I was invited up to the New Hampshire Institute of Politics to join a panel on social media and politics.  I was excited to participate and think the discussion went really well.  Below is the full video from the event for anyone who is interested.  Thanks again to NHIOP for being gracious hosts and for my fellow panelists and our moderator for such a great discussion.

Click, Blog, Post, Tweet ... VOTE: Social Media and the Contemporary Campaign from NHLFDA on Vimeo.

With the recent debt ceiling "compromise," more and more people are growing increasingly vocal about how the President is dooming himself by alienating his left base that helped get him elected.  The NYT is even joining in the fray, warning Obama about the rift he's creating.  While there's no doubt that the left isn't pleased with the President and they view recent events as more of a capitulation than a compromise, it doesn't mean he needs to worry about losing their support.

The Republican field of potential challengers is the farthest right it has been in decades.  All of the candidates, except Hunstman, publicly admonished lawmakers for the deal.  The GOP candidates have been relentlessly courting the Tea Party vote by going as far right as they can, even when those sentiments are against the views of the majority of the country.  All of this is happening in the background while the foreground is represented by Republican lawmakers playing chicken with our country's credit rating, limiting collective bargaining in states, and defunding Planned Parenthood in others.  

These things will mobilize Democrats plenty, even if they're somewhat disappointed in Obama.  Democratic voters have now seen what a Republican Presidency and/or Senate majority could look like, and that will be all the motivation they will need to fight in 2012.

Even with these uniting factors among them, there's always the chance that the left base could fall into disrepair or fail at driving home their message to more moderate voters.  However, that sentiment is ignoring the fact that the top of the ticket in 2012 is perhaps the best campaigner, organizer, and messenger in recent electoral history.  If people are wanting to be organized and inspired, then Obama is the one who will do it.  Even with low approval ratings and all of these distractions, he has already started shattering fundraising records.  Just imagine what he'll do when campaigning becomes his primary focus and he has a bankroll to start driving home this message to voters around the country.

Even if they don't formally approve of the job he's doing, Democrats will be out there canvassing, fundraising, and voting for Obama.  I believe the President and his team are well aware of this fact and will continue letting the Tea Party alienate the rest of the country and the GOP start to tear at the seams.  No doubt about it, 2012 is going to be a true fight for both parties, but to think that the President's base won't turn out for him is a failure to understand all of the other factors in play.

There is a stigma against picking fights.  It's seen as crude, immature, and cheap.  Anyone who has been with me after a few drinks knows that I have a different point of view.  Actually, even in the most sober of states, I'm more than happy to pick a fight or push someone a little too far.

It's not because I'm hoping for an actual all out brawl or because I revel in the discomfort of others, but because I understand the emotion that it can evoke.  When speaking to coworkers and employees, if you position an upcoming competitive task as a fight rather than just an objective, they are far more likely to fiercely rally behind the cause, and your opponent is much more likely to feel intense heat from your efforts rather than just an uninspired flicker.

Examples of this strategy can be seen across the business world.  Larry Ellison is the perfect example.  Boisterous and provocative, he doesn't see things in gray, only black and white.  Right and wrong.  Oracle or a contender.  When he hired Mark Hurd, he didn't shy away from confrontation -- he went so far as to step over the line and immediately called into question the entire HP partnership.  He rallied the troops and spit fire, and HP limped away.

The same strategy can hold true for startups and small companies.  One of my favorite marketing strategies of the past year was when Posterous called out Tumblr and encouraged people to "graduate" and switch services.  They could have been coy and hinted at the advantages associated with Posterous, but they instead chose to be blunt and pick a fight.  I don't know the final results of the campaign, but I know it convinced me and was a well trafficked promotion.

While business has good examples of the value in picking fights, the best niche is probably politics.  Look at the tea party -- isn't that what they're doing (maybe the only thing)?  

A couple weeks ago, I was disappointed to read that President Obama was shying away from a public fight and was going to use a loophole to temporarily appoint Elizabeth Warren as the chief consumer watchdog.  

I understand that it's a delicate time of year for politicians, but I cannot understand how it would hurt his standing to publicly advocate and fight for a nominee whose sole charge is to protect consumers from Wall St.  That would be a hell of a rallying cry for the November GOTV efforts.  However, by avoiding the fight, the issue has slipped virtually under the radar and the administration is unable to leverage the fervor that a public fight would stir up.

I'm not saying that you should use a sledgehammer to kill ants -- many situations are still best resolved by discussion and compromise.  However, it's important to remember the value of picking a fight when you want to really create momentum, corner a competitor, or rally the base.  Don't be afraid to throw the first punch.