Posted on 02/01/2002 7:21:32 AM PST by truthandlife
The chairman of the Republican National Committee urged conservatives to combat liberal media bias by expressing their views to journalists. But he also told the annual Conservative Political Action Conference that selling the conservative message, which appeals to "serious thought,” would require "extra effort.”
"There are some members of the media who have some redeeming qualities,” Chairman Marc Racicot joked Thursday.
The former Montana governor, recently named by President Bush to head the RNC, recalled the joke that the duty of an editor was to separate the wheat from the chaff, and then print the chaff.
"Seriously,” he advised, "talk to journalists. Engage them. Most are inclined to welcome the opportunity.”
But Racicot warned that in spreading conservative beliefs, "When you think about it, it’s a more difficult message. It is a calling to a higher level of incisive analysis and responsibility, and additional effort and labor. And sometimes it’s not easily accepted.”
The GOP chairman compared this to family situations where "children don’t always want to hear what parents pass on to them in terms of advice and counsel. And I think that’s true of the conservative message as well. So we have to recognize the extra special challenge that we have in people being willing to accept hard advice.”
Some conservatives in the past have criticized Racicot for his liberal governance in Montana.
The newly installed GOP chief also said:
STATISTICS:
1. Democrats ALWAYS get the same turnout
2. The Republican vote VARIES GREATLY based on the turnout of conservative base voters
Democrats have gotten virtually identical turnouts in each of the last five presidential elections. The following chart dramatically illustrates this startling fact:
| 1980 | 1984 | 1988 | 1992 | 1996 | |
| Voting age population in millions | 157.6 | 172.8 | 180.7 | 185.6 | 194.8 |
| Democrat votes in millions | 35.5 | 37.5 | 41.8 | 44.8 | 45.6 |
| Percent of Democrat votes | 23% | 22% | 23% | 24% | 23% |
It is the Republican message -- and its effect on the conservative base -- that determines Republican success in presidential elections.
The fundamental reason for the victories of Ronald Reagan (1980 and 1984) and George H.W. Bush (1988) is that they ran on a solid conservative agenda that was easily understood, and believed, by conservative base voters.
Both President Bush (1992) and Bob Dole (1996) lost because their campaigns lacked conservative credibility, resulting in fewer Republican votes as the conservative base abandoned them by either staying home or registering a protest vote for Ross Perot.
Rove said that one reason the 2000 election was so tight was that as many as 4 million Christian conservatives did not go to the polls, reported "The Chicago Tribune." Although the Bush campaign had expected 19 million evangelical voters to vote for their man, election returns revealed only 15 million turned out to cast ballots.
Republicans must present an easily-understood, credible conservative agenda. When we do, we win; when we do not, we lose. I am sorry but Christian conservatives still have strong influence in politics whether you like it or not.
Your analysis is very interesting and I agree with it as to the Republican votes. However, Republican only votes are insufficient to win elections. You have to appeal to your base as well as attract independents. I do believe that Racicot is correct as to the independent votes being a tougher sell. Independents are independents because of their lack of idealogical conviction. Therefore, appealing to idealogical convictions on the issues will not be largely successful. There, emotions do sway. Reagan won not just by being conservative to attract his base, but also by his charisma and personality. Bush the elder was really a Reagan re-election. By 1992 he had to be re-elected without Reagan's influence. His lack of conservative credentials lost his base, and his lack of charisma failed to sway independents. You are correct in that holding your base is a must, and Republicans have not been as successful. However, broadening your base and appealing to independents is also necessary.
Absolutely right. When given a choice between a Democrat and a Republican who is an ersatz Democrat, many conservatives stay home.
I am sorry but Christian conservatives still have strong influence in politics whether you like it or not.
No need to be sorry.
You are right and the message I'm getting right now is that the GOP is going to IGNORE clear evidence of SERIOUS crimes by the DNC and Clinton administration the last 9 years. As far as I'm concerned, unless Racicot speaks to these CRIMES then he is no different than the former RNC Chairmen. I ask again ... why hasn't the RNC mentioned the Riady non-refund? Why isn't ANY mention of this on the RNC website? Here is a clear case where either SOMEONE connected with the DNC broke SERIOUS campaign finance laws or Riady LIED under a plea agreement which should be null and void if he lied. NO EXCUSES. I am tired of the GOP and Bush administration ducking THEIR responsibility to investigate and prosecute the crimes the democRATS committed. I am a life long Republican and I will NOT vote for Bush and the GOP if they are willing to ignore MURDER, MASS MURDER, TREASON, ELECTION TAMPERING, BLACKMAIL, BRIBERY, PERJURY and EVERY OTHER CRIME YOU CAN NAME by democRATS. If they do that then they are not to be trusted either.
And, by the way, I know a bunch of people that feel the same way.
I see conservatives winning on the emotional front due to the War on Terror. National security (fear) is a big issue these days, something conservatives are better at handling than liberals--racial profiling, border security, military funding are all issues that conservatives should win big time.
What did the GOP propose in the last election that would be considered a 'conservative agenda'? Bush could not even carry the popular vote against Gore (an inept challenger carrying the Clinton White House on his back).
Why does he single out Christians? Is he suggesting that Christian conservatives 'take a hike' (whether they like it or not)? I'm a single issue pro-life voter regardless of party. This means more to be than any other issue. I already took the hike.
Thanks for your time.
Bravo!
Assimilation is a winning issue in the hispanic community. No matter what the Demons say, hispanic immigrants and 1st generation americans (before they're corrupted by the welfare-crats) have a strong understanding of the American dream - the opportunity to work, succeed, and offer a better life for the entire family. If Bush & the GOP can communicate that vision again, the "Si" vote is theirs.
That is just not true.
Jimmy Carter got his a$$ cleaned in 1980 becuase of the economy. Twenty percent interest rates, 10 percent unemployement and the Iran hostages cost Jimmy Carter his job.
Reagan ran on the fact that he was the only presidential candidate in history to have been elected president of his labor union not once but twice. No one was to draw the conclusion that Reagan was pro labor.. now were they?
Reagan never failed to mention in his stump speech in 1980 that Reagans political hero was That Great NEW DEAL Conservative Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Over and over Reagan said he was still a fan of FDR. Reagan said at nearly every campaign stop in Democrat Districts, that he left the Democratic party because the party of FDR had changed not him. The reporters used to joke that the Democrats were going to sue Reagan for Plagerism. Most of us said if we heard one more time how the Reagan economic program he was calling for was IDENTICAL TO JOHN KENNEDY's in 1960 we were going to puke.
Reagan implied that he hated big corporations because one had fired his Dad on Christmas eve. Reagan told that story of the pink slip in the Christmas envelope instead of a bonus at every stop. Those of us in the press used to say it word for word with him and then see who could make the best fake sob sounds. That is what reporters do when they have seen the same act 200 times.
Reagan ran to the left to get the center voters for all he was worth. Even with the bad economy and the hostages it still took a move to the left in order to beat Jimmy Carter.
One thing you ought to consider... They say you can go to hell for lying.
If you believe you can go to hell for lying (which I don't and I stated facts and not opinion in my comments) then with your statement above, get your fire suit ready. Do you specialize in revisionist history? Are you a member of the media or academia?
It's been 30 years and they're still telling us we have to change "hearts and minds" about abortion, while, at the same time, doing nothing beyond symbolic pap to actually start changing those hearts and minds. At this rate, abortion should be finished in this country by about AD 3456. I remember the Karl Rove quote about conservative Christians staying home on election day. The veiled lust for them to be gone was dripping from the quoted text. Congratulations for moving on.
I like what you have to say but I wish to make one point. I would rearrange your statement above to read: The fundamental reason for the victories of the conservative agenda after 1980 was Ronald Reagan.
Even though he got little of his agenda implemented his personality and his message was loved by a majority of American people. RWR got a lot of the politically ignorant middle of the political spectrum to go out and vote for him.
GWB is about to do the same thing. The big question is can we influence him to actually do something with his power?
Can we hope that instead of squandering the political capital handed to his father on a silver platter he will resume the Reagan Revolution in his second term?
BIG QUESTION!
Well I didn't see this. You gave away your liberal revisionist history title. I HIT ON THE HEAD. You guys are too easy to figure out.
Almost convincing, Armando, but I've got one thing to say that refutes it:
1994.
Hmmm?
That's right.
It wasn't a Dimocrat who said "Watch my lips..." and
"No more gun control."
It's not so hard to sell the the people, but hard as heck to sell to the Republican party leadership and office holders.
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.