I am beginning a new movement for 2010 and beyond. Vote against every incumbent at every level in the government. If we really want to affect change in this country we have to take action now. Career politicians have had their chance and they have failed, it is time to make the move and vote them all out of office. Of course I have reasons for all of this.
The Founders never meant for "politician" to become a career. The initial idea was that people would serve for a term or two and return to their careers and homes, at that time service was the privilege and power was to be feared. The tables have turned, power is now the goal. Service means nothing to any of them anymore, if it did they would listen instead of trying to buy off voters with pork and earmarks. The original men who served this country did so reluctantly and with great respect to the new institutions that they were forming. John Adams was famously quoted on several occasions as being against service because he thought himself not up to the task mentally or financially. At that time the pay for the position was paltry, as it still is today for the most part, but the influence was nil. There were no special interest groups to perpetuate the career politician, eventually they had to return home to maintain financial solvency. This set of circumstances led to unwilling and selfless leaders. Unwilling to lead out of ego, unwilling to gain great power and selfless in that the country was always put first.
In voting out all incumbents we could also solve the Lobbyist problem and impose term limits on our own, without the dogfight of a Constitutional Amendment. In getting rid of all incumbents we get rid of all lobbyists. When the incumbents are gone lobbyists will have no long term relationships or influence, should that influence begin to reassert itself it will not matter because every two years in the House and six in the Senate we, as voters, will clean them all out again anyway. I would love to see lobbyists deal with that proposition, they would actually have to argue their stands based on the merits of the issues, talk about some real debate.
Obviously this is a pie in the sky notion, but it is one I am all for. Republicans have left me in the cold, and the Democrats have never come out of the cold. I believe that the country is ripe for this kind of movement, now all we need is a spearhead. My mantra will be find me a guy who does not want to be in the House or Senate, and I will show you the guy we, as voters, should want in there....
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Sunday, March 1, 2009
I did not leave my party, my party has left me
Lately I have been very angry about the way in which the Republicans are going about their business in Washington D.C. They have become the party of no. No ideas, no leadership, no ability to counter liberal ideals, no political courage, no political identity, the list could go on and on.
I have heard many times in the last several months about the reasons that the Republicans lost the election; Obama was a positive and vibrant figure that could not be beat, the party lost it's way fiscally, the party lost it's way socially, the party was not conservative enough etc... The one that seems to be taking hold is that the party was not conservative enough on issues of social consequence and that it needs to shift further right in order to win in upcoming elections. To this argument I respond by saying, ARE YOU CRAZY!!! There are two reasons I believe that this is absurd.
First, new voters came into the fold in 08 in alarming numbers. Obama introduced many new people into the electorate and they came out for him in large numbers because he spoke to the middle well enough to get them to vote for him on social concerns (I am discarding Foreign Policy here because polls show that of the voters that thought Foreign Policy was most important they split for McCain). These new voters are not liberal or conservative, I believe that they are centrists with a left lean on social issues. I have discussed this past election with many new voters and I was alarmed by the eclectic nature of their views. Many value the environment, but also National Security. Many believed that social issues were more important in this election cycle, but indicated that had they voted in 04 they would have voted more on Security and Foreign Policy issues. Many indicated that they felt like Obama talked more intelligently about their core concerns this time around, but that they felt like he was not well versed enough should Foreign Issues become a flashpoint in the near future. While this is not scientific, I use it to argue the larger point that the Republican Party did not lose because they were not right enough. It is abundantly clear to me that the Republicans lost because they forgot how to talk to the middle about social/economic issues. A move to the right will not work. A strategy to talk to the middle will work. I do not advocate sacrificing conservative ideals to do this. I advocate remembering that Ronald Reagan did this with unbelievable success without sacrifice of conservative ideals. The party needs to find to find that resonating message to the middle and begin talking to new voters, and they need to do it now.
Second, the Obama Presidency will clearly be one of governing from the left. After all the rhetoric about the middle, he has given many indicators in the first month that the middle is not somewhere he will dwell. Obama has stepped up the partisanship and moved the party to the left. I believe that this will leave a void in the middle and allow for the Republicans to pick up not only middle voters, but also many new voters who have no real political affiliation with either side.
The message needs to quickly change. The Republicans need to stop whining about not having a seat at the table and just sit down. They need to start talking about alternatives to the Obama plan and pushing them in the media whenever they can. Of course the alternatives will not pass, but they must begin positioning themselves for 2010 and beyond. The continuous whining and lack of leadership will only guarantee eight years of far left governance, something I do not want to see and something the country can't afford.
The party also needs to drop the flimsy, transparent political ploys. The united stand against the stimulus bill was refreshing, but it was too late. Where were these same Republicans during the first bail out on the Bush watch? They were nowhere. In rallying against the Obama stimulus, without providing a cogent alternative, they looked like they were playing a political game. Similar to being for something before being against it, ring any bells?
In short I am a conservative, and I am proud of it, but we can't win again until we talk to voters with a broad spectrum of views. I am advocating talking to the middle with plans that make sense and providing a conversation about alternatives, instead of a shouting match about not having a seat at the adult table.
I have heard many times in the last several months about the reasons that the Republicans lost the election; Obama was a positive and vibrant figure that could not be beat, the party lost it's way fiscally, the party lost it's way socially, the party was not conservative enough etc... The one that seems to be taking hold is that the party was not conservative enough on issues of social consequence and that it needs to shift further right in order to win in upcoming elections. To this argument I respond by saying, ARE YOU CRAZY!!! There are two reasons I believe that this is absurd.
First, new voters came into the fold in 08 in alarming numbers. Obama introduced many new people into the electorate and they came out for him in large numbers because he spoke to the middle well enough to get them to vote for him on social concerns (I am discarding Foreign Policy here because polls show that of the voters that thought Foreign Policy was most important they split for McCain). These new voters are not liberal or conservative, I believe that they are centrists with a left lean on social issues. I have discussed this past election with many new voters and I was alarmed by the eclectic nature of their views. Many value the environment, but also National Security. Many believed that social issues were more important in this election cycle, but indicated that had they voted in 04 they would have voted more on Security and Foreign Policy issues. Many indicated that they felt like Obama talked more intelligently about their core concerns this time around, but that they felt like he was not well versed enough should Foreign Issues become a flashpoint in the near future. While this is not scientific, I use it to argue the larger point that the Republican Party did not lose because they were not right enough. It is abundantly clear to me that the Republicans lost because they forgot how to talk to the middle about social/economic issues. A move to the right will not work. A strategy to talk to the middle will work. I do not advocate sacrificing conservative ideals to do this. I advocate remembering that Ronald Reagan did this with unbelievable success without sacrifice of conservative ideals. The party needs to find to find that resonating message to the middle and begin talking to new voters, and they need to do it now.
Second, the Obama Presidency will clearly be one of governing from the left. After all the rhetoric about the middle, he has given many indicators in the first month that the middle is not somewhere he will dwell. Obama has stepped up the partisanship and moved the party to the left. I believe that this will leave a void in the middle and allow for the Republicans to pick up not only middle voters, but also many new voters who have no real political affiliation with either side.
The message needs to quickly change. The Republicans need to stop whining about not having a seat at the table and just sit down. They need to start talking about alternatives to the Obama plan and pushing them in the media whenever they can. Of course the alternatives will not pass, but they must begin positioning themselves for 2010 and beyond. The continuous whining and lack of leadership will only guarantee eight years of far left governance, something I do not want to see and something the country can't afford.
The party also needs to drop the flimsy, transparent political ploys. The united stand against the stimulus bill was refreshing, but it was too late. Where were these same Republicans during the first bail out on the Bush watch? They were nowhere. In rallying against the Obama stimulus, without providing a cogent alternative, they looked like they were playing a political game. Similar to being for something before being against it, ring any bells?
In short I am a conservative, and I am proud of it, but we can't win again until we talk to voters with a broad spectrum of views. I am advocating talking to the middle with plans that make sense and providing a conversation about alternatives, instead of a shouting match about not having a seat at the adult table.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
The Bush Legacy? Let the Speculation Begin
So the end is near. Eight years of George Bush policy and leadership is now coming to a close and it is time to begin the honest asessments of what has transpired and what the legacy will ultimately be.
In previous entries I have argued that this administration was the most paranoid and aloof since the Nixon Administration and I will stand by that statement. The lid has been on this White House since at least 2005 and it could be argued that the lid was on before that. This administration has shown a remarkable inability to get out in front of it's failures. Couple that with the inability to trumpet the successes that they have had and it has been a recipe for disaster. Some of this has most certainly been to protect the American people from frightening details about the war on terror, but there has been a decided lack of trust in the American people to decide for themselves what the information means. The White House has shown an amazing inability to let the people to make their own judgements about policy successes and failures and that indicates a flaw in leadership. Successful administrations admit failures and headline their victories, this administration has done neither very well. Therefore the legacy they have built, at least for the time being, is a very negative one.
Bush can, and should be, credited for his continued principled stand on this war. The President has never deviated from the course that he set out on after 9/11, that is something that should be admired. In the face of failure and criticism Bush has avoided being a windsock in this day and age that is a rare trait amongst politicians. If the war on terror continues for a generation, and I believe that it will, this President will eventually be viewed in a favorable light much like Nixon was later in his life.
In previous entries I have argued that this administration was the most paranoid and aloof since the Nixon Administration and I will stand by that statement. The lid has been on this White House since at least 2005 and it could be argued that the lid was on before that. This administration has shown a remarkable inability to get out in front of it's failures. Couple that with the inability to trumpet the successes that they have had and it has been a recipe for disaster. Some of this has most certainly been to protect the American people from frightening details about the war on terror, but there has been a decided lack of trust in the American people to decide for themselves what the information means. The White House has shown an amazing inability to let the people to make their own judgements about policy successes and failures and that indicates a flaw in leadership. Successful administrations admit failures and headline their victories, this administration has done neither very well. Therefore the legacy they have built, at least for the time being, is a very negative one.
Bush can, and should be, credited for his continued principled stand on this war. The President has never deviated from the course that he set out on after 9/11, that is something that should be admired. In the face of failure and criticism Bush has avoided being a windsock in this day and age that is a rare trait amongst politicians. If the war on terror continues for a generation, and I believe that it will, this President will eventually be viewed in a favorable light much like Nixon was later in his life.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
What Kind of Weird Alternate Political Universe are We Entering?
In reading about and researching the new Obama economic plan I am forced to ask, what the hell have we gotten ourselves into? The centerpiece of the plan is to create 2.5 million new jobs (I did not see a timeframe within which this piece of magic is supposed to happen) by spending money on much needed infrastructure and urban improvement projects. The spending will top 700 billion dollars which when coupled with it's twin, the 700 billion dollar bailout from October, the cost for "fixing" the economy will be a minimal 1.4 trillion dollars. I am no economic expert, but that sounds like a lot of money to me.
The irony of this program is that it is also designed, as stated in Obama's own words of wonkdom, to be fiscally responsible. I will give everyone a moment for that to sink in. FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE!!! This must be some sort of joke and the punchline will be paid at the bottom line by the taxpayer. Obama paints the rosy picture of cutting govenment waste in order to fund some of his plans, but we have heard this song and dance before. The cold hard fact is that we will end up paying for this program of "responsibility" and at the end of the day I am not sure where the idea will take us.
There is some historical precedent for spending ourselves out of an economic crisis, it worked when FDR did it in the late 20's and early 30's. The US was on the verge of meltdown when FDR helped build the country from the ground up with infrastructure programs and targeted social welfare entitlements and then led the country to post war prosperity. The times now though are not apples to apples to the times then. At that time the U.S. was a burgeoning democracy and had many yet untapped rescources, natural and otherwise. American ingenuity was just beginning it's rise to the top. During the present time our ingenuity has been surpassed by the ingenuity of developing nations, much like we surpassed the developed nations of the eary 20th century. Our time as politcal, economic and military hegemon is drawing to a close and I could make the argument that it is already over. Attempting to spend the way out of this crisis with infrastructure projects and targeted social welfare entitlements will not work this time the world economy is too far beyond what we can do within our own borders.
The next hegemon in this world will be an energy hegemon. If some country does not act quickly to usurp the oncoming oil hegemony by spending resources to develop viable alternative energy sources every Western power will kneel to the new hegemony of oil. For the new President the agenda should be to create new jobs and spend new money in the area of developing alternative energy sources that could be viable on the world stage. We can become the energy hegemon and render oil nearly obsolete if the alternative source is pursued seriously enough and is made cost effective enough for large consumers like China and India. If we could remove the Chinese, Indian and American markets from the oil consumer list then over half of the world's population would be using a resource that only we knew how to make. Is this utopian? Sure. Is it improbable? Sure. Is it impossible? No. Obama has the chance to do for alternative energy what Kennedy did for space exploration, tap into the will of the American people and begin to get something done. Only a few Presidents have ever had the ability to move the country in an entirely new direction. Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Reagan and now maybe Obama if he so chooses. Whatever you personally feel about the President Elect, it is no secret that I am not his biggest fan, the time to move this country is now. There is a new direction out there, the country is just waiting for someone to show the way.
The irony of this program is that it is also designed, as stated in Obama's own words of wonkdom, to be fiscally responsible. I will give everyone a moment for that to sink in. FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE!!! This must be some sort of joke and the punchline will be paid at the bottom line by the taxpayer. Obama paints the rosy picture of cutting govenment waste in order to fund some of his plans, but we have heard this song and dance before. The cold hard fact is that we will end up paying for this program of "responsibility" and at the end of the day I am not sure where the idea will take us.
There is some historical precedent for spending ourselves out of an economic crisis, it worked when FDR did it in the late 20's and early 30's. The US was on the verge of meltdown when FDR helped build the country from the ground up with infrastructure programs and targeted social welfare entitlements and then led the country to post war prosperity. The times now though are not apples to apples to the times then. At that time the U.S. was a burgeoning democracy and had many yet untapped rescources, natural and otherwise. American ingenuity was just beginning it's rise to the top. During the present time our ingenuity has been surpassed by the ingenuity of developing nations, much like we surpassed the developed nations of the eary 20th century. Our time as politcal, economic and military hegemon is drawing to a close and I could make the argument that it is already over. Attempting to spend the way out of this crisis with infrastructure projects and targeted social welfare entitlements will not work this time the world economy is too far beyond what we can do within our own borders.
The next hegemon in this world will be an energy hegemon. If some country does not act quickly to usurp the oncoming oil hegemony by spending resources to develop viable alternative energy sources every Western power will kneel to the new hegemony of oil. For the new President the agenda should be to create new jobs and spend new money in the area of developing alternative energy sources that could be viable on the world stage. We can become the energy hegemon and render oil nearly obsolete if the alternative source is pursued seriously enough and is made cost effective enough for large consumers like China and India. If we could remove the Chinese, Indian and American markets from the oil consumer list then over half of the world's population would be using a resource that only we knew how to make. Is this utopian? Sure. Is it improbable? Sure. Is it impossible? No. Obama has the chance to do for alternative energy what Kennedy did for space exploration, tap into the will of the American people and begin to get something done. Only a few Presidents have ever had the ability to move the country in an entirely new direction. Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Reagan and now maybe Obama if he so chooses. Whatever you personally feel about the President Elect, it is no secret that I am not his biggest fan, the time to move this country is now. There is a new direction out there, the country is just waiting for someone to show the way.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Cabinet Musings
So the search for the Cabinet begins and the speculation is rampant at present. The appointment of Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff should signal that the administrative heavy in the execution of governmental business will not be President Obama. Emanuel has a long history of being the guy that knows where the skeletons are and how to bury the bodies when discarded after political use. This then begs the question, who else will be on this cabinet and why?
Some serious pundits have put the Hillary question on the map. Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is very interesting, but I believe it is politically dangerous for Obama and politically damaging for Clinton. For Obama the selection of someone as polarizing and recognizable as Hillary Clinton would not be a good move. Much has been made of Obama's affinity for Lincoln and his assemblage of rivals for a cabinet, while the sentiment is nice, there is no way it can work today. Putting a media star like Clinton on the Cabinet could only be a political danger for everyone involved. Lincoln had a distinct advantage when he named Seward, Chase and other rivals to his cabinet, namely that there was no mainstream media at the time. The animosity and rancor that sometimes found it's way into Lincoln Administration proceedings was not viewed or even read about by the public at large. In today's day and age any sign of distress from the Cabinet room could be a soundbite in about 5 seconds. To put someone like Hillary there would only lead to distraction and possible mayhem if there were ever a diagreement between the President and the Secretary of State. It could also be problematic for Obama if he does not choose Bill Richardson for this post (he has long been considered a possibility and a favorite by many) because Richardson essentially burned his bridge with the Clinton's when he backed Obama for the Presidency. Not choosing Richardson could cause a political rift amongst others that Obama needed support from to win. Sending a message that loyalty is not repaid with loyalty would be a death knell for Obama in building a coalition between the far left and the middle left. Hanging Richardson out to dry would be a critical mistake at this point and it would also lead me to reassess the political acumen of the new President.
I also do not believe that there would be any upside for Hillary in taking this position. Hillary Clinton still wants to be President. As unlikely that it is that she ever will be, Hillary knows that being a middle left supporter of Obama's on the key issues while being a critic of the intiatives that are far left will serve her better in the long run. Hillary also has to consider that she could be getting set up to take a fall for Iraq should the new administration not be able to get out as quickly as promised. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense would most likely have to answer for the failure that is sure to come in this area. There is not a feasible way that Obama can meet his Iraq promise in any way that will not have the stench of failure on it. It is going to take longer that what has been promised to get out of the situation and Hillary knows this.
Some have advocated that John McCain be selected for Obama's Cabinet. This is actually an idea that makes some political sense. McCain is at the end of his career and he will not ever be President. For Obama to reward McCain for his many years of distinguished service would be a master political stroke. McCain would be an excellent choice for Secretary of Defense or State and would work well with Joe Biden in providing the President with sagely advice on the Foreign Policy direction of the country. There is no downside for McCain on this one and only upside for everyone involved.
The final Cabinet will look much different from traditional administrations. This will be an interesting transition period, the grist mill has only just started turning out the names.
Some serious pundits have put the Hillary question on the map. Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is very interesting, but I believe it is politically dangerous for Obama and politically damaging for Clinton. For Obama the selection of someone as polarizing and recognizable as Hillary Clinton would not be a good move. Much has been made of Obama's affinity for Lincoln and his assemblage of rivals for a cabinet, while the sentiment is nice, there is no way it can work today. Putting a media star like Clinton on the Cabinet could only be a political danger for everyone involved. Lincoln had a distinct advantage when he named Seward, Chase and other rivals to his cabinet, namely that there was no mainstream media at the time. The animosity and rancor that sometimes found it's way into Lincoln Administration proceedings was not viewed or even read about by the public at large. In today's day and age any sign of distress from the Cabinet room could be a soundbite in about 5 seconds. To put someone like Hillary there would only lead to distraction and possible mayhem if there were ever a diagreement between the President and the Secretary of State. It could also be problematic for Obama if he does not choose Bill Richardson for this post (he has long been considered a possibility and a favorite by many) because Richardson essentially burned his bridge with the Clinton's when he backed Obama for the Presidency. Not choosing Richardson could cause a political rift amongst others that Obama needed support from to win. Sending a message that loyalty is not repaid with loyalty would be a death knell for Obama in building a coalition between the far left and the middle left. Hanging Richardson out to dry would be a critical mistake at this point and it would also lead me to reassess the political acumen of the new President.
I also do not believe that there would be any upside for Hillary in taking this position. Hillary Clinton still wants to be President. As unlikely that it is that she ever will be, Hillary knows that being a middle left supporter of Obama's on the key issues while being a critic of the intiatives that are far left will serve her better in the long run. Hillary also has to consider that she could be getting set up to take a fall for Iraq should the new administration not be able to get out as quickly as promised. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense would most likely have to answer for the failure that is sure to come in this area. There is not a feasible way that Obama can meet his Iraq promise in any way that will not have the stench of failure on it. It is going to take longer that what has been promised to get out of the situation and Hillary knows this.
Some have advocated that John McCain be selected for Obama's Cabinet. This is actually an idea that makes some political sense. McCain is at the end of his career and he will not ever be President. For Obama to reward McCain for his many years of distinguished service would be a master political stroke. McCain would be an excellent choice for Secretary of Defense or State and would work well with Joe Biden in providing the President with sagely advice on the Foreign Policy direction of the country. There is no downside for McCain on this one and only upside for everyone involved.
The final Cabinet will look much different from traditional administrations. This will be an interesting transition period, the grist mill has only just started turning out the names.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
The First 100 Days
We all hear about the first 100 days everytime there is new administration or Congressional election. The question always is what will the first 100 days look like? What will take place?
After the 2006 mid-terms the American people heard from Pelosi and Reid that the change, oh the change she was a comin, and it would be glorious. So what happened to the glory? Democrats frittered away their political capital against a weak President on the one issue that he was intractable on and that they had no chance of winning, Iraq. Reid and Pelosi severely miscalculated their potential for success on this one key issue and the result was not what they were hoping for and an expediture of political capital that they could not recover from. Instead of softening the weakened President with blows to other policy areas where they could have had success, they opted for the all or nothing Iraq strategy and lost. Pelosi and Reid are not going anywhere, and are in fact more prominent than before, they will take another pass at Iraq and they will want to do it quickly.
This means that Obama's first 100 days are going to be rife with risk and it will take a master politician to navigate the choppy waters of his mandate. Obama owes the left and they are going to come after him early and often to get what they want. Expect that Iraq, SCHIP and Health Care, taxation plans, spending plans and programs will spring forth from the Congress like Old Faithful. Obama's ability to placate the left with some victories without further damaging the economy will come to the forefront. If he can make his way through it will be impressive.
Ahhh but there is the darned economy. Obama has another group that he owes, new voters. They are going to want all the things that he promised them as well. Better financial times, more money in the pockets of the lower and middle class, Health Care etc... The way in which he handles the populace will be the very telling as well.
Obama is in a sticky spot at present. Bend to the left and risk the economy or bend to the new voters and risk the left. This will be an entertaining 100 days starting in January of 09 and I expect it will be fantastic to watch.
After the 2006 mid-terms the American people heard from Pelosi and Reid that the change, oh the change she was a comin, and it would be glorious. So what happened to the glory? Democrats frittered away their political capital against a weak President on the one issue that he was intractable on and that they had no chance of winning, Iraq. Reid and Pelosi severely miscalculated their potential for success on this one key issue and the result was not what they were hoping for and an expediture of political capital that they could not recover from. Instead of softening the weakened President with blows to other policy areas where they could have had success, they opted for the all or nothing Iraq strategy and lost. Pelosi and Reid are not going anywhere, and are in fact more prominent than before, they will take another pass at Iraq and they will want to do it quickly.
This means that Obama's first 100 days are going to be rife with risk and it will take a master politician to navigate the choppy waters of his mandate. Obama owes the left and they are going to come after him early and often to get what they want. Expect that Iraq, SCHIP and Health Care, taxation plans, spending plans and programs will spring forth from the Congress like Old Faithful. Obama's ability to placate the left with some victories without further damaging the economy will come to the forefront. If he can make his way through it will be impressive.
Ahhh but there is the darned economy. Obama has another group that he owes, new voters. They are going to want all the things that he promised them as well. Better financial times, more money in the pockets of the lower and middle class, Health Care etc... The way in which he handles the populace will be the very telling as well.
Obama is in a sticky spot at present. Bend to the left and risk the economy or bend to the new voters and risk the left. This will be an entertaining 100 days starting in January of 09 and I expect it will be fantastic to watch.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Obama, Palin and other post election tidbits
The gaffes have already begun. The President Elect has been involved in two so far. The first, the backhanded slap at Nancy Reagan in his press conference. Aside from the shot being offensive to people whom have always respected and admired Mrs. Reagan, it was also relatively poor in terms of timing. Obama had just lost his own Grandmother and then he took the shot at the 87 year old widow of the conservative icon, I am willing to chalk it up to a rookie mistake.
The second, Obama and President Bush met yesterday in one on one meetings that no advisors were present in. Interestingly details of the meeting were later leaked to the media. I wonder how that happened and what the purpose of it was. There is no way the information came from the Bush people on this one. There has not been a lid on the White House for the last four years, there is no way you would hear a peep from them now. The only answer is that it came from Obama and his people. The cautionary tale here should be that the President Elect is not the President yet, do not undermine the office that you will eventually hold and then expect that others will show you the respect that you did not show to your predecessor. Rookie mistake #2 and this was a big one.
Finally, scuttlebut abounds about Sarah Palin. Mrs. Palin suddenly has all sorts of interviews scheduled and has said that if it is God's plan she will run for President in 2012. Let me be the first to say, this can't happen! The only way Palin should run in 2012 is if God's plan is for Obama to be re-elected. It is also being thrown around that Palin may run for the Senate if Ted Stevens seat is vacated. The prospect of this is amusing to me for various reasons, but let me just say, stay Governor and do your homework. Next time Palin steps into the national spotlight she needs to be ready to answer tough questions. Not look like the beauty queen caught in the pageant spotlight.
The second, Obama and President Bush met yesterday in one on one meetings that no advisors were present in. Interestingly details of the meeting were later leaked to the media. I wonder how that happened and what the purpose of it was. There is no way the information came from the Bush people on this one. There has not been a lid on the White House for the last four years, there is no way you would hear a peep from them now. The only answer is that it came from Obama and his people. The cautionary tale here should be that the President Elect is not the President yet, do not undermine the office that you will eventually hold and then expect that others will show you the respect that you did not show to your predecessor. Rookie mistake #2 and this was a big one.
Finally, scuttlebut abounds about Sarah Palin. Mrs. Palin suddenly has all sorts of interviews scheduled and has said that if it is God's plan she will run for President in 2012. Let me be the first to say, this can't happen! The only way Palin should run in 2012 is if God's plan is for Obama to be re-elected. It is also being thrown around that Palin may run for the Senate if Ted Stevens seat is vacated. The prospect of this is amusing to me for various reasons, but let me just say, stay Governor and do your homework. Next time Palin steps into the national spotlight she needs to be ready to answer tough questions. Not look like the beauty queen caught in the pageant spotlight.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Why Palin = Failin
Aside from the 20/20 hindsight and Monday Morning Quarterbacking about electoral strategy and where the Republicans went wrong in the election, it is time to take a deeper look at what the pick of Sarah Palin meant to the conservative movement in general.
Republicans have traditionally held themselves out as the party of small responsible government, and for years this message was resonant with voters. Fiscally in the last several years the train went off the track somewhere and Republicans became no better than Democrats in the trainwreck that is spending. However, socially there had historically been a stark distinction between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats were typically the party of handouts and big government and Republicans advocated the opposite. To a certain extent this is still the case fiscally, at least in the wings of the fiscal right, however socially it is not the same. Republicans became the party of "Big Brother". They began to legislate against things that a majority of people in this country feel should not be legislated. Some of this was in response to 9/11 and most Americans have no issues with those principles, but some other areas of social legislation have caused new voters to enter the system in response to what has taken place. Republicans and especially conservative Republicans did not start talking to those voters. Those voters and voters in the middle whom traditionally lean right left the fold of the party that could be easily viewed as out of touch.
We live in a time when voters want more say in their lives in the areas that are important, at home and at work and within the family unit. The conservatives need to get out of the way on issues that they view to be principles of morality. Current stances on; Abortion, Gay Marriage, regulation of TV and Radio and regulation of the written word will not work, particularly as more of the country is becoming accepting of these things. Conservatives continue to rely on the moral message on these issues and they are alienating voters that would otherwise agree with them on the issues that should be the most important; National Security, Economy, Education etc... Is it really worth losing elections over the moral issues when they could be winning on the issues that the country thinks are most important?
So what does Sarah Palin have to do with this? The answer is simple. McCain was a candidate that could talk to the middle about the issues that are important and offer a stark and intelligent contrast to what Obama was proposing. It would have been a classic showdown of traditional conservative values against traditional liberal values. Small Government v. Big Government. National Security for the future v. National Security with naivete. Managed Health Care v. Social Health Care. McCain could have still lost the election, but it would have been fun to watch. The pick of Palin indicated that the far right, most of whom are religious, were pushing the election to be about the moral things that have poisoned the Republican Platform for the last 16 years. McCain got unduely painted into a corner from which he could no longer fight with his message to the middle because the contrast of Palin from the right was too much to overcome.
Real conservatives, conservatives that believe that government should not legislate with a moral brush, should be engaging in a movement to remove the far right influence from the Republican Party. It is time to drop their positions on abortion, homosexuality and other areas and focus on the areas that are important to the future. If the far right will not get on board then they should be extricated from the party. There is too much at stake going forward to hold on to the sacred cows of the past.
Republicans have traditionally held themselves out as the party of small responsible government, and for years this message was resonant with voters. Fiscally in the last several years the train went off the track somewhere and Republicans became no better than Democrats in the trainwreck that is spending. However, socially there had historically been a stark distinction between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats were typically the party of handouts and big government and Republicans advocated the opposite. To a certain extent this is still the case fiscally, at least in the wings of the fiscal right, however socially it is not the same. Republicans became the party of "Big Brother". They began to legislate against things that a majority of people in this country feel should not be legislated. Some of this was in response to 9/11 and most Americans have no issues with those principles, but some other areas of social legislation have caused new voters to enter the system in response to what has taken place. Republicans and especially conservative Republicans did not start talking to those voters. Those voters and voters in the middle whom traditionally lean right left the fold of the party that could be easily viewed as out of touch.
We live in a time when voters want more say in their lives in the areas that are important, at home and at work and within the family unit. The conservatives need to get out of the way on issues that they view to be principles of morality. Current stances on; Abortion, Gay Marriage, regulation of TV and Radio and regulation of the written word will not work, particularly as more of the country is becoming accepting of these things. Conservatives continue to rely on the moral message on these issues and they are alienating voters that would otherwise agree with them on the issues that should be the most important; National Security, Economy, Education etc... Is it really worth losing elections over the moral issues when they could be winning on the issues that the country thinks are most important?
So what does Sarah Palin have to do with this? The answer is simple. McCain was a candidate that could talk to the middle about the issues that are important and offer a stark and intelligent contrast to what Obama was proposing. It would have been a classic showdown of traditional conservative values against traditional liberal values. Small Government v. Big Government. National Security for the future v. National Security with naivete. Managed Health Care v. Social Health Care. McCain could have still lost the election, but it would have been fun to watch. The pick of Palin indicated that the far right, most of whom are religious, were pushing the election to be about the moral things that have poisoned the Republican Platform for the last 16 years. McCain got unduely painted into a corner from which he could no longer fight with his message to the middle because the contrast of Palin from the right was too much to overcome.
Real conservatives, conservatives that believe that government should not legislate with a moral brush, should be engaging in a movement to remove the far right influence from the Republican Party. It is time to drop their positions on abortion, homosexuality and other areas and focus on the areas that are important to the future. If the far right will not get on board then they should be extricated from the party. There is too much at stake going forward to hold on to the sacred cows of the past.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Election 08: Repudiation or Change the Nation?
The election is over and President Elect Obama has begun his journey of hope and change that will surely carry this country into some interesting areas in the next four years. The question that has to be answered at this point is; was this election a repudiation of George W. Bush and his administration or was it a game changer for this country and the conservative movement?
A look at the election results will lead many to assume that this election was a game changer. It will lead many to assume that this is the beginning of the country becoming left center instead of right center. The numbers in raw form are favorable for this opinion. Obama won the election by the biggest margin that a Democrat has won by in over 40 years. On the face of it things would appear grim for the conservative movement and the Republican Party. Republicans were not ready to confront the introduction of new voters into the system. Republicans could not hold the voters in the middle that helped them gain power. Obama was able to introduce people who either did not care or were cynical about the process into the system with his message of hope and change. Republicans will need to figure out how to talk to these new voters quickly in order to prevent this from being a game changing election.
This election was also a clear repudiation of the Bush Administration. Bush's approval rating is historically low. The approval rating of Congress, largely controlled by Republicans for the better part of two decades, is historically low. Bush has been the most reclusive and schizophrenic President since Nixon. The Administration had no message and no ability to communicate success for the last two years, and I would argue that they lost their way for most of the second term. This failure led to an electorate that was angry and the revolt took place at the ballot box. Obama did not win on a substantive message, it is the first time in recent memory that a candidate was able to win with very little detail to his plan. The failing of the Bush Administration and the party was complete long before the election took place. The failing economy and the inability of the Administration to champion the success of the surge and the War on Terror led to the victory of the candidate that was saying what people wanted to hear. Clearly the failures of the party over the last eight years have led to this.
Could this election be a game changer? It most certainly could, but Obama has to work with two mandates going forward. One from new voters whom are going to want results based on their hopes for something new and different. The other from the far left and the people that pushed him to the top of the heap. Obama will not be able to buckle to the far left, he must keep them in line and protect his more important mandate, the one the new voters have given him. If Obama concedes to the far left agenda and vacates his message of something new he will have a difficult time holding this fragile coalition together. Look for Obama to temper his approch and take a considered look at his mandate for change. Obama will try to develop a mandate and hold on to the political capital that he has gained from the electorate, it is the most important political capital that there is.
Republicans going forward need to be vocal when the climate is right to be vocal. They need to counter Obama and give ideas that are sound and different from what he is proposing on the key issues that will be faced over the next four years. Health Care, the economy and the War on Terror are critical areas where the Republican can offer a contrasting viewpoint with a tempered hand. Criticism for the sake of criticism will not work. New voters want something different and the Republicans need to show where they are different from Obama on the substative points that people care about. A failure to provide a cogent and salient differing view on the issues of import will lead to this election being viewed as a game changer and Republicans don't want to get to that decision in the minds of the voters.
2010 will tell us if this was repudiation or game change. Only twice in the history of this country has the party in power in the White House not lost seats in a mid-term election, 1932 and 2002. 2010 will give us some answers, until then I will lean towards this election as repudiation with the potential for game change.
A look at the election results will lead many to assume that this election was a game changer. It will lead many to assume that this is the beginning of the country becoming left center instead of right center. The numbers in raw form are favorable for this opinion. Obama won the election by the biggest margin that a Democrat has won by in over 40 years. On the face of it things would appear grim for the conservative movement and the Republican Party. Republicans were not ready to confront the introduction of new voters into the system. Republicans could not hold the voters in the middle that helped them gain power. Obama was able to introduce people who either did not care or were cynical about the process into the system with his message of hope and change. Republicans will need to figure out how to talk to these new voters quickly in order to prevent this from being a game changing election.
This election was also a clear repudiation of the Bush Administration. Bush's approval rating is historically low. The approval rating of Congress, largely controlled by Republicans for the better part of two decades, is historically low. Bush has been the most reclusive and schizophrenic President since Nixon. The Administration had no message and no ability to communicate success for the last two years, and I would argue that they lost their way for most of the second term. This failure led to an electorate that was angry and the revolt took place at the ballot box. Obama did not win on a substantive message, it is the first time in recent memory that a candidate was able to win with very little detail to his plan. The failing of the Bush Administration and the party was complete long before the election took place. The failing economy and the inability of the Administration to champion the success of the surge and the War on Terror led to the victory of the candidate that was saying what people wanted to hear. Clearly the failures of the party over the last eight years have led to this.
Could this election be a game changer? It most certainly could, but Obama has to work with two mandates going forward. One from new voters whom are going to want results based on their hopes for something new and different. The other from the far left and the people that pushed him to the top of the heap. Obama will not be able to buckle to the far left, he must keep them in line and protect his more important mandate, the one the new voters have given him. If Obama concedes to the far left agenda and vacates his message of something new he will have a difficult time holding this fragile coalition together. Look for Obama to temper his approch and take a considered look at his mandate for change. Obama will try to develop a mandate and hold on to the political capital that he has gained from the electorate, it is the most important political capital that there is.
Republicans going forward need to be vocal when the climate is right to be vocal. They need to counter Obama and give ideas that are sound and different from what he is proposing on the key issues that will be faced over the next four years. Health Care, the economy and the War on Terror are critical areas where the Republican can offer a contrasting viewpoint with a tempered hand. Criticism for the sake of criticism will not work. New voters want something different and the Republicans need to show where they are different from Obama on the substative points that people care about. A failure to provide a cogent and salient differing view on the issues of import will lead to this election being viewed as a game changer and Republicans don't want to get to that decision in the minds of the voters.
2010 will tell us if this was repudiation or game change. Only twice in the history of this country has the party in power in the White House not lost seats in a mid-term election, 1932 and 2002. 2010 will give us some answers, until then I will lean towards this election as repudiation with the potential for game change.
Friday, November 7, 2008
So it begins.....
So the election is over, the Republicans went down to the inevitable defeat that I had been telling people about since August of 07. The question becomes what is next?
Over the next several days, weeks, months and maybe years I will monitor and discuss the developments of the Obama Administration. In addition I will take a critical look at the Republican party and the conservative movement and give my opinions about realignment.
Stay tuned.....It will be a fun ride.
Over the next several days, weeks, months and maybe years I will monitor and discuss the developments of the Obama Administration. In addition I will take a critical look at the Republican party and the conservative movement and give my opinions about realignment.
Stay tuned.....It will be a fun ride.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)