Also, you also have to consider biology for the under 35 women who aren't running for office.  A lot of us are at home taking care of the next generation and just don't have time to get involved.  

Yeah, we understand that most people work during the day and that's why meetings are scheduled for 6:30 - 7 pm, but that's prime family time and when we start getting our kids ready for bed.

I always wondered why I didn't see a lot of younger women at the meetings, but now that I've got a toddler at home, I totally get it - because I'm one of the people who wants to be more involved, but I can't because of just the practicalities of raising a kid.  So, I'm a lot more picky about what I do attend because I've got to take my family into consideration.

Also, a lot of us who are under 35 really don't want our kids to have the same messed up childhoods (ie divorce, latch-key kid) that we had, so we just aren't interested in pursuing a career as demanding as being a state legislator.  Our family trumps being in the State Legislature.

Communication is an area where I believe the younger generation does hold an advantage.  They have a better grasp of the new communication tools available through the internet, and by virtue of being young, other young people are more likely to listen to what they have to say.  

I mean it would be great to have more young people and women, ideally that'd be nice. But when I vote for someone, and I think most people are this way, they don't care about what they look like or how old they are, they care about their values and their beliefs.

I noticed that the writer is very concerned with various 'groups' of people and sets a desperate tone to 'attract' more of these people to the GOP.

TRUE CONSERVATIVES CARE ONLY ABOUT IDEALS, and whether or not those ideals reflect the values upon which this Country was founded -- God, Country, Fiscal Responsibility, Personal Responsibility, etc.

The shared values of true Conservatives do not recognize nor pander to 'groups', but rather represent a call-to-arms for all Americans, regardless of race, age, gender, religion, or any other group to whom the other political parties pander.

If the GOP wants to win, it simply needs to shine a light on the vast differences between Conservatives and Liberals.  Rather than running against an individual, our candidates need to run against the true Liberal beliefs.  You know, those wacky beliefs that Liberals, themselves, prefer not to mention until after they're elected (because they know most Americans would not share their radical views, so they have to keep them under wraps).

50% under 35, the other 50% women???

It sounds like you are throwing out all the White guys over 35, those are seasoned, experienced politicians, with proven consistent voting records, on issues you may be concerned with.

It kind of sounds like an affirmative action program, or quota hiring.

Take a look at the mess, that kind of stuff creates.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090422/ap_on_go_su_co/us_scotus_firefighters_lawsuit

WHAT MATTERS MORE...

What matters so much more is the substance of a candidate's core values, beliefs, platform, open-mindedness, willingness to listen and actually represent, ability to unify, and ability to stand up to criticism and attack, which will invariably come from a hateful Left.  What the Republican Party needs to stand for is standing against this kind of demographic pandering that results in wishy-washy values, based on the Left's interpretation of multiculturalism or demographic diversity, which has been sold so long to Americans, that even now, it eeks it's way into our (supposed-to-be-conservative) Republican Party.  (Incidentally, as a white male, I find it highly offensive and unprofessional, if that matters to anyone else.)

Lastly, let's get something absolutely straight about DIVERSITY. The Left has used it as a means to DIVIDE people according to their demographic by continually pointing out policies of Diversity and producing 'Diversity Training' to industry that dwells on how Diversity means white males being considerate of other races and women (what about other races being considerate of the host of European sub-ethnicities in our culture, specifically ideas of honor and chivalry?). This in itself is divisive; white males are not the problem our society today, haven't been for a long time, not sure they ever were (en masse) as the feminist movement has besmirched their own gender so much that Freud, were he alive today, might accuse them of a mental illness he called 'penis envy'.  Conservative women are more concerned about actually BEING feminine and standing for right and against wrong, which I, for one, am staunchly in favor of and support whole-heartedly; this includes a lack of discrimination, yet encouraging fair competition and discouraging unfair double-standards.

The Left pushes the slogan DIVERSITY IS STRENGTH; again this is WRONG.  UNITY IS STRENGTH; this is why their party is now stronger than ours. Ours is fractionalized and factionalized because some of us have bought their hype, having been misled, which is part of what I'm fighting against for the benefit of our party! While UNITY IS STRENGTH, what, then, is DIVERSITY, really?  DIVERSITY IS ADVANTAGE, which doesn't necessarily take the distilled form of demographics; rather, performance diversity. "All Men are created equal" (do I really have to insert here that 'Men' refers to 'huMANity'?); yet, a Man is also the sum of his deeds (again, women too!), meaning outcomes depend on what you do with yourself and your life.  Therefore, Diversity as Advantage is expressed even more in what people can DO in a group, NOT HOW THEY LOOK!!

In Conclusion, we must Reach Out to groups we need to win through good marketing of our ideals, educating them on why we win in the Arena of Ideas, and engage them in conversations of substance, hopefully, purging them of the Lies from the Left; i.e., we need to carefully convince people to join us, not pander to demographics. It is also more a matter of Marketing the Republican Party properly, without sacrificing substance.  We can look to the future, and REACH OUT to the future, while standing on the RICH HERITAGE of our past as a party.  Getting away from that heritage is how we got into the wilderness in the first place.  Never make that mistake again!

We are losing our Constitution in government because lawyers are more interested in telling people what they CAN'T do than empowering them TO DO. Even now, lawyers in government are pridefully rewriting our way of life into their own image, even thinking they can run businesses they know nothing about, and for what? Because they've sold the electorate somehow on the idea that only lawyers can write law? Wrong!  I could rewrite the Tax Code on one page, if not a line or two. Translation into legalese or ensuring a new law doesn't unintentionally conflict with good existing law is what paralegals and staff lawyers are for (including any other legal issues involved).

Therefore, perhaps we should concentrate on DIVERSITY of SUBSTANCE, PERFORMANCE, PROFESSION within our CONSERVATIVE UNITY in order to produce good laws and Constitutional Governance. After all, the Framers of the Constitution were...

"Ben Franklin was the only really old man.  Eighteen were under 40; three were in their 20's. Of the 56, almost half - 24 - were judges and lawyers. Eleven were merchants, nine were landowners and farmers, and the remaining 12 were doctors, ministers and politicians."
  -- Excerpt from Atty Rush H. Limbaugh, Jr.'s speech, "Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor"

I've known this guy since my sophomore year of high school (79 - 80), and I can promise you that he is a rock-solid Reagan-style Republican.  He's also well capable of holding his own, if not mopping the deck with, any random troll lurking about on this site.

Recruitment is far different than preference, and I support the concept he envisions, although I am fearful the moment he assigned numerical goals that we're going down the road to quotas or preferences.

Half of politics is showing up, according to the old saw.  It's true.

I for one have advocated, along with Akindele Akinyemi, and others, that WE SHOW UP IN INNER CITIES.  That we ask minorities, women, and others run.  That we fear nothing in those requests, make NO ASSUMPTIONS, and act surprised when they say "well, I'm a Democrat, or traditionally voted D..."....

Ask why?  Explain your values and beliefs ... LISTEN to what their values and beliefs are. Honestly. Match those values and beliefs to yours and ours both logically and emotively.

Here's something the North Oakland Republican Club will do next month.  Members will go to a church in downtown Pontiac and serve food at a charitable event.  No direct politics but the organization names says enough.

Multiply that by a 1000.

OUTREACH.  Participation. No special catering or changing of policies or principles to "fit groups".  Stick to your guns - and explain them. Sincerely.

It will take longer with African American geographic concentrations because there is both a longer history of our neglect and because the social concentration creates a peer pressure barrier where the first inputs will be slow and result in low outputs until you reach a tipping point to break through the social ice and defense layers the Democratic party has built up for years.  We already see though that African American populations that are in "diverse" neighborhoods have more diverse voting patterns and may be easier to reach - the same is true of all ethnicities and women.  Because they are less concentrated the social pressure and their own experience is wider and I can envision quicker turns of the tide within those demographics BUT WE HAVE TO WORK IT.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but it seems to me that we have primaries in this state to winnow down our field of candidates, and the strongest usually survive.  So, the only way to get your desired result is to handpick candidates based on what demographic they meet, rather than their strength as a campaigner.  Or what they believe in.

And, if that's the case, I hope you are pretty good at picking people that have a good work ethic, that are quick on their feet, and are willing to actually work... and know the issues.

Oh, and have the right "look", and gender, and so on.  

Bean counting and quotas and cherry picking demographically 'right' groups aren't how you win.

Presenting a good case is how you win.