I'm sure physicists can find ten ways to make LeBron James's decision to ditch the Cleve for the Heat relevant to their profession, so, hey, especially on a Friday during Congressional recess, political reporters can do the same.
ONE, if you're going to pull a Hamlet, keep those thoughts inside your head. Don't talk to friends who will leak word of your back-and-forth to the media. Don't publicly agonize, allowing yourself to be courted like a king, dramatically raising expectations and hopes in cities with major media markets. Decide quietly. It usually doesn't matter what you do, it matters how you do it. Don't be Mario Cuomo, having a plane idling on a runway waiting to whisk you off to start your campaign and making sure everyone knows about it.
TWO, for things like this, single-topic exclusive interview programs almost never go well. When was the last time that a politician, or, anyone, really, gave an exclusive interview where they revealed their decision and it didn't come off as self-indulgent? Using the Boys and Girls Club as a backdrop looked cynical when it was announced, and it looks like LeBron used the good folks there as a prop.
Which leads to point THREE: self-indulgence is unseemly. As Nate Silver points out, LeBron's Q rating, which will determine the type of endorsement deals he gets, will probably drop after this decision. I disagree with Nate: of course the decision was selfish, which, again, is OK: decisions tend to be selfish as a matter of definition. In LeBron's case, he wants a championship ring, which is quite feasible for a guy who already has lots of money. As Silver himself notes, Brett Favre's Q rating dropped after his public vacillation and indecision, but it rose after he performed quite well as the Vikings QB. That leads to the next lesson: