Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton. Many wail that these pair are the most unloved and inept American presidential candidates ever to run.
Wherever you sit with their attributes, one thing stands out from their electioneering. Campaigns can spiral out of control when someone throws in a credibility grenade.
For Sillary it was “wikileaked” Wall St speeches. For the Trumper it was “hot mic” fairer sex views.
I recall something similar from the Bush-Gore race. The subsequent winner slammed late on with a previously hidden DUI charge.
They are apparently deliberately timed to cause maximum damage. Appearing as the November Day-After-First-Monday vote nears.
Hence the term October Surprise.
We encounter such eleventh-hour attacks in solution selling.
A torrid client divorce. Suspect balance sheet items. Divergent strategic intent.
Sometimes there’s plenty of scope for the unscrupulous competing vendor to scandalmonger.
As you may know, for me there is no way ahead with slating the opposition. Indeed, I revel in never even mentioning them. The only thing that matters is best fit to prospect needs.
So when hit with any potential slander yourselves, how should it be handled?
Well, if we were to take a lead from the current politicians’ example, there’s a choice.
One side comes out what they believe as “fighting”. Laying on their own thick slathers of counter-low blows.
The other simply shrugs, and says “they’re free to run their campaign however they want”. And get on with stating their side’s case.
In a few weeks we’ll have the answer which response prevails.
I know which way I recommend for us already.