... because I plan to spell out exactly what they're doing wrong in winning over independents.
Why would I do such a thing?
Three reasons:
- I believe that even the most well meaning, well led and well advised government performs better when it has genuine, loyal opposition constantly scrutinizing their actions. What the United States currently has is less akin to loyal opposition and more akin to a horrifying combination of the Simpson's "Ha! Ha!" Nelson and the guy suing to have the CIA stop reading his thoughts.
- By highlighting what Republicans are doing wrong, liberals are empowered to capitalize on their mistakes. Many of the points will also apply to liberal critiques of Republicans.
- This lecture I'm sitting in is unbearably boring. Seriously, someone get me out of here. Please...
If any of this interests you, please do read on below the fold...
Note: As this entry is written by an Australian, it should be read exclusively during the 'tea break' in the middle of a cricket match, while eating Tim Tams and having a sexy accent.
Suggestion 1: Criticism works better when you're not viewed as a hack
Do you know why Frum's critique of Republican strategy made front page news and dominated several news cycles? Do you know why Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann making the exact same point didn't?
I'll give you a hint. It's for the same reason a plane crash is newsworthy and a plane having a safe and uneventful flight is not. The former is an anomaly that's shocking and interesting, the latter is a daily occurrence no one cares about.
What does this mean for you? It means that people will take you a lot more seriously if you don't bend yourself backwards to twist everything the government does, no matter how positive into a negative talking point. Here's just part of the list of things you reacted to as if President Obama was naming Osama Bin Ladin to his cabinet while declaring one party rule and replacing Grant with Mao on the fifty dollar bill:
- Healthcare reform
- Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
- Bailouts
- TARP
- New Doctrine on the use of Nuclear Weapons
- Miichelle Obama's white house vegetable garden
- Bo the white house dog
- Barack Obama bowing to foreign leaders
- Miichelle Obama touching the queen of England
Now, I'm not suggesting that from your point of view, several of those items aren't truly frightening. Heaven knows Bo undermines the vision of your founding fathers. Yet, even your most valid critiques of genuine flaw are far, far less effective because of your utter inability to admit that anything the President does is EVER good.
Perhaps an example would be edifying. I'm a fan of David Brooks. I don't agree with him philosophically and I feel that he occasionally gets out of his depth when commenting on issues in which he has no grounding but I still respect him. You know why? Because when the President does something positive for the United States, David Brooks is not afraid to say so. Republicans tend to act like this makes Brooks weak, a traitor or a RINO and maybe they're right... but it makes him a hell of a lot more credible than any of the thousand right wing talking point machines that spout the same 3 lines about big government, throat ramming and socialism regardless of what's being discussed.
Suggestion 2: Criticism works a lot better when you have credibility
Four days a week, Jon Stewart is able to viciously skewer politicians with their own previous statements. Something you may not realize is that Jon Stewart is not magical. He does not own a crystal ball (unlike Colbert, who owns two) and doesn't read tarot. What he has is a research department, an internet connection and a bunch of newspaper subscriptions.
Here's my proposal: Hire a consultant in charge of hypocrisy prevention. I realize that most 'young Republicans' are over 40 and the average Republican is old enough to have draft dodged World War II. Understanding this, let me explain this new thing we have now called 'the internet.' On the internet there exists a record of everything you have ever said in public... ever. Everything. Ever. If you're a leading political figure, hire a bunch of guys whose job it is to take upcoming public statements and research, 'How Stewart will make me look like a lying hypocrite the night after I say this?'
While we're on the subject of hypocrisy...
- Either stop purporting to be the party of traditional family values or stop sleeping with male prostitutes you're not married to.
- Either stop purporting to be the party of small government or stop trying to empower federal agencies to be able to shoot anyone 'Ai-Rab looking' on sight.
- Either stop purporting to be the party of fiscal discipline or stop blowing up the deficit every time you get to drive the big federal government truck.
You may not even have to. Just act with the slightest bit of humility. Admit that it's possible, just possible that something that went wrong in the last twenty years wasn't Clinton or Carter's fault. I know you guys want Reagan on the $50 so that your wallet matches your tattoos but believe it or not, the man was capable of error. So was Bush Sr. So was Bush Jr. So was Bush Jr (not a typo, I just wanted that last one to sink in).
Suggestion 3: Learn to stand up to your base without alienating them
Did you notice how President Obama managed to get elected without promising hippy moonbat liberal loons everything they ever wanted? Did you? I can assure you that the Greenpeace fanatic chained to an oil rig in 30 ft seas in the Atlantic is no less dedicated (or insane) than the Tea Party member carrying the picture of Obama with a Hitler moustache sodomizing the statue of liberty. You don't have to promise them everything they want.
You have two choices. Either you admit that the Tea Partiers are a radical, utterly irrational fringe group with an agenda they are unwilling to compromise on in the slightest and thus have no room in the political process OR you stick to your position that the Tea Partiers are patriotic, well informed Americans with genuine concerns. If you choose the latter, you should have no problem whatsoever getting up in front of them and saying, "I broadly support your agenda, but feel that it goes further than is prudent." Then I'd run... because chances are at least one of them knows what prudent means and will lead the torch and pitchfork wielding mob that attempts to burn you for your heresy.
When the Tea Party goes bonkers it creates a lot of noise, which can give you the false impression that the entire country is lining up behind you against the administration. Don't buy into it. Sign creation, slogan chanting and ability to rhyme things with 'Nazi' doesn't actually translate into additional votes. The Democrats hated Bush easily as much as you hate Obama and couldn't get rid of him in 2004... and if we believe your talking points, he had the mainstream media against him.
Suggestion 4: Stop all using the same exact talking points
I know I've touched on this before but for the love of everything holy please stop using the exact same phrases. I know you think it makes you appear unified and on message. It doesn't. It makes you look like the Japenese vending machines that dispense used female undergarments... the colours and packages may be different but the product is still always the same (and very disturbing).
The only ones who memorized and began using the 'ram this bill down our throats' rhetoric that you seemed so proud of during the healthcare debate were those who supported you anyway. You don't need to win those guys over, they think Obama is an uppity street punk whose here to take their gun and forcefully convert them to Islam before releasing a gangsta rap music video. The people you actually want to convince think you sound like a skipping CD.
Suggestion 5: Find a real candidate for 2012
Statistically speaking, there must be someone out there that's Republican, a decent human being and not having sex with an Argentinian, a male prostitute, a stranger in an airport stall or Todd Palin. I know you've been trying really hard to find a governor to be your next rising star. Well done. Think harder. Really.
It's an anti-incumbent mood in the country and the best you can come up with to represent a breath of fresh, conservative air is a guy whose run before (Romney), a woman who single handedly improved the job security of every satirist on the internet (Palin) and whatever the hell Ron Paul is.
Whatever else you may think about President Obama, you have to concede that Candidate Obama is really, really good at campaigning. He crushed Hillary Clinton, danced circles around McCain and won the Presidential Election as a black man with the name Barack Hussein Obama. Seriously. You don't honestly think Romney is going to take this guy down. I know you don't. So go back to the drawing board. Or nominate Palin, because if you're going to lose anyway you may as well make Jay Leno's job easier for a year.
-----
You're welcome.