Tag: GOP

Newt Gingrich, defined

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Friend of the Program Matt Lewis posted seven easy steps to follow if you’d like to talk like Newt Gingrich yesterday.  Here’s one that might be Number Eight: Allow others to define the conversation for you.

The latest news cycle on all things Gingrich revolved around his “rocky” entry into the Presidential race – which was “rocky” because of comments he made on policy ideas devised and proposed by others.

This isn’t the first time a Gingrich campaign has suffered a rough start.  Heck, this isn’t even the first time this year a Gingrich campaign has suffered a rough start – the same round of stories were written two months ago, when campaign subordinates couldn’t figure out whether or not Gingrich was actually officially “testing the waters.”

Even Gingrich’s campaign slogan – “Winning the Future Together” – was a phrase he used first, but which has been claimed for 2012 by the incumbent he hopes to defeat.

For another candidate, this might just be a run of bad luck.  Gingrich, on the other hand, has a track record of letting issues define him rather than getting out front and defining issues.  In fact, he has a 15-year track record, stretching back to the days when his Republican Revolutionaries of 1994 got their lunches eaten by Bill Clinton during the budget battles of 1995.

Gingrich has apologized to Paul Ryan and underscored his opposition to forcing people to buy health insurance.  Maybe his comments on both were misunderstood.  He’s still a bad candidate because he has to keep answering these distracting questions – and it’s his inability to drive messages that lead to these questions being asked in the first place.

Newt announces (with theme music by Mike Post)

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

If Newt Gingrich is trying to frame himself as the anti-Palin – intelligent and thoughtful rather than populist and excitable – this video does the trick.  Mustering all the enthusiasm one would expect from a commercial for reverse mortgages, Gingrich cites his two decades of experience, taking special care to drop the name of GOP saint Ronald Reagan.

This video looks like Newt and Co. were so enamored with the medium of YouTube that they forgot to make a video that was actually compelling.  The talking head presentation featuring no one but Gingrich is simply boring.  With the GOP primary field so often described as “crowded,” this is not the way to stand out.

The GOP Primary Presents: “Answering For Santino” Week

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

The three front runners for the Republican nomination each have baggage, and since last week we’ve seen their strategies for dealing with it.  Tim Pawlenty is very sorry about signing a cap-and-trade bill while he governed Minnesota; Mitt Romney has some ‘splainin’ to do to get people to quit using the word “Romneycare”; and Newt Gingrich… well, Newt’s got kind of a Cee Lo Green thing going on with his previous support for aggressive environmental action:

“I’d do a commercial with Al Gore,” Gingrich said last May in an interview with the website Human Events. “My point is conservatives ought to be prepared to stand on the same stage and offer a conservative solution.”

Pawlenty’s strategy is probably the best for now (pending Romney’s speech).  It is, appropriately enough, safe and genuine, but Gingrich is at least sort of right, too.  This line of messaging does help to further the idea that he is the Thinking Republican’s Candidate to a degree.  But the audience shouldn’t be conservatives (at least, not quite so obviously).

The past five years are absolutely full of examples of grassroots activists demonstrating that they don’t like to be lectured to.  There was Marco Rubio besting Charlie Crist in Republican primary polls (and eventually the general election), Joe Miller over Lisa Murkowski, and Rand Paul over Trey Grayson in Kentucky’s Senate race.  If you feel like going back farther and crossing the aisle, ask Joe Lieberman how rank and file Democrats felt about him in 2006.

You don’t like being lectured to.  Do you hear me?  You don’t like it.  (You do, however, appreciate irony, I hope.)

The point is, that instead of scolding conservatives that they should be stewards of the environment, Gingrich should be more inclusive.  Consider how his second sentence above would sound with a slightly different perspective:

“My point is that we can stand on the same stage and offer better, more creative solutions that will protect our environment without putting people out of work.”

Wouldn’t that make you feel a little bit better about being on the same side as Gingrich – as if you’re both part of the same winning team?

RNC jumps right on the Ryan budget plan

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

On Friday, the RNC sent out an email calling for supporters to sign a petition in support of Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget proposal.  Quick, huh?

Speed kills, and this RNC email came over a month after Ryan uploaded his YouTube video outlining the problem with continuing government spending.  That gave the Democrats a month to complain that the GOP budget proposal would strip old people of their medicine like a starving robot.  The RNC is a little bit late to the party on this one.

On the plus side, the email does direct activists back to a petition, where they can register their support and send their own brief message.  If the RNC is doing things right, that means the folks on the email list who respond to this email will be tracked and identified for the upcoming Presidential races.  If those people live in some place like Ohio, they should be on the extra-special, “we need these people to go to the polls and I bet they’d drag four people” list.

The spending issue isn’t going away, and there’s plenty of time to re-frame the debate.  For the RNC it’s better late than never.

At least AP saved some money by not showing up

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

The Associated Press and Reuters joined Mitt Romney in not attending this week’s Republican quasi-Presidential debate.  A story written by the AP covering the AP’s decision quoted an AP official:

The opening stages of an event as important as the presidential selection process should be as accessible as possible to all forms of journalism,” said Michael Oreskes, the AP’s senior managing editor. “These candidates want to lead the country. The country has a right to see them from various angles, not only where the TV cameras are positioned.

Remember, Journalism school students, there’s no reason you can’t quote yourself in a story you write about yourself.  That’s completely fine.

The AP isn’t clear exactly how the rights of the voting public are trampled by Fox News in restricting still photos during the televised event, but not by the AP in refusing to cover the event at all.

The only potential problem is that there will be no embarrassing pictures capturing candidates with their faces scrunched up or with mouths gaping ajar while they pronounce words like “sure” or “capital.” The restriction on pictures would be horrible for the AP if they sold pictures.

Oh, wait, that’s right: they sell pictures.

It is also tough to stomach the spin used by both AP and Reuters in holding up their readers and news consumers like human shields as the aggrieved parties.  In reality it was the news organizations who were slighted by the picture ban.  This isn’t a First Amendment problem; it is similar in that such cases the “public right to know” is used as shorthand for “the news company’s right to publish.”

But luckily for the voters, the AP is pretty much irrelevant as a news gathering organization anyway.  By using their platform for political speech, they become even less so.

Trump, GOP ’12 hopefuls, and The Birth Certificate of Destiny

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Up until the last month or so, President Obama had no reason to release a birth certificate and every reason to let the conspiracy theorists opine that he was a secret Muslim born in Kenya.  Every time they did, established Republicans had to scramble to distance themselves from the so-called “birthers.”

Then came Donald Trump’s big mouth, and the birth certificate came soon after.   Why would the President engage on this issue now?  Without the birth certificate, the Republican 2012 primary debates would shape up with the more traditional candidates (Romney, Pawlenty, et. al.) distracted from their core issues.

It may be that the President has internal poll numbers which show that the issue is taking a solid foothold among the electorate (despite more public polls that demonstrate a collective “meh,” even among those who think Obama is from Mars).

But maybe the President wants the GOP to avoid the distractions after all and engage in spirited discussions on their core issues – namely, federal spending.  After watching the ever-more-moribund Republican messaging on smaller government over the past few weeks, the President may look at this as a fight he can win.

When he tunes into Fox news in a few months for the first primary debates, the President would rather have Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty argue over who will cut entitlement spending than have them both deny conspiracy theories.

Obama’s release also solidifies Trump’s candidacy.  A month ago Trump was a novelty; now there can be no denying that his campaign has had some sort of impact.  When the President of the United States reacts to your Today Show interview, you are no longer a complete joke.

And with the certificate released, Trump may have a chance to mouth off on other, more important important issues such as energy policy, health care, and the size of government.  A blunt, unapologetic voice countering the policies of the current administration is what makes Chris Christie and exciting candidate.  Since Christie remains firm that a 2012 shot is out of the question, that role is most likely filled by Trump.

The Obama campaign is probably delighted by the idea of Republicans having to deal with the Trump candidacy in the early primaries, betting that his loud, unfocused rhetoric will distract the rest of the field.  The best way for him to claim his share of attention is, ultimately, to talk about real issues rather than moot issues.  By taking the birth certificate conspiracy theory off the table, the White House made Trump a slightly more serious voice for the primaries.

Whew, that was close!

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

A little over a week ago, President Obama launched his relection bid the way he announced his first campaign – with a YouTube video.  The video highlighted campaign volunteers in an effort to stress the grassroots nature of his campaign (which will still of course be run from the White House).  This continued on the Organizing for America blog, which has done little else but highlight volunteers re-enlisting.

But while they were getting the band back together on a mission from God, Washington, D.C. was breaking out with shutdown fever.  Congress and the President didn’t reach a budget deal until late into the evening on Friday, and OFA was nowhere to be found.

For Republicans, the President apparently could not have announced at a better time.  With OFA focused on the re-election campaign, there was no one beating the bushes for grassroots action in the week leading up to the deadline deal.  Just as Republicans have been wasting the buzz around Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity video, OFA sacrificed a chance to score major points.

As the deadline for a shutdown grew nearer, well-timed pressure on wavering GOP lawmakers might have helped the Democrats come out of the first budget battle a bit stronger than they did.  As the Obama 2012 campaign kicked off, OFA lost focus.

The Republicans should be prepared to fight a little harder during the next budget battle, because chances OFA won’t miss the opportunity again..

Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na BACHMANN!

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

It’s shaping up to be a big week for Minnesotans running for President, with Michelle Bachmann yesterday suggesting that there might be a future announcement about preparing to make an announcement that she would consider heavily running for President.  (That’s an official FEC designation, as I understand it.)

For 2012, it’s tough to see where Bachmann will draw support.  She has made plenty of inroads with tea partiers, but her operation may be short on organizational infrastructure – a polite way of saying that the usual top-level consultants who know how a Presidential race is run may not want to touch her with a 40 foot pole.  (And what candidate would you touch with a 40 foot pole?  But that’s a question for another blog.)  Perhaps sensing vulnerability and indecision from Palin – or with inside knowledge that she won’t run – Bachmann sees the potential for a candidate straight out of central casting for the strong, suburban soccer mom demographic like herself to fill the gap.

Or maybe Bachmann is, despite all the criticism, pretty smart about the nature of political movements.  Some pundits might advise she bide her time, run for Governor or Senate, and table her White House ambitions until 2016, 2020, or even 2024.  But while the tea party movement where her support is based is very relevant now, the reality is that its influence may have already crested with the 2010 election.  If it could carry her through Iowa and possibly South Carolina early on, she could at least score a pretty good speaking slot at the Republican Convention.  It would be a long shot, but it also might be her best shot.

Urban Renewal

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Last night, Centric played the first two episodes of In Living Color from way back in 1990.  This sketch was on the second episode:

If you had flipped over to the local DC news during the ensuing commercial break, you might have seen that Mayor Vincent Gray is rapidly losing public approval thanks to – you guessed it – a scandal.   More than two decades later, DC residents still suffer corruption from city hall.  They have company in other urban centers like Detroit.  In most cases, corrupt urban centers are run by Democrats.  In fact, that’s probably why they’re corrupt; without another political party ready to exploit scandal for political gain, politicians get sloppy and party leaders are less diligent about kiboshing candidates with skeletons in the closet.

In places like DC, the Republican party apparatus is almost non-existent – even if it’s well organized, national party committees and donors aren’t likely to funnel money into urban regions where wins are unlikely.  But short term losses may net long-term gains, and the Gray scandal offers a prime opportunity for the DC GOP – or other, like-minded groups – to make a very plain case to the District’s voters.

You’ve tried it their way, the pitch could go, now give us a chance.  You’ve tried big government, and it attracts corruption like a flame attracts moths.  Maybe we can do better by doing less.

Again, the DC GOP (nor any counterparts in other cities) likely doesn’t have the extensive resources it would take for this kind of hand-to-hand combat.  But if I was a wealthy Republican donor, I’d be interested to see what kind of traction a good, aggressive, forward thinking campaign could accomplish.

After all, Vincent Gray got elected, and he might as well have stepped out of this:

 

 

 

 

Results don’t lie

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

My latest post over at Pundit League talks about the Obama White House’s attempt to shift the focus on budget debates from the money to the benefits.  This month, they’re talking about education as a sacred cow; future budget battles are sure to treat other programs similarly.  As difficult as budgets are, it’s still a tough sell to cut back on government programs everyone is used to.

But what if those programs, for lack of a better-refined and focus-group-tested term, suck?  That reality may be the best arrow in any small government Robin Hood’s quiver.

The Heritage Foundation points out that a boom in education spending has not bought higher performance in America’s public schools.  Thomas Sowell made a similar point this week, when he wrote about the allegedly ecologically friendly policies of urban liberals in San Francisco pricing low- and middle-class blacks out of the city.  Private unions – who represent workers who actually have to worry about their jobs – are concerned that the EPA would cause layoffs from companies forced to spend extra complying with extraneous regulations.

For each of these programs and others like them, there’s always talk about the benefits.  But as Speaker Boehner said this week, “Talk is cheap.”