Tag: Excitement

Welcome back.  Its part III.  And while Justin Amash may or may not "deserve" to be primaried, maybe its not such a bad idea. Right?

Anyhow, I don't like to simply complain about things for which I have no answer. Though I may sometimes do so, its just not constructive.

The bottom line is that with the way long time party elites, and the fresh stock of activists often clash, we have a dysfunctional mess.  Yes we all work together until at least one side is satisfied that there is no more advantage in doing so.  A situation that offers less opportunity for growth and advancement of either continuing political domination by the party power brokers OR for the strength of message that comes with core principled positions.  neither side winds up the winner for any longer term.  And it was only under the intense pressure of the circumstances that gave us the Tea Party, activist conservatives, and constitutional types which are willing to put up with the intense political bigotry found with the old guard.

If the party elite has not figured it out, most of those new political activists don't really care about party dominance. Its more of a means to end the disregard of our constitution and traditional values.  They simply want their voices back and want to be heard.  Most would likely be perfectly happy watching professional politicos straighten it up.

If only they would.

There IS a way to satisfy all sides. There is a way in which the 'elite' within the party lose nothing, gain the help needed to enhance party dominance, risk little in trust built relationships, and see better results out of government.  All the while, new activists and party members are able to influence, assist, and return the party to the rule of law principles the very name 'Republican' originates. And it compromises no one's principles or desires for equal opportunity.

I have stated or at least alluded to the concerns  either interest has. For the established members, its loss of power, both in the ranks occupying congress, and influence among local and state parties. For the 'insurgent' membership, it is the inability to wield influence in who represents true Republican and conservative principles.  Suspicions for the end result of either desire, making one side or the other incompatible.

Not exactly the way to build a successful party.

The lefties are in charge, their EPA is destroying business, the justice department is destroying our borders, the president is destroying our world standing as a super power, the treasury and fed destroying our currency, the previous congress has set the timer for self destruct on healthcare, and the current and presumably 'better' congress cannot even show the skills needed to stop the fiscal bleeding. Michigan's own congressmen have been stitching their fingers together ala super committees, and even the good doctor Dan has wrapped the gauze a little too tightly choking off the air that provides for common sense.

How important is 2012 to you?

Think death-star-about-to-blow-up-the-planet kind of important.

"It's not impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they're not much bigger than two meters. "

An article by John Hawkins on 7 Reasons Why Mitt Romney's Electability Is A Myth was a reminder that there are people who are more motivated by charisma, charm, and I might dare say 'gravitas', than by substantive policy concern. Hawkins starts off:

"1) People just don't like Mitt Romney: The entire GOP primary process so far has consisted of Republican voters desperately trying to find an alternative to Mitt Romney. Doesn't it say something that GOP primary voters have, at one time or another, preferred Donald Trump, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and now even Ron Paul (In Iowa) to Mitt Romney?

To some people, this is a plus. They think that if conservatives don't like Mitt Romney, that means moderates will like him. This misunderstands how the process of attracting independent voters works in a presidential race. While it's true the swayable moderates don't want to support a candidate they view as an extremist, they also don't just automatically gravitate towards the most "moderate" candidate. To the contrary, independent voters tend to be moved by the excitement of the candidate's base (See John McCain vs. Barack Obama for an example of how this works). This is how a very conservative candidate like Ronald Reagan could win landslide victories. He avoided being labeled an extremist as Goldwater was, yet his supporters were incredibly enthusiastic and moderates responded to it.

Let's be perfectly honest; Mitt Romney excites no one except for Mormons, political consultants, and Jennifer Rubin. To everybody else, Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama is a "lesser of two evils" election where we'll grudgingly back Mitt because we won't lose as badly with him in the White House as we would with Obama. That's not the sort of thing that gets anyone fired up to make phone calls, canvass neighborhoods, or even put up "I heart Mitt" signs in their yards. "