小布什智囊谈政治

    有效的竞选能够展现出候选人最好的一面，而非塑造一个顾问认为民众希望看到的理想形象。

    选民们说到底也是希望做出正确的选择。真实非常重要。    

    刚刚过去的这次大选非常辛苦。你现在还喜欢你做的事情吗？

    我喜欢“解谜”的说法。这个谜面是“如何将某人从他们现在所在的地方，带到终点？”另外，有意思的一点是，这是一个协同合作的过程。

    领导超级PAC，与组织一场竞选有何不同？

    决策会更容易些。竞选是候选人的表达。因此，你会有朋友、顾问、配偶和一位踏上竞选路的候选人，需要一些时间来消化你提出的建议。

    在超级PAC世界中，复杂性大大降低，因此也更吸引人一点。

    谈谈你自己吧，似乎有些人认为你无所不能。

    是有这样的说法。我是个传说，不是一个人。

    为什么会这样？

    我不知道。我想，可能这么想更容易些。政治科学家们有个词叫“以偏概全”。“以偏概全”是一种理解的捷径，藉此人们可以理解某人或某事的更多方面。

    这对你有利吗？

    你知道吗？事实就是这样。我做不了什么，也改变不了这一点。

    我还得问问福克斯那场关于竞选结果的报道。据称，这对你的职业生涯是一大打击，你这么看吗？

    福克斯的人认为这是一个好的电视节目。他们想有一个机会，解释他们是如何做出判断的。他们坐在那儿说：“我们已经打电话给俄亥俄州，那里有991张选票可分别投给两位候选人。”他们很明智地说：“我们对我们的专家预测小组有信心，但还是请卡尔来谈谈他的担忧。他的担忧合情合理——我们得把它说出来，这也是一个学习机会。”

    译者：早稻米

    Effective campaigns take the candidate at his or her natural best and put it on display, they don't mold a candidate into the ideal image of what the consultant thinks the people want to hear.

    Voters, at the end of the day, are trying to do the right thing. Authenticity matters a lot.

    This last election was exhausting. Do you still like what you do?

    I enjoy the idea of a puzzle. And the puzzle is, "how do you take someone from where they are and get hem to the end?" It's also interesting because it's a collaborative process.

    How is leading a super PAC different from organizing a campaign?

    Decision-making tends to be easier. Campaigns are the expression of their candidates. So you'll have friends and advisors and spouses and a candidate who's on a campaign trail and needs time to absorb the information you're proposing.

    It's just a lot less complicated and, as a result, a little bit more seductive in a super PAC world.

    What about you? There is a kind of mythology around your power.

    There is. I'm a myth, not a human being.

    Why is that?

    I have no idea. I think it's just easier. Political scientists use the term heuristics. Heuristics are shortcuts to understanding something broader about somebody or something.

    Does that ever work to your advantage?

    You know what? It is what it is. There's little or nothing I can do to change it.

    I have to ask about the Fox broadcast of the election results. That was reported as a blow to your career, do you see it that way?

    The Fox people thought it was good TV. They wanted an opportunity to explain how they arrive at a decision. They're sitting there saying, "We've now called Ohio and there's 991 votes separating the two candidates." So they wisely said, "We have confidence in our decision desk, but let's get Karl to voice this concern. It's a legitimate concern -- let's voice it and let's use this as a teachable moment."