Republicans and the future (by Ken Mehlman, new RNC Chairman)

T.S. Eliot once wrote that politics is too important to be left only to politicians. Last year, 1.4 million Americans from all 50 states resoundingly agreed and volunteered their time on behalf of President Bush's re-election campaign.

Voters were evenly divided going into the election, but mobilizing an unprecedented number of volunteers enabled Mr. Bush to receive more popular votes than any candidate in American history. Democrats exceeded even their own expectations in spending more than $100 million more than Republicans, but were swamped by the millions of Americans who contacted their friends, neighbors, relatives and colleagues and explained what re-electing Mr. Bush would mean: peace through freedom abroad, and an ownership society through more personal freedom here at home.

The 1.4 million volunteers and 7.5 million activists that propelled Bush-Cheney '04 to victory didn't just sign up. The grass-roots energy that generated 102,000 calls into talk radio shows, 411,989 letters to the editor, 9.1 million volunteer door knocks and a total of 27.2 million volunteer phone calls enabled Mr. Bush to receive more popular votes than any candidate in American history, and a clear mandate from the American people.

Our grass-roots effort was so effective because our volunteers were spreading Mr. Bush's bold agenda for a second term in office. The war on terror needs to be won. Social Security needs to be strengthened. Our judicial system needs to be reformed. Our tax code needs to be simplified. And that's just the beginning.

Mr. Mehlman has some admirable goals. He'd like to expand hispanic, black and union votes. I'm sure wants to expand the other democraphic groups as well. Well and good.

I do think the youth might be appreciative of the ability to sock away some of their Social Security funds. They should be able to. Good plan. I do believe that education access to blacks is important, and I think it's an admirable goal to work toward better schools for their children in the inner cities.

While I like the idea of reaching out to union voters, I do not think we're going to sell many of them on the idea that poor tax policy sends jobs outside the country. Union members may not be the brightest bulbs on the tree, but they're not just the bulbs that are 'out' either.

Flooding this nation with poor uneducation immigrants does not come in under the heading of 'poor tax code'. Forcing workers in the U.S. to compete with workers outside the U.S. than can make as little as ten to twenty cents per hour, doesn't come in under the heading 'poor tax code'. Out sourcing jobs to India or elsewhere doesn't come in under 'poor tax code'. I challenge the attempt to qualify these issues as 'poor tax code' issues, because slicing off a few percent of tax code fixable taxes, isn't going to slice 50% to 90% off the cost of manufacturing, or wages paid to American citizens.

While the goals seem wise and supportable, the means to attain at least some of them are not on the radar.

When you start thinking about jobs, downward pressure on wages, outsourcing, trade deficits, you soon realized that these problems affect most people we're trying to attract. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that our trade and open doors immigration policies make the U.S. worker the bullseye for anti-U.S. worker darts.

Why even a union member, or perhaps those in the democraphics the Republicans are trying to attract might figure this one out.

Good luck Mehlman. Policies aren't going to change and you're swimming up river.

Please keep in mind Ken Mehlman is one smart cookie. The "union vote" is not as you have outlined it. Actually outsourcing is only the concern of a small number of union members. Unions are now divided into relatively three groups, trades, industrial and service. The service unions (teachers, government workers, etc.) will vote Democrat if Hitler/Stalin is heading the ticket. As far as the trades and industrials, they voted for GW Bush by a very small majority. Union membership is declining rapidly in this country. The only real growth is in the service unions. Mehlman probably wants to pick up another 5% or so from the trade/industrial unions, which is quite possible. If he picks up another 10% from Blacks and 5% from Jews, the Democrat Party will be toast for a long time to come. This guy Mehlman is one who studies the demographics to nth degree. He worked wonders in 2004, and unless the Democrats wake up and get real, he may just give them a spanking they never dreamed of in 2006. He is a guy who fashions a strategic plan that will bring more voters to the Republican Party. Don't underestimate him. IMHO. I believe he will be a great RNC Chariman.

Your demographic breakdown of union membership is an important one. I think that's a good point.

Your comment about the service union and their proclivity to vote Democrat is also rock solid.

I do believe this problem extends outside unions though, with regard to negative impact on labor, and the perceptions of those trying to support a family.

I'm not going to take issue with your characterization of Mehlman, his statistical wizardry and all. I will however tell you that I am left scratching my head to a certain degree though. Illegal immigration is a hot-button issue. The day when it was going to overlooked, or looked on favorably is gone. Bonified polls are beginning to show a massive shift away from support for this.

If Mehlman is the statistitican you state he is, and he carries any weight at all, Bush's immigration policy goals are not only dead, he's going to reverse them himself and get with the program.

If he doesn't, we're going to be facing a very difficult situation in 2008. I am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. I'm not the only one.

Thanks for the comments.

Mehlman did a good job. And I agree about reaching out to union workers. Union leaders have moved way over to the left, and have come out in favor of issues like gay marriage and abortion that are anathema to most of the rank and file. Reagan appealed to the rank and file, and I believe Bush did better with them this time around than last. Most of them are social conservatives.

On the other hand, if it's true that the RNC is thinking of giving Ann Stone, that kook who leads the Republicans for Choice, an important leadership post in the RNC, I trust they will think again. That would be disastrous. It would drive away the very votes they are working so hard to attract. It would be a truly stupid move. It would lose millions of votes, slow the drift of Catholics into the party, make the Evangelicas stay home, discourage the hardest working volunteers, and kill the momentum we have built over the past four years.

Say it isn't so.

You are correct in your assessment of illegal migration being a hot button issue. Part of the problem is that no politician of either party really wants to ante up on it. I spent some time in Singapore and asked my Chinese and Indian friends there how they controlled illegal entrants to the city/state. They told me that Singapore has an Government Identification Card for every soul in the country. If someone gets in and operates without a card they cannot purchase a pack of cigarettes, nor get a job without a card. I am sure some folks beat the system, but it is kept to an absolute minimum. Of course, if we put forth something like that, we would be accused of operating in a "Big Brother" environment. Fact is, IMHO it is not a bad idea for everyone to have a national ID card. It can be used effectively to send illegals back to their native country, if they do not have alien resident status, stifle voting irregularities, you know, one person, one vote, and for many ID requirements. I believe the Israeli's have something along the same lines. I don't know if we could make it work, but it is food for thought.

The powers-that-be in the GOP once upon a time, not that long ago, arrogantly scoffed at those of us who constantly preached the importance of the grassroots and the putting into action of self-government; preferring their chosen methods of money/media campaigning almost exclusively.

But over time, they, faced with the demands coming from the grassroots of the party, began to pay lip service to these concepts...IMO only because they had to.

Now it has reached the point that even they know they can't win without us.

The illusions have been destroyed by reality, most strikingly in this most recent election cycle.

And the good part is we have only scratched the surface of what the conservative movement is actually capable of, politically and organizationally.

The conservative movement is the big Daddy of American politics. No other possible coalition even comes close.

I will admit there are some rather compelling plusses associated with implementing a national I.D. I do believe the day will come though, when another politician will come along that makes Clinton look like George Washington by comparison. On that day I do not want my ability to eat, work, keep a roof over my head, make purchases or travel to be turned off at this person and his party's whim.

The level of control that you describe, is precisely why I do not want such a card. It's great when it works for us. It will be tragic when turned against us.

The problem as I see it, is that 'some lowest common denominator' always comes along that sees things 180 degrees different than people with a good head on their shoulders do. It's that nut-job and his ilk that you have to plan for. Sadly.

On the other hand, if it's true that the RNC is thinking of giving Ann Stone, that kook who leads the Republicans for Choice, an important leadership post in the RNC, I trust they will think again. That would be disastrous. It would drive away the very votes they are working so hard to attract. It would be a truly stupid move. It would lose millions of votes, slow the drift of Catholics into the party, make the Evangelicas stay home, discourage the hardest working volunteers, and kill the momentum we have built over the past four years.

As far as I know, its alread been done.

She has stated an acceptance to the party platoform and no intention (stated) of changing it.

She also remained silient when Mehlman got involved in a pro-life march along with the rest of the GOP.

I remember reading somewhere, that most of the RNC co-chairs are usually pro-abortioners, but they have to tow the line and not speak out.

As of now, Ann Stone, has, formally announed that she will take no part in, speak for, and appear at, any pro-abortion events, GOP or not, and will not associate with any pro-abortion elements in the GOP.

Now, those are the fact, I'll see what happens before I weigh in with my opinion, but right now, I am still not happy.

Out sourcing jobs to India or elsewhere doesn't come in under 'poor tax code'. I challenge the attempt to qualify these issues as 'poor tax code' issues, because slicing off a few percent of tax code fixable taxes, isn't going to slice 50% to 90% off the cost of manufacturing, or wages paid to American citizens.

Depends on a few factors. I actually met somone who's job it is to help companies outsource (tip, they do over inflate their numbers). It was for my MBA class.

Taxes for the most part, won't do anything to stop outsourcing, at most, certain companies and certain industries, it might help. Depends on the company, and situation. There's more then a few factors that go into deciding to outsource for a business.

Alleviating conditions, can slow it down, but its a structural issue.

Now for a long time, many savvy Repubs have been aware that RINOS were plotting to co-opt the pro-life position while they would manipulate the Repub party into their orbit to carry out their elitist, self-serving "Everything For Us, Nothing For You" agenda.

Republicans went from being a minority party to winning great victories based on their pro-life positions. They cannot win without pro-lifers. We know it. They know it. Please see map below. Tampering with the pro-life position would be a disaster for Repubs (not to mention the disastrous effect on the unborn).

It would not be a good idea for pro-abort RINOS-with-an-agenda to plot and plan behind the backs of all the pro-life people who voted for Bush.

Got that, Kenny?

Conservative pro-life Christian voters made monumental contributions to GWB's 2004 vote totals. Pres Bush won with 63 Million Votes (13 million more than 2000).

The map, though impressive, conveys the misleading impression that blue state Catholics voted for Kerry.

According to EWTN "The World Over Live" analysts, with the exception of VA, where Catholics spit 70/30 in favor of Bush, the majority of Catholic voters split 55/45 for Bush.....a whopping number of votes since Catholics number about 52 million Americans.

According to CNN exit polls, Bush voters included 38% of union members, 40% of those with union members in their households, 42% of those earning $15,000-$30,000, 44% of those who earn under $50,000 and 44% of Latinos, 45% of youth (aged 18-29), 13% of liberals—even 11% of Democrats voted for Bush.

If you look closely, the map appears to place the insignificant "Other Voters" in the ocean.....that's accurate, because "Other Voters--RINO Republicans" were on cruise ships.

(MAP UPDATE Bush won Michigan, Ohio, Iowa and New Mexico later.)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.