Archive for May, 2008

Sounds like Obama needs to get Axelrod back on message….  

Cross-posted from The Next Right 

It wasn’t the senior staffers to Barry Goldwaters 1964 campaign who would go on to change this party and this country.  They certainly did a great deal to set the stage, but in reality their greatest feat was to activate an army of young, engaged, thoughtful conservative activists. Young men and women who could think, who could execute, and who recognized the mission ahead.

As it stands, we are failing ourselves as a party for lack of investment in our own survival.  I’m the first to admit a bit of bias because of where i work but I think if we as a party want to pull things back together we need have a vibrant, engaged youth component.  When you look at the voter skews from 2004, 2006, and the disparity in primary results in 2008 one thing sticks out above all others. Younger generations are voting against the Republican brand.

We are very lucky, in my opinion, to have a candidate like Senator McCain, who has a strong enough personal brand to attract some of the people we would otherwise lose: but our congressional candidates rarely have that same appeal, and we as a party are certainly not guaranteed candidates of that ilk in the future.

We need to get very serious about making our brand more appealing to young voters, and to get young people bought into the overall concept of what this party is about: limited government and individual liberty.  This is not a hard sell, but when the Democrats and their affiliates are outspending us in the demographic by 25 to 1 we are going to have an uphill battle.

So what are some realistic solutions?

Short term:

• Get youth activists involved in your campaigns and organizations – Talk to College kids about your candidates/orgs and let them know about opportunities available.  Young people are attracted by other young people.  Show that your campaign is open to people of all ages, and that responsibility is doled out on merit not on longevity.
• Hunt where they eat – Use the mediums young people like, namely the internet.  Facebook and MySpace need to be more then afterthoughts, they need to be active, up to date portals for information and connection.

Long Term:

• Get some active young surrogates – We need young people out there speaking on behalf of the party–candidates and activists–talking about the message.
• Put out ideas on the issues young people are talking about – We have solutions to problems like college affordability, and healthcare, we have better ideas then the ones that are out there, but we don’t do enough to package them for a youth audience.
• Get more input from the youth wing of the party, give them a bigger audience among party leaders and they will tell you what they need to make an impact.

Now, I’m not naive enough to suggest that we make these changes and all of a sudden we are going to win the 18-19 vote 80/20, but we don’t need to.  We just need to not lose it by that margin, which is exactly what current trends, if left unchecked, will yield.

The Millennial generation is going to be the largest voting bloc in this country very soon.  We need to be ready with a solid pitch if we want to be competitive and that means message and messenger.  The CRNC is doing some great work, we are getting people engaged online, we are turning out serious bodies for GOTV operations, but this effort will have to coalesce from the bottom up just as much as from the top down.  It will need the conscious support of county party chairs on up, and the understanding of candidates and campaigns.

It’s not easy, but long term we either invest today or lose tomorrow. 

Yes, although hard to believe, they all have something in common – the year 1999. That’s the last year that Senator John Kerry from Massachusetts passed a bill – any bill – into law in the Senate. For the rest of us, not doing our job for NINE YEARS might be a firing offense. In November, we have a chance to hold John Kerry to the same standards we have to abide by ourselves.

Now, check out this video!:

“After Senator Obama’s own advisors and supporters backtracked from his stated desire to hold summit meetings with the leaders of the world’s worst regimes, Senator Obama himself has begun to reinterpret his stand. He now claims that some ‘fear’ to ‘negotiate’ with the likes of Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who has called Israel a ‘stinking corpse’ or Ayatollah Khamenei, who called Israel a ‘cancerous tumor.’ I have news for Senator Obama: I have met some very bad people before in my life. It is not fear that drives my opposition to unconditional meetings with Ahmadinejad, Khamenei, Kim Jong Il, and Raul Castro; rather it is my clear understanding that such a course will fail to eliminate the threat posed by these rogue regimes. I don’t fear to negotiate. Instead I have the knowledge and experience to understand the dangerous consequences of a naive approach to Presidential summits based entirely on emotion.”

Senator John McCain on having the experience necessary to be president…and how Barack Obama lacks it…

Give me a break! This guy (Barack Obama) is now trying to court the Jewish vote by attempting to relate his losing a Congressional race in Chicago to what the people of Israel endure everyday in horrible acts of terrorism. Take this passage:

When I ran against Bobby Rush [for Congress], the perception was that I was Hyde Park, I’m University of Chicago, I’ve got all these Jewish friends. When I started organizing, the two fellow organizers in Chicago were Jews, and I was attacked for associating with them. So I’ve been in the foxhole with my Jewish friends, so when I find on the national level my commitment being questioned, it’s curious. [Emphasis mine]

Really Barack? You enduring some politics by association hardships in your failed candidacy for Congress is comparable to innocent people in Israel being blown apart by savage terrorists? Your inexperience is showing…

On top of this, Barack was widely known in his early days in Chicago to have been associating with radicals on the Palestinian side of the argument and only came around to support Israel when he realized it would be politically advantageous for a future life in politics. (See this article about Barack’s ascent in Chi-Town’s machine politics).

Now, if that wasn’t ridiculous enough, Barack then trains his perceptive foreign policy analytical skills on the current situation in Israel with this earth-shattering, bold observation:

The lack of a resolution to this problem provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable actions, and so we have a national-security interest in solving this, and I also believe that Israel has a security interest in solving this because I believe that the status quo is unsustainable. I am absolutely convinced of that[...] [Emphasis mine]

Are you joking?! Is that supposed to be some sort of bold proclamation condemning terrorism – that Israel probably can’t sustain itself if it continues to be bombarded by rocket attacks, suicide bomber, and radical jihadists of all stripes into perpetuity?

That Barack Obama is just now stumbling onto these facts should be very disturbing to anyone interested in national security and foreign policy, its domestic impact, and the impact on allied nations like Israel who is engaged in a fight for their very survival against these monstrous and cowardly terrorists.

They will not go silently into that good night! Hill-Dawg’s supporters are cotninuing to travel nationwide to volunteer for their leader as described in this article from the Washington Post.

“It’s become so personal, just one insult after another,” Smith said. “These sides are starting to feel some hate for each other. Everybody is angry, but I’m going to keep at this as long as I can. I never want to look myself in the mirror and say, ‘You quit. You didn’t do your part.’ “

Barack might have some trouble bringing women voters back into the fold after this nomination is all sewn up. With sentiments like these:

“I don’t even know these other women, but I feel like I do,” said Zenia Kuzma, from Shepherdstown. “We’ve been going through this same ordeal together.”

…there’s is definitely some allegiance-to-a-higher-cause-type motivation for many women voters with Hillary’s candidacy. And right on que:

“The more I’m involved, the angrier I get. Every call for her to get out of the race just incenses me. It makes me crazy. Who are you? Who in the world are you to tell this woman who’s done so much that it’s time for her to be quiet and sit down?”

As I have said before, this Dem nominating process is driving a wedge between certain demographic groups that Obama will need decisive margis with to win in November.

We shall see…

We need your help in naming the impact levels for 2008. We’d like to have 8 levels, but if you have a great theme that uses more or less we’d still love to hear it. Share your ideas and we’ll put the top 5 to a vote!  Post you ideas in the comments below, or join the conversation in the Storm Discussion Group.

Mary Katharine Ham has a very interesting post on the importance of staging and advance work in sending a message on television. She has posted two pictures of the Obama rally in NC held tonight – one the television shows and the other from a little more…uh, inclusive angle.

As Seen On TV:

As Seen In Real Life:

Now anyone in politics can tell you that every campaign in the world tries to master the angle the media depicts in photos and on television in addition t orchestrating countless other things to portray an bigger, more excited, all around better crowd than might actually be there. But Miss Ham (is it Miss or is she a Mrs.? I just don’t know) brings up an interesting point here about the lack of media scrutiny of such facts with the Obama campaign and an overzealousness to report them about Republicans like John McCain:

I realize it’s standard practice to rope off an area of a venue for crowd-wrangling and appearances, but this is a little drastic. McCain’s event at the Wait Chapel at Wake Forest today was nicely filled if not overflowing, but I imagine if he had held it at Groves Stadium and filled only the endzone seats, someone in the media might have said something about it. Obama doesn’t have such worries, I guess.

Indeed.

Karl Rove (CRNC alumnus) has shared some insight into the electoral map with Fox News, and I have decided to share it with you here as I prepare to fall asleep assuming that Barack Obama is going to get a bounce out of tonight’s Democratic primaries in Indiana and North Carolina.

The news is good and bad when we look at the maps Mr. Rove has constructed using polling data for general election match-ups with McCain v. Obama (shown below) and McCain v. Clinton. The good news is that the Dems seem to have nominated (presumptively, but they say never count the Clinton’s out ’til their out) the electorally weaker candidate:

The bad news is for College Republicans in those yellow states above – get ready for some serious GOTV work and a lotta attention this summer and fall…

But hey, it’s why we’re here right?!

Some interesting state results to note, both good and bad:

NY – We’re down only 4%!

NE – Up by 3%…

TX – 4%…

MI – Moving to our column!

OH – This is awesome. The GOP in OH has had some rough years for the brand name up there, but we are holding strong in 2008.

FL – If it stays this strong (performing better than state like Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska for instance) it will be hard to call this a “swing state” in 2008. This speaks to the amazing reputation of former Gov. Bush and current Gov. Crist.

MO – See FL above. Traditionally a bellwether state, with an 8% victory, it will allow us to focus resources elsewhere.

IA – My home state is under-performing.

NM – Up by 2% in a close state from ’00 and ’04 with an important congressional and US Senate races.

Well, I could go on here, but those are some notables. Of course, this is all really for naught as it is way too early to be measuring in-state general election polls, but it paints an interesting starting picture. I should note too that states like MO and FL will probably remain incredibly important in the general election even if polls show them at decent margins now. I’m very, very confident we will win both states, but Barack’s say-anything-do-anything campaign will surely contest them with force and CRs will need to be prepared to add a little truth to the madness in states such as these.

If you notice something really striking that I have failed to mention, send it to csmith at crnc dot org and I’ll be happy to include them in a future post!

It seems as though Barack’s problem with rural and sometimes blue-collar voters isn’t going away. McClatchy has an interesting article up on the subject with some great lines from Dem voters who say they will never, ever vote for Obama in a general election:

 Lou Meyer, a housewife in Sellersburg, had similar thoughts. “He won’t wear a flag pin. Anyone who can’t stand up for their country, I won’t vote for,” she said. “If it’s Obama versus McCain, I’m between a rock and a hard place, but I’m not going to vote for Obama.”

…

Dennis Whetsell, a Brownsburg accountant, voiced other concerns: “Obama doesn’t have experience. McCain could work much better with Congress.”

…

“I’d like to get the troops home as quickly as we can,” said Whetsell, “but we also can’t allow the area to fall into the hands of Iran or Syria.” McCain, he said, understands all the nuances.

…

AND they like McCain!

“He’s honest. He’s not afraid to look you in the eye and tell you what he thinks,” said Cheryl Pauley, a Brownsburg housewife. “Obama is a yes man.”

Awesome news!

And some facts to back it all up:

The Pew poll showed that 23 percent of self-described conservative and moderate Democrats say they’d vote for McCain over Obama in November. If Clinton’s the nominee, that number drops to 14 percent.