Like a battlefield commander, politicians prefer to stake out ground of their own choosing and have the fight come to them.
The advantage is clear. By doing so, they get to set the terms (read: talking points) of the engagement.
Columnist David MartinThere's one big catch for flag planting politicians, though. Their competition has to think of them as being worth fighting, or else they'll end up making camp on a lonely outpost. Think Ron Paul.
So far, the two 2016 presidential candidates who've done the most effective trench digging are Bernie Sanders on the left and Jeb Bush on the right.
Though not many folks gave Sanders much of a chance when he launched his White House campaign in April, the often-disheveled Vermont senator has slowly been gaining momentum, and his influence on Hillary Clinton is becoming more evident by the week.
Take, for example, Hillary's Wednesday announcement from South Carolina that as president she'll propose tax credits for businesses who hire and train apprentices. The biggest benefit of doing so, she says, would be a decrease in unemployment numbers, especially among younger workers. This sounds all well and good, but scratch beneath the surface and the Bernie factor is clear.
Over the past couple of weeks, labor groups voiced their frustration with Hillary for not instantly siding with them against President Obama's pending Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, which the unions feel would undermine American jobs.
While Hillary dawdled on the issue, Sanders quickly and vehemently spoke out against it. His reward? The endorsement of the Palmetto State's AFL-CIO chapter just days before Clinton's appearance in Charleston.
According to the AFL-CIO's website, it provides about 450,000 training program and apprenticeships every year across the country. So, it stands to reason that if Clinton's apprenticeship tax breaks materialize, the AFL-CIO would be a direct beneficiary of the program.
What was viewed by most media outlets as a savvy play for Millennial votes was, in reality, little more than Clinton trying to recover the lost support of a very influential Democratic special interest group - one that Bernie is threatening to steal away.
And it's not just special interests that are becoming Bernie fans. Voters are too. A fresh New Hampshire poll had him just three points off Hillary's heels among voters who are familiar with both candidates.
On the other side of the aisle, it's yet to be seen if Jeb will be able to pull the conservative conversation to the center. Just a year or two ago, such a proposition - courting the base to the middle - would be unfathomable, but so far Jeb has refused to give an inch of ground.
Jeb's stances on immigration reform and Common Core school curriculum certainly make him an outlier from the rest of the GOP hopefuls, but unless positive poll numbers start separating him from the pack, it's likely none of them will see the value of immediately charging his ramparts.
To date, Jeb's done a better job of luring policy critiques from the right-wing punditry than from other candidates.
The debates could change all that. Even if the first few end up resembling a game show gone wild, a couple of good performances by Jeb will force his competition to engage him on the issues of his choosing, which is exactly what he wants.
We're a long way from knowing whose pull will ultimately have the most influence on the presidential primaries, but Jeb and Bernie's flag planting has already revealed something very important about the nature of the biggest names in the race: Jeb is willing to risk his candidacy to stand on his convictions while Hillary's footing is more flexible.
How do we know? Well, just ask Hillary how many apprentices the Clinton Foundation has employed to date. The answer? Zero.
David Allen Martin is a syndicated columnist who writes from Chattanooga. You can email him at davidallenmartin423@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @DMart423.