really, what led them there?
Calling them wrong and dismissing
their feelings is just lazy.
They are not you.
They have their reasons.
They’ve made their experiences.
Most importantly, their feelings are real.
Can you at least see them?
Or better yet, feel them?
Because that’s where you need to go.
Empathy is hard. You might not like what you discover. But it’s also the only way to find words that resonate.
That’s where the opportunity lies: If you understand what drives them deep inside, you can craft a better offer.
A message that resonates even stronger,
a story that meets those same needs,
but in a way the original source never could.
The truth is: It’s not on us to decide what resonates. It’s on the people. Only if we find their frequency, will it resonate.
What that means to me is that whenever your story doesn’t resonate as strongly as you hoped for, you need to
→ figure out why,
→ find a better frequency, and
→ tell a better story.
Never stop telling better stories.
Never stop offering an alternative.
Never let them take control of the stories.
Not to win a debate.
But to light a path that people can’t resist following.