It wasn’t until the day after the U.S. presidential election Mrs. Clinton appeared before the public to give her concession speech. Giving a concession speech the day after, rather than the night of, is quite the break of tradition. It may have been done before, but as far as recent memory serves, it hasn’t. (Too be clear, I’m speaking of when the candidate has already made “the call,” and conceded.)
During that speech I made the following observation to a colleague: “This looks more like a business PR rollout than a concession speech.”
It would appear that “observation” proved more exacting than even I first thought. And to add further weight, I’ll use Mrs. Clinton’s latest appearance, along with a few other tell-tale signs which, I believe, help bolster that argument.
With that said, let me just make clear: This is all conjecture on my part. I’m looking at this purely through a business perspective, which intrigues me, just as I did previous. The political side, or implications is for others to discuss, or discern.
So, as they say, “let’s dig in” shall we?
Not long after that “speech” I penned the following article: “On That ‘Concession Speech (aka Meet The New Clinton Inc.)” where I stated the following. To wit:
“However, if I am correct? What everyone thinks, and is taking at first blush as a purely “political” event? Where the defeated party or candidate rides slowly off into the sunset? May suddenly come to realize over the ensuing months and years was more akin to a new “political business rollout” presser. With far-reaching implications. Implications I’ll contend, that could affect everyone. Whether one agrees with them, or not.
First – the symbolic: Did you notice the color purple? I bet you did, and how could you not? And it’s for that reason I couldn’t help but start to think: Why? For it’s not like they were there to party like it was 1999, were they?”
As of this writing two very important factors to support this argument have come to fruition. First: The recount initiative brought forth by the Green Party candidate Jill Stein. And second (and what I believe was far more important, again, from a business view) Would it show “a market and demand” for fundraising? Regardless whether the initiative would make a real difference or not (e.g., nullify the results.) Hint: You bet it did.
In only a few weeks the recount initiative raised close to $7 Million with aspirations of $9.5. At the pace it was setting, that amount was not only seen as easily reachable within days, but more importantly – the possibility of being raised even higher, again!
And here is where I believe “Clinton Inc.” (CI) suddenly began paying very close attention. So close in fact – they decided to join it after initial signs of discounting the effort. For this had all the markings of what in the business world is known as, “a successful, initial, product roll out.” So, let’s dig a little deeper shall we?
In Mrs. Clinton’s first appearance after the election results there seemed to be no real direction or distinction as to which way CI would forge post-election. However, with that said: Did anyone notice the color of her attire? Hint: Purple. Not stunningly purple as was that at her concession speech. But purple nonetheless.
(Screen grab Source)
In my earlier article I continued on this observation. To wit:
“I’ve heard and read a few observations to the effect of: “Both her and Bill chose to wear purple to show unity and blah, blah, blah.” Well, that may be so, but I don’t think so. At least, not in the vein suggested.
I believe that overwhelming presence of purple was to subliminally push, or to stress, the new color of standard/banner for either a new political party, or, at the least, a new political movement to rally under. And it borders on branding genius if I’m correct in that assumption as I’ll try to explain. (Remember: I’m coming at this from the business side, not the political.)”
Now there’s an old saying in business, and it goes like this: “Once, is considered luck. Twice, can be considered coincidence. Thrice is a pattern.” So is there a “pattern” present? As always dear reader, I leave that for you to decide. Here’s Mrs. Clinton in her latest public appearance since. To wit:
(Screen Grab Source)
I want to reiterate a point, for I believe it’s germane and possibly adds more clarity (and something it seems no one else ever considered) as to why everyone had to wait till the next day as opposed to the usual night of. Again from my previous article. To wit:
“I believe the real reason why everyone had to wait till the next day for Mrs. Clinton’s concession speech was not because she was too tired, or as some have speculated “health reasons.” No. I’m of the opinion this was always Mrs. Clinton’s plan-B. But as the election drew on, both her and her surrogates (along with the entire main-stream media) thought it was a done deal and broomed it thinking there was no reason to have it at the ready.
Yet, when it proved it was Plan-B, or B-gone entirely? (and I believe the Clinton’s always to have a Plan-B for they have proven to be second to none in political brinksmanship) There was a mad-scramble on to both find an outfit (for optics) and ready the speech as best they could. Reasoning; the moment for implementation of that plan was that concession speech, and not a moment later, if any form of salvage was possible. Hence: “Go home, and we’ll see you all tomorrow!”
And some further reasoning from the same. Again, to wit:
“Effectively both her, as well as Bill are now on the outside of the political spectrum looking in. This is, for lack of a better term, the antithesis of their former main “product feature.” And with that comes a very, very, very (did I say very?) reduced speaking fee schedule, along with a sudden drought of once readily provided pleasantries. (i.e., free use of private jets, etc.)
This is a position the Clinton’s have never been in since entering the political fray, which has been nearly their entire lives.”
A total makeover, or total reboot, is usually the only thing that may help. And I believe what we watched on Wednesday was just that: a total reboot, re-branding, and relaunching of the new (and improved?) “Clinton Inc.”
Did you notice the difference in Mrs. Clinton’s demeanor and forthright at this latest appearance from her prior? Again, hint: Absolutely.
There were two distinct traits which caught both my eye and ear to solidify my reasoning was entirely plausible, and they were these. Mrs. Clinton (e.g., “Clinton Inc.”) now appeared to be back in “product” mode. i.e., “Fake news.” A product which by all accounts has found a willing “market.” And second, “She appeared to be making sure it will be her “identity” associated with any further efforts going forward.
A move which I looked at as “brand positioning.” i.e., Essentially seizing the momentum and moving Jill Stein’s image along with her efforts (which have a “shelf life” that’s near, if not already expired) off the “shelves” sort-of-speak, and replaced with the new CI “product.” Which, as one can see by all accounts – has a willing and almost unabashed “marketing team” (i.e., the main-stream media et al) just waiting for a new “CEO” to formally lead the charge ever further. And it only takes a Ph.D in “Duh” to notice Mrs. Clinton is going to insert herself directly into that position.
Again, don’t take my assumptions. All one needs to do is watch her latest speech, then, decide for yourself.
Once the Jill Stein effort showed there was serious money to be raised, and raised quickly? This is where I believe CI not only decided it was time to get-in-while-the-getting-was-good. But also, make sure no one else (i.e., other Party or figure-head “brand”) could take the momentum and keep it, effectively squeezing CI out.
This is classic “brand and market positioning.” And it’s exactly what I would expect to see, or might even advise if I were partaking in it myself. i.e., “You know there’s a possible market and you’re the brand leader, but you’re unsure of the depth; so you watch as an “upstart” ventures in, and watch carefully for traits of repeatable success; if success does come you quickly try to “partner;” once partnering is achieved, you look for ways to differentiate your “product” within; then – co-opt the entire market via your “differentiated” product with your full market weight and capital as soon as any weakness in the other’s “product” shows any sign of weakening. The Stein effort was doing just that precisely when Mrs. Clinton gave this latest speech.
As I stated in that prior article: “From a business standpoint – it’s stunningly brazen as it is brilliant.”
It would appear “fake news” is just the “product” to help ensure spin-offs such as challenges to the electoral college, and more that will be
sold fundraised for who knows how long. Maybe into perpetuity. Again, from my article. To wit:
“It will be all about division – not “unity.” For that’s where the money is in politics currently. Whether one likes to hear it – or not.
Currently there is a backlash against not only the president-elect, but more importantly – there is an outright civil war taking place within the Democrat Party apparatus. Both from within, as well as those which identify (and/or vote) with it.
And what would be the easiest group of disaffected people to start building, and more importantly fund-raising for?
Why the new (again, all speculative on my part) inclusive “Unity Party” of course, under the new color standard and banner of purple, shredding the iconic “blue” and leaving the “old guard” in its wake. And it just so happens (funny, no?) there’s a matriarch-in-waiting who just so happens to run/own a well founded political organization which can collect their “funds” and fight for their cause of “unity” because, after all, she won the popular vote and was “denied.” So, “She feels your pain!”
Here’s a bit more:
“Are you beginning to see why all that purple now makes sense seen via this prism?
Mrs. Clinton along with Bill, Chelsea, and the entire current working apparatus currently involved in the Clinton Foundation can now pivot and mesh right into a “brand new bag.” i.e., The Clinton Foundation For Political Unity. Or something to that effect, attacking the electoral college as “The enemy of democracy!”
Its logo? A purple banner with “Do it for her – Do it for us!” Or, ________(insert you platitude of choice here)
However, what is currently a far more important attribute? To “Clinton Inc.” that is?
An immediate set up, and destination, to handle all those disgruntled “fund raised” dollars that would most assuredly begin to roll in with near immediacy once fully implemented. Along with a place to now reserve bookings (for very high speaking fees I would assume) for what will obviously be its “royal couple.” Oh, yes: and a reason as to “hold onto” any remaining donations left over in the coffers since the election. You know, to put to good use for the sake of “the new movement!”
There’s only one thing left to prove whether all of this is “tin-foil-capped” or not.
Watch for the formal “Donate here” that is most assuredly to come from CI in the coming months. As I stated before:
“Gotta pay the bills some how, no?”
© 2016 Mark St.Cyr