A Campaign Plan For Conservative GOP Candidates (Part 1 of 12)

Vanity ^ | A While Back | MAKnight

[MAKnight]

Can a true-blue all-round Conservative win in a Left-leaning state like Maryland? Judging from what happened to Bret Schundler last year in New Jersey, the conventional wisdom would suggest a strong "No". But ... I believe that Bret Schundler could have won that race in November.

"How?" is the $1,000,000 question a friend considering a run asked me. With the added benefit of hindsight from 2000 & 2001 observing the Bush, Santorum and Schundler campaigns I gave him the following suggestions. Criticisms, contributions and all other forms of opinion welcome ...

•       Go the whole nine yards on the issues, i.e. be an unapologetic and proud Conservative, whether it be on school choice, abortion, gun control, tort reform, compulsory unionism, bilingual education, property rights, welfare, taxation, etc. The media would scream foul and waste no time in "advising" you to lurch as far to the Left as possible i.e. become more "moderate".
        You can be the most conciliatory/ "moderate" of Republicans, but should you be running against a Leftist Democrat, the unions are still going to call you a threat to worker's rights, the NAACP and La Raza would still call you a racist, NOW and NARAL would still call you a threat to women, Sarah Brady and her cohorts are still going to call you a threat to children, the NEA and AFT would still call you a threat to public education and the Sierra Club would still call you a threat to the environment. And everything they say about you would be faithfully repeated by their ideological allies in the Press and news media.
        So if you're going to be labelled as an out and out Conservative, i.e. Bret Schundler you might as well let it all out and go to the mat to make your case to the voters ... and let the chips fall where they may. As a candidate, this means that you have to be completely unafraid of losing. Witness how successful the Press has been in making many Conservative Republicans seem almost ashamed or afraid of their principles / beliefs. How can you possibly win votes when its obvious you want to sweep your beliefs under the carpet, out of sight as if they were some dirty secret to be ashamed of? Stand up for them, defend them as loudly and as effectively as possible ... don't run from them.
        The fact is, not many Conservatives have proven themselves able to stand the continued assaults on them by the Press as it wields the "moderate"/ "extremist" club. Even Bret Schundler swerved Left on the Second Amendment and even on racial issues. The result? He only got 12% of the black vote. It's clear that waffling, pandering and obfuscation simply don't work.
        The Founding Fathers based this Republic on the notion that a well-informed populace is the only one capable of self-government. So, inform them. The media isn't going to do it. State your positions as a principled Conservative and stand by them to the very end. No-one has really tried this, yet. Be not afraid of any issue no matter how much the Press tries to make it your Achilles heel i.e. abortion.

  .......

Hoping that it helps anyone thinking of running for office some day, particularly in a Democrat dominated state. Note indeed that this has been proven to work; witness the election of Scott Walker (an outspoken and self-identified Conservative Republican) over Jim Ryan (a Leftist Democrat), 55%-45% in the Milwaukee County Executive's race on May the 1st.

Walker never once hid his conservatism and he won a high-turnout election in a county that went 61% for Al Gore in 2000. He even managed to eat significantly into the Democrat's share of the black and Hispanic vote. The following is from the Milwaukee Sentinel Journal article), which had (typical media Democrat fixation) endorsed Ryan.

      Walker didn't concede any sector of the community to his opponents in the primary or the final election, including the city of Milwaukee and African-American neighborhoods where others presumed he would be weak.
      An anecdote that shows how effective his campaign was: Ryan appeared on a Saturday afternoon program on WNOV-AM (860) several weeks ago, hosted by Lenard Wells, a retired Milwaukee police lieutenant. After Ryan left, Wells criticized Walker strongly and said he didn't want to have Walker on his program. But within minutes, Walker was at the studio in person, where he went on the air and, as usual, handled himself well. Moments like that show why he did far better than many expected among African-American voters.

If this proves anything, it proves that Ronald Reagan's victories in CA and the nation, the Gingrich Revolution in 1994 and Bret Schundler's Mayoral victories in Jersey City were not flukes. Conservatism, combined with the right candidate(s) and bravery is a winning formula. Eliminate the media's bias and you need not even be a super-charismatic "Great Communicator"/ Stategist to succeed.

[MAKnight]

Criticisms, contributions and all other forms of opinion welcome ...

[rdb3]

Heads up, mhking.

I'm coming back to this one.

[jla]

I absolutely agree with you.
I also believe that Conservatives should articulate more as to why their ideas are superior as well as how they work.
President Reagan did this wonderfully. And he kept it simple, to the point, & often interjected his own great sense of humor.

Result: He won every state except MN (and D.C.).

[Cicero]

I tend to agree with you. Bush refused to campaign in New Jersey or Virginia in support of the Republican candidates for governor, and as a result both of them lost.

This time around, Bush has been campaigning hard for most of the candidates, thankfully. But he could have done more for Simon--who like Schundler beat the establishment candidate in a primary and as a result is getting pretty grudging support.

A candidate doesn't win by being half-hearted. And since the Dems will attack even the most liberal RINO as a Nazi reactionary, it does little good to be weasel-worded. People respect honesty and enthusiasm.

[Gorest Gump]

Bush refused to campaign in New Jersey or Virginia in support of the Republican candidates for governor, and as a result both of them lost.

Schundler(sp?) lost pretty bad, as I recollect. For Bush to push hard for a candidate so out of touch with the electorate would have only hurt Bush. Plus, Bush was plenty busy during campaign season. Let's face it; Schundler is responsible for losing, not Bush. The Virginia race is a different story. Perhaps Bush could have turned the tide against Warner. Perhaps not.

But he could have done more for Simon--who like Schundler beat the establishment candidate in a primary and as a result is getting pretty grudging support.

Don't even try to pin Simon's trouble on Bush. Simon's foot is in his mouth more than in his shoe. From my perspective, Simon has run one of the worst campaigns in modern history. Californians apparently don't like Davis. But Simon has made himself even less likable.

[mhking]

I'm coming back to this one.

This looks like both of us will get some mileage out of this one. I'll be back as well.

[Still Thinking]

You can be the most conciliatory/ "moderate" of Republicans, but should you be running against a Leftist Democrat, the unions are still going to call you a threat to worker's rights, the NAACP and La Raza would still call you a racist, NOW and NARAL would still call you a threat to women, Sarah Brady and her cohorts are still going to call you a threat to children, the NEA and AFT would still call you a threat to public education and the Sierra Club would still call you a threat to the environment. And everything they say about you would be faithfully repeated by their ideological allies in the Press and news media.

I agree. Shading to the left, if you're the Republican, also has the effect of allowing the Democrat to move to the left, too, so you potentially have a more socialist winner than you otherwise would have, no matter who wins.

[WOSG]

I also believe that Conservatives should articulate more as to why their ideas are superior as well as how they work.

That is really the key, it is not so much as being MORE conservative, it is about bing CONFIDENT and SECURE IN YOUR BELIEFS that will attract the voters to you. A Reagan-style candidate is not afraid to be bold, and that attracts voters for what it is: Ideas and leadership.

A strong convervative message is a POSITIVE message.

[MAKnight]

Bold

[Mute]

I agree, up to a point. A conservative candidate should not be afraid to appear conservative, but he can't afford to completely ignore political reality either.

Reagan won the biggest electoral vote total in history, and Goldwater lost the biggest popular vote landslide in history. You can certainly argue that the mood of the country was different in 1964 and 1984, but not that different, especially considering how similar ideologically the two men were. The difference was, Reagan realized that there were perfectly good conservative ideas that America was not yet ready for.

For example, in his syndicated column in the 70's, Reagan raised the idea of making Social Security a voluntary contribution system. The response was overwhelmingly negative, and he never pursued it again. His "failure" to address issues like Social Security and the estate tax has actually led some paleoconservatives and libertarians to contend that Reagan wasn't conservative enough. (Joe Sobran has gone so far as to claim Reagan was a liberal). It has also led some conservatives to conclude that Bush is more conservative than Reagan, at least in some ways.

The truth is, while Reagan was certainly not afraid to state what he knew in his heart was right, he was more pragmatic than people generally believe. And, as usual, he was right about that too.

[ampat]

I doubt there are any conservatives in office who have the guts to speak a fully conservative agenda. They are just too worried about their political futures. On the other hand a new candidate going against an incumbent might have a chance. I would love to have Mr. Newt be a speech writer for conservatives.

[Agamemnon]

Let's face it; Schundler is responsible for losing, not Bush

Wrong. "Republican" RINO Party bosses did in Schundler at every turn. Their hand-picked guy that lost to Corzine was who the bosses wanted for gov, but not the regular GOP voter. DiFrancisco, the acting gov post-Whitman, was an obstructionist slug from the word go. In the wake of 2000, NJ RINOs even lost the NJ legislature because they looked and acted so much like Dems.

Without party "political machine" support, Schundler was a goner, and Bush's lustre would have suffered in post-911 pulling for a guy the RINO machine was in the process of pulling down.

Hope RINOs like McGreevy and the Torricelli substitute, "Looter-berg." If Schundler was in there, do you think this could have happened? Blame for losing this gov seat belongs squarely on NJ RINOs.