To:    GOP Friends

From:    Dave Doyle

Re:    Response To 2010 Predictions

To those of you who read the white paper by MDJ&P Strategy Consultants, it is very reminiscent of comments that were made about the Michigan GOP heading into the 1990 election. At that time many said the Party was dead and couldn't attract top tier candidates; the Dem machine would outspend and overwhelm the GOP.

You probably won't be surprised that I have a very different view of GOP prospects in 2010. Let's review Michigan political history and where we stand today.

Heading into the 1990 election, just like now, we had lost back-to-back gubernatorial elections. The 1986 election was a massive landslide for the democrats, and was proof, according to some, that raising taxes in 1983 was politically popular. Democrats controlled the state house, both U.S. senate seats and the congressional delegation, as well as the offices of Attorney General and Secretary of State.

Some of the comments made about the GOP nominee were that he was not an inspiring speaker, he had no statewide name ID, he had no business experience, we needed a moderate on social issues, and where the hell was Beal City?

Nationally, shortly before the election, the GOP President broke his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. Heading into Election Day, all the trends were against the GOP and many said we could not possibly win.

The most important issue heading into the November 1990 election was rising property taxes.

What people were saying in 1989, until Election Day, was that the GOP needed a top-tier candidate and John Engler wasn't it. I don't have to tell you that Engler's victory in 1990 was a major upset and he went on to be one of the most effective governors in Michigan history.

Fast forward to 2009. The Dems have again won back-to-back gubernatorial elections. They again have control of both U.S. Senate seats and the congressional delegation. However, the GOP Secretary of State and Attorney General were both re-elected in 2006.

Despite comments made about the current GOP candidates, here is my take on the field. Two of the candidates were comfortably re-elected statewide in a very good year for the other party. One of the candidates is a very popular incumbent congressman from a vote rich part of the state. One is a physician and expert on healthcare issues. Other GOP candidates rumored to be exploring the race are a popular sheriff from a major county as well as successful businessmen. Having done a fair amount of candidate recruitment in the past, this sounds like a pretty strong field to me.

On the national level, the currently popular democrat President has proposed the largest spending plan in history. If implemented, his energy plan will dramatically increase gas and electric bills for every consumer in the country and likely put a stake in the heart of the U.S. auto industry, and I won't even mention the cost or consequences of his national healthcare plan.

The most important issues in Michigan today are the concern over the lack of well-paying jobs and the weak economy. Rising quickly toward the top of the list is the concern over increasing property taxes while property values are decreasing. Recent statewide polling by MRG indicates that people in Michigan are evenly divided as to which Party does a better job of running the state of Michigan. This is a dramatic improvement for Republicans from last year and similar to the numbers in 1989. In addition, the latest poll shows that Republicans are recovering their gravitas on issues most important to today's voters: creating jobs, attracting new business to turn around the economy and cutting property taxes.

Now, let's look at the likely Dem nominee. He was elected to the state house way back in 1982 and he has held public office ever since. He is hardly the candidate of change. But, of course, he is not running on change. He wants to continue to build on the record of the Granholm/Cherry Administration. Does anyone think that this is a good campaign platform? Apparently the voters don't think so either, given that he loses to every Republican candidate tested in head-to-head matchups on MRG's latest statewide poll. In fact, John Cherry never garners more than 34 percent against any of the Republicans tested - just one percent more than the percentage of voters who say they primarily vote for Democrats - not what I would call support that crosses party lines.

There are a lot of ways to look at election results to shore up the conclusions that you have already drawn.  Some people look at these results and draw the conclusion that only candidates of a certain ideology can win.

This method ignores the fact that elections are influenced by all of the candidates in the race; what is happening locally, statewide, nationally, and internationally; and thousands of other factors.

Michigan history shows us that at any given time, conservatives, moderates, or liberals can win. It all depends on the year and the candidates. John Engler and Bill Milliken were both elected three times in Michigan. Jennifer Granholm and Jim Blanchard were both elected twice.

Yes, it is correct to point out that the GOP has not done well in the last two cycles. It is also true that the Michigan GOP is stronger today than we were in 1989. It is not correct to conclude that only candidates of a certain ideology can be elected.

We have a long way to go before November 2, 2010, and a lot can happen between now and then to influence the outcome of the race. Contrary to the conclusion of others, 2010 looks to me like a real opportunity for the GOP.

Dave Doyle is the Executive Vice President of Marketing Resource Group, Inc. MRG is a full service political consulting and public relations firm that works with republican candidates and business friendly associations and companies. Dave also served as the executive director and then chairman of the Michigan Republican Party from 1989 to 1995.