Republican Strategy

I was pleasantly surprised to find so much current information on Republican strategy on the Internet. The first web site quoted contains a perfectly written, intelligent statement on the need to employ the tools found on the Internet in an effort to replicate the success of the Obama campaign. Though not an interview, the answers found online almost certainly represent the direction of the Republican party more accurately than a blue state party chair could.

Question: What three things does the Republican Party need to do to broaden its national base for 2012?


Answer: 1.) The Internet: Our #1 Priority in the Next Four Years Winning the technology war with the Democrats must be the RNC's number one priority in the next four years.The challenge is daunting, but if we adopt a strongly anti-Washington message and charge hard against Obama and the Democrats, we will energize our grassroots base. Among other benefits, this will create real demand for new ways to organize and route around existing power structures that favor the Democrats. And, you will soon discover, online organizing is by far the most efficient way to transform our party structures to be able to compete against what is likely to be a $1 billion Obama re-election campaign in 2012.


2.) Our technology should give Republican activists the ability to connect with fellow activists at the precinct level. We must encourage the growth of standalone volunteer communities, giving them the tools to organize themselves online, with the official party taking a step back and not trying to control them. We can't anyway.


3.) A "40 Under 40" initiative. Undoing the damage to our party's brand among America's youth will take more than new slogans and hip spokespeople. It will mean making young voters the face of the Republican Party, and not just another target group with its own bulleted list of "outreach" talking points. To that end, the next Chairman should commit to a simple goal: working towards a Republican Party where at least 40% of our challenger and open seat candidates for Congress are under 40. Such a party will send a signal to all Americans that the GOP is once again the party of the future.


Question: What conditions will be right for a Jindal campaign for 2012? Alternatively, what conditions in 2010 would cause Bobby Jindal to wait until 2016?


Answer: Even though I have committed myself to giving Obama a chance to prove me wrong about him, I am still looking ahead to 2012 and trying to figure out what it's going to take to unseat this jerk.The way I see it, the GOP strategy will probably vary based on Obama's approval ratings toward the end of his first term. If he holds a high approval rating over 50%, Republicans are going to have to go for the "hail mary" and run someone unconventional. Bobby Jindal comes to mind, as he is young, fresh, energetic, and has the ability to galvanize the base. Even so, it might not be enough considering that if Obama is regarded at least somewhat favorably, there probably wouldn't be many moderates/independents ready to hand the WH back to Republicans given a not-so-distant memory of Bush's abysmal ratings. I'm not sure I have the answer to this scenario, but it will take some creative thinking.The strategy is much more simple if Obama's approval ratings are in the 40's or below. You run Mitt Romney and let him run away with it. The GOP campaign strategy in this scenario will be to point out that we tried to vote for "change," bringing in someone inexperienced with the hopes that he would infuse Washington with new and fresh ideas, and it didn't work out. So let's put a "familiar old shoe" in there with a ton of experience and a long track record of success and let him right the ship.


Question: What does Bobby Jindal (or any prospective candidate for 2012, for that matter) need to do over the next two years to position themselves for a successful national campaign?


Answer: Building Jindal Up to Tear Him Down…
Ramesh Ponnuru poses an interesting thought regarding recent coverage of Bobby Jindal: “I wonder if this sort of swooning is really going to be helpful to Gov. Jindal in the long run.”
Jindal is being built up beyond the level at which anyone can deliver, by those who are excited about his candidacy. He now holds the mythic title, “Perfect Candidate, Heir of Ronald Reagan.” Funny thing is that I’ve remembered quite a few candidates and political leaders who’ve been hit with that label and fallen to Earth, not because they were bad, but they were not what we were expecting.
The way the GOP puffs up politicians is reminiscent of the scene from Braveheart when William Wallace identifies himself and then is challenged because William Wallace was 7 feet tall.

Bobby Jindal is a man of great accomplishment, he’s one of the party’s best young leaders. He’s a heck of a governor. Let’s leave it at that. While I don’t think he’ll run in 2008, I hope he runs someday, and I hope that conservatives don’t build Jindal up to a point that he simply can’t deliver.

Another McCaffrey Rant

Did I forget to mention that McCaffrey was also Clinton's drug czar? In the following clip we see the evil general avoid answering Alex Jones' questions concerning high-level government drug trafficking. Note his calm demeanor and Jimmy Stewartish voice:




What the hell was that about? Answer the question!

Drug czar McCaffrey had a bit of fun with the networks during his crime fighting years. Not content to employ PSLs to get the anti-drug message to the people, McCaffrey found a way to get the networks to embed anti-drug messages into the story of some of their shows. The incentive to the networks was simple--lots of money. Of course, this underhanded attempt at mind control was never revealed to the viewing audience. You can't exactly tell people that a government official is reviewing embedded messages from their government in their favorite show before the show is aired. That takes all the fun out of it!

Fear This Man

The spectacular New York Times article concerning General McCaffrey's conflict of interest issues with NBC News brought to our attention by Mr. McEnroe is, to me at least, a perfect example of the value of large, professional news gathering and reporting companies. Citizen reporting will probably be a part of the future of news, but there will always be a need for experienced, well-connected and determined reporters.

The David Barstow expose' in the New York Times that led to the Salon article by Glenn Greenwald is an excellent example of a level of reporting far beyond even the most determined citizen reporter. The expose' was expertly written, engaging, thorough and in depth to a degree suggesting numerous high-level contacts and trusted sources. I was not surprised, incidentally, that General McCaffrey profits from the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan--he has a history of being on the wrong side of the law.

I was especially interested in the story because I believe General McCaffrey is also a war criminal. I base this belief on the stories related by the multiple reliable witnesses of McCaffrey's ordering of the slaughter of thousands of retreating Iraqi soldiers after a cease-fire had been ordered in the Desert Storm conflict. Was there outrage in the media about this atrocity? Not really--its hard to replay the down, if I may use a sports analogy, when the clock has run out and the victorious team is carrying the coach off the field. We won, we didn't lose that many lives on our side, and Sadam Hussein was humiliated. But we're talking about real people really dying. The photos of the slaughter were of a staggering number of dead bodies and burnt vehicles and equipment not vanquished athletes hanging their heads in defeat. McCaffrey wanted to be famous for something, so he gave the order to kill them all.

General McCaffrey deals in death at the highest levels. Only reporters with access to and experience at those levels can get the kind of story David Barstow has given us. If the media goes too far in the direction of the citizen reporter we may never be informed of what the super powerful are up to. We might lose the trail on scoundrels like General McCaffrey.

Jindal=Goodness

This is the kind of image we like to see early on in the process--our man making nice with a not- so-bright looking white guy who thought it necessary to point out the writing on his t-shirt. We see it, buddy.

This article from the Times Picayune reports that Gov. Jindal was apparently satisfied with his meeting with the incoming Obama administration. With an attitude like this, its hard not to like the guy:


"The administration used this as an opportunity to hear from us," Jindal said. "They weren't looking for a consensus because they were not yet ready to present a package. They didn't have details. But rather this was purely an opportunity for them to gather input. As they emphasized, this was the first of many steps."

Apparently, Gov. Jindal made a favorable impression on Mr. Obama at the meeting:

Jindal said he shared a light moment with Obama regarding recent reports that Republicans consider Jindal to be their version of an Obama-style rising star.

"President-elect Obama and I had a very nice, friendly conversation about the issues," Jindal said. "As he was leaving, he made a very friendly, complimentary, joking comment. I will keep it private because it was said in private."

A "nice, friendly conversation" with your future opponent is a good thing.