How To Play the Spin Game (And Why The GOP Is In Meltdown)

by DemFromCT

georgia10 points to the new Newsweek poll that has Bush at 33 and asks the sub-header question "How low can the Republicans go?"? I think they mean poll numbers, not sleaze factor, but it's a good question either way.

Part of the reason the GOP finds itself in "women and children first" territory is because that's exactly what they didn't do. And when it came time to spin the debacle, as (of all people) Lanny Davis points out in TNR, they did everything wrong.

Ask any professional crisis manager--or any academic who teaches this discipline in business schools--to name the worst-handled crisis in the history of the universe, and Exxon's mishandling of the Valdez oil-tanker spill is inevitably at the top of the list. High-ranking Exxon managers found a way to break every rule of Crisis Management 101: They didn't immediately get all of the facts out; they waited too long to even show up at the scene; and, most importantly, they delayed far too long before telling the truth and accepting responsibility. And so the bad news got worse--the story continued to dribble out, and the damage to the environment was nearly exceeded by the damage to Exxon's reputation. In short, Exxon and Valdez became the poster children for how to mishandle a crisis.

Well, Valdez, move over. This week introduced the world to an even more inept performance: Dennis Hastert's handling of the Mark Foley matter. It is, from start to finish, a case study in how not to manage a scandal.

There are two classic business model crises to look at: the Exxon Valdez as what not to do (see above), and Tylenol as what to do. Davis doesn't cover Tylenol, but taking responsibility and inventing the "tamper-proof package" resulted in Tylenol's being a best seller today.

Of course, people in the center of crises rarely see the value of a "tell it all/tell it early/tell it yourself" strategy. So what should Hastert do now to minimize the crisis rather than magnify it? Hint: Don't sink into a defensive crouch. The law of crisis management is: Stop the bleeding first. Don't ask for, or expect, a complete cure, at least not in the short term. Hastert announced Thursday that he took responsibility for what happened, but if the speaker asked for my help, here's the statement I would have him deliver:

    I and my colleagues screwed up--we should have reacted to these warning signals about Mark Foley differently and sought a bipartisan investigation when we first learned of this information. We allowed political considerations to get in the way--that is the only explanation I can come up with as to why we didn't inform the Democratic member of the House Page Board at the time but only the Republican chair. And for that, I and my colleagues are truly sorry.

But he won't, he didn't and he can't. There is no leadership in House leadership, they're afraid to unleash the long knives in the House, everyone behind Hastert in rank (and I mean everyone) is tainted, and Republicans don't know the meaning of the term accountability. They are so far in over their heads they don't even understand how screwed they are (but the Newsweek poll helps to put it in perspective).

Conventional wisdom is that the Republicans have made their decision and to change their minds would be seen as a sign of weakness and corroboration that they're guilty. But they are guilty, at least of negligence, so that typical GOP response of circling the wagons is failing them. They haven't been transparent, they haven't proven capable of investigating themselves in a timely manner, and they haven't stopped the bleeding.

Interestingly, the Dems are getting far too little credit for playing this well. And there seems to be some angst that  Bush isn't being hung on Iraq and policy issues; not to worry. All the polls including Newsweek show that the GOP does poorly all around. That makes it doubly difficult to peddle the story that it was all a Democratic plot. No go, guys. Only Republicans were in charge, and whever leaked the IMs did the kids in the Capitol a service. I'm watching the GOP person on MSNBC humma-humma over the exchange as I write, getting clobbered by the Dem he said-she said spokesperson. Sad.

And as for dumping the GOP over Foley-Hastert-Reynolds rather than Iraq, well, if you can't get Capone for murder and racketeering, get him for tax evasion. Either way, he winds up behind bars.

Comments

[ab initio]

"Only Republicans were in charge, and whever leaked the IMs did the kids in the Capitol a service."

DemfCT, this is the key.

From Iraq to Katrina. From Al Qaeda to spying on Americans. From torture to subsidies to oil companies. The Repubs have been in charge and completely excluded the Dems from even a token participation in the decision making. In every instance the Repubs have showed poor judgement and most importantly have put party above country. They value the privileges of power more than American values or the interests of the American people.

Its time to turn them out!

[katie Jensen]

What lessons do you think americans (if we are lucky) might learn from this shakespearian story about power and corruption? What can we do to come away from this smarter wiser and better for it? That's a discussion I would love to hear. This has been a tragic lesson, so lets make the most of it so that the suffering has a purpose.

[Dismayed]

More damning still is the fact that an honest Republican (there must be one) submitted this to ABC. That provides an indication of just how frustrated this person must have been, and how deep the do nothing position must have been entrenced. How many people did this person go to - how certain he (or she) must have been that his own leadership was not going to do anything. That singular fact tells it all about what was going on with leadership. They knew. They refused to address. They got burned. Sometimes things turn out right.

[Kagro X]

Not to dismay you, Dismayed, but I think it's still quite likely that you'll find out that the Republican who brought this issue to light ultimately did it to stick a shiv in Foley's back, not to protect any children.

[KdmFromPhila]

Hastert's failure to address Foley's behavior before the scandal broke is emblematic of the Republicans' failure to hold the administration accountable. Hastert's failure to admit that he made a terrible mistake is emblematic of the GOP's inability to fix problems. If that second point becomes clear to the public....

BTW, perhaps Hastert knows that an apology will raise questions about other aspects of the scandal that have not come out yet.

See John Avarosis

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/10/second-republican-congressman-snared.html

[DemFromCT]

as to what to learn, Dionne has a good column today in the WaPo.

[John Forde]

I think the Exxon failure is exagerated. They did not handle the crisis well at the time, but the long run the meme held. That is that Captain Joseph Hazelwood was drunk and not watching the ship's radar.

As Greg Plast points out this meme serves Exxon well since it upstages the fact that the ship's radar on the Exxon Valdez had not been functioning at all for about ten months.

[ww in oakland]

Whatever the former page's motivation for turning over the emails, he does seem seem to be part of a growing context of moderate (and not-so-moderate) Republican disgust with the GOP. How many well-placed state party members in Kansas have switched to the Democratic side of the aisle of late? Colonel Wilkerson starts giving acid speeches about the Cabal. Senator Warner stands in front of news cameras and says that Iraq is falling apart.

The most-recent 33% Bush approval rating from Newsweek has to reflect a serious dissatisfaction with and defection from the party by a lot of previously loyal Republicans.

[Dismayed]

You know, KargoX that thought occured to me shortly after posting my comment. More likely, you're right. So much for my one honest republican - Ha. Newsweek has a new article posted by Marcus Mabry with polling numbers of all stripes. They are devistating for the GOP. And even through the roar of this scandal, The absolute failure of Iraq is breaking through. What we are seeing is a thermonuclear implosive train wreck - horrific yet who can look away? The fallout is exceeding my wildest dreams. America is now confirmably sick of these thugs on every level. It's about time.

[Dismayed]

By the way. Keith Oberman hammered Bush in a Special Commentary the other night. I mean HAMMERED him. It's worth finding and watching.

[americanforliberty]

The Foley's pedophila, call it what it is, goes directly to the moral "Republican" base. Haster will have to resign or look for a tidal wave of Democratic new comers to Congress. Because the "moral" Republican base will stay home, hopefully, instead of voting for the Republican Party that hides sexual predators, so they can keep control of the party..i.e. politics over the safety of children with whom they have been entrusted with.

[DemFromCT]

Technically, it's ephebophilia (13-17) as opposed to pedophilia (under 13) unless there's stuff on Foley's computer we don't know about. Both the mental health community and the GLBT community (unfairly tarred with the word) ask for precision.

[Jodi]

First, Foley should be prosecuted as well as the law permits. If there aren't laws that enable prosecution, then we need to rework the laws.

Hastert dropped the ball. The Republicans should punish him for not doing his job (leadership) and will punish them for hurting the party, but he hasn't done anything criminal and probably nothing that the Ethics Committee can punish. Where I was raised, he would fall into that "good ol' boy category," with a penchant for going along, not rocking the boat, and sometimes (here particularly) not very responsible or bright.

To compare this to Exxon Valdez is overblown hype, but then as DemFromCT has pointed out to me, this is a "political blog."

[jwp]

Maybe I missed it.

Did that 21 year old in Oklahoma SAY that he gave "too friendly" email to ABC?

I read the statement by the parents, and they didn't sound like he did it.

And exactly who provided the avalanche of IMs?

We don't know what happened to let loose this story.

Does not matter with regard to Hastert's culpability. But it remains an interesting mystery to me.

[Mimikatz]

Ever since I saw "The Marriage of Figaro" last summer I have been thinking about the "droit du seigneur" that allows the Count to think it is ok for him to seduce his wife's maid on the eve of her wedding (or insist on having the marital privlege himself) that is a central feature of the plot.

I wonder if there was also a reluctance to discipline Foley because hitting on pages and young staff is part of the "droits du seigneur" of a Congressman, at least in their minds. Others have certainly done it in the past. And the apparent inability to acknowledge that it was not just inappropriate e-mails but a failure of supervision and accountability suggests that they really didn't see what was wrong with Foley's conduct, or just didn't care about anything but hanging on to their privileges and power.

One thing we can learn from this is that people who purport to be the party of personal responsibility and to lecture others about their morality had damn well better look at their own conduct too. Pride goeth before a fall, as some book or other had it. And another is that thinking of yourself all the time usually doesn't provide a good role model.

[DemFromCT]

"To compare this to Exxon Valdez is overblown hype"

Only if you think the entire Foley scandal is overblown hype. In fact, it's rather a politically naive point of view to suggest that a scandal that loses soccer and security moms as well as values voters ands social conservatives to the GOP this cycle is "hype" of any kind.

[Ardant]

It seems Hastert's problem is "he who represents himself has a fool for a client." And, he couldn't conveniently take the 5th in public.

Hastert is an enabler of Foley's activities and as a result was unable to place himself in an "advocacy" roll. He has to finagle a defense for himself and those acting under his "leadership."

Not all that pleasant under any circumstance, he comes across even worse in a (negative) high visbility role. A 10-second sound bite/video of him is about all any reasonable person can handle. To see him schlump off after his presser made me cringe.

[ab initio]

The Repub sex predator story certainly has legs. I saw it on TV even today. That's over a week of coverage. Whatever spin the Repubs come up with - wether it is the Dems leaked it before the election or we've got an investigation going or we knew nothing about it or as soon as we found out we got Foley to resign - the story is still on the air.

And all these Repub responses are just made up nonsense and it makes them look even worse. I saw a segment on MSNBC Live this morning where they had a Repub claim that Dems leaked the story when they cut to the Dem he says ABC says they got the story from a Repub congressional staffer. The Repub just made stuff up whereas the Dem had some facts - check with ABC they say they got from a Repub staffer.

Now there is Reynolds running ads pointing fingers at Hastert. These guys have just made the whole situation worse. Instead of dealing with it in a straightforward manner as DemfCT pointed out they tried to weasel out and came across as folks with real poor judgement.

[Jodi]

Yes DemFromCT, overblown.

In sports, you play and you play, and then someone comes along and points to the last error or even to one error in a series of errors, miscues, bad strategy, simplistic ideas, and poor effort as "losing the game."

I don't think that this will go into the books as a "great case in point for mismanagement."

Now the Iraqi war will.

You take away the war, or the aftermath of the Iraqi war DemFromCT and Foley-Hastert would only cause a "blink" for the soccer moms. Maybe a "tsk, tsk, what a shame."

If there had 300,000 troops on the ground when the statue fell as the Army Chief of staff had requested. The General Rumsfeld pilloried him publically. If even a year later there had been placed 300,000 troops on the ground.
If the Iraqi Army hadn't been totally disbanded and essentially set loose upon the country. "We want to build an Defense Force from the ground up."
If there weren't 2,800 dead, if there weren't 25,000 wounded. If. If.
This would hardly cause a stir.

Iraqi is the colossal blunder.

The Cheney Turkey Shoot is another case of overblown hype.
Conspiracy, legal, intrigue, coverup, mismanagement, etc.!
I bet I can look back in your archives, and find the same kind of hysteria at that time, that is present here, now.
And the very issue that caused me to wash up on this shore, the Rove-Plame case. Overblown hype.

Sure Foley-Hastert is another point scored against the Republicans, but think about this folks. Think long and hard if you want your dreams to come true.

AFTER ALL THE TERRIBLE ERRORS AND GRAFT, AND BAD PRESS THE REPUBLICANS HAVE HAD IN THE LAST YEARS SINCE THE IRAQI STATUE FELL, IT STILL TAKES THIS TO ENSURE THAT THE DEMOCRATS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE.

One of my more vocal coaches would say. "P*ss Poor effort, girls. P*ss Poor!"

So to the Dems (dyed true blue)here, I say, you might have eked out a win but it was a p*ss poor effort. The other team just blew it. So how are we going to improve so that we don't need the other team to just go totally stupid?

I personally don't get any good feelings from either the Dems or the Repubs.

[CLK]

Hastert has always been the figurehead Speaker. Delay was the real speaker.
Delay is gone (Thank you, Ronnie Earle)
Now we see the underbelly of the Delay House of Representatives.
Ugly, isn't it?

ELECT DEMOCRATS TO CONGRESS

[jwp]

Jodi, why are you yelling?

CTDem is correct; terrible GOP response. Also, the breach of faith by the Repubs was enormous, and reflective of what kind of an organization they have been these past few years.

Jodi is correct that Iraq is a bigger crime.

I am a partisan Democrat. I am horrified that kids were hurt, but glad that the Repubs were exposed in a way that they cannot easily evade.

Still, I have a nagging unease about where the story came from. The leak to CREW, the phony website -- it sounds professional to me. Creating a legend.

Tricky business to have our politics manipulated -- even when it is in a direction I fervently desire.

[texas dem]

It is true that the press will hate you for the big things and then nail you for the small things. Like the Capone-taxevasion story over and over again.

The press is down on Cheney over Iraq, so when the shotgun story happened they nailed him. They would not have covered that story that way (with the huge emphasis on how "secretive" he was) if they didn't already have more complex and less-easily-digestible reasons for loathing him. Hell, in that case they were actually talking on the air about how it was a metaphor -- a metaphor for the real offenses he'd committed that they weren't talking about.

Ditto Hastert and this scandal. If Hastert had a reserve of goodwill here, he'd be fine and the press would not be pursuing him. He doesn't.

Ditto Clinton and every tiny thing he ever did, and also Dean and the Scream. The press had their own more complex motives, and they expressed those by changing how they covered more simple stories.

It's also true that if they'd won Iraq, every sin of the last six years would have been forgiven. However, they didn't. The hole in Rove's magnificent plan. The consequence of applying CollegeRepublican-level strategic thinking to, you know, civilizations and the whole world and stuff. Iraq is not a campaign stunt, cannot be thought of as a campaign stunt, and, we're relieved to finally learn, cannot be papered over with campaign stunts.

[DemFromCT]

Jodi, why are you yelling? As Coach Hastert says, "There's no one to blame but yourself if you get pinned."

Your points (which are little more than debating points) would only be meaningful if the playing field were equal. It's not. R's have incumbancy, the WH megaphone, a compliant press (even sans the F-word channel, as Cafferty calls it on CNN), and more money than Croesus. Dems have the issues, seen in the polls. And the scandal simply crystallizes everything in a way that voters understand. there's nothing unfair about the issue costing Rs the congress, and Bush his last two years.

[jwp]

I see that I am befuddled.

I guess the "too friendly" email was Louisianna. And the outed IM correspondent is Oklahoma.

But my general question is the same. Has anyone seen any claim that either person directly approached ABC? Or knew about it?

If I have the story right, only the too friendly email went to CREW? Is that the legend? And so CREW only gave that too friendly email to FBI?

Now who can believe this story? That this whole elaborate set up happened only on the basis of the too friendly email? Without knowledge of the true hammer, the IMs?

And then the IMs just happened along?

I have long suspected that Watergate happened because the military did not like detente, and did not like getting cut out of the loop by Kissinger to China, etc.

I suspect there are folks who don't like the stovepipe intelligence organizations, the dingbat approaches to provocations like Ghorbanifar, who don't like Iraq -- or a war in Iran. Didn't like the Plame affair.

Motive. Capability.

If true, it creates a brotherhood of people with a shared success and a shared secret. And temptations for the future.

Or maybe this is all paranoia. Hopefully so. I just wish that a coherent and plausible story about how this scandal unfolded would come forward.

And I wish I had never seen the name "Me" on that Kos diary.

[Dismayed]

I read the memo Denny and co sent out to the House asking them to all call pages to see if any other allegations were out there. And further asking that any 'information' be provided to the 'committee' who will handle it in 'confidence'. Is this the same committee that didn't tell the democratic member about the initial allegations? To be sure, 'confidence' means "and no one else will ever ever ever hear of it again". Meanwhile the committee (under repub control and not telling the dem members anything) will refuse to comment during an ongoing investigation. Man, am I tired of this little gambit. Anyone who knows anything more should send it straight to the press. Congressional investigation has become a synonym for bury in a deep deep hole. The idea of the ethics committe 'investigating' this is just F@$#ing laughable. I mean roll in floor, turn blue, laughable. Investigate? Committee? Congress? Oh, now I've done it. I've cracked a rib.

[Jodi]

Why am I yelling someone asks?

I am yelling because my brother is still due to go back to Iraq, again. My father is safe enough but my brother isn't.

Debating points? DemFromCT, I am not playing to the audience. I know who is here. This is your audience. I couldn't win any argument here unless I were to toe the line, and shout in unison with the rest of the pack. I am just venting a little and maybe complaining because the Democrats are so very ineffective that the Republicans are running roughshod over the country.
If any one party got better character, that would cause the other party to have to improve too. But later good character isn't what politics has to offer.

I am also determining what the chances of people, like that are in this group, changing and becoming more effective. That is a part of what I do. I determine the possibilities, the probabilities of success of ideas. Many times it isn't just the technology or the ideas themselves, but the people involved that determine an outcome.

OK. Enough about me.

LET ME SHOUT THIS!
IS THERE ANY PROOF THAT THE IM's ARE REAL?

THAT THEY ARE FROM REAL PEOPLE.
THAT THIS ISN'T JUST ANOTHER FRAUD LIKE THE PAPERS THAT SHOWED UP FOR 60 MINUTES.
THAT THIS WON'T HAVE A TERRIBLE REBOUND EFFECT?

I don't know anything except that there is nobody listed yet as a recipient of those vile IMs. I noticed up above that other people are wondering what is going on. Where these websites came from.

[jwp]

they are real

Foley resigned

[Kagro X]

Ha ha, yeah.

Hey, maybe Iraq's a forgery, too.

You might as well just stop.

[Rick B]

Jodi,

The emails are real. I also read earlier today that there is a now age 21 ex-page who met with Foley and had sex with him. The relationship started when he was a page, but went further after he left the program. It's not just cyber-sex any more.

Apparently the sex was legal age-wise, but I think one of the laws that Foley got passed made it a federal crime to use the internet to seduce someone.

Consider these as rumors, but I am pretty sure they will check out and be heard a lot more next week.

[Jodi]

Rick B,

I suspect that there is substance there too.
Let me ask this though. Perhaps others thought as much also, and unable to get pages to come forward, put the IMs (falsified) on the WEB pretty much to attract attention, and get the investigation going.

Just remember that Cops can lie, to trick the "perps" into talking or doing stupid things. Also Dems and Repubs as well. (Just not to a Federal Investigator. There you must be a bit more careful.)

Nothing new there.

My guess is that Mr (now) Foley has a lot of dark secrets, that were preying on his mind, and his sister (campaign manager and all) wanted to get him out of harms way, and a good lawyer was also probably involved.

As for it being against the law to seduce someone of legal age on the internet, you have that totally wrong.
If the age is ok, you can run the Green Eggs and Ham routine on them.

~would seduce you, could seduce you, might seduce you, did seduce you, on the shore, on the wheel, in the water, on the ground, in the air, on the net, on the phone, on ...,

[DemFromCT]

Jodi, there's no seriousness about iraq without a Dem congress (or a dem WH.... it was true in 2004 as well, but not enough people listened).

[Sara]

CREW's role in this seems very minor -- they got the E-Mail from a Republican Source, and within hours passed it on to the FBI, and no one else. Anyone in DC would be stupid to hang on to something like that beyond normal transmittal time, and any group like CREW should suspect that someone was trying to compromise them. Afterall, are they not supporting Wilson-Plame's Civil Suit? This apparently happened at about the time that arrangement was announced. There is something about this that just doesn't fit quite right. Anyone else have any insight?

[priscianus jr]

Demfrom CT,
Even though you're right that they've managed the scandal very badly -- quite honestly, if Hastert had come out with your suggested statement -- which I admit is about the best he might have done -- then maybe we could agree he had said what he ought to have said. But in terms of putting out any fires, I can't imagine it would have made much difference. This is BAD, man, and it's not going away.