Right now the Romney campaign and their team is at a crossroads. I'm hearing two different rumors conflicting with one another right now. With about a week before the absentees (34% of the vote) and a little less than a month and a half before the November election, it's time for the campaign "experts" and advisors to take a close look at what they are doing, what they aren't doing, and adjust properly.
Now is the time to make a move, and by that, I mean a helluva lot more than just phone calls and lit drop n runs.
I've done a lot of campaign stuff, even after originally planning on doing nothing except my business stuff. Glutton for punishment I guess. I'm not a rookie, and not someone who just armchair quarterbacks after the fact. After 11 years on the inside with politics, I will call out incompetence when I see it. I also do not live in a bubble and come from a family with independents, democrats, republicans, and capital l libertarians. Most of them aren't that political outside of voting and following the issues.
One of the things I refuse to do however are political phone calls. I always thought they hurt us back in the day, and believe more so now. They are a waste of time, money, and resources - ESPECIALLY in a general election campaign. We all know Election Day is in November. People are tired of being called multiple times, from multiple organizations. We have the robocalls, the party calls, the superpac calls, money calls, etc. People don't like to be bothered 7-8 times. It pisses off voters who may very well take actions against that candidate. The insider asks "What are they going to do, vote Obama?" Probably not if it is a base voter (although some have said they will vote for who call them the LEAST), but that voter may very well say "go foxtrot yourself" and stay home, especially for the "electable" candidate that people aren't excited about in the first place. This isn't a race between Romney and Obama (and the 3% of 3rd party votes). This is a 3 way race between Romney, Obama, and staying home. I don't think it is a coincidence that Romney has dropped in all polls after the major Super Saturday phone calls. Some think Paul Scott was recalled partially due to all the phone calls there as well. Romney always had trouble closing the deal. Don't close the deal against him by 7-8 phone calls. Phone calls also have diminishing returns with caller ID. I know the claim about how 7-8 calls help, but even if that was true then (which I doubt) it is certainly untrue for the past few years. I'll mention more on that after the election, win or lose.
The other thing you can't do is insult the base, especially with bad tactics. When you have hundreds of millions of dollars, you need to spend the money wisely. TV ads are only one part of the budget. Some, so they can bray about their large small donor base, are selling their signs (or giving them out to volunteers only). That's the current state of Romney's campaign in Michigan regarding signs. That is possibly the absolute stupidest idea I have ever seen in politics outside of Akin's comments and McCain and the overrated Karl Rove announcing their quitting to the world. Whoever had that idea has his head up his ass and needs to get fired and blacklisted so he is not an adviser on any campaign ever again. Signs belong on yards in front of houses, not right of ways. They belong out starting at this time, not just at polling locations on election day after 35% of the people already voted. Signs in front of houses build momentum which builds on itself transforming light blue states into late swing states forcing opposition to spend money on TV ads where they did not plan to do so before. Sign momentum and hard work with doors takes candidates who supposedly have little shot to win like Joe Hune in 2002 and have them win. You don't refuse to give them out to supporters and then sell signs to people in yet another nagging push to bother people for money - especially when they are used to just picking up signs. You give signs out, and tell people we're running out and need money to get more of these signs that you are seeing everywhere. People don't waste their money on losers. No signs on lawns = loser. Campaigns selling signs and refusing to give them out = loser campaign dragging down the entire ticket and causing insulted members of the base to stay home hurting all of us. Don't complain to the victory center directors. They are just the Indians and follow orders. It's the fault of the advisors and consultants who live in a bubble and have their heads up their asses. When you have hundreds of millions of dollars with fundraising, there is no excuse - none - for not having signs for any supporter that needs one. If county commission and township races can budget for signs properly, so can presidential.
Romney's campaign has to choose whether or not to be a winner or a loser. I'm hearing two different possible scenarios, one I won't say good but not bad. The other scenario is McCain 2008 in its operation. This race will be won or lost likely in the next two weeks. If it is doing the same thing it is doing now, it's game over. I'm hearing conflicting reports in the direction it takes. I've also learned a few things from the past several years.
1. Do not donate to non-local Superpacs or National Organizations. They are run by Washington/Maryland/Virginia and Washington/Maryland/Virginia style consultants in a bubble who don't understand reality. If they can't run things properly, they aren't worthy of our money. We don't work for the party. It's supposed to work for us.
2. LONG TERM - Local parties and organizations needs to be self sufficient and if that steps on a few national toes, TS. Every local and district party should have an active federal FEC and state/local Secretary of State account so we don't let national decisions hurt us down the ticket. Since it has been shown over and over again that National doesn't do things properly, we have to take care of things ourselves and be ready and able adapt to all situations. It's time for our political party money to stay home and not go to Ohio. Those local resources then need to be spent our way and on our terms. Precinct Delegates elect local and (through state convention district caucus) district leadership. We can control our party. It's time we take control in case another national campaign does a McCain and hangs us out to dry.
As far as this goes regarding Romney, I've heard two different scenarios. I don't know if he will do a McCain. He was on a lot of damage control because of the overrated Karl Rove's comments regarding Pennsylvania. Right now regardless of what decision he makes, the momentum is against him. The pundit class has him required to run the table to have a chance to win. That's an unacceptable premis that needs to be changed. It CAN be changed because elections aren't in September. Romney needs to - at worst - make sure Obama has to fight in the light blue states, much as Obama did in Indiana back in 2008, and even Bush in 2000/2004 in a pre Chris Christie New Jersey. If Obama dictates the fight, it's game over.
Romney needs some specific plans that are more than talking points, and needs to create momentum. He needs to put signs up in all those sign locations that requested. ASAP. That encourages supporters. Don't sell them. Don't play games with them. Do your job and let your workers and volunteers get their guy elected.
Are you in or out, Mitt? I'll find out in the next weeks.
Showing posts with label inside baseball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label inside baseball. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Sunday, September 02, 2012
Pick your battles - is it worth it?
There's a lot of inside baseball dust ups and gamesmanship going on right now with RNC convention away from the speeches. There's plenty of blame that could be spread around, and a lot of it could be avoided with common sense.
I preface this by saying the following. I voted for Ron Paul in 2008 and Rick Santorum in 2012 during the primaries. I held my nose and voted for McCain in 08 and will be holding my nose and voting for Romney this year to get rid of Obama, Eric Holder, and the rest of his cabinet. I don't consider myself a "Paulite" and don't follow his supporters 100% I don't consider myself one that always sides with - or against - "leadership." I call things as I see them. I don't like coronations on any side. Pushing a coronation on me is a good way to get my opposition. That was one of the reasons I did not support Romney - or Paul - in this year's primary. Coronation tactics and takeover tactics. Make your case and I'll make my own decision. That's why we have primaries.
Many conservatives, and almost all the Ron Paul supporters went apeshit at this vote at the RNC convention. Now I support the first part of the rule 16 (primary binding), but not the second part with disavowing if the candidate and state party does not support them. I would support the disavowing for the presidential vote at the convention, but not the other votes with the other committees.
I have three problems with the rule.
1. HOW it was enacted. That's shown at the video posted at Right Michigan Bus games, and an Obama style script from a teleprompter wasn't needed.
2. Would the disavowing delegate occur for the presidential vote only, or for the rules committees and other stuff as well?
3. It wasn't needed. Mitt already won and had the votes. This was probably about avoiding future floor fights from the camera. Now I don't like airing stuff in front of cameras or even in public meetings. If I have a problem with a leadership decision, I'll usually give my gripes in private behind the scenes. It's more effective that way. On the same note, in the era of youtube, that's impossible to do no matter what if something is taped.
But in reality, this doesn't do that much, except potentially protecting themselves from laziness. It wasn't needed and Mitt had the votes. This is a much different era of primaries in 2012 than it was in 1976 with the rise of the internet, cable news, talk radio, and everything else. People harken back to the brokered convention in 76. That was 36 years ago. I wasn't born yet. I've seen a lot of changes in primary elections just in the years I've followed politics.
If you want a "tea party" or "liberty candidate" as the video says - to win, you plan this long before the convention.
This wasn't nearly as bad as the extra delegate which cost Saul Anuzis his position as RNC committeeman. That wasn't needed either and in the end didn't make a difference, but could have potentially been a much bigger problem. I like Saul and he's a good guy who's done a lot for grassroots that is overlooked, but that was a bad decision. We all make them at some point.
What both of those things where - was equivalent to Terrell Owens celebrating on the Dallas Star at Cowboy's stadium in an infamous football game.
This was stupid. It wasn't needed. It didn't do much of anything except rub it in the faces of people the leadership do not like. It's bad tactics, just like hostile takeover attempts from the other side are also bad tactics. It's short term thinking that is a long run failure.
I'm repeating myself with this one phrase. "It wasn't needed." Certain people in leadership didn't need to pick the battle. No good was going to come from it. There's other battles that didn't need to be picked. That's not limited to one side either. Some of the Ron Paul folks wanted to try and get a floor fight to replace Romney as the nominee. They lost it after they lost the primaries with their candidate finishing way back in the pack. Shit happens. My candidate lost too. Take your lumps like we did. On to the general election and it's time to improve through downticket races and gaining support of voters so more parts of our platforms become enacted - long term.
Now some (not all) of the Paul supporters want Obama to win out of spite through 3rd party votes in the hopes that future candidates would beg them for support. That won't get support and will cost immensely. That would get the entire Paul movement smashed forever and destroyed by any means necessary - and most conservatives would join in the smashing because as much of a problem Romney is, Obama is that much worse. It won't be "We can control the election, you need us" like some of them want. It will be "F-you. Obama won or almost won. You helped him. Time for your movement to die." If you become viewed as poison, everything you touch - including your issues - also turns to poison because will be tied "with those people."
The most important thing in politics is relationships. While it is inevitable that bridges sometimes get burned, it's important to avoid it when it is avoidable. I've had good relationships with people in the party despite at times being in heated disagreements. We both understood the reasons for our actions, and while there was even some hard feelings at the time, it wasn't personal. They weren't my enemy, and at the end of the day they didn't help THE enemy. Helping the enemy however, is a whole other matter. That's as cardinal of a sin as backstabbing. I will never ever forget the bastards and pieces of trash who were "conservatives" or "republicans" for Obama in 08. They helped give us Obamacare, the stimulus, Eric Holder, bad SCOTUS picks, tax increases, record debt, record deficits, and a vastly increase government. The establishment can't smash those who support different primary candidates, especially those who are willing to work within the party. Those that lose - whether it be the "moderates" (by far the worst offenders), libertarians, Paul supporters, conservatives, or anyone else need to suck it up and not campaign and use threats to spite the winner.
The reality however is this. None of the gamesmanship was needed, nor effective in their goals. In reality, it didn't do much, if anything. It did not effect the outcome. If you want to elect a presidential candidate in the primary, convention is only one small portion of it. You have to win enough delegates in the primaries and caucuses in enough states. RNC rule changes only affect a small portion of this, usually with scheduling of primaries. Most of the power is done through the state level through state committee and also with the state legislature/governor. Even a lot of the scheduling is done there.
The way to stop the bad stuff is to make sure we have good committeemen and good state chair and state committee members, and make sure other states do the same thing. That's how bad rules get stopped. It starts locally, but electing good precinct delegates, executive committee members, county officers, district committee and officers, and state committee members, along with RNC committee members is how it is done. It's long term, and takes a lot of organization, recruitment of good candidates for those positions, and reaching out to swing voters that make decisions.
Also, there's statutory members automatically on those exec committees. They are your county elected officials (or nominees). Those are important people and will always some of the power regarding county officers. That county commissioner race is important.
I've been at this 11 years. Some have been around longer. Many have not. Most don't know how to organize. Most who do know how to organize don't know how to convince the swing voters and alienate them (happens with all cliques) with takeover attempts and power grabs (or what seem like them), and airing stuff to the media that should be handled in house. There's battles to fight. There's battles not worth fighting. All or nothing is a failure. Picking the battles at the right time after paying one's dues with the party, is the correct way to handle things.
In other words, all sides need to think long term, swallow their pride, don't celebrate like TO did, pick the right battles, and stay cool.
I preface this by saying the following. I voted for Ron Paul in 2008 and Rick Santorum in 2012 during the primaries. I held my nose and voted for McCain in 08 and will be holding my nose and voting for Romney this year to get rid of Obama, Eric Holder, and the rest of his cabinet. I don't consider myself a "Paulite" and don't follow his supporters 100% I don't consider myself one that always sides with - or against - "leadership." I call things as I see them. I don't like coronations on any side. Pushing a coronation on me is a good way to get my opposition. That was one of the reasons I did not support Romney - or Paul - in this year's primary. Coronation tactics and takeover tactics. Make your case and I'll make my own decision. That's why we have primaries.
Many conservatives, and almost all the Ron Paul supporters went apeshit at this vote at the RNC convention. Now I support the first part of the rule 16 (primary binding), but not the second part with disavowing if the candidate and state party does not support them. I would support the disavowing for the presidential vote at the convention, but not the other votes with the other committees.
I have three problems with the rule.
1. HOW it was enacted. That's shown at the video posted at Right Michigan Bus games, and an Obama style script from a teleprompter wasn't needed.
2. Would the disavowing delegate occur for the presidential vote only, or for the rules committees and other stuff as well?
3. It wasn't needed. Mitt already won and had the votes. This was probably about avoiding future floor fights from the camera. Now I don't like airing stuff in front of cameras or even in public meetings. If I have a problem with a leadership decision, I'll usually give my gripes in private behind the scenes. It's more effective that way. On the same note, in the era of youtube, that's impossible to do no matter what if something is taped.
But in reality, this doesn't do that much, except potentially protecting themselves from laziness. It wasn't needed and Mitt had the votes. This is a much different era of primaries in 2012 than it was in 1976 with the rise of the internet, cable news, talk radio, and everything else. People harken back to the brokered convention in 76. That was 36 years ago. I wasn't born yet. I've seen a lot of changes in primary elections just in the years I've followed politics.
If you want a "tea party" or "liberty candidate" as the video says - to win, you plan this long before the convention.
This wasn't nearly as bad as the extra delegate which cost Saul Anuzis his position as RNC committeeman. That wasn't needed either and in the end didn't make a difference, but could have potentially been a much bigger problem. I like Saul and he's a good guy who's done a lot for grassroots that is overlooked, but that was a bad decision. We all make them at some point.
What both of those things where - was equivalent to Terrell Owens celebrating on the Dallas Star at Cowboy's stadium in an infamous football game.
This was stupid. It wasn't needed. It didn't do much of anything except rub it in the faces of people the leadership do not like. It's bad tactics, just like hostile takeover attempts from the other side are also bad tactics. It's short term thinking that is a long run failure.
I'm repeating myself with this one phrase. "It wasn't needed." Certain people in leadership didn't need to pick the battle. No good was going to come from it. There's other battles that didn't need to be picked. That's not limited to one side either. Some of the Ron Paul folks wanted to try and get a floor fight to replace Romney as the nominee. They lost it after they lost the primaries with their candidate finishing way back in the pack. Shit happens. My candidate lost too. Take your lumps like we did. On to the general election and it's time to improve through downticket races and gaining support of voters so more parts of our platforms become enacted - long term.
Now some (not all) of the Paul supporters want Obama to win out of spite through 3rd party votes in the hopes that future candidates would beg them for support. That won't get support and will cost immensely. That would get the entire Paul movement smashed forever and destroyed by any means necessary - and most conservatives would join in the smashing because as much of a problem Romney is, Obama is that much worse. It won't be "We can control the election, you need us" like some of them want. It will be "F-you. Obama won or almost won. You helped him. Time for your movement to die." If you become viewed as poison, everything you touch - including your issues - also turns to poison because will be tied "with those people."
The most important thing in politics is relationships. While it is inevitable that bridges sometimes get burned, it's important to avoid it when it is avoidable. I've had good relationships with people in the party despite at times being in heated disagreements. We both understood the reasons for our actions, and while there was even some hard feelings at the time, it wasn't personal. They weren't my enemy, and at the end of the day they didn't help THE enemy. Helping the enemy however, is a whole other matter. That's as cardinal of a sin as backstabbing. I will never ever forget the bastards and pieces of trash who were "conservatives" or "republicans" for Obama in 08. They helped give us Obamacare, the stimulus, Eric Holder, bad SCOTUS picks, tax increases, record debt, record deficits, and a vastly increase government. The establishment can't smash those who support different primary candidates, especially those who are willing to work within the party. Those that lose - whether it be the "moderates" (by far the worst offenders), libertarians, Paul supporters, conservatives, or anyone else need to suck it up and not campaign and use threats to spite the winner.
The reality however is this. None of the gamesmanship was needed, nor effective in their goals. In reality, it didn't do much, if anything. It did not effect the outcome. If you want to elect a presidential candidate in the primary, convention is only one small portion of it. You have to win enough delegates in the primaries and caucuses in enough states. RNC rule changes only affect a small portion of this, usually with scheduling of primaries. Most of the power is done through the state level through state committee and also with the state legislature/governor. Even a lot of the scheduling is done there.
The way to stop the bad stuff is to make sure we have good committeemen and good state chair and state committee members, and make sure other states do the same thing. That's how bad rules get stopped. It starts locally, but electing good precinct delegates, executive committee members, county officers, district committee and officers, and state committee members, along with RNC committee members is how it is done. It's long term, and takes a lot of organization, recruitment of good candidates for those positions, and reaching out to swing voters that make decisions.
Also, there's statutory members automatically on those exec committees. They are your county elected officials (or nominees). Those are important people and will always some of the power regarding county officers. That county commissioner race is important.
I've been at this 11 years. Some have been around longer. Many have not. Most don't know how to organize. Most who do know how to organize don't know how to convince the swing voters and alienate them (happens with all cliques) with takeover attempts and power grabs (or what seem like them), and airing stuff to the media that should be handled in house. There's battles to fight. There's battles not worth fighting. All or nothing is a failure. Picking the battles at the right time after paying one's dues with the party, is the correct way to handle things.
In other words, all sides need to think long term, swallow their pride, don't celebrate like TO did, pick the right battles, and stay cool.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
