PRINCIPLED COMMUNICATION

Joe and his wife Martha were approaching a stop sign on their way home one evening. Having come to a complete stop, Joe looked both ways and was preparing to proceed through the intersection. Martha, also looking both ways from her passenger seat vantage point, saw what appeared to be a semi barreling down on the intersection from the right. She exclaimed to Joe, "Don't go yet! I don't think that vehicle coming the other way is going to stop." Joe calmly replied, "Martha, it's a four-way stop and I have the right of way," and proceeded into the intersection...

Joe was right...dead right in proceeding upon his principled conviction. Oftentimes we hold beliefs that we know are true for us, and perhaps are universally held truths across cultures (i.e. Thou shalt not kill). We can express and live out our convictions in a principled and respectful manner with moderation toward others.

When communicating to a diverse audience toward achieving that margin of victory, we should be able to comfortably express our personal conviction with a tone and volume appropriate to remove any doubt about our principles.

We begin to lose our margin of victory when, in an effort to demonstrate the moral strength of our character, we infuse our personal convictions with such tone, volume, and fervor so as to appear full of disdain, intolerant, extreme. For every citizen we may attract with such vitriol, we may lose two who previously leaned toward our core message.

Hold firmly and live out your personal and universal principles, but be mindful of how you are communicating the moral strength of your character to a diverse audience. We are a Big Tent, not a Big Top.

TODAY'S QUESTION: Are your principled communications conveying solutions to your audience's widely-held concerns, or narrowing the appeal of your message only to your existing base?

THE BIG TENT OR THE BIG TOP?

Nothing gets 24/7 cable news coverage like extremist acts or extremist rhetoric. The torching of a luxury vehicle dealership by an environmental terrorist group or the gruesome homicide of an abortion provider might garner huge "ratings" and attract a certain segment of the television-watching population. The margin of victory is subtler and more substantive.

There will certainly be times when we will effectively and appropriately employ the media catalyst of the "extreme" (yet lawful) event/rhetoric. But the vast majority of our time will be spent broadly communicating, through our sincere actions and rhetoric, our positive solutions to issues affecting a plurality of our citizens and businesses.

Conservative principles by their very nature are time-tested, transparent, and largely codified in the U.S. Constitution, our state Constitutions, and the laws that flow forth from those documents. Conservative principles have provided the guiding and moderating influence in our nation that has ushered in and fostered certainty, freedom, faith, and opportunity--even as society and technology have evolved.

So, let's leave the Big Top circus antics to the extremists and fringe groups to pander to the ratings-hungry media. And instead let us win the hearts and minds of all persons who value freedom, opportunity, the rule of law, and God--under the Big Tent of principled solutions.

TODAY'S QUESTION: Are YOU communicating your conservative ideals as positive solutions to widely-held concerns, or are YOU merely targeting specific issue groups?

THE MARGIN OF VICTORY

Bill and Bob had taken their families to the zoo one fine Sunday afternoon. While their wives had taken the children over to the ice cream stand, Bill and Bob stood admiring the lions in their natural habitat exhibit. The lions looked hungry, licking their chops in anticipation of the next feeding.

Suddenly one of the lions jumped over the enclosure from the rocky perch and landed on the concrete pedestrian walkway. Bill looked at Bob, terrified, and exclaimed, "Do you think you can outrun a hungry lion?" Bob replied smiling over his shoulder as he took off, "No, but I think I can outrun you."

Campaigns are won by a margin of victory, sometimes (as in the examples of Bush v. Gore and Franken v. Coleman) quite slim. But a victory is a victory nonetheless. At the pre-primary stage of many contests you will find a field of mostly well-meaning individuals committed to principles and ideals, and as the election cycle continues, those who are focused upon the "lion" begin to fade away. The contest ultimately ends when one individual remains statistically ahead of his/her final competitor(s), even if only fractionally so.

Every race of consequence will have its valiant heroes willing to stand entirely upon one or a few pungent issues that fan the passions of a core constituency. Much media attention may even be paid to the fervor. But as the last confetti and balloons fall, the man/woman who outran the lion is the individual who put forth the issues that propelled him/her beyond the fearful footfalls of the lion's prey, who only a few months before may have stood side-by-side peering into the lion's den. The electorate will judge which candidate put forth the critical solutions...with its hearts and minds [and feet] on election day.

TODAY'S QUESTION: Are YOU putting forth the critical solutions that address the issues and win the hearts and minds...or will the lion eat YOU?