|
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 |
|
Digg This | 
Facebook | 
Technorati
