|
Stretch Your Thinking
I just arrived in San Antonio. This is one of my favorite cities. Tonight, it's to bed early. Tomorrow, it's the River Walk. On the plane down here, I started re-reading a great John Maxwell book called Thinking for a Change (as you may know, I'm a huge fan of leadership books -- and John Maxwell is the best). I like to keep good books and re-read them. Often, I get more out of them the second time around (and this is no exception). One of the things Maxwell does is list the people who have "stretched his thinking." I decided to do the same. Here's the list of people who have stretched my thinking ... ...Keep in mind that the people on this list are people who have stretched my thinking. Some of these folks are famous and some aren't. Here goes:
John Maxwell - Leadership
Mike Murdoch - Wisdom
John Dunagan - Class and Professionalism
Dale Seley - Servanthood
Ronald Reagan - Character
Lyn Nofziger - Humor and Kindness
Paul Wilson - Toughness
Tygh Bailes - Relationships
Harvey Mackay - Networking
... Who is stretching your thinking???
|
Post calls nixin' the estate tax, "lunacy"
Here's the link. Harold Meyerson's primary target is Sen. Max Baucus because he is a quasi-reasonable Dem on the issue. Senator Baucus knocked harshly upon the door of a gathering I was at a while ago to tell us to keep it down...I thought that was pretty funny and worth sharing.
|
What's the score?
The consensus on education of environment, per my earlier hypothesis, is that both parties have viable platforms to use (or not use) on the local and state levels. I somewhat disagree in that many of the most contentious environmental issues are greater is scope than states and thus the Democrat's big-government philosophy is easily pawned off to the federal level, whereas it's tough for the GOP to maintain that, for instance, global warming is a state issue. One reader points out: "You forgot the biggest issue of all: federalism!" That's true, though fighting for states' rights is the Congress' job, and isn't really as much of a local or state campaign issue. So what's the score: The National Conference of State Legislatures has a good page on this...Republicans hold the majority of both houses of the legislature in 21 states; Democrats control 17 states, and 11 states are divided . Republicans control 28 governorships (v. 22). The trend seem to be: GOP dominance on the state level lags behind Congress as far as the rate of accendance, but the GOP has a greater control of the states than the Congress. Party turnover is slower on the state level than in Congress, which means the Democrats are still riding the wave of their 50 year masterdom. If someone sends me info on local council breakdowns or mayoral breakdowns (in cities were those elections are partisan) we will keep this thred goin. Otherwise, suffice it to say, I think, that the GOP is probably most helped on the local level by tax policy and property rights protection--because the Democrats are forced to keep their mouths shut on the issue.
|
From the mailbag on tax policy; test 2
Test two of my hypothesis is whether or not the GOP is advantaged in local and state campaigns because tax philosophy. To the mailbag we go...
Pat writes:
"[Re: property taxes] ABSOLUTELY! We see this advantage in the 20 something state legislatures that passed TABOR ammendments [Tax Payer Bill of Rights; they usually include caps on tax increases barring a referendum]. Also many local principalities and townships have passed their own 'tax freezes' [also, mostly provide for increases with a referendum]. The GOP drives this debate."
Kat writes:
"issues like eminent domain work better on the state level. This is easy to see because since the Kelo Decision there hasn't really been much federal eminent domain legislation signed into law. Local issues, like eminent domain, that impact people directly are the subject of local and state campaigns, and because all the champions of eminent domain protection are Republicans, they are more credible to speak on the issue and Demcrates are left dumbstruck."
OK, this is actually disappointing because these are the only two decent emails I recieved explicitly targeting taxes and property rights. However, I think that Pat is right on the money.
Without having looked at the data, I would venture to guess that the GOP does better in local and state election because the Dems can effectively argue for higher federal taxes by erecting a smokescreen of 'saving social programs' and 'balancing the budget,' but on the local level, you'd be hard-pressed to find a Dem that will outright say "I'm for higher taxes." The GOP ownes this: lower state and federal taxes. This is precisely why, in my estimation, we still have federal estate tax and income tax, but many states have done away with income taxes. Most importantly though, property taxes: find me a Dem that campaigns for higher property taxes! Even if they do so by pushing public education, Dem philosophy does not lower taxes and improve education at the same time, where a campaigning GOPer can call for lower local property tax attracting charter schools or easing zoning for new private education institutions...
If you disagree or want to opine on environment or education issues, email me at asb37@georgetown.edu. See you in a few...
|
HEO Re-Design
Kudos to Human Events Online's Right Angle blog for their re-design. It looks snazzy. And in case you're looking for a dialogue (not a monologue), they now allow you to leave comments on the postings ...
|
The mailbag on social issues; test 1
Does the GOP's philosophical position of social issues make it more efficacious on the local and state level than that of the Dems? Here's what you have said...
Pat writes:
"I am worked for a state senator for 8 years and abortion came up almost weekly. The bar is set really low federally for 'qualifying' for a legal abortion. It's up to the states to decide at what age women need parental consent, or if they need any type of consent at all. It's up to the state how much taxpayers front the cost of birth control or even low-income women's abortions. Democrats and Republicans fight about this in state campaigns all the time so I don't think that pro-lifers are any better suited to tackle the issue than pro-choicers."
Joan writes:
"Democrats rely on Roe v. Wade never being overturned. The GOP is taking the matter into their own hands across the nation and voting on the state level to inact [laws]...that make abortion illegal in-state the minute RvW is overturned...fighting the status quo is always a more energizing position for campaigns."
An anonymous user of yahoo mail writes:
"...and as far as social issues are concerned, let's talk abstinence education. Yes, Republicans in Congress and the President have increased funding but this is always going to be a local issue. Do I want my property taxes funding abstinence education in public schools? You bet I do, but Democrats can just as well argue against it on the local level...there is probably not [an advantage] for Republican campaigns as far as ability to speak to social issues."
Okay, send me comments on fiscal issues, education, and the environment--as well as any stats you have on party breakdown of local and state governments. I'll be back in a few and we'll weigh all this out early this evening.
|
CA Voter Mail
 ... The reports of my departure are exaggerated. In fact, I'm leaving DC for Texas, this afternoon. Next month, I'll be in Orange County, CA. Speaking of which, just south of the OC, there is a special election coming up to replace Duke Cunningham. ...This liberal site has posted some of the Republican voter mail pieces (paid for by the NRCC). I thought you might like to check them out.
|
Update & my hypothesis...you say:
OK--to update those of you that didn't read my last post, Matt's in TX training the GOP Convention and your stuck with me. My hypothesis that I want to explore is that the GOP philosophy makes more sense in local and state campaigns than does that of the Democrats. Email your thoughts to asb37@georgetown.edu I want to get your thoughts on social issues, fiscal issues, education issues, and environmental issues. Then, I want to look at what the score is: how have GOP local and state election results stacked up against the Dems in light of what the Congress and White House looks like. Then we'll make some conclusion. And yes, this post is a copout for having a bunch of stuff to do a work this minute. Send me more emails!
|
...and the apprentice gets the hammer
We have lost Matt for a couple days. The Texas GOP Convention is flyin' him out there to host his renown campaign communication training workshop. If you're not one of the 700 folks already registered to learn from Matt how to become "great communicaters" (caps reserved for Reagan), that's okay: it's in his book... But Matt's absence also means...more of me. So, I have an hypothesis that I want to focus on tomorrow. Send your thoughts to: asb37@georgetown.edu. Here it is, two-fold: 1) Republican philosophy is more conducive to local and state elections than typical Democratic ideology. 2) Republicans fair better in local and state elections (in this latest, most people say, 6th party-system--though I've heard 5th and 7th), and will do so through 2008 With your help, this may just turn into a strategy memo that I'll send to Matt in Texas.
|
In Case You're Wondering ...
... about this back-and-forth we're having (and in case you missed our introduction of him) Boz is a Georgetown University student who is interning with the Campaign Leadership Company, this summer. As you can see, he's already helped "elevate" the level of discourse here at Matt Lewis & The News ...
|
HEO vs. NRO: It Depends...
Wow. This is sort of "Clintonian" ... We're both right. Sort of. Upon further review, it seems President Reagan's favorite "magazine" was National Review. ... But his favorite "paper" was Human Events. Sure, he carefully parsed his words so that they could both be his "favorite." But factually, he was correct: National Review is a magazine -- and Human Events is more of a weekly newspaper ... Take that, you Buckley Lover!
|
Watch yourself Matt! NR was Reagan's Favorite
President Reagan on February 21st, 1983: "I think you know that National Review is my favorite magazine. I've even paid the ultimate compliment of commandeering two of your longtime contributors, Aram Bakshian and Tony Dolan, on our White House staff. NR isn't a favorite only because it's fought the good fight so long and so well, although that would be reason enough. It's my favorite because it's splendidly written, brilliantly edited, and a pleasure to read. In fact, I honestly believe even if I were to suffer from mental illness or convert to liberalism for some other reason - [laughter] - NR would still be my favorite magazine because of its wit and its charm and intellectual quality of its contents." But, Human Events is great too. I know Matt writes for them!
|
The Corner is Fine, But ...
 ... Just remember that Human Events (not NRO) was Reagan's favorite ...
|
Oh Harry...
Of course, from Reid's statements as reported by the NY Times, it would seem he expects his numbers to go up because of this free boxing tickets scandel...it's like when Arnold 'inhaled' or as if Orrin Hatch had four wives.
|
Can Red State Dems Lead?
Will Harry Reid go the way of Tom Daschle? Clearly, his approval numbers in his home state of Nevada are down. No doubt, this is because getting elected in Nevada requires one to be moderate, while being Minority Leader requires one to be a tough partisan. Writing at Hotline's "On Call" blog, Chuck Todd says there may be longterm implications... "If Reid's tenure as Senate Dem leader ends the same way Daschle's tenure does, it could mean that a 'red state' Dem won't be picked as leader for a long time. Being personally safe politically may become a necessary job requirement."
|
Speaker Pelosi?
Good post. I liked this quote from the article ... "Is America ready for Nancy Pelosi's Contract With San Francisco?" - Representative Ric Keller, Republican of Florida.
|
But she's an "Italian-American Catholic Grandmother"
Actually, I don't much care to encourage you to waste your time on "Speaker" Pelosi, as some delusional Democrats and flippant Republicans title her. Though, there is a surprisingly accurate description of Nancy Pelosi (which means a good look on why I hope she gets on TV more) in the NY Times this morning.
If I were a Democratic strategist, I would rally the troops behind Steny Hoyer for Speaker--in the event the Dems pick up the 15 seats they need. Now, I don't believe they will, precisely because of this strategy of vilifying Republicans as right-wing and then dutifully lining up rank-and-file behind most left-wing elements of their party. Case-in-point is the expectation from party leaders that Pelosi will go unchallenged for speaker.
How about Ned Lamont up in CT. Here we have a liberal^n Democrat worth between $90-300 million challenging Joe Lieberman in the primary. And he's got a chance! The Times sings his praises today. Americans respect Lieberman; I see him on campus all the time and he's a very principled dude, for a Dem. But he's not left-wing enough to satisfy a party that is high on he pipe-dream of--not a majority in Congress--a liberal majority in Congress. If that continues to be the goal of the Democrats, more power to 'em--but actually it will just mean more power to Republicans.
|
Boycott Google
Just kidding. But, this is according to a morning post on "The Corner" from Jonah Goldberg: It's kind of sad. They change their homepage logo for all sorts of holidays and occasions. Just last week they paid tribute to Arthur Conan Doyle's birthday. But Memorial Day doesn't seem to rate anything at all. Update: A reader sends this along:
|
... and The News
Happy Memorial Day! Here are a few stories of note, today: There is an article in the Washington Post about how CA Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is moving to the left. That's the real substantive angle of the article, but this excerpt is what caught my attention: "He is very gubernatorial now,' Jeffe said. 'You almost never see him out without a shirt and tie. And he's surrounded by a lot of Democrats, as much as or even more than Republicans." If you've read my recent Campaigns & Elections article, Dress for Political Success, you know that candidates can use their wardrobe to underscore their message. Depending on your goals, a candidate may want to wear a suit (and be portrayed as more "serious"), or roll-up his sleeves and be portrayed as an average "joe sixpack." Clearly, Ah-nold is attempting to be taken more seriously. ... Speaking how image affects credibility, The Washington Post has a piece today about Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley -- and his background as a musician (until recently he played in an Irish Rock band).
O'Malley is currently running for the Democrat nomination for governor. If he wins, he will face Republican Governor Bob Ehrlich. Will O'Malley's background as a local "rock star" humanize him and help him connect with average voters? Or will it show that he is an egomaniac who can't be taken seriously??? That is the question.
... O'Malley's fellow Marylander, Michael Steele, is featured in Bob Novak column today.
It seems Steele has taken a page from Gov. Schwarzenegger (both have decided its smart politics to run against Bush, this cycle.) Unlike Schwarzenegger, however, Steele is criticizing Bush more on style than substance. He is also criticizing him for mishandling Katrina.
I really believe there is a niche out there for a candidate running for president to get to the right of Bush and basically run for president against Bush -- from the right. Steele isn't running for president, but he seems to be the first credible person who is hitting those talking points and walking that tight-rope. Let's see how it works.
... Lastly, I am very impressed with Elizabeth Vargas' comments today about her being replaced as the co-anchor of ABC's "World News Tonight." Her classy comments were not only the right thing to do -- it was good politics, too. It's a long ballgame. I think she may end up back behind that desk in a few years.
|
Thinking of You
Four of my mom's brothers served in the United States Military: Stanley, Harry, John, and Perry. I am thinking of them this weekend. Another good family friend -- Edgar Winfield -- recently passed away. Edgar was a country boy from the mountains of Wolfsville, Maryland before World War II broke out. He ended up going to Europe and was part of the D-Day invasion. I knew him as a great neighbor and friend. This weekend, I am taking a little time to remember these brave men. I hope you do the same.
|
Should Voters "Phone It In"?
A column in today's Washington Post asks: Should we pick presidents the way we pick the American Idol (via phone)? Personally, I should hope not. My take: If a person can't motivate themselves to go to the polls, then perhaps, they are not sufficiently dedicated to casting a ballot.  This, of course, is not even half as bad as the Arizona initiative which would award $1 million to randomly selected voters (in order to encourage voter "participation"). If you ask me, anyone who needs to be bribed to vote is, by definition, not worthy of casting a ballot. Conversely, voters on American Idol actually pay to cast their vote. If nothing else, the people who cast a vote for the American Idol are interested in the outcome -- and are willing to sacrifice something to help pick the winner (although I would certainly not encourage this sort of "poll tax" for voting in a political election, merely going to the polls constitutes a sufficient sacrifice of time and energy). Call me "old fashioned," but I'm all for having an Election Day where most Americans actually go to the polls. The way to increasing voter participation isn't to bribe voters with a chance of winning a million bucks, or to make it "easier" for the disaffected to cast a ballot (by phoning it in). The answer is to find a way to make voters as invested in the outcome of a presidential election as they are in the outcome of American Idol. Of course, that's a tall order.
|
Peggy Noonan - Memorial Day column
I missed this column on Thursday, but it's good and worth a looksie.
|
Nice Cover ... But is that illegal?
 You've got to give the NY Post credit for writing eye-catching headlines ... ... And in other pop-culture news, National Review is listing the top 50 conservative rock songs. I am confident the Pretenders will be surprised to see "My City Was Gone" on the list ...
|
Roll Call: a sign of things to come
 This cartoon from today's Roll Call pretty much sums up what I've been worried about this week. Republicans must defend seperation of powers, but it's going to bite us in the rear a little bit. Here's how you respond to a liberal that drops a line on you similar to the above RJ Matson cartoon: "uhh, the first three statements are categorically false." Per the 4th, it's true.
|
Over at RedState, Mike Krempasky has the House Leadership Talking Points regarding the seperation of powers (as it pertains to the Rep. Jefferson incident) ...
|
Luntz frames immigration debate
Daily Kos got their hands on Frank Luntz's new framing document regarding how the GOP should talk about the topic of Immigration. Here's the PDF.
|
NYT Squirming over "Hastert Decree"
I always smile when the NY Times tries to incriminate Republicans for perverting American democracy. The editorial board clings to an understanding of democracy tantamount in accuracy to that which I held in 2nd grade social studies class. And I went to public school. Today, the NYT opines through the hazy lens of a "people's" democracy on Speaker Dennis Hastert's "triumphalist decree that no bill [on immigration]...can be put to a vote unless a majority of his Republican caucus...agree to it." Of course, Hastert is right that "the job of the speaker is not to expedite legislation that runs counter to the wishes of the majority of his majority." The Times calls Speaker Hastert the most "hard-core" of "House obstructionists." Aside from the comical nature of vilifying Republicans as obstructionist after the Democrat's circus these past three years, I think the Times actually believes the proper role of the Republican leadership is to support the passage of Democrat initiatives. The Times is pretty much crying foul on a simple check and balance in the American system. The Senate Bill, from a conservative's perspective, is watered-down and impotent. (If you haven't read the Ed Meese op-ed from yesterday' it's worth a look.) Let's hope that Hastert sticks to his guns and empowers our majority to do what it's supposed to do. I am delighted to see a little hard-nosed gusto from the Speaker. With every major media outlet reporting on an alleged rift between conservative voters, Congress, and the President, it's about time that the leadership stand-up and defend the principles it was elected to fight for. Even if it seems from the NYT's rant that the "Hastert decree" is a political liability, it isn't. We want the NYT to squirm. Kate O"Brien and Richard Lowry are absolutely right in the current issue of National Review: "Once Republicans have given away the premises of their governing philosophy, they have no foothold to resist Democratic initiatives." Go get 'em Denny.
|
Words Matter
... According to the latest Diageo/Hotline poll, "45% don't believe being a ' politician' is a 'noble' profession (but 60% believe being a member of Congress is 'noble')." This, of course, is like insisting you are a "custodial worker" (and not a "janitor").
|
I spoke at American University today on the topic of Recruiting & Motivating Volunteers. One of the students asked me if I had read this book called The People Principle. (He said it was very consistent with what I teach). ... Of course, this interests me greatly. If you've read this book -- and have thougths about it -- please email them to me.
|
Infamous Democrat political consultant Bob Shrum disputes his presidential consulting record: "The 'curse of Shrum' is that, supposedly, I have worked for every losing Democratic presidential nominee in six elections, but never for Bill Clinton. Wrong, wrong, wrong, writes Robert Shrum."
|
Pelosi wrist-slaps Jefferson
House Minority Leader Pelosi today released a request for Congressman Jefferson's resignation: Dear Congressman Jefferson:
In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation from the Ways and Means Committee.
Sincerely,
Nancy Pelosi
Democratic Leader
Yea right. Pelosi will no doubt be able to funnel through the media a positive message of combating internal corruption--just like Democrats circumvented a political albatross when 40 Democrat Senators were revealed to have taken money from Jack Abramoff. Hopefully someone will pick up on the inconsistency here: Pelosi calls for Jefferson's resignation from a committee, but calls for Tom Delay and Bill Ney's resignation from the House. Weird. Twill be interesting to see if she continues to employ her popular "culture of corruption" invective...
|
As a movement conservative, you can count on me to tell you about competing sites. As such, I'm recommending you check out the blog of a fellow Republican: Bill Pascoe. ... According to National Journal's " On Call" blog, Pascoe has: - smuggled cash and computers behind the Iron curtain
- was a Hill CoS--is a former RNC spokesman and chief speechwriter
- is a former nationally syndicated radio talk show host
- wrote a column for the Washington Times for 10 years'
- worked for the State Dept. on Central America
- had the thankless job of being Bush-Quayle '88's liaison to conservatives
- wrote his master's thesis on, among others, Sen. Chris Dodd
- managed, in recent cycles, the campaigns of (ahem) Alan Keyes, David Vitter, Bret Schundler and Doug Forrester
- runs Urquhart Media LLC today with three partners.
It's a good read. Enjoy!
|
Introducing ... The Boz!
Political sagacity does not usually accompany youthful impetuousness. To try and prove me wrong, I welcome on board Alex Bozmoski, a seemingly perspicacious Georgetown University undergraduate. Boz will be joining the CLC team for a couple months, so we can look forward to his strategy memos. He is 20 years old from Wisconsin, and is the founding chairman emeritus of Take Back Georgetown Day, the largest entirely student run conservative conference in the country. He served as the Chief-of-staff for the GU College Republicans and ran his own conservative print publication, The Right Idea, for two years circulating 5,000 monthly in 8-states. At Georgetown, Boz researches climate change policy and is starting to form a niche as a Republican environmental politics strategist. He will be studying at Oxford University all next year. Welcome to the team Boz!
|
Dennis Prager has a column out about the dumbing down of the liberal lexicon: Instead of feeling the need to thoughtfully consider an idea, most liberal minds today work on automatic. One-word reactions to most issues are the liberal norm.
This is easy to demonstrate. list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:
Racist
Sexist
Homophobic
Islamophobic
Imperialist
Bigoted
Intolerant
And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:
Peace
Fairness
Tolerance
The poor
The disenfranchised
The environment ... I guess John Kerry and Joe Biden haven't been paying attention to these talking points. They've never had a one-word answer in their lives.
|
DeVos Rocks Technology!
Enough Ned Lamont. On the Republican side, I like this Dick DeVos ad, titled: " Stay With Us." As the Detroit News writes: "The ad is based on a vlog, or video blog, that is featured each week on the DeVos campaign Web site. The vlogs generally feature the Ada businessman out on the campaign trail." The campaign is even utilizing technology to talk about the ad ... "It's a great way for people to have a real-time update on the activities of the campaign," DeVos campaign spokesman John Truscott said during a video chat with reporters Friday." Vlogs? Vchats? Kudos to the DeVos vCampaign for utilizing technology!
|
In Defense of Richard Viguerie
Today, writing in Roll Call, David Winston, has a stinging retribution of Richard Viguerie's Washington Post opinion piece: "Bush's Base Betrayal." Right off the bat, Winston asks, "how can Viguerie expect to be taken seriously when he advocates a strategy that would elect House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to Speaker and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to Senate Majority Leader?" Were this conclusion intellectually honest, it would indeed be an indictment against Viguerie. But Viguerie never advocates that conservatives should sit out the upcoming elections. Nor does he wish that Democrats will control Congress. Instead, he merely advocates supporting conservative candidates directly, rather than working to fund the national party committee's. It's fine for Winston to disagree with this assertion, but he should not misrepresent Viguerie's position. Of course, his "out" is the word "strategy." He writes that Viguerie's "strategy" would lead to Democrats winning control of Congress -- but, of course, that is opinion being stated as fact. Next, Winston is critical of Viguerie's opposition to Bush's "compassionate conservatism." I'm surprised that he takes such umbrage to this. After all, many fiscal conservatives have long been critical of what Viguerie cites as "the greatest increase in spending since Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society." Again, you may disagree with Viguerie's opinion, but he is certainly not alone is pointing out where Bush has strayed from a fiscal conservative orthodoxy. Most concerning, Winston criticizes Viguerie's position that conservatives should stand on principle, saying, "The last time Republicans suffered a temporary defeat, they didn't regain the House for 40 years, and a lot can happen in 40 years." This is where it becomes clear that these two men are coming from completely different worldviews. Most likely, Viguerie views examples of "standing on principle" through the lens of a conservative. He remembers losses that the conservative movement suffered -- like Goldwater in 1964 -- or Reagan in 1976 -- that ultimately made conservatives stronger. Most would agree these losses were extremely traumatic to conservatives (at the time), but they ultimately paved the way for conservative victories in 1980 and 1994. At the end of the day, it is clear that the way you view Viguerie's column depends on your worldview: If you are a conservative first, you agree with him. If you are a Republican first, you don't. Winston is entitled to his own opinion -- but not his own facts. In this instance, he has misrepresented Viguerie's position. Winston may simply resent Viguerie's willingness to break Reagan's "11th Commandment" and openly criticize a fellow Republican (it does not escape me that the only way for a Republican to get a op-ed in the Post is to criticize a fellow Republican.) But I think that debate is a healthy bi-product of Democracy and should be encouraged, not discouraged. I also find it odd for someone to attack Viguerie for merely re-stating positions that have long been advocated by many in the conservative movement. Lastly, I think that as a founding father of the conservative movement, Richard Viguerie has earned our respect -- even if we disagree with him.
|
Matt's Summer Tour!
This summer, I will be hitting the road to conduct campaign training in our two biggest states: Texas and California! Here are some details about our Summer Tour: - June 1 - San Antonio, TX - TX GOP Convention: This one-day grassroots workshop will take place at the TX GOP Convention -- but you don't have to attend the convention to attend the training! Click here for a pdf flier about the event. And click here to register! (The cost is just $10)!
- July 8 - Orange County, CA - "Teaching Elephants to Run" seminar: I'll be in Orange County, CA this July for a day's worth of top-notch campaign training. We will cover everything from Message to Get-Out-The-Vote. This training is actually FREE to Republicans. To register, email dsparks@sparksrealty.net.
|
This new ad says we should censure Jimmy Carter. On one hand, they are right; Carter is horrible. On the other hand, isn't it weird to run a negative ad against a guy who isn't running for office?
|
Last week, I posted the Ned Lamont TV ads and praised them for being "pretty darn creative." I received a lot of flak for that. Some people felt they weren't serious enough. Others felt they did not utilize emotion. The critics were right ... Sort of. Regardless of how you feel about Lamont's challenge to Senator Joe Lieberman, at the end of the day, the ads worked (as is evidenced by the fact that Sen. Lieberman will have to face Ned Lamont on August 8). The bottom line is that the ads were effective at generating interest in Lamont. It got people talking about him, posting the ads, and forwarding them to their friends. And when it comes to raising money nationally from the net-roots -- that matters. But the critics of the ads are correct, too. The ads were dangerously reminiscent of Howard Dean's campaign (in the sense that they are about "process" rather than selling the "benefits" of his candidacy). Lamont's ads were creative enough to catch our attention. That's a good start. But to win, Lamont must now do what Dean never did ... pivot into a more traditional campaign. That will require money, grassroots (not just net-roots) support, and a message that resonates with average Democrat voters. The odds are long. But it will be fun to watch.
|
The Opposite Show
 The reports of his bearded demise were premature, it seems. Al Gore is back in vogue. In truth, his potential political resurrection isn't really a surprise to me (Nixon had nine lives, too). And, in truth, I don't expect Gore-mania to sweep the country in a major way -- but he might just make a comeback in the eyes of the media. Here's why: Timing is everything, and often the key to making a comeback is simply to wait your turn -- and hope your opponents will fall out of favor. You will, in turn, look like the wiser alternative. The "wait-things-out" strategy has worked for politicians of all stripes (both good and bad, by the way). The goal is to wait until the world turns around to your way of thinking. Think of Ronald Reagan at his ranch, just waiting until 1980 came around ... Once in a while -- even when things are running relatively smooth (think 1992) -- people want change. This is true, not only when it comes to ideas, but in terms of style. Voters, it seems, like to switch back-and-forth between political "styles." That's why each president is usually (in some way) the opposite of his predecessor. Often, this is arbitrary. It's a matter of timing. For example, if FDR had been president when the stock market crashed, voters might have ironically ousted this rich out-of-touch New Yorker in favor of a leader more like Hoover (Hoover's leadership style -- not just his policy differences -- would have been seen as "refreshing," the theory claims.) But history didn't work out that way. Hoover got blamed for the Depression, and voters looked for a man who was his opposite ... FDR. This is precisely the point Sabastian Mallaby makes in today's Washington Post. But in this case, he is arguing that George Bush has made Al Gore more palatable: "...President Bush and the congressional Republicans have created a Ross Perot moment: a hunger for a leader with diagrams and charts, for a nerd who lays out basic facts ignored by blinkered government. By their contempt for expert opinion on everything from Iraqi reconstruction to the cost of their tax cuts, Republicans have turned Diagram Gore into a hero."Regardless of whether or not Gore is the alternative to Bush, I think it's safe to say the public will look for someone who is, at least, stylistically quite different from Bush (this is good news for McCain). This isn't a knock on Bush. Eight years of the same leader is a long time for a generation who grew up on video games. We have a short attention span, and it may just be that we are applying it to our politicians, too. It's sort of like the Seinfeld episode where George does everything the opposite of the way he normally would -- and it works! (Instead of tuna on wheat, it's chicken salad on rye.) And, all of a sudden, he's Mr. Popularity. Is Al Gore the chicken salad on rye to George's tuna on wheat? Only time will tell. But like I said, these things work in cycles. The other day I saw a car with an " I Miss Bill" bumper sticker, and it made me think: Everyone was sick of Bill, ten years ago. But today, he is rated more favorably (in many ways) than President Bush. It just goes to show you "the grass is always greener"... Granted, there are many who have big policy differences with Bush, but that doesn't account for the average American who doesn't pay close attention to policy. Could Bush's problem be that we're bored with him? This may sound like an unsophisticated analysis, but how much do you want to bet that in five or ten years, the public will be clamoring for another president who "talks like a normal person," " isn't a policy wonk," and "isn't into nuance"? I can almost guarantee you it will happen. But first, there will plenty of time for the wonks with graphs and charts. They're coming. Watch out.
|
And The News ...
... Writing in today's Post, conservative leader Richard Viguerie has some interesting thoughts about President Bush -- and how he's lost the conservative base. Viguerie makes some good points -- and as a founding member of the conservative movement, he's certainly qualified to make them. ... I've written extensively about the liberals' attempt to "re-brand" themselves as "progressives." Today, George Will's column gives a bit of the history behind the terms and describes why, at least one self-described liberal, doesn't want to give up the liberal nametag.
|
Christine Todd Whitman's moderate group, It's My Party Too, has launched their website ...
|
Teamwork & Communication (Boston Style)
Thomas Boswell has a very interesting article about teamwork and communication (oh yeah, and the Boston Red Sox). Whether you're talking about people on a political campaign, co-workers in your office, or even members of a sports team, communication is key. This is an instructive read (and there are also some good references to The Big Lebowski in there, too) ...
|
Traditional Campaigning vs. the Internet
Hotline's " On Call" blog has some good info on micro-targeting, today. They also confirm some of the things I've been saying about the use of the internet on political campaigns: "Despite the emerging concept of using the Internet as a political advertising tool, parties are still hesitant to utilize the medium in terms of message delivery. ... although it is useful for early-on fundraising, branding and communications with a candidate's base, the real crunch for voters comes within the final weeks of a campaign. More intrusive media, such as TV, Cable and Radio, have proven to be more effective. Thus, campaigns are less likely to take away dollars from traditional forms of targeting."
|
As you know, I'm a fan of Joe Klein's new book (Politics Lost). I just stumbled across this old article of his that is along the lines of his book: The Perils of the Permanent Campaign
|
Three RNC operatives have been found guilty of criminally violating federal communications law for their participation in jamming the Democrats' phone lines in New Hampshire in 2002. On the surface, the plan sounded like good old fashioned Lee Atwater "Hardball" politics. Campaigns are tough and if the goal is to outmaneuver your opponent -- they certainly succeeded. In fact, one of them was quoted in the Washington Post saying . . . [it's] military common sense that if you can't communicate, you can't plan and organize." He's right. ... But the problem is the military analogy isn't. While political campaigns have some resemblance to war, our enemies are Americans and we are subject to domestic U.S. law. (They say "all's fair in love and war," but politics isn't included in that saying -- for a reason.) Of course, the specific problem is that it violated federal communications law -- something that I have no problem believing your average political operative who is just trying to win a race would not realize. Sometimes people just get caught up in this stuff and follow along. Again, this poses a real problem for young political operatives. It is easy to get caught up in the excitement of a campaign. And, unless you are a lawyer, how do you know exactly where to draw the line between running an ambitious and aggressive campaign -- and breaking the law? That's why it's important to have been trained in leadership and to have a solid philosophical foundation before getting involved in the partisan game. But, here's the part that nobody else has mentioned: Political operatives (on both sides of the aisle) love to sit around late at night and tell stories of things they've done that make this phone-jamming thing look tame. There is a long storied tradition of stuff like this. In fact, there are parts of the country where pulling-off something like this would earn you "bragging rights." The difference, in this case, is that they got caught. Political operatives should take this as a lesson: We must be careful not to get so caught up in the passion of a campaign that we lose sight of ethics -- and the law.
|
There is a saying that real diplomacy is telling someone to "go to hell" -- and having them look forward to the trip! This is a skill that Tony Snow has, and Scott McClellan, didn't. McClellan could never get them to look forward to the trip. He was always staying "on message" -- but he didn't go to the trouble of trying to disguise it. He didn't' realize that this was a courtship. What Scott McClellan never got is that the real skill in parrying a question is to make the reporter feel that you answered it -- or at the very least -- that you care. Otherwise, you're not really "spinning" anybody but yourself.
Conversely, Snow seems to understand this lesson. As Dana Milbank notes today: "Reporters leaving the 40-minute session would discover that, like his predecessors, Snow had imparted no useful information to them. But he had done it in a far more entertaining manner. " Snow also has a real advantage in that people respect him. He has credibility -- and he must guard it with his life. My advice to Tony Snow is to never be put into a situation where he is out-of-the-loop with the rest of the administration. He must continue to be more forthcoming than his predecessor (this will be good for him -- and the president). Based on yesterday, it looks like Snow is off to a good start. As Don Imus said this morning: "I don't know him, but I like him." They used to say that about Reagan. It's a good sign, indeed.
|
Tony Snow Has What it Takes...
Today was Tony Snow's first White House briefing. You could tell immediately that his stage presence was better than Scott McClellan's. It was also a nice touch that he talked about his personal battle with cancer. If nothing else, it sent a message that he is a real person, capable of going "off script." Granted, there will be tough days ahead. But it is immediately clear that Mr. Snow has more natural ability for this job than his predecessor did (what else would you expect from a TV anchor). I wish him luck.
|
 Pollsters are increasingly worried about the growing number of Americans who no longer have a home number. (As you may know, many Americans are increasingly moving toward using their cell phones, exclusively.) The problem is, pollsters call landlines. Currently, about 1-in-4 landline users say they make give it up and go exclusively with a cell phone. Complicating matters, cell phone-only users are "different" from the rest of America. So excluding them from your sample will increasingly skew the results. (So what kind of people don't have landlines? Click here.) At the end of the day, it is an issue that pollsters will have to work out (if they want to be able to provide an accurate reflection of the electorate). According to the AP, "Cliff Zukin, president of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, suggests that the survey research field is heading for a new world where surveys 'will be conducted via mixed modes, pretty much at the respondent's choice."
|
13 Campaign Tips from the Left ...
|
Dan Balz has a good analysis of the policy-side of Bush's speech. It's also a good reminder of how presidents are rarely defined by the agenda they campaign on (FDR is a prime example of this). More often than not, presidents must respond to what's thrown at them. Here is an excerpt: "President Bush once saw the immigration issue as an opportunity to expand the Republican Party by attracting more Hispanic voters with a message of tolerance and inclusion. His nationally televised speech last night was an admission that the issue has now become a problem that, if not managed carefully, could quickly become a historic liability for his party."
|
 I'm not going to comment on the content of Bush' speech, tonight. I'll leave that to bloggers (and the press). Instead, I would like to comment specifically on Bush's presentation style. Okay, so it wasn't the Reagan Challenger Speech. ... But (aside from the " false start" that some networks aired) he did seem relaxed and comfortable tonight -- more so than he's seemed since his first term (that's a long time to be uncomfortable). Speaking of which, for some reason, I've recently seen a few clips of Bush from the 2000 campaign. He was much better then. He may not have been polished -- but he was more real. This seems a bit counterintuitive; You would think that a politician would become a better communicator with experience. But I think the opposite is often true of presidents: The stress takes a toll on them. They start to realize that every word they say will be parsed, and that has to really be hard on your confidence. In any event, Bush's speech tonight seemed to be a bit of a return to the old Bush. Too often, his speeches feel like he's just going through the motions. Tonight, it seemed like a real conversation. Maybe he's finally getting his groove back? Do you agree? Email me your thoughts at MLewis@CampaignLeadership.com. (Remember, I'm talking about his style -- not the substance).
|
He's Good When it Don't Count ...
Is there something about losing a presidential race that makes you, well, better? (Remember how Bob Dole suddenly became funny after losing in '96?) ... Or is there something about the process of running for president that makes you, well, worse (think Al Gore or John Kerry). Hotline reports on John Kerry's recent influx of charisma: "In the past few months, Kerry has presented a side of himself very different from the one the public saw during the 2004 campaign ... he is looser, clearer and more compelling." Kerry is considering another run for the WH in '08 and "people close to him certainly sense a change in [his] attitude". Ex-Sen. Gary Hart (D-CO): "He's much more outspoken, much more decisive and much less likely to give credit to this Administration." "If Kerry had run in 2004 using his 2006 language, (Pollster Frank) Luntz argues, he might be president now.
|
It's informative to study how political operatives rise thru the process to ultimately become referred to as someone's "political guy." As an operative, it's the ultimate compliment to be identified with an up-and-coming candidate. People say things like: "You know Lyn Nofziger ... he's Reagan's guy." Well, The Fix has an interview today with Pataki's political guy. Here is an excerpt: "Rodriguez brings two unique skills to the table when it comes to presidential politics -- Iowa expertise and a deep knowledge of the Hispanic community."... And speaking of politico's who have risen thru the ranks: Howard Kurtz has a good profile today on Tony Snow. It turns out he used to be a long-haired "hippie." Who knew?
|
The Great Delegator Meets an MBA President
When it comes to managing and motivating people, I'm a fan of the Reagan model. In fact, some have called Reagan, "The Great Delegator." Recently, I was teaching this principle (as it relates to motivating campaign volunteers) and a student asked me whether or not Bush's problems were caused by his following my theory (I'm not sure if this was an attempt to make me look bad, or a legitimate question). ... My answer was that Reagan's model of delegating authority probably did allow for Iran/Contra to happen -- but it also won the Cold War. In short, there are trade-off's involved. I also pointed out that delegation assumes you are giving authority to smart and good people. Reagan's first term (with Baker, Meese, and Deaver) did not involve an Iran/Contra scandal. It was only when these three left his side that problems arose. This article in Slate appears to address the question. I thought I would share it with you: "Bush's stated management model -- appointing good people, delegating authority to them, and holding them accountable for results -- reflects some common-sense notions he picked up at Harvard Business School. His actual management practice, however, has not followed that model. In practice, Bush tends to appoint mediocre people he trusts to be loyal, delegates hardly any decision-making power to anyone beyond a few top aides, and seldom holds anyone accountable. These failures are related. If you don't give people real authority, you can't reasonably hold them responsible for what follows. What has grown up around the president as a result is not an effective political machine, but a stultifying imperial court, a hackocracy dominated by sycophants, cronies, and yes men.
|
George Will has some thoughts on Joe Klein's new book: Politics Lost. Read my thoughts on the book here and here ...
|
Boehner a Fan of Human Events' Blog
|
Campaign Training at TX GOP Convention
If you're a Republican who is planning on being in the San Antonio area on June 1, I wanted to encourage you to attend our campaign training at the TX GOP Convention. ( Here is a PDF flier with the details). Topics will range from Voter ID & Targeting -- to Developing a Persuasive Message -- to GOTV Strategies. The training and the TX GOP convention (which is actually bigger than the national GOP convention) will take place at the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in San Antonio. Registration is easy: Just fill out this " pre-registration" form. (Note: You do not have to be a delegate or alternate to attend the school.) For more info about our campaign training seminars, check out www.campaignleadership.com. I hope to see you on June 1!
|
 National Journal has a good review of liberal Geoffrey Nunberg's book: Talking Right: How the Right turned Liberalism into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York Times Reading, Body Piercing, Hollywood Lovi (Hardcover) .Here an excerpts from the book -- that may inspire you to read it: "The right's most notable linguistic achievement isn't its skill in coining distracting catchphrases, but its success in capturing language of everyday political discussion,' Nunberg argues. And the chief aim of his book, according to the Stanford professor, is to help the left 'recapture [that] ordinary language."
|
Conservatives turning on Bush
It took long enough, but the media is finally talking about conservative dissatisfaction with the Bush Administration. But my question is: Who on the Right -- has the right -- to criticize? As far as I can tell, fiscal conservatives, like Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth, are the most credible conservative critics of Bush. After all, fiscal conservatives have been critical of Bush's spending from day one. I give them points for staying true to their principles. Additionally, folks who view illegal immigration as the defining issue, get a pass from me. Bush has never hid his pro-Immigrant position -- but it is fair to say the issue has become much more visible in the last six months. Regardless of how you feel about the issue, these folks have every right in the world to draw a line in the sand. But when it comes to some of the critics, I'm sorry, it just seems a bit opportunistic to me. The public is fickle. "Nothing succeeds like success," they say (and they are right). When a politician is doing well, everybody jumps on the bandwagon. We love to build them up -- and we love to tear them down. Conservatives are not immune to this phenomenon. Last night, the Baltimore Orioles had something like a pathetic 15,000 people in the seats at Camden Yards. How much do you want to bet that if the O's were in first place, every seat in the house would be full? Patton said it best: "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser." Likewise, if Bush's approval ratings were at 60 percent, would conservatives be willing to speak out about his policy positions?
|
 Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, (R-MD), puts a lot of stock in the power of bumper stickers. According to The Frederick News Post, he is encouraging supporters of Scott Rolle's Attorney General Campaign in Maryland to put a bumper sticker on their cars. Here's why: "Let me tell you what that bumper sticker does," he said, "it's worth about $250 in advertising.'
A lot of people will not vote party line, nor will they vote on issues, he said.
'They're going to vote for a perceived winner, and there's nothing like having a perceived winner if about every third car you see on the road has a Scott Rolle bumper sticker on it,' Mr. Bartlett said. 'That sends a message."All I know is: Out on the road today, I saw a deadhead sticker on a cadillac. A little voice inside my head said ... That sends a message!
|
 Anyone who knows Nebraska -- and Nebraska football -- knows how unbelievable this is. Tom Osborn led the University of Nebraska to 3 national championships. He had never won a race with less than 82 percent of the vote. But he lost, yesterday. ... In politics, anything can happen. Aside from the fact that the Osborn camp may have initially taken the race too lightly, it also appears that Heineman's campaign outworked them on the ground: According to National Journal's On Call blog ( password reqd), Heineman's campaign manager Carlos Castillo "attributed his win to his GOTV ground game, including micro-targeting voters, and appealing to the agricultural vote in the GOP rich 3rd Congressional district. "
|
 The Washington Post has a big front-page story today, titled: " The Year of the Black Republican?"COLUMBUS, Ohio -- When J. Kenneth Blackwell took the stage here on May 2 to claim the Republican nomination for governor, he became something more than his party's standard-bearer in a bellwether state.... "We've gone from a model of outreach to a model of inclusion,' (RNC Chairman Ken) Mehlman said. 'Outreach is a top-down approach. Inclusion says, 'Let's find some really good people and encourage them to run for office."
... Several months ago, I wrote an article rating Blackwell and the other Black GOP candidates. Today, my predictions look more accurate than ever. Let's see if my predictions continue to hold up...
|
According to the USA Today, there are five big issues for Election 2006 ...
|
Democrats Over-Promise?
More and more Democrat leaders are predicting they will take control of the House of Representatives, this November. These brazen pronouncements seem to defy traditional political wisdom; typically it is smarter politics to lower expectations -- not to raise them. Bill Clinton followed this sage advice. Prior to the 1992 Democrat primary in New Hampshire, his team convinced the press that a second-place finish would actually prove his political resiliency (he had just come out of the Gennifer Flowers and draft controversies). By setting the bar low (at second place) he was able to "spin" the story to make it look as if he had won. That "victory" made Bill Clinton, "The Comeback Kid" (even though Paul Tsongas had actually beaten him by eight points). The expectations game works equally well for Republicans. During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush's campaign wisely downplayed his debating skills. The Bush campaign's method was counter-intuitive but brilliant. In essence, they said if Bush merely survives the debate, he will have "won." Likewise, if Al Gore doesn't mop the floor with him, Gore will have "lost." It worked. Bush gained momentum merely by surviving the debates. One of the most important tools in public relations is to under-promise and over-achieve. Set the bar of success low for yourself. Build your opponent up to a level he cannot achieve. This is counterintuitive to the self-promoter in you who wants to hype things. So why are the Democrats doing the opposite? There is another theory in politics that says change can't happen unless people first believe it can happen. By hyping their chances, Democrats are providing their base with an important commodity: hope. They are also injecting excitement into the race. In short, they are making people believe they can succeed. Of course, this is a huge gamble. By hyping their chances, the Democrats have put themselves in a "do-or-die" situation. Winning a few seats will no longer deserve celebration. Anything less than taking control of Congress will now be viewed as a disappointment.
|
The Fix has a good interview today with Chris Esposito of the liberal group: Emily's List.
|
We pride ourselves on being educational. As such, we bring you the following definition: "Stump": According to our source: "The term 'stump' refers to early political rallies when candidates may have stood on tree stumps to address the public. The tree stumps were replaced by platforms on wagons, and finally by stages."
|
We're beginning to see Rove's plan for '06. The question is: How many times can you go to the well?
|
Patrick Kennedy Has Nothing to Fear...
 Earlier this week, The Fix somewhat quixotically asked if Rep. Patrick Kennedy's controversial car crash puts his Congressional seat in jeopardy. But as David Fahrenthold writes in today's Post, frankly, the voters in Rhode Island don't care about the scandal. Incumbents almost always win. But some states take this maxim to another level -- they will forgive their beloved incumbents of almost anything. Reading Fahrenthold's article, it becomes obvious that Rhode Island fits into this rubric. To be sure, many politicians have been taken down by scandals (in fact, I could name several this year). In fairness, the Fix does not say one way or the other whether or not Kennedy's seat will be "in play." Still, it is a common lament that "inside-the-beltway-types" tend to overestimate the effect personal scandals will have back in the district. As far as I can tell, there are two good reasons this phenomenon exits: For one, there is a bias toward controversy. We can all agree it is more interesting to cover a close race than a blowout. So it is in the best interest of political observers to overestimate the closeness of a political contest. But probably the greatest reason for this disconnect is that it is impossible for any of us to understand the inner-workings of all 50 states. There is an inconsistent standard: A career-ending controversy in one part of the country may be laughed-off in another. Each state has a unique political culture, which greatly influences the way they view their elected officials. National journalists must rely on their experience -- as well as their local contacts -- to give them insight into the voters. And sometimes, this gives them an inaccurate picture. Some states, for example, view their incumbents as a reflection of themselves. As such, any outside attack on the incumbent is viewed as a personal attack on the citizenry. People who have followed Rhode Island politics realize the affinity citizens of the state have for their politicians. Rhode Island, after all, is the state that gave us the longest-serving mayor in modern day history -- former Providence Mayor Buddy Cianci. Despite years of apparent involvement in racketeering, conspiracy, and other charges, Cianci was never turned-out by voters (it took being sentenced to 5 years in jail to end his career). In fact, some believe he would win office again, if he were to run for Mayor. Compared to Cianci's activities, Kennedy's car crash is very minor. But in my estimation, Kennedy has already proven he can overcome huge lapses in judgment. But Kennedy has another advantage: He is a Kennedy. It may be hard for us to believe, but there are still people around the country to attribute to him their admiration for JFK and RFK. To some, he is the avatar of Camelot. Last cycle, an apparently drunken Patrick Kennedy publicly said: "I have never worked a [bleeping] day in my life." That comment didn't hurt his re-election bid, one bit ... and my prediction is this won't either.
|
If you are interested in the topic of "framing" -- and in how some liberal linguists are trying to use language to influence politics -- then this is a MUST READ.
|
... And The News
 There are several politically-instructive and/or interesting stories in the Post today: ... Dana Milbank's column talks about the Patrick Kennedy story -- and about how his going for "treatment" was a good political move: ... "It's a get-out-of-jail-free card,' one producer predicted." ... E.J. Dionne has a typically liberal-slanted column titled, " The Great Republican Rebranding." In it, he says, "All over the country, Republicans are engaged in a massive effort at rebranding, reframing and, in some cases, wholesale retreat from past positions."
... Heck, even the letters-to-the-editor were getting into it. One anry letter-writer chides the Post using " the politically correct terminology 'undocumented workers' rather than illegal immigrants."
|
Good Staff Work
 This picture was taken recently at the Shad Planking -- a VA political event. Notice how Sen. Allen's staff makes sure they are standing behind him with the signs. Getting a picture like this doesn't just happen. When the candidate changes direction, you have to stay behind him. You've got to know where the camera is, and then position accordingly. That's good staff work ...
|
By now, you've heard about Patrick Kennedy's "run-in" with the law. This has now become a case study in how to handle negative information. Over at his blog, Dan Flynn's analysis is that Kennedy is borrowing Bill Clinton's strategy for handling negative information ... "Patrick Kennedy is taking a page out of the playbook of Jimmy Swaggart, Bill Clinton, Dan White, and yes, his father (Remember: 'When I fully realized what had happened this morning, I immediately contacted the police'?). Pat Kennedy postures as not the beneficiary of favorable treatment, but rather a victim. 'I struggle every day with this disease,' the representative claimed. A disease that make you lie? A disease that makes you obstruct justice?"
|
Think your vote doesn't matter? According to the Washington Times, "Two voting-age sons of a northern Ohio candidate didn't go to the polls Tuesday, and their father's race ended in a tie." Candidates should always encourage friends & family to vote absentee (or vote early) -- not so they can skip the election -- but so they can work the polls. According to the Times, the candidate (who was running for the local Democrat central committee) "was able to laugh about it Wednesday, but he said his sons are going to be getting an earful for skipping the election..."
|
sex, politics & video tape ...
 It has become a pretty common practice for campaigns to hire a guy whose sole job is to follow the opponent and video tape him or her at campaign stops. These people are called " trackers." As long as the tracker is up-front about what they are doing (instead of pretending to be filming a documentary or something clandestine), there is nothing wrong with this practice. In fact, in many cases, a weird sort of admiration/relationship develops between the tracker and the candidate he is tracking. However, sometimes, as is the case in Virginia, things get out of hand. In this case, the Webb campaign decided to call the cops and complain that this common practice is actually "harassment." Fair enough. I may disagree that it's harassment, but if they want to call the police, that's their right. But then, the Webb campaign took it one step further, and decided to go after this young man, personally. They found a blog that his girlfriend was posting (I have to assume this is legit, but who knows?). Sadly, it seems his girlfriend put some personal stuff out there on her web diary that has been discovered (reason 103 to be careful of blogs). (In a related story, note the picture of Rep. Mary Bono's son from his "my space" page. Just one more example of how the internet is changing politics...). ... Back to the "tracker" story: I think this is an example of a campaign going negative -- except instead of attacking their opponent -- they are destroying the life of a young political operative. Look, it's fair game for one political candidate to attack another (when you declare for public office you become a public figure). It's quite another thing to personally go after a campaign volunteer or staffer. Personally, I think the Webb campaign crossed the line.
|
Why Gas Prices Matter ...
 Why is gas such a potent political issue? Writing at CQ, Craig Crawford explains ... "Gasoline is much more than an economic commodity. It is a political touchstone as well, one of the few universal purchases that consumers can so easily compare over time. The prices of a gallon emblazoned on service station signs provide ubiquitous reminders of the rising cost -- and a tempting symbol for individuals to use in measuring their economic well-being. There's nothing like the price at the pump for provoking conversation at the water cooler."
|
Back to the Tipping Point
 Those of you who are regular readers of this blog may remember my disappointment in the book, The Tipping Point. This Stanford student seems to have the same problems with the book that I had (in fact, you could skip the book and just read this review -- and basically learn everything you need). As he states, "Gladwell's book is not meant to provide step-by-step instructions on how to spread a message. His rules do not exist to be followed directly." Well, I'm still waiting for the book that does tell how to spread a message ...
|
Pardon the Comparison (PTC)
 ... Hat tip to Jim, aka: "The Show" for pointing out slight resemblance between 9-11 plotter Zacarias Moussaoui and a very depressed Michael Wilbon. (Now we know who is going to play him in the Made-for-TV movie.) In all seriousness, he should fry...
|
New Libertarian Blog ...
For those of you who enjoyed my recent post about Atlas Shrugged (you know who you are), I'd also like to inform you that the Cato Institute has started a group blog ...
|
Well Said ...
Despite the sycophantic title: "A Man Who Won't Sell His Soul," David Ignatius has some very good insights into John McCain -- and presidential politics -- in today's Post. I found this line especially interesting: "The early question about any presidential candidate is whether he wants the job badly enough to suffer the indignities involved in getting it."
|
Huckabee Making a Move in Iowa ...
Sure, the Iowa Caucus is a long way off, but it's never too early to speculate: My sources on the ground tell me Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is making major inroads in Iowa. ... And this is consistent with what National Journal's Mark Ambinder recently wrote: "(Huckabee) is the race's only credible evangelical Protestant in a state where Christian conservatives generally dominate the caucuses. And his outreach to these activists and to key Iowa GOP insiders is more broad and deep than has been reported. With denominational lines breaking down, his Catholic outreach will be decisive. He's fantastic on the stump, too." I'm hearing his compassionate conservative message resonates well with Iowans. If that's the case, this could be very good news for Huckabee -- and/or Sam Brownback. Huckabee is also apparently tight with Governor Vilsack (both are governors and they share an interest in the topic of diet and exercise.) It will be curious to see what this friendly, but bi-partisan, relationship might mean as '08 approaches. Lastly, it appears the Iowa press can't get enough of him. I'm told his press coverage in the state has been spectacular. We shall see how this develops ...
|
Limbaugh's Legacy
With his deal finally reached, the Rush Limbaugh painkiller story may finally fade into the past. Upon the hopeful conclusion of this saga, I thought it would be appropriate to mention some of the positive contributions made by Limbaugh: Limbaugh was revolutionary because he was a conservative voice for everyday Americans. Conservative intellectuals have long been inspired by reading authors like Buckley, Kirk or Hayek. But since Reagan's presidency, conservative populist and anti-elitists have been part of the Republican Party. Often, these were "Reagan Democrats." Many of these folks (who were brought into the movement by Reagan -- a C student at Eureka College) found a new voice in Rush Limbaugh (a college dropout). Limbaugh thrived at a time when the conservative movement and the Republican Party lacked an identifiable leader. And he was readily available for anyone who could afford an AM radio. For several years, he was a lone voice in the wilderness. Especially popular during the Clinton years, he was practically the loyal opposition, until '94. Today, it is fashionable to talk about the importance of the new media in politics. While much of attention is paid to FOX NEWS and the internet, talk radio's revolutionary influence has been somewhat forgotten. That's a shame. Countless conservatives have been inspired, mentored, and motivated by the "Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies." I count myself among them. Despite his stumbles, Limbaugh has contributed greatly to the conservative movement. May he continue until everyone in America agrees with him.
|
The Power of an Email List
As this RollCall article points out, John Kerry's failed presidential bid left him with at least one reward: His email list. "He lost his bid to become president in 2004, but that campaign left him with an invaluable commodity: an e-mail list 3 million strong that he can call upon to rally support for causes and candidates -- or another presidential run." ..."A Kerry e-mail 'has the ability to transform an election,' said Jenny Backus, a Kerry consultant. 'Not everyone knows who Rahm and [Senate Minority Leader Harry] Reid are; they all know who John Kerry is." I derive two lessons from this: 1. You and I should start building our email list, today (I have one to the left of this page). Even if it is on the local level, and you only collect a few thousand addresses, it's worthwhile. And (at least for now) it is virtually free to contact your supporters via email. 2. Investing in building an infrastructure means you can benefit even if you lose. That's not always the case. For example, if you invest all your resources in TV campaign ads, there is little benefit if you lose your election. If you lose, those messages are lost in the ether. Conversely, if you invest some of your resources into building a donor or volunteer base, it's yours to keep. You can use it to help other conservative candidates -- or to possibly run for office in the future. This is one of the many reasons it's wise to invest at least a portion of your resources in the grassroots (and in this case, the netroots).
|
Bizarro World: Liberals Attack Politics Lost
This makes perfect sense. I have been saying good things about liberal Joe Klein's new book, Politics Lost. ...So it makes perfect sense that the liberals at DailyKos would attack him.
|
You're Not Normal ...
If you're a political junkie, it's good to be reminded that "you're not normal." For example, if you know who the press secretary is, you are clearly outside the mainstream of America ... Stu Rothenberg's recent column in RollCall makes this very point: "Can you imagine a husband turning to his wife over dinner to comment about the new press secretary? 'Hey, did you see that White House press briefing this afternoon while you were at work?''Yes,' says Gertrude, 'You know, Earl, I haven't been entirely happy with the president's decision-making recently, but that Snow pick is great. I think Bush is doing a really good job after all."
|
Frederick Gets it's Props...
The Frederick News Post is announcing the likely entry of State's Attorney Scott Rolle into the Maryland Attorney General race. According to the paper, this past Friday night, Lt. Governor (and U.S. Senate candidate) Michael Steele was in Frederick, MD, to woo candidate Rolle: "Calling on a round of applause and signaling to Mr. Rolle, Mr. Steele said, 'We have among us an individual who is going to take a leap to run for statewide office.''I learned a long time ago in my neighborhood you gotta take care of the homeboy,' Mr. Steele said. 'So let's take care of him."Rolle is, perhaps, the most gifted orator of any of the Western Maryland politicos. And the fact that Governor Ehrlich and Lt. Governor Steele have turned to him is a tribute to Rolle -- as well as a signal of the nascent importance Frederick will play in future statewide campaigns. Regardless of the outcome, his involvement will no doubt increase turnout and excitement in this traditionally conservative part of the state. And that is very good news for Ehrlich as he fights tooth-and-nail to win votes in areas like Baltimore County.
|
| |
|
Digg This | 
Facebook | 
Technorati
