Party Leadership Races

This week we (precinct delegates) will be selecting the next executive committee for our county party. The executive committee will be picking the officers. I'm not running for county party because of time constraints. I have too many irons in the fire right now and basically can only be a vote and title right now for county. Someone else can do a better job, and I don't need an important sounding title.

There won't be a slate. The process is 18 votes for the at large positions. It will be a straight up ballot vote selecting the paid party members. That's it. Some people I'll actively support. Some I'll actively oppose. Some I'll stay neutral. I'll post more on that this week. Lana Theis, Brighton Township Treasurer, is running for county chair. Mike Murphy is stepping down as chair by his own choice. Lana has my support.

Some time after that, there will be another convention to select delegates to state convention. This is for the state and district committee leadership. For the 8th District (of which I am a committee member), I support our incumbents if they run again. I don't usually make blanket endorsements, but we're a good team. It's a good committee going in the right direction after starting from scratch. It has been dormant for years outside of its role as a convention. Now it's an actual political party. The big race at the next state convention however is state chair, and there's an interesting tidbit from Saul Anuzis.

Snyder To Weigh In On MRP Chair Race

MIRS reports: “For those of you who felt the incoming governor would sit on the sidelines and watch the Michigan Republican Party (MRP) select a new chairperson, think again.

There are strong indications that Gov.-elect Rick SNYDER will voice his “personal choice” to replace outgoing Chair Ron WEISER and it may come sooner than later…

…Snyder wants someone to be a “partner” in his legislative efforts and his personal review of all of the candidates is now underway and “he will make his personal preference known.”

Multiple sources have laid out the field of candidates to include Secretary of State Terri Lynn LAND, MRP Finance Chair Robert “Bobby” SCHOSTAK and MRP Coalitions Vice Chair ScottGREENLEE ”

I think this is a good idea. He is our Governor, our leader and will set to tone and direction our state will take over the next 8 years. He needs to have a team around him he can count on and work with.

I’m looking forward to hearing from him.

I'm also looking forward to hearing from him, but I'm not going to vote necessarily for - or against - his pick. Who Snyder picks has no bearing on who I support. I know the tradition is for the governor to pick his guy. That goes back to the Engler years and he for the most part controlled the party. If Snyder's pick is best, I will support that pick. If someone else is better, that's who I'll support. I'm nobody's yesman.

This will be a good first test for Snyder. He'll need to pick someone electable by the state delegates selected by the county conventions. I'm still learning more about the candidates before I make my choice. I hope Snyder does due diligence and picks the right person for the job.

Speaking of Saul, he's running for RNC Chair and has my endorsement for what that's worth (I can't vote for RNC chair, only committeeman). I think he'll do well if he has good fundraisers (right now there isn't at RNC) and strategists (not as bad as Steele's rep and not nearly as bad as NRSC, but could be better) working for him. Saul's an ace at communications, and that's an area lacking right now from party. He does well on TV and knows how to use the internet. Saul earned my respect by circling the wagons on the Granholm tax increases. We didn't have the votes, but he prevents a worse cave than their was by the GOP. Saul's not afraid to hold someone's feet to the fire and took a lot of heat from the insiders for doing so. Good luck to Saul in his race.

Now we need to make sure the GOP has good leadership

I'll get to the detailed results later except to say that the GOP had a big win. It looks as if there is a clean sweep statewide. County, state house (I think, I need to double check), state senate, Governor, AG, Secretary of State, and a conservative Supreme Court.

Due to the arrogance and fubars from 06 through 08, the voters gave us a gift, just as Obama was given a gift in 2008. Obama is a dumbass and blew his chance. The GOP were dumbasses and blew it from 02-06. Don't blow it. Don't cave to beltway interests and sell out. Big Government Conservatism is dead and has been repudiated as much as Obama leftism has been. Conservatives, independents, and liberals alike don't want the same old schiese. We need to stay involved and hold our new reps feet to the fire. That means calling them, writing them, talking to them, and getting party leaders that will remind them who is in charge. Us. The people.

Those that do good work need to be rewarded. Those that don't need to be fired in August.

I've long said that politics is a marathon and not a sprint. That's true. We need to make sure our reps have their feet held to the fire when it comes to their voting decisions. Republicans that act like democrats, especially on fiscal issues, lose power quickly. The GOP can not be like Bush and Congress from 2002-2006. No more TARPS. No more AIGS. No more No Child Left Behind. No more Prescription Drugs boondoggles. Those were bipartisan pieces of crap.

It's also time to make sure the GOP has good leadership. Some of this we can control, and some of this we can't. We can't control much who the house and senate pick for leadership, both federally and state. All we can do is call our GOP reps and ask them to pick the right people for leadership. The rest of the legislative leadership is outside of our control. John Proos and Randy Richardville are jockeying for leadership in the state senate. I have some concerns about Richardville on fiscal matters. He's great for populist Monroe County and its labor history, but is he fiscally right for leadership?

The Republican Party Leadership is within our control. There's a County Convention coming up the 18th. This convention is where party leadership and the next executive committee will be chosen. I have a vote here as do all seated precinct delegates.

Unfortunately, Mike Murphy is stepping down as Livingston County Republican Party Chair. He promised one term, and that's what he gave. He did a good job there and if he changes his mind, he has my support. He did not have a big personal agenda and did not play games. He inherited a tough administrative related issue, and brokered a good agreement early on before it gave us headaches. We all made a few calls and resolved the issue before it became a big problem. Murph gave everyone a fair shake regardless of title, but was no pushover either (by factions or by Lansing). Meetings were usually on track and on time. There was generally good planning and good budgeting. He left it in better shape than when he took over. I expect the same from the next county party leadership.

County Party Leadership is chosen by the executive committee. The executive committee is chosen by precinct delegates which were seated at the previous convention or earlier (elected in primary). That is why the precinct delegate races are so important. Precinct delegates choose the at large county party executive committee members (statutory members are county commissioners, state reps, state senator, sheriff, prosecutor, treasurer, clerk, and register of deeds). The executive committee that is elected chooses its officers.

After this county convention, there will be another convention in the future. This one is for District and State Party leadership. Precinct delegates will choose state delegates, which will caucus with District and will choose the leadership for the district committee and leadership, state committee (underrated, but with the most power), and state party officers.

The current 8th district committee has done a very good job in a limited amount of time. It was dormant for about ten years. During the entire time I've been active, the 8th District Committee was nothing more than a convention procedures committee. That changed under the new leadership. We organized, planned strategy, raised some money, and helped the counties in our jurisdiction without being micro-managers. I will be running for re-appointment for the 8th district committee. I will be supporting incumbents for the committee leadership in the 8th District committee due to its excellent transition from a pure convention procedures committee to an actual political party committee. I think we've earned it, but that's not for me to decide.

There's already rumors about potential candidates running for State Chair. Traditionally, the governor picks the state chair. If he does, he needs to make sure it's a good choice which will be accepted by the grassroots. Snyder may stay neutral (which would not surprise me) as well and that is probably the safest position for him. I think a lot of the establishment is going to push a real big name to try and quell a floor fight. In the past, that would work. Today, I'm not sure. Right now, I'm undecided and am waiting for any official announcements before I make a decision. Another big position is RNC Committeeman/Committeewoman. The RNC Committeeman/Committeewoman are two votes towards the next RNC chair. That's another big deal with ramifications.

This is the beginning, and not the end.

The Michigan Republican Convention - 8-28-2010

It was a long, long, long, long, day today. I didn't get much (any) sleep for today, so this may come off as a little ornery. Today was the Republican convention. It was a little different than most conventions and probably has the most contentious floor fights since a couple of the Youth Chair fights a few years back.

The nominees are as follows:

Lt Governor - Brian Calley
UM Regents - Andrea Fischer Newman and Andrew Richner (Uncontested)
Wayne State Trustee - Danialle Karmanos and Diane Dunaskiss (Uncontested)
MSU Trustee - Mitch Lyons and Brian Breslin
State Board of Education - Dr. Richard Zeile and Eileen Weiser (Uncontested)
Supreme Court - Justice Robert Young and Judge Mary Beth Kelly
Attorney General - Bill Schuette
Secretary of State - Ruth Johnson

The first sign that this wasn't going to be an average convention is the rumors and hype about what the rules were going to be, etc. Much of that was yesterday. I was asked to be alternate for the rules committee. If I was voting on changes or potential changes to the rules, I wanted to know what the facts were and not what the hype was. I was not elevated to being on the committee, and based on what I found out, I'm kind of glad I wasn't because I was going to be dodging a bunch of arrows no matter what I did. I left when that committee started because I heard there was rumor of possible 8th district caucus beforehand, and with at least three high ranking 8th district committee members tied up in the rules meeting, I wanted to make sure I was ready if needed for votes as I'm an officer on 8th district. I didn't stay in the rules meeting for the whole thing, but I know the proposed changes failed on a close vote. I was opening to altering one rule, and was completely against altering most of them. One alarming rumored rules proposal was straight out of the union. No secret ballot. That was a problem in the past, and I'm glad that we have had a secret ballot for the last couple conventions. It needs to stay, and I will be raising hell here if that ever changes. More on the rules later.

My biggest complaint was the lines. I knew this was going to be a tough convention because there are a lot of new people with tea parties, longtime local activists who now were going statewide, and the longtime activists and normal factions who were there. We knew there was going to be a high turnout. That's part of the reason why this was at the Breslin Center. However, there should not be hour+ lines going on to start the convention. That's going to put people in a foul mood to begin with. I understand the need for security, but there should have at least been multiple lines (A-L/M-Z etc), or credentials mailed. That would have saved at least 2-3 hours today.

The first interesting battle was over Lt Governor. The West Michigan Tea Party faction opposed Brian Calley as Snyder's pick, or wanted to send a message of some sort and wanted Bill Cooper, who ran for Congress in the 2nd District, to be the Lt Governor. The big battle was over the voting process on this. The party wanted a show of hands. The tea party wanted roll call. It was getting very contentious until Cooper withdrew from the race and gave his speech. It was a good speech, and if there is a lesson to learn from that, it is to learn the processes of conventions, its rules, how the committee members are selected and elected, and how they are changed. This is a marathon, not a sprint. Personally for this race, I'd like to have seen this go to a secret ballot vote with the others which were on there, even using "candidate A and Candidate B" ballots. It could have been done that way. The raise of hands votes can be shady at times. Oral roll call would have taken 10 hours and I would have staunchly opposed that. I know traditionally that the Governor candidate historically picks the LT candidate which is almost always confirmed easily, but there needs to be preparation when the gubernatorial candidate gets 35% in the primary. I didn't have a problem with Calley, especially when some of the other names I've been hearing were much, much, worse. However, there is a virulent backlash against anything these days that comes off as old boys club, whether it is or not.

After that start, there was a bunch of uncontested races that were uneventful. I was waiting for one to have some possible headaches, but that didn't happen.

Then came the contests. Most were done right. Two of them were one on one. Winner wins. That's how the AG and Supreme Court races were. The Supreme Court race was civil with Mary Beth Kelly winning easily with the support of the justices of what used to be considered the best State Supreme Court in the country. The AG race was for awhile, but I think Bill Schuette nearly lost what was at one time a massive lead when his camp drew first blood and went negative through a surrogate (when there was an extremely negative SoS campaign). I expected better from him. I like both Schuette and Bishop and can easily vote for either of them this fall. Schuette won in a very close race, and will be facing Genesee (Flint) County Prosecutor. Judge Schuette v Prosecutor Leyton. It should be an interesting race.

One major contentious race was MSU trustee. It turned out the way the rules were set up worked better for the candidate opposed by many of the establishment anyway. They wanted all candidates up with people voting for the top two of the three. The way the rules were set up split the MSU trustee seats. These were rules from either February or last year. They've been there for awhile. I didn't like this particular one, but the process should have been set then, not today. Anyway, it wasn't the way I was concerned it would be. I was concerned that incumbent Don Nugent, whom I did not support due to tuition increases and too much of a willingness to go along with the more liberal decisions of the board, would be getting a free pass. Nugent was openly supported by most of the state party due to being an incumbent. It turned out that Nugent did not get a free pass. He announced his re-election for what was classified as either "seat A" or "seat B". I'm not sure which was which. Breslin ran for the seat currently held by democrat Colleen McNamara (Airport Ed McNamara's daughter). Lyons ran as well and had to choose one seat or the other. He chose, whether planned or not, Nugent's seat. Breslin got the pass. Going into the convention, I thought it was going to be vote for two out of the three. That's how it should have been, just like the November ballot. For me, at least I could have done that in that I could vote for both Breslin and Lyons as planned.

What really riled up the crowd was when one individual introduced a motion. That was poorly handled, and may have actually contributed to costing Nugent his trustee position. The motion was combining the two seats and having the top two of the three candidates moving on the ballot, just as we vote for two candidates in the November election. The parliamentarian said that the motion was for Mitch Lyons to run on two ballots, once against Breslin, and once against Nugent. That was not the motion. Not at all. That could have been explained better through the rules and procedures that they were not allowed to do things as stated in the motion and that the alternative allowed under the rules that had to be approved before convention only allowed this instead. Do you still support this motion? That really riled up the crowed and looked like incumbent protection to many of the newcomers there, as well as some of the old guard who were not procedure junkies. The vote came in, and Lyons won. It wasn't even all that close.

There was contention of the Secretary of State race procedures. Some wanted multiple votes where the last place candidate dropped out. The rules stated two votes. The highest two vote-getters run off Southern Style for the winner (unless one gets 51%). I happen to support the current rules in place for this race, else we'd be there all night. Runoff system works great here. It worked well here, and it was fair.

It was an interesting convention, and it foreshadows the future and what we as activists need to prepare for AFTER the November elections. Bill Cooper hinted at this to his tea party supporters. Those who are tea party activists, long time republican activists who aren't tea party, establishment supporters, and your classic convention unpredictable swing voter like me need to know how things work. Marco Rubio said it best in Florida when he was battling RINO Charlie Crist, then supported by Florida's state party. If you don't like the job the establishment is doing, pick a better establishment.

We as republicans choose our establishment. My own view on establishment is this. When they are right, I support them. When they are wrong, I don't. Today they were both. They were dead right in the Secretary of State race, and dead wrong in their quasi semi-official support of Don Nugent (whom the majority believed did not deserve re-election). Regardless of that, the establishment is elected. That goes for State Party, down to county party.

Precinct delegates make the decision. Their number one job is to choose party leadership. They(we) need to be informed in what goes on. That means they need to show up at meetings. They need to show up at conventions. They need to know who is running for the party positions, and make informed decisions as to who they support.

All Precinct Delegates go to county conventions. County Conventions choose the county executive committee. I happen to think that Livingston County's executive committee, the "establishment" here does a pretty good job. The county conventions choose delegates to different state conventions. After the election, there will be a state convention for party leadership. Those delegates chosen go to state convention and caucus with congressional district. This chooses our district committee. Until this current term, the 8th district committee was just a bunch of fancy titles that didn't do jack squat outside of procedures at state. This term, we've built the committee from nearly scratch and it will be a player in some races this fall.

It is also at these conventions were state committee is chosen (outside of county/district chairs - which are also elected by delegates). This is the big one. State Committee. There's also state party officers - chair and vice-chair which are also elected by state delegates.

Know the processes. Know how things work. Work through the processes to create good change when needed, and prevent bad change (Ie, the Hamburg problem spreading to the county party) when it isn't needed. Prior planning prevents piss poor performance. That goes for everybody. Establishment. Tea Party. Candidates. Delegates.

County Conventions, Inside baseball, tea parties, Hamburg, power politics, and future warnings

I don't usually post much inside baseball here, especially local related. It usually isn't constructive. It puts me in the line of fire in areas where I'd rather not be.

Last Thursday, August 12th, was the Republican Party County Conventions. The convention is the same day in all counties. The purpose of THIS convention is to choose the delegates for State Convention. The real power though isn't decided at this convention. This one does matter for Lt Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Supreme Court, and university races, but ideologywise, it's not that big of a deal (depending on Snyder's LT pick). This time. The big one is AFTER November. We have two conventions there. One to pick county party leadership, and one to pick the leadership for state committee and district committee.

The process is different for each county. Most are "at-large" while I believe Oakland is "caucus."

A conservative teacher - Oakland County

Mason County

Jason Gillman - Grand Traverse County

Here in Livingston, our chair Mike Murphy and the election committee here did a very good job of a potentially terrible situation. The committee worked to make sure the what would otherwise be competing interests from getting into a major fight. There was a combination of old guard, somewhat newer conservative activists who are involved, and tea party participants. Previous conventions in Livingston were easy. Who wanted to go to state went. This one had about 2-3 times the normal turnout.

The one group left out was the Hamburg clique which wants to take control of the party. They were the filibustering ones there. Here's a newsflash for the Hamburg gang and their takeover attempt. You're not that important. We don't care that you are elected officials. We don't care that one of you are related to the Romneys. We don't care about your personal vendettas against a couple of activists due to local Hamburg politics. We do care however, that we don't want the soap opera embarrassment coming to County Party. We got on track internally in the last four years and do not need your clique to screw it all up. One of the clique members was running his mouth at about how bad the county party is for not doing enough to back recalls etc in Hamburg. This was about the umpteenth rant and fillibuster from the clique, and the rest of the 125 people there in the packed house was tired of it. I had enough myself and admit, somewhat rudely interrupted the individual with a five word comment. "Because you don't show up."

Despite not being on County Executive Committee in four years (I'm on district instead), I go to most of the meetings. I'm on a strategy committee. I do behind the scenes work for them. I don't see that Hamburg clique at any of those events. They then come here, and run our mouth about us at an event for state convention delegates, after not doing anything except put us in the papers? The rest of the crowd wasn't impressed with most of that clique either, as they finished way back in the pack in voting for convention delegate, barely making alternate. My choices were made quite easily in voting. Humble the clique.

We need to be prepared though when the county party leadership is going to be picked. We can not allow Livingston to turn into Hamburg Township Government. We need to make sure that the next committee takes what is best from the past four years, and improves on it, and represents the county well and does not become a soap opera. I think the county did that well with the tea party groups in the area for this meeting and hope that continues to be the case. I don't expect that from the Hamburg clique based on the behavior I saw Thursday.

Leave the soap opera politics back in township. I don't like it there, but I don't live there. It's not really my business outside of periphery. Pushing this on county makes it my business and county doesn't have time for that BS.

Republican comeback in the Northeast?

While the big story for 2009 was the takeover of the governor's mansion in New Jersey and Virginia, there's more good news for the GOP, and the disasters of 06 and 08.

2006 and 2008 was a disaster for the GOP. Republicans were wiped out in much of the country during those two election cycles with unpopular incumbents and struggling state and local parties. It was very tough in the Northeast and Midwest, for different reasons. In Ohio, you had Taft. Here in Michigan, it was the economy and "outsourcing" tag. Indiana had their own issues. Illinois is Obama's home state. Minnesota and Wisconsin have long held democrat leanings.

Michigan's State Senate District 19 is a bellwether district covering Calhoun and most of Jackson Counties. It voted for Granholm twice, Bush twice, and Obama.

I found this interesting National Review article by Jim Geraghty.. They looked at some of the recent results in suburban northeastern counties. Keep in mind that most of those are much more liberal than the two big suburban counties here (Oakland and Macomb).

Consider these six numbers: 62, 53, 54, 60, 60, 53.

Those numbers are the percentage of voters who supported Barack Obama last year in Westchester and Nassau Counties in New York, Bergen and Middlesex Counties in New Jersey, Fairfax County in Virginia, and Bucks County in Pennsylvania, respectively.

Now, here are the percentages of the vote that the top-of-the-ticket Democratic candidates got in each of those counties this year: 43, 48, 48, 44, 49, 45.

.........

But as the stack of 2009’s defeated Democrats piles up to include Westchester county executive Andrew Spano, Nassau county executive Tom Suozzi (probably), and state supreme court nominee Jack Panella in Pennsylvania, with a roughly proportional slide in the Democrats’ share of the vote, perhaps that party’s problems go well beyond the flaws of any individual candidate. Perhaps the suburbs of the northeast and Mid-Atlantic states are looking at the party and concluding, to adapt a recurring phrase from Obama’s days as a candidate, “This is not the Democratic party I knew.”

Westchester County? Ouch. Nassau? Ouch. Bucks County? Ouch. Those have recently been almost base counties at the top of the ticket. Westchester and Nassau are base counties across the board. Bucks will swing at times, but still has dem leanings.

After 2008, the declarations were blunt: Obama won 50 percent of suburban voters, the most by a Democrat since exit polling began in 1972. Democrats benefited from increased turnout among young voters and African-Americans, but the suburban shift from Kerry’s modest 47 percent was the real sign that they were winning over skeptics.

Kerry ran better than Gore in SOME suburbs (Fairfax, Bucks), and the same or worse than Gore in others (NYC suburbs, Oakland, Macomb). Obama ran better than both Gore and Kerry there. The article then mentions a poll with some of the shift since 08 election, as the memory of Bush goes back into the distance.

Page two of the article though really says something. Keep in mind, this is the Northeast, and not the Midwest here.

What is crystallizing in the northeast is voters’ incredulity that government at every level should be demanding more while delivering less at a time when people feel strapped and anxious about their futures. Almost all voters feel an ever-sharper pinch from the economic downturn, but they look at government, from their county seat to Washington, and find little or no sign of frugality or careful budgeting. There was also a time when conventional wisdom dictated that a pro-life Republican could not win a race in the northeast. Here are three candidates who suggest a lot of what we know about politics in the northeast is wrong:

The northeast is the most pro-government area of the country outside of California. It is the home of the rich white regressive (so called progressive) democrat. They have a lot of influence up that way. However, the swing voters are not buying what is sold anymore. I think there's several reasons for that, most importantly is Bush gone and Obama being just another politician not living to the hype.

Nassau County:

Republican challenger Ed Mangano is, as of this writing, not quite the next Nassau county executive. But he leads Tom Suozzi by 353 votes after a weekend of absentee and affidavit ballot counting, a process of counting that is expected to extend past the Thanksgiving holiday.

A county-executive race doesn’t dominate the headlines the way a presidential race does, but Suozzi entered this race the heavy favorite. In a county with more registered Democrats than Republicans, in a state where the GOP is supposed to be dead, an incumbent with a huge fundraising advantage ought to be able to win in his sleep. Perhaps that is a good way of describing what Suozzi attempted; he finished the race with perhaps $2 million in his campaign war chest unspent.

Nassau County is one of the two Long Island NY Counties. It's the more democrat of the two (Suffolk is the other). It went 53.84% for Obama, 52.25% for Kerry, 57.93% for Gore, 55.7% for Clinton 96, 46.4% for Clinton in 92.

Senate:
Hillary Clinton 06 - 60.47%
Charles Schumer 04 - 66.45%
Hillary Clinton 00 - 45.15% (Rick Lazio was from Long Island and won there, and Hillary carpetbagged)
Charles Schumer 98 - 46.5% (Al D'Amato was from Long Island and won there)

Governor:
Elliot Spitzer 06 - 64.88%

Nassau can sometimes be competitive though. The GOP has a congressional district still based in Nassau (Peter King), although the democrats have two districts there, one of which is winnable in a very good year. Part of the problems on Long Island were local scandals and a sweep of the county offices. If that's straightened out, there is a good chance for a comeback, at least of competitiveness.

Westchester County is much more democrat, and this was the real big upset. Westchester County is just north of the Bronx. Yonkers, White Plains, and Chappaqua, where the Clintons now live.

Rob Astorino is supposed to be the kind of Republican candidate who can’t win in the northeast anymore. He ran a fairly explicit campaign emphasizing fiscal conservatism, depicting the county’s management as wasteful, bureaucratic, inefficient, corrupt, and out of touch. He hammered his rival, telling voters that the incumbent county executive, Andy Spano, “raised your taxes almost 60 percent in the last seven years alone. Mr. Spano has ballooned the annual budget by $1 billion in the past 12 years, from $800 million to $1.8 billion per year. He spends more than 87 nations do, and you pay for it.” Intriguingly, while the pro-life Astorino didn’t put his faith or social views front and center, his conservative bona fides are impeccable: He is a radio host and program director for the Catholic Channel on Sirius Satellite Radio and hosts a Thursday-night program with Cardinal Edward Egan, the former archbishop of New York.

Astorino shellacked the three-term Democrat, 57 percent to 43 percent, in a county where Democrats have nearly a 2-to-1 advantage in voter registration. This is a county where Al Gore and John Kerry carried 58 percent of the vote, the county Bill and Hillary Clinton call home. It may be a bit self-serving, but Spano contends that his defeat reflects voters’ anger at Democrats at the state and national level. “It has nothing to do with me, as far as I’m concerned,” he told the New York Times. “They’re mad at Albany, and Washington.”

Westchester went 63.36% for Obama, 58.1% for Kerry, 58.63% for Gore, 56.9% for Clinton 96, and 48.6% for Clinton in 92.

Senate:
Hillary Clinton 06 - 66.50%
Charles Schumer 04 - 70.48%
Hillary Clinton 00 - 51.09%
Charles Schumer 98 - 54.5%

Governor:
Elliot Spitzer 06 - 69%

The two districts that cover Westchester are both democrat (one based, one partial), although one of them had been republican until 2006 due to other counties in that district. The other has been democrat since 1988. Westchester is about as Democrat as Ingham County (Lansing) here at home. It's not a county that republicans are supposed to win.

Pennsylvania is a more competitive state than New York, but has gone democrat recently, largely in part to the Philly Suburbs swinging left and having more population than the Pittsburgh suburbs which have swung independent. It was close in 04, but not in 02, 06 and 08 with Ed Rendell and the Philly area machine. Some good news came in a Supreme Court race. Supreme Court is a partisan race in Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania’s supreme court race pitting Republican Joan Orie Melvin against Democrat Jack Panella didn’t attract much national attention; while there was plenty of television advertising, it had two relatively unknown candidates, and the dominant issues of Washington were largely non-factors. The Democrat began with significant advantages: The state currently has 1.2 million more registered Democrats than Republicans, and Panella’s campaign raised $2.35 million, outdoing Melvin’s by almost 3-1, according to statistics compiled by an advocacy group, Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts.

Instead, Melvin won 53 percent to 46 percent, and won every suburban county around Philadelphia except Montgomery, which the Democrat carried by 1.4 percent. While the Democrat Panella garnered 70 percent of the vote in Philadelphia, traditionally the engine that drives Democratic wins in statewide races, the city had a miserable turnout of 12 percent.

That says something. Right now, the GOP only has one and 3/4 districts there. Jim Gerlach has a 50/50 district based in Chester County (and has part of Berks, Leigh, and Montgomery County where he loses). Charlie Dent has a Leigh valley based district that has a small part of Montgomery County. Joe Pitts has a heavy GOP leaning district with Lancaster County and part of Berks and Chester Counties.

2008:
Montgomery County - 60% Obama
Delaware County - 60% Obama
Bucks County - 53.74% Obama
Chester County - 54% Obama
Berks County - 53.76% Obama
Lancaster County - 55.21% McCain

2004:
Montgomery County - 55.57% Kerry
Delaware County - 57.15% Kerry
Bucks County - 51.10% Kerry
Chester County - 52% Bush
Berks County - 52.97% Bush
Lancaster County - 65.80% Bush

2000:
Montgomery County - 53.54% Gore
Delaware County - 54.36% Gore
Bucks County - 50.46% Gore
Chester County - 53.33% Bush
Berks County - 52.68% Bush
Lancaster County - 66.09% Bush

For President, the GOP last won Bucks in 1992, and last won Montgomery and Delaware Counties in 1988. The irony is that Dukakis almost won Pennsylvania in 1988 due to winning big in Western PA. Most of those counties for Dukakis went for McCain and GW Bush.

Geraghty makes his point here.

While these six counties have their differences, they are all classically suburban and among the wealthiest in the nation. There are 3,141 counties in the United States; ranked by median household income, Nassau ranks 12th highest nationally, Westchester ranks 47th, Bucks ranks 76th. Of the other counties mentioned earlier, Fairfax County ranks 2nd; Bergen ranks 28th, Middlesex ranks 68th. A wholesale rejection in the varied races of 2009 suggests that voters in these places are changing what they think when they hear the word “Democrat.” A year ago, it represented change from a wearying and disappointing Bush presidency; today it represents runaway spending, an arrogant dismissal of cries of over-taxation, and a fundamental disconnect from the daily life and problems of constituents.

After the 2008 election, Robert Lang, a demographer at Virginia Tech’s Metropolitan Institute in Alexandria, scoffed to the Washington Post, “The Obama campaign clearly understands where the battleground of this election was. Do [the Republicans] have the basic math skills to sit with an Excel spreadsheet and figure out where the growth is, or are they out of their minds?”

The good thing about 09 is that the talking heads who say the GOP is just a southern party can sit down and shut up. I said a few years back about the special elections where the GOP lost three in a row (either 05 or 07). One doesn't mean much. Two has my guard up. Losing three in row is a real problem.

Here's the opposite. Winning Virginia is important, especially Fairfax County which is a "non-Southern" part of Virginia at least in culture. That stopped the bleeding. Winning in New Jersey shows some offense. Winning the Philly burbs and some of the New York suburbs now is sending a message. Add the 19th district here at home for another swing district with a much different cultural area. Several distinct areas went GOP.

That doesn't mean that we're back. We're not. What it does mean is that the bleeding has largely been stopped for now. There's still a lot of work to be done with 2010. Most important in 2010 is the gubenatorial races and state legislatures. Why? They draw the boundaries in most states. While I don't care for the redistricting decision making process, it is what it is, and knowing the rules of the game is most important. Needless to say, for that reason alone, three republicans will automatically get my vote. The nominees for governor, state senate, and state rep.

The 09 elections were hopefully the beginning or a nationwide comeback against the radical leftist policies of Mr. Obama, Rahm Emmanuel, Mr. Reid, and Ms Pelosi.

The GOP's biggest obstacle to a comeback, idiot senators

First of all, I want to get this out of the way. I'm not on board yet for the 2012 Sarah Palin for president campaign. I'm still undecided, and while I like Palin, she's not my first choice among potential candidates. That aside, Palin is a big draw for the grassroots, and that rubs some insiders in the beltway the wrong way. There was a whole bunch of yapping back and forth about a big NRCC fundraiser where she attended.

This lead to a sneering catfight from DC's The Hill that reminded me from a scene from the movie Ghostbusters. From the mayor's office scene - Is this true? Yes it's true. This man has no dick.

From the Hill

Several GOP senators offered searing criticism of the Alaska governor when asked in recent interviews whether she could pose a credible challenge to President Obama in 2012.

“She has to hunker down and govern and show she’s not a joke,” said a GOP lawmaker who represents one of the southern battlegrounds of the 2012 election.

First of all, if you don't sign your name to your statement, it's a joke. This reminds me of the anyonomous coward state rep here last year over the tax increase who was all pissed off that he was being pressured by the GOP to reject the tax increase. That's why I thought of the scene from Ghostbusters. If you can't put your name behind it, then it is worthless. It's cowardly.

We'll find out in 2010 about Palin's ability to govern as decided by her constituents back home. My money on this statement was Graham, and he's a joke as far as I'm concerned.

One GOP senator questioned whether Palin has enough gravitas for voters to trust her in tough economic times.

“If the economy implodes, I don’t see her as having much of a chance,” said the lawmaker, who noted that Palin’s national political ambitions have caused her political troubles at home. “She has also taken on water up there in Alaska.”

Sounds like wishful thinking.

Sadly, the democrats had the best quote here.

Meanwhile, Democratic strategists delighted over the confusion caused by the spat.

“Oh, to be a fly on the wall during the NRCC-NRSC dinner planning meetings,” quipped a senior House Democratic political aide.

Right now we have an economy in the crapper. We have record deficits and spending. We have massive big government power grabs by Obama's goons, and you people are all bent out of shape with Palin? Do your jobs for once and try and put up some spirited opposition and alternative plans.

Once again, the US Senate, democrat and republican alike, shows the worst the government has to offer, and Obama can be tossed in that category as well. He was a senator.

Jim DeMint tries to get Senate Leadership to wake up, gets attacked for his efforts

The Senate proves once again that it is the most inept body on the face of the earth. This time it's the GOP senate leadership being the problem....again. Jim DeMint tries his best, but this is his response.

From Politico

Just after November’s election, Republican senators huddled in a closed-door meeting to consider a package of rules that would have tossed Ted Stevens out of their conference, imposed term limits on party leaders and otherwise changed the way the Senate Republican Conference does business.

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, who proposed the rules, saw quickly that they weren’t going to be popular with his colleagues. So one of his staffers urged him to withdraw the proposal setting term limits on the GOP leader, and DeMint hoped the others would remain packaged together so they could be considered in a single vote.

But Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander of Tennessee took issue with the staffer and quickly called a vote on the term-limit proposal before DeMint decided to withdraw it. Then party leaders proceeded to call up each of DeMint’s other proposals separately, creating a long series of votes that DeMint lost badly.

“No doubt,” DeMint said, Republican leaders were “trying to humiliate” him.

Let's look at what the old system has got us. The Senate revived the bailout. Ted Stevens invented the bridge to nowhere. The senate spends more than the house and voted for that bridge 80-20 or something like that. The same people who screw up get promoted and are part of the club. DeMint, who is a relative newcomer to the senate. McConnell has been there for years. Alexander is new, but was a Tennessee governor and has been a politican insider for ever.

As Republicans seek a way forward after two disastrous elections, social and fiscal conservative activists off Capitol Hill are rallying behind DeMint because of his unrelenting style to force his party to return to its small-government, free market roots. DeMint, 57, said in an interview that he’s not dwelling on his previous battles with the GOP leadership and sees areas where his party’s leaders and the Obama administration can work together to solve the country’s problems.

But DeMint is less willing to compromise with Democrats than many in his party, and some Senate Republicans doubt his fiery tactics can lead their party out of the political wilderness when the public is seeking an end to legislative gridlock.

DeMint’s critics, including senior Republican senators and top aides in the Senate, say his refusal to work within the norms of the body — by showing deference to party leaders and chairmen and building support behind closed doors without airing concerns first to the news media — undermines his ability to draw support for his cause.

The problem right now is that there is too much deference to "leaders" and not enough leadership that deserves deference. Right now the GOP needs to do two things more than anything else.

1. Formulate a clear plan of opposition plan to Obama's big spending. Noticed I said "plan." That doesn't mean simply saying that Obama's plan sucks (which it does). It means coming out with a good alternative to Obama's plan and communicate it to them.

2. Clean up the corruption. Don't tolerate the Ted Stevens types anymore.

Inside baseball (RNC, MI GOP races)

I'm violating the 3rd rail of my site. I generally do not comment much publicaly on inside baseball measures that are not elections. It often causes more trouble than it is worth. Right now we have two significant races affecting the GOP. One is for RNC chair. The other is MI GOP chair.

I'll start with the MI GOP chair. I am currently undecided in who I am supporting, assuming that I am a state delegate for the next convention. I have been a delegate every time I chose to run for the spot, so I assume it is likely I'll be at the next meeting. Ingham County Chair and former State Senator Norm Shinkle was running, and dropped out and supported Former Slovakia Ambassador Ron Weiser. That means two people are running now. Ron Weiser and State Rep and US Senate candidate Jack Hoogendyk. I know both Norm and Jack who are both good people. I do not know Ron Weiser. I don't claim solidarity to the "West MI" clique or the "East MI" cliques, etc. etc. I've backed those firmly in the West MI clique in the past, and those in the East MI clique in the past. I will continue to back those in both camps.

I have three questions for each of the candidates.

1. How are you going to keep the State Senate, AG, and Sec of STate seat, and how are you planning to take back the house, governor, and State Supreme Court back from the dems?

2. How do you plan to assist candidates who are running - specifically.

3. How will you build on the current foundation set by Saul and his administration and which would you do the same or different?

Those three questions and answers will determine whom I support.

Now for the RNC, there are six candidates for that position.

1. Saul Anuzis
2. Mike Duncan
3. Michael Steele
4. Ken Blackwell
5. Chip Saltsman
6. Katon Dawson

1. Saul Anuzis. Saul is great at logtistics and communications. That's his specialty. Many chairs want to be part of the cocktail party crowd. Saul will go to the grassroots meetings instead. Saul also is not afraid to go on TV to go after the dems, or to ruffle feathers. He's a solid conservative (fiscal, life, guns), and is working to make sure the GOP is fiscally conservative again. I remember how on Granholm's tax increase, he was doing his best to try and firewall that from going into law. It didn't happen, but he showed that the Republicans need to stand for something and not follow the leader of Granholm which started this downward spiral going back to 02-04.(Johnson/Sikkema) I do have one concern. Who will Saul hire in DC for election consulting? Saul is a delegater, like a lot of CEO's. After 2004 I talked with him about election mailings and strategies since I had some concerns about some of them and what happened in a few races. I think that is his one major weakness in Michigan. If that is addressed, and I think it can be as Saul IS a delegater, then Saul can be a great chair for the RNC. Election strategy is my only concern, but it is a concern. I think it is less of one in DC for him than it is in Michigan with the cliques. DC has it's cliques, but Saul isn't as tied to/against them than he was to a degree in Michigan.

2. Mike Duncan, the incumbent, needs to go. The RNC, NRCC, and NRSC hung out to dry so many winnable seats and got involved too often in primaries, spending money that needs to be used to win seats away from democrats. That's not to get to the next part. Mike who? I've never seen him. He's the RNC chair, and I couldn't pick out his face in the crowd? That's not good. Lastly, he was Bush's guy. I've frankly had enough of the Bush years and the big spending and the "big government conservatism." Sorry, Mike. It's not personal against you, but just how it is time for Boehner to step down from leadership, it's time for new leadership in DC that is frankly not tied to the establishment crowd.

3. Michael Steele. His claim to fame is running successfully as Bob Ehrich's LT in Maryland back in 02. Ehrlich as governor, Steele as LT Gov. He ran in 06 against Ben Cardin and did not win.

4. Ken Blackwell. I like the guy since he wasn't tied to the corrput Taft liberal republican machine in Ohio and their tax increase/gun grab support. More importantly, Blackwell spoke up and fought that when it was not the in thing to do. Taft was convicted of four misdemeanors while in office, and Blackwell was not a part of that. Unfortnately, he lost badly in his gubenatorial campaign.

5. Chip Saltsman - Mike Huckabee's campaign manager and former policy advisor to Bill Frist. He did a good job in Tenneesee from keeping it from being Gored in 2000.

6. Katon Dawson - South Carolina Chair. I don't know much about him, although South Carolina is the most GOP state in the South up and down the ticket.

For MI GOP Chair, I'm undecided. For RNC, I support Saul Anuzis.

Mark Sanford gets it

Sorry for the long delay between posts. Late November/December is tough. I had a trial and two papers I had to write and finish.

There's a reason I've hoped he was going to run back in 08, and why he would be my first choice in 2012. Mark Sanford wrote this in Politico back on November 29.

Mark Sanford - What's next for the GOP

Our party took nothing short of a shellacking nationally. Some on the left will say our electoral losses are a repudiation of our principles of lower taxes, smaller government and individual liberty. But Election Day was not a rejection of those principles — in fact, cutting taxes and spending were important tenets of Barack Obama’s campaign.

Instead, voters rejected the fact that while Republicans have campaigned on the conservative themes of lower taxes, less government and more freedom, they have consistently failed to govern that way. Americans didn’t turn away from conservatism, they instead turned away from many who faked it.

Mark Sanford walked the walk. THAT is why I hoped he was going to run. This governor had the courage of calling out big spenders in his own party, and did it in a fashion that brought much attention to the problem. When the state legislature gave a bloated spending bill to Governor Sanford, he line item vetoed it. To add insult to the injury, he brought two pigs to the capital, named one pork, named the other barrel, had a press conference with them. That sent a message, and it wasn't even partisan.

Sanford had three prongs on rebuilding the GOP.

First, let’s go back to the principle of saying what you mean and meaning what you say. A political party is much like a brand, and brands thrive or wither based on how consistently they deliver on what they promise. Along those same lines, it’s important for brands to stick to their knitting. If John Deere’s tractor sales are declining, they don’t say, “Tell you what, let’s make cars and airplanes, too.” Instead, they focus on producing better tractors.

I make that point because there’s a real temptation in Republican circles right now to try and be all things to all people. We tried that already — it was called “compassionate conservatism,” and it got us nowhere.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. The GOP got lucky in 2000 and 2004. While the Bush campaign are good organizers, they are poor strategists when it comes to message. In 2000, they barely beat a real bum in Gore, and in 2004, they ran against a traitor in John Kerry and barely beat him. It was buying time, because Congress did not keep the big spending parts of Bush in camp and simply followed him. Nobody respect followers.

Compassionate Conservatism was never real popular with the base. Bush got buy with much of the base because of social issues, bad opponents, jerks in the media and on the left we wanted to see lose (the old he's a son of a bitch, but our son of a bitch), and many on the left wanting to see a war lost for political reasons. (Politics stops at the border, and that continues now with Obama as president).

Eventually though, when the Republicans act like democrats, voters are rather going to have the real thing than democrat-lite. No Child Left Behind was a joke. Prescription Drugs including Viagra paid for by the feds? McCain/Feingold? Panic driven handouts after Katrina? Deficit Spending? Bridges to Nowhere? And now the trillion dollar plus bailouts. What the hell are you guys doing? I never signed up for any of that, and that is why I am a 1994 Republican and not a Bush Republican.

Second, our loyalties need to be to ideas, not to individuals. Ted Stevens in many ways personified the opposite of what the GOP is supposed to be about, reveling in his ability to secure pork and turning a blind eye to ethical lapses.

There needs to be a high standard for our franchisees. In other words, I believe Republicans and conservatives must agree on our core principles. St. Augustine called for “unity in the essentials, diversity in the nonessentials, and charity in all things,” and while I believe there should always be a big GOP tent, there must also be a shared agreement on the essentials — including expanding liberty, encouraging entrepreneurship and limiting the reach of government in people’s everyday lives.

First, let’s go back to the principle of saying what you mean and meaning what you say. A political party is much like a brand, and brands thrive or wither based on how consistently they deliver on what they promise. Along those same lines, it’s important for brands to stick to their knitting. If John Deere’s tractor sales are declining, they don’t say, “Tell you what, let’s make cars and airplanes, too.” Instead, they focus on producing better tractors.

I make that point because there’s a real temptation in Republican circles right now to try and be all things to all people. We tried that already — it was called “compassionate conservatism,” and it got us nowhere.

Second, our loyalties need to be to ideas, not to individuals. Ted Stevens in many ways personified the opposite of what the GOP is supposed to be about, reveling in his ability to secure pork and turning a blind eye to ethical lapses.

There needs to be a high standard for our franchisees. In other words, I believe Republicans and conservatives must agree on our core principles. St. Augustine called for “unity in the essentials, diversity in the nonessentials, and charity in all things,” and while I believe there should always be a big GOP tent, there must also be a shared agreement on the essentials — including expanding liberty, encouraging entrepreneurship and limiting the reach of government in people’s everyday lives.

I can't disagree with any of that.

Finally, we need to look toward the states for answers, rather than toward Washington.

I am struck by how many of my colleagues around the country were quietly advancing the kinds of reforms and conservative principles that Washington politicians would do well to emulate.

In Louisiana, Bobby Jindal is making market-based reforms to his state’s Medicaid program, while over in Georgia, Sonny Perdue is tackling health care affordability with a Health Savings Account program. Sarah Palin has cut spending and fought corruption in Alaska. Rick Perry in Texas has balanced the budget while cutting taxes, creating more than a million jobs in the process. Mitch Daniels in Indiana is innovating when it comes to building infrastructure.

I could go on, but the bottom line is that you don’t have to look far to find examples of how sticking to conservative principles not only yields a better-working government but, frankly, yields electoral success as well.

When Washington is the problem, change isn't going to come from Washington leadership like Blunt, Boehner, and McConnell. Instead, the following people need to be the voice and faces of our party. Sanford. Jindal. Palin. Pence. Hensarling. Coburn. That is the future of the party.

We’ve thrown $2.3 trillion toward bailouts and a stimulus this year with little to show for it in the way of results, with seemingly hundreds of billions more being contemplated by Congress each day. Borrowing from Medicare, Social Security, our grandkids and the Chinese to remedy a problem created by too much borrowing strikes me as odd, and hardly the “change” Americans really want.

Where change must come, though, is in once again making our party one that governs on the principles it professes. That change starts with each of us in elected office, and more importantly, with each person who cares about returning to conservative principles making their voices heard.

One thing I liked seeing was the Livingston County GOP putting up billboards and a commercial that subtlely mentions the good thing the LOCAL Republicans have been doing. We need to first and foremost regain the fiscal responsibility mantra in our party. That starts by walking the walk, and calling out all sides that do not walk the walk. It's time for more Mark Sanford and less government conservatism and less George Bush and "crap sandwich" "conservatism".

Allan Filip running for 8th District GOP Chair

I knew this already, but was keeping it quiet until the Argus had this.

Allan Filip will not seek reelection after receiving the endorsement for 8th congressional district chairman.

"I will always cherish the honor of having served as chairman of the Livingston GOP over the last two years. I am proud of our group's accomplishments, Filip said. "I look forward to new challenges in the 8th district and hope we can build on the success of the Livingston GOP. I will continue to be very active in Livingston County."

Fillip made the announcement on Thursday night. He was endorsed by Mike Rogers and Larry Ward.

I think Allan did a good job for the party. Without going into details, it was a mess at the end of 06. I'm not going to point fingers on that here. It's done and over. Old news. The first thing is that the new leadership calmed some things down that needed to be calmed. That worked well for him as he wasn't a fan of inside baseball. He did well at putting some of the factions of the party back together and worked well with others. I was a Ron Paul supporter. He was a Romney supporter. Allan and I still worked well together. That doesn't mean we always agree, but we agreed much more than we disagreed and when we disagreed, we did so respectfully. I disappeared for a while from the inside stuff, but still kept in touch and did saw enough to see some of the good changes that took place.

Today, a good foundation is in place, and without the work the county put in, I have no doubt at least two races, if not possibly three or four would have been carried by democrats. That wasn't all Allan, but he was part of it. When McCain left the state, our county still had the capacity to do some things on our own.

Are things perfect? No. But I judge a leadership role of officers by this. Did the chair of the Livingston GOP leave the spot in a better position now than he did when he took it over? The answer is yes. That's all I can ask. Same goes for any other organizational position, VP, both Treasurers, and both Secretaries.

I know one person who is running for Allan's spot, and I'm probably backing him. I won't disclose that here yet. Stay tuned. Good luck to Allan for the 8th District spot. He's got my support, as well as the support of the previous chair, Larry Ward.

Blunt steps down from leadership

From Redstate

Roy Blunt is out as Whip. He held a press conference earlier.

This opens the Whip job for Cantor.

A team is coming together. With Adam Putnam and Kay Granger leaving, that clears those seats. Can we fit Hensarling in to one of those spots?

That's a start, but why the hell is "crap sandwich" Boehner still there? He needs to step down as well or get voted out of leadership. After 06 and his weak leadership in 08, he needs to stop his Matt Millen leadership.

We need ideas people in charge. The leading name I'm hearing is Cantor. He's an improvement, but I'd rather see Pence, Hensarling, Blackburn, or someone of that vein who can compete with ideas and then communicate them as alternatives to the big leftism of Obama, Pelosi, etc.

In other news, Dow down 300+ so far. It was down 500+ yesterday after Obama one. He's already tanking the economy. Oh well. You all voted for him. Walk it off.

The boy who cried wolf

One thing that irks me about many activist groups is what I call "The Boy who cried wolf syndrome." While my email box was flooded with the Obama's UN gun control bill email (not true, it was a bad spending bill but not a gun control bill and his record is so horrific on that issue that it doesn't need falsehoods) and the Obama's a Muslim rumor, it detracts from the real record of his that sucks. These false wolf sightings hurt the real disasters that Obama presidency will bring to us, like his appointments of Supreme Court justices and Federal Reserve governors that have a lasting impact on our country long after he is gone. At best, the real wolf is overshadowed by false wolf sightings, and at worst when the real wolf appears, nobody listens.

Now we have this battle brewing among the GOP. From the Detroit News

Conservative activists are preparing to do battle with allies of Sen. John McCain in advance of this summer's GOP convention, hoping to prevent his views on global warming, immigration, stem cell research and campaign finance from becoming enshrined in the party's official declaration of principles.

McCain has not yet signaled the changes he plans to make in the 2004 Republican platform. But many conservatives say they fear wholesale revisions could emerge as candidate McCain seeks to put his stamp on a document that is a paean to the policies and principles of President Bush.

"There is just no way that you can avoid anticipating what is going to come. Everyone is aware that McCain is different on these issues," said Jessica Echard, the executive director of the conservative Eagle Forum. "We're all kind of waiting with anticipation because we just don't know how he's going to thread this needle."

The convention platform is not worth a fight. It is symbolic and nothing more or nothing less. What the REAL platform is not given at the convention, but it given by the combination of all the candidates running for all the partisan seats across this country, from precinct delegate where I'll be serving a fourth term to township trustee to county commissioner to sheriff to state rep to state senate to congress to senate to president. The convention platform is a piece of paper, not a constitution.

I haven't even looked at the current platform until this article. That tells you how important it really is. 92 pages. I only needed to get to page 2 when I found a major domestic policy disagreement. His boondoggle prescription drugs plan and No Child Left Behind. Since when are federal expansions of government republican values? Now where I come from. It's inclusion in the platform doesn't bother me that much. The actions themselves are another story.

I have no problem with a total rewrite. I'd reduce the GOP platform to one sentence. The Republican party supports less government and more freedom. That's it. 92 pages dillutes its value. I'm not reading 92 pages of something that is purely symbolic. What's there may be important to the marketing crowds and cocktail parties in DC, but it isn't that important to real America.

The most important thing though isn't the platform language. It is the grumbling about McCain changing the platform....when it hasn't been changed yet. The wolf hasn't been on the hunt yet. Why is the Eagle Forum raising Hell before there is something to raise Hell about? If McCain is excluding pro-life speakers like Clinton did to Bob Casey Sr in 1992 than I would be raising a little Hell as that would be sending a clear message. We as conservatives need to pick our battles. Be prepared for the wolf, but don't sound the alarm until he's there ready to attack our pets and lifestock. If I was the Eagle Forum, I'd be pushing McCain more on the VP choice and judicial nominees than I would be on platform language.

Time for GOP to stop drifting left and be conservative again

The Politico had a good story today about the GOP's rebranding effort. I've been saying for years that we had a problem drifting towards the left with more big government under Mr. Bush's leadership. It caught up with us in 2006, when we lost the vote of the independents - mostly among populist Reagan Democrats with a throw the bums out attitude. It did not help that a large number of conservatives stayed home in protest.

From the Politico

When New Coke became a sales and public relations debacle in April 1985, parent company Coca-Cola yanked it from shelves in 79 days, reintroduced Classic Coke, pumped millions into advertising to repair its brand and roared back as the soda giant two years later.

The Republican Party hopes it can be so lucky.

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) recently created a small, ad hoc advisory group of fellow members to help restore the GOP brand as the party of small government, fiscal discipline and tough-minded foreign policy.

Examples from the corporate world, where brand rehabilitation is a lucrative specialty, prove that it is possible to save even the most damaged reputations with the right strategy.

But these lessons also highlight the challenges Republicans face trying to replicate this kind of PR magic in the 14 months before they face voters.

Corporate image experts say the key to saving a bruised brand in the marketplace is a quick response. But the Republican decline can be charted over the course of years, with little effort to correct problems in a decisive or comprehensive fashion.

We have Coke Classic (1994 Republicans) and New Coke ("Big Government Conservatives" - in reality, liberals).

The problem is simple. The GOP went away from its Reaganite and 1994 "Contract with America" roots. It moved to the left. Big government is leftist, and the GOP RAPIDLY expanded the size of government with its leftist expansion and increased spending. That's not in line with the base, and much of the base had enough. Donations are down, as is voter turnout. And through all that the media and democrats are talking about the GOP moving to the extreme right. That's absolute bullshit - Angus sized.

The problem is simple. Ethics. With idiots like Larry Craig, Duke Cunningham, Don Sherwood, and Mark Foley, we made the frontpage in the worst possible way.

The problem is simple. Communication, Plans, and general competence. That costs us more than anything else. Our national party is acting about as competent as Granholm. It doesn't know what it wants.

The GOP can make a comeback. In order to do so, it needs to do the following.

1. Primary ethicaly challenged reps - Send a message that Foleyism and Craigism is not tolerated in this party. Leave the crooks - the Norman Hsus, Gerry Sudds, Mel Reynolds, George Soros, Jack Murtha, Bill Jefferson, and Dan Rostenkowskis to the other party. (And Jack Abramoff was a switch hitter among parties for that matter backing Stabenow)

2. Stop running to the left. A message is worthless when it isn't followed. We can not run on less government, lower taxes, and fiscal responsibility when it is not being followed. If I wanted more government, I'd vote for a democrat. I don't want to vote democrat lite, and I'm just about through doing so. I held my nose with Bush twice. That's enough for me. I'd like to see some backbone for once.

3. Competence. The 02-06 GOP class sucked. The democrats 06-present class suck even worse. There's an opening for us if we go back to our roots, and present a real plan that is more than the same old talking points.

New Coke and "Big Government Conservatism" hasn't worked. Let's look back at our 1994 roots and adapt that for the future.