What the US Presidential Election Can Teach us About Branding
Let’s talk about the candidates’ branding for a second. And no, I’m not talking about Jeb Bush’s various logo changes. I’m talking about the candidates’ personal brands.
It goes without saying that if you’re an entrepreneur, you are your brand. And with that comes a huge responsibility to the integrity of that brand.
People’s perception of us and who they think we are is directly linked to how we act…in public, online and offline, for business or in our personal lives, and whether we realize people are watching us….or not…they are.
Our reputation hinges on what we do, what we say, and how we do/say it.
So setting political opinions aside, let’s look at our two primary candidates and what their outward-facing appearance says about their personal brand:
Hillary Clinton
- Strong, competitive, win at all costs
- Female, mother, hoping to use that to her advantage
- Controversial practices, many Americans don’t trust her
- Traditional politician, knows the system, has party support
- Financially wealthy, yet doesn’t talk about it
- Polished, seasoned speaker
- Not well versed in social media — campaign staff most likely write and/or screen her tweets
Side note: She also is very good at being a chameleon — she can flip her accent in a second depending on the audience she is speaking to. It’s like an actor shifting in and out of character, which comes off to some as fake. I was fascinated the first time I noticed her doing this. For example, when campaigning in the southern states, she speaks with a southern drawl. When speaking to New Yorkers, that accent is clear. (I’m sure some of that is due to the fact that she’s lived in both places and the accent is natural, but still…)
Donald Trump
- Strong, competitive, win at all costs
- Male, father, husband
- Controversial behavior, many Americans strongly dislike him
- Not a politician — “don’t have time to be Politically Correct”
- Financially wealthy, celebrity status, and flaunts it
- Seasoned businessman and negotiator
- Loose cannon on twitter — unfiltered…or not… we don’t really know…
So you can see that there are some very clear similarities, but there are also some key differences. In the earlier days of the election, I felt the differences were more pronounced. The two candidates were drastically different in terms of their message, and also in how the public perceived them.
Donald Trump was brash, unapologetically the rebel, the problem child. He flaunted his money and fame, yet seemed to relate to the people and spoke the words that so many Americans were thinking — and without hesitation. He was a political outsider and clearly went against the system, which made him likable by folks who wanted change.
Hillary, on the other hand, was a politician, through and through. She had the experience, the friends in high places, and she had already run the White House once before (let’s be real, it wasn’t Bill). She was polished, yet almost too much. She was welcomed by the Democrats and fans of Obama, yet seen as “more of the same”, and people who wanted change naturally turned away from her.
Over time, things got muddled.
Hillary started talking “Bernie-speak”, in that she adopted many of the ideas that made Bernie Sanders her biggest competition for the Democratic nomination, riding on his wave to get his followers. She tried to convince the middle class that she understood their pain — yet then contradicted herself in private speeches when she insulted them. She talked about “going low and going high”, yet advertisements were 99% negative mud-slinging. Many Americans who wanted to like her had a hard time trusting her.
Trump continued to be brash, but was toned down a little by his campaign staff who tried to get him to stay on message. He didn’t change his behavior a whole lot, though, and the fact that his own party was against him made his followers want him elected even more. As news of his private behavior came out, he tried to sidestep and sweep things under the rug. He wanted Americans to trust him, yet his own behavior was deplorable, and his temperament and ability to lead was called into question.
As the campaign progressed, the messages got even more mixed up. It became less and less clear what the candidates stood for, who they aligned with, and what they truly believed in. Their actions and words were all about winning, and less about their values. They wanted the victory and would say anything to get it.
Public perception is a key part of your branding. There are tons of stories on both candidates that talk about how they treat their staff in private, how they got and spent their money and how legal it all is, how they handle their taxes, respect (or lack of) for women and minorities, etc. It all depends on what the media wants to feed us on any given day, and we can choose to believe or question it.
But this post is not really about the election. It’s about branding.
I want you to compare our candidates’ campaigns to your own branding. I want you to think about the impact that YOUR public opinions, marketing messages, posts, tweets, past history, and overall behavior have on your personal brand.
What do you post on social media, and is that in alignment with your values? Are your personal values in line with your business values? How do you treat people in the grocery store? In traffic? In private? At the gym? Is there a disconnect there, or not? What are people saying about you, and is it true? How do you respond?
Believe it or not, people are watching, and want to understand who you really are. People want to see the real you so they know whether or not they can trust you, and if your values align with theirs.
When you clearly communicate who you are, what you stand for, and how that translates to what you do — and don’t waver from it — THAT is the foundation of a strong brand.
