DCRepublican.com

It looks like there is an update to the post I made back in April, Where ‘States Rights’ Sometimes Get Complicated.

Even though the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the death penalty was too severe of a sentence for those found guilty of child rape, it appears that many state legislatures will remain steadfast in introducing and attempting to pass laws that provide these offenders with the toughest possible sentencing guidelines.

I was quite surprised Supreme Court was able to develop a majority opinion (5-4) that essentially removed the rights of individual states to determine what is ‘just punishment.’

Even though this was a huge victory for many on the far-left and certain religious types, I was pleased to see how John McCain and Barack Obama addressed this case:

Republican Sen. John McCain called the ruling “an assault on law enforcement’s efforts to punish these heinous felons for the most despicable crime.” Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said there should be no blanket prohibition of the death penalty for the rape of children if states want to apply it in those cases.

I have to admit, I was quite pleased to see Barack Obama make this statement. All too often to Democratic candidates succumb to the pull of the far-left fringe, and it usually comes back to haunt them, especially in middle America.

Obama’s statement makes me wonder what how he would prioritize the view of states rights when it comes to picking his Supreme Court Justice should he be elected. Would it be more important than a potential nominees stance on abortion? Gay rights?

I think it would be an interesting question to be presented to the candidates in a debate, “if you were given the task of picking a Supreme Court nominee during your presidency, list the top three ideological viewpoints that you would be looking for, in order, based on priority.”

Hopefully if they do another YouTube debate, someone can sneak in a question like this. Maybe the snowman.

In the past, I have been very critical of campaigns at all levels, primarily going after their lack of effort in trying to capture the young, energetic and willing base of the GOP.

Fortunately, I haven’t been the only one who has noticed these problems, and for many of the campaigns they have made strides in the right direction in terms of using technology in their favor (see Bob Schaffer for on example).

However, as candidates are starting to finally get their websites and campaign structures in order to accommodate volunteers and activists, I’ve started to see what seems like a withdrawal from campaigns on all levels, even by those who would be classified as “campaign die-hards.”

I know that things like this are bound to happen when your party has a sitting two-term President. For many, there seems to be an assumption that simply writing a check to Senator McCain or the Republican National Committee is going to take care of securing a victory come November.

Even though check writing isn’t going to make someone President (though it helps), lets just pretend that their logic is correct. Let’s assume that each of these Republicans writes their check to Senator McCain and he is able to work the right states and win the election, then what? Was this a win for the GOP?

There are many Republicans that I have spoken with who seem to believe that the only victory that the Party has to worry about is the presidency, assuming that once John McCain is in office, he’ll simply veto every piece of earmark-laden piece of legislation that comes across his desk.

Unfortunately, those who make that assumption need to understand that if the GOP doesn’t pick up some key seats, or loses just a few, having a veto-proof majority is something that wont be too far out of reach for the Democrats.

Just look at what happened with the Farm Bill, even without the Democrats having a veto-proof majority, they were able to override President Bush’s veto and pass one of the most earmark-packed pieces of legislation I’ve ever seen.

As the Democratic majority in the House continues on its likely path of growth, why would anyone assume that the addiction to earmarks is going to lessen on either side? For the Demcrats, they know that the more votes they have, the more secure they become. For some Republicans, the assumptions sets in that even if they try to stop earmarks, the Democrats will just override them, so they might as well take what they can get for their districts.

Basically what I’m saying is that the only way that the prospects of a McCain presidency can be successful in terms of fulfilling the pledges he’s making now, is by having a strong effort to get likeminded Republicans elected with him.

While the House is probably a lost cause for at least another cycle, I think that the GOP can keep or pickup some key seats in the Senate. In my opinion, Virginia (Jim Gilmore), New Mexico (Steve Pearce), Louisiana (John Kennedy), Colorado (Bob Schaffer) and New Hampshire (John Sununu) are the states that we should focus on doing whatever we can to keep in, or bring to Republican control.

In order for any of these seats to be won, Republicans need to start helping these campaigns in conjunction with their efforts to get Senator McCain elected. Furthermore, if the means are available, we need to contribute money to these campaigns and get our friends to do the same. In fact, you can even create your own fundraising page at Slatecard.com and give to the candidates you want to see win. Just talk to Joe Mansour, and he’ll help you get started.

I’m not saying that everyone should stop helping the McCain campaign. In fact, I’d suggest just the opposite and encourage more people to help him win, but at the same time also consider helping candidates in your area who might also have a chance to bring or keep a conservative voice in Congress.

It’s going to be an ugly battle this cycle, but with the right amount of foot soldiers on the ground, I’m confident that those conservatives who deserve to stay in Congress or get elected will.

Another great BarelyPolitical production:

And of course anyone who has ever worked on a campaign can probably understand this video. There is a reason one of my favorite songs is”Gone Til’ November” by Wylcef.

I’m not sure if the only one who found this interesting, but check out the email below that the McCain campaign sent out to their supporters today:

We recently launched a brand-new JohnMcCain.com and want to invite you to visit our new website today. But first, we want to take a minute to say thank you for being a part of our online community. You are the engine that drives our online efforts, which have so far raised millions of dollars online, organized thousands of volunteers and spread John McCain’s message to your friends and family.

There is more work to be done and we’re excited to unveil a new website that will be the cornerstone of our online efforts. More importantly, we want to hear from you. After you’ve visited the new JohnMcCain.com please take a minute to complete a brief online survey to tell us what you think.

Working together, we’re confident the web will be an important tool to involve you in this campaign, to communicate our message, organize supporters and win in November. But we need your help - please visit the new JohnMcCain.com today, surf around and give us your feedback. Tell us what you like, what you don’t like and send us your ideas. More importantly, take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family with a personal invitation to visit our new website.

Thank you, as always, for your strong support for John McCain online. We look forward to hearing from you!

Sincerely,
The McCain 2008

Did anyone notice that nowhere in the email, or on the survey did they ask you for money? I can honestly say that of the hundreds of emails that I have received from various campaigns, this is one of the few that doesn’t have a fundraising ask in it.

Normally I would analyze this is being a wasted opportunity to raise some much needed money. However, this email does something that the McCain campaign hasn’t really been doing before, inviting people to be engaged with the campaigns website.

Now instead of asking for a cover charge to become involved with the campaign, all they are asking now is that you simply “join the conversation,” as David All would say.

I can honestly say that in terms of using email to engage supporters, this is probably the ‘best of McCain’ thus far.

If people open the email and take the survey, I’m certain that a vast majority of them will reach a new height in terms of their dedication to getting John McCain elected.

Furthermore, if this successful, this could be a good starting point for the McCain campaign to build an online model similar to Barack Obama, where you don’t ask for their money right away, but instead simply ask that they get involved. Once they’re in, asking them to invest $10, $20 or even $50 at a time becomes much easier, simply because they have already put so much time into the campaign.

For those of you haven’t already heard, Barack Obama has finally clinched the Democratic nomination, finally bringing a start to the much awaited general election.

Even though Senator McCain has already acknowledged that the general election begins today, there is still the factor (or non-factor) of Hillary Clinton.

There were many reports today that Hillary Clinton was going to be dropping out of the race this evening, giving Barack Obama the go-ahead and guaranteed nomination. However, I knew from the beginning that those reports were inaccurate for one reason, her Wednesday morning schedule.

Hillary Clinton is scheduled to speak to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC) policy conference, where she will address over 6,500 pro-Israel activists. It should be no surprise to anyone that if Hillary Clinton wants to remain successful in bankrolling her future elections, keeping the New York Jewish community (that is in heavy attendance) happy is an absolute must.

Walking into the conference the morning after (I guess a political walk of shame could apply here?), giving a speech as the loser is something that no Clinton would ever do. She will take advantage of this speaking opportunity in some way, whether that be by finally stepping aside, or declaring that she will remain steadfast. But, no matter what she says, she’ll get media coverage and will have text for a future fundraising letter.

This could also be a good venue for Senator Clinton to make the case that even if she cant be on the ticket as the Presidential candidate, she still can bring a lot to the table as the Vice-Presidential candidate.

Currently, Barack Obama does not have strong support within the Jewish community. In fact, this past weekend at the Israel @ 60 birthday celebration here in Washington, I was shocked to count over 300 John McCain stickers on random attendees, and only 30 or so Obama stickers.

Unfortunately the Clinton campaign didn’t send any staff to this event, however I have no doubt that there would have been an exponentially higher number of people showing their support for Hillary Clinton over Obama at this event.

This is something that Obama is really going to have to consider if he wants to even come close in this election.

Without someone like Clinton on the ticket, someone who is down with the chosen people, Obama is going to have a hard time getting to many of the pro-Israel, Jewish Democrats, simply because they don’t see him as someone who will stand up to groups like Hamas and Hezbollah when Israel is in her time of need.

With that observation, this should be the time that the McCain campaign, Republican National Committee (RNC), and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) go after the Jewish, pro-Israel vote more aggressively. This is a base that Republican Party must make great inroads with if we want to be successful in any upcoming election. Based on what I saw this weekend, it appears that McCain is right on cue with their outreach.

I’m hoping the RNC will soon follow.

Is McCain going to dominate the pro-Israel community? Here is the latest from the AIPAC Policy Conference, and I’ll have more on this later this evening:

McCain Emphasizes Importance of U.S.-Israel Alliance

Senator John McCain (R-AZ), the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, opened AIPAC Policy Conference 2008 in Washington, D.C. in front of more than 6,500 pro-Israel activists from all 50 states.

Sen. McCain said that Iran must be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons and reaffirmed his support of a strong U.S.-Israel relationship.

“My friends, as the people of Israel know better than most, the safety of free people can never be taken for granted,” McCain said. “And in a world full of dangers, Israel and the United States must always stand together.”

The Democratic candidates for president, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) will address Policy Conference attendees on the morning of June 4.

Over the past few weeks, Senator McCain has received a relatively small amount of attention from the media, while the majority of the headlines have been dominated by stories regarding the campaigns of Senators Clinton and Obama.

However, there has been one story that has received more attention than it should have over the past few days, this time regarding another member of Senator McCain’s campaign that has had to step down due to business ties related to previous lobbying activities.

While this latest departure is just one of a handful of staffers to step down for similar reasons, I can’t help but wonder why they are making such a big deal of this?

Furthermore, I have now found myself pondering the question of which associations are more important in campaign politics, personal or professional?

Based on the way that the media has covered Senator McCain’s problems with his top advisors, many would be under the impression that it is the professional ties that are more problematic in campaigns.

Then there are others who would use the example of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright for Barack Obama, making the argument that it is personal ties that weigh heavier than those that are professional in nature.

In my opinion, both have their place in the campaign, but it seems that there is a bias that both sides are experiencing, making each association more or less important for the other, based on their political party.

For the Democrats, they have continued to paint the Republican Party as a group of politicians that are “fat cats,” who are chummy with some of DC’s top lobbyists.

Then you have certain Republicans who have tried to paint the Democratic Party as one that sees patriotism as a dirty word and doesn’t value religion, the constitution, etc.

Overall, both sides have done an excellent job of putting the opposition into these boxes.

However, who is this hurting more?

Some would argue that this is hurting the Republicans more, because they already poll lower when it comes to being trusted, and of course there are still the ties to the Bush Administration that can and will hurt some of the candidates.

While this might be true in some instances, I think that overall, these attacks are going to hurt the Democrats, simply because it’s Barack Obama making these statements directly, which creates a whole new dynamic.

One thing that John McCain has been doing very well, is keeping the heavy mudslinging at a minimum until the time is right , asking judgment questions instead of making “in-your-face” statements.

Obama on the other hand, has made reference to Senator McCain’s lobbyist ties on many occasions, using that as a springboard for painting himself as the candidate who hasn’t become a DC insider.

The problem this poses for Obama is that it creates many different media streams that WILL be used to attack him.

The fact of the matter is that regardless of how long you’ve been in DC, there have and will be many instances where you will do favors for friends, it’s the unfortunate nature of politics these days.

Sometimes that will mean securing funding for a hospital that your wife works at, or pushing through an earmark that your friend or top donor is behind.

No matter how you spin, those elements are the things that make someone a DC insider.

Furthermore, Obama is painting himself as someone who is anti-lobbyist. In fact, I’ve heard people try to make the argument that Obama has never even met with a lobbyist, which is completely false, but it’s a sign that his strategy is working well… for now.

Eventually someone is going to get their hands on his Senate calendar, illustrating the number of meetings he’s had with lobbyists, as well as the frequency. The results shouldn’t be surprising to anyone who has seen the inner-workings of Congressional politics.

Instead of all of this back-and-fourth based on ties, I think that both of the candidates should stay focused on the issues, presenting real solutions, with real implementation strategies. This is what the American people want to hear.

If the Republicans can stop attacking McCain and embrace his ideas (even if it’s hard to do), the party will be in a position where they are seen as unified, thus giving people something to be confident in.

If that doesn’t happen, these attacks by Obama will seem more legitimate, simply because the message of “change” is much easier to swallow then the message of “internal chaos” that seems be affecting the GOP. No matter what the attack is, if the GOP doesn’t seem like it has its act together the attacks will seem much more credible.

I’m sure that I wasn’t the only person surprised by seeing former Congressman Bob Barr’s latest resurgence – this time running for President under the Libertarian Party.

While the likelihood of Bob Barr winning is quite slim, I do believe that he could bring an interesting dynamic to the race that could have a significant impact on the outcome of the election this November.

On a few occasions, I have discussed the need for the Republican Party to find a way to harness some of the energy of the loyal Ron Paul base. However, with Bob Barr entering this race, it’s going to be much easier for those supporters to find common ground with Barr as opposed to Senator McCain, spelling out problems for the GOP.

Furthermore, when Ron Paul actually decides to exit this race, if he throws his support behind Bob Barr, it’s safe to assume that the majority of the Ron Paul army will also follow.

Now in terms of percentage of the overall electorate, I don’t think that Ron Paul’s loyalists would have much muscle if this was your typical election. However, with the likelihood of Barack Obama being the Democratic nominee becoming more likely every day, this Ron Paul army now finds itself in a position of power.

Under normal circumstances, it would be assumed that this army of conservative/libertarian voters would usually support the next best thing when their candidate leaves the race. For the last few weeks, that next best thing has been John McCain (by a long shot for some, I know), but now with Bob Barr throwing his hat in, the McCain campaign is going to have to find a way to get to some of these voters, or find a new group of ‘independents’ to go after.

If Hillary Clinton was the nominee for the Demcorats, this wouldn’t be a big deal, simply because the independents would naturally gravitate more towards McCain. But Barack Obama does very well independents, which pulls away more potential non-traditional voters from the McCain campaign.

When you throw in the potential of a ‘Bob Barr’ effect, the results could pose significant problems for the McCain campaign.

Even with Bob Barr entering this race, I still believe that McCain has a good chance of winning in November. However, it’s going to be more difficult than once assumed and the McCain camp is going to have to make some strategy decisions that put them in a position to reach out beyond the identified supporters and ‘likely independents’.

You can already see the McCain campaign doing this with their latest pitches on global warming, supporting proposals like cap-and-trade.

While these definitely have appeal to the non-traditional-Republican voters, they are fighting words in some free-market, libertarian-Republican circles, who cringe at the idea of more government intervention.

If at any point it appears that this race is going to be a lost cause for the Republican Party, I don’t see any reason why libertarian-Republicans wouldn’t throw their support behind Bob Barr just to make a point to the Republican National Committee.

I personally think that John McCain is making some smart moves by addressing the environment issues early on in his campaign. As you know, there are many Republicans who doubt the credibility of global warming claims and believe that the government shouldn’t impose new regulations based on those claims.

By putting these issues on table now, there is a good chance that once the debates start rolling around, people will begin to look at more contrasting issues, such as national defense, immigration, health care, social security and other tax policies where Obama and McCain see things much differently.

But, at the same time, this also gives Bob Barr an opportunity to reach out to those people (mainly libertarian leaning Republicans) who are opposed to McCain’s views and raise money to go on the attack.

If Bob Barr has the ability to harness even one-half of the energy that surrounds Ron Paul’s campaign, he’ll definitely have the ability to play spoiler in November.

Now all Bob Barr needs is an endorsement from Paul, and we’ll have one hell of a race.

Like I said, I think McCain can still win this and I’m not all that worried… yet. I mean, he does still have to compete with Mike Gravel first, right?

On a side note, I did see that the Ron Paul headquarters in Arlington, VA has been vacated…

Despite the fact that the 2008 presidential primaries have been anything but uneventful, in terms of other campaigns across the country, it seems as if everyone else is off to an incredibly slow start.

Even though it’s already May, there are still many hot-races that haven’t even come close to moving into full swing.

While I find this extremely troubling for both parties, I find it to be most problematic for Republicans, simply because they are already heading into this election as the underdogs.

Awhile back, Time Magazine published what they thought were the top 10 Senate races in the 2008 election: Virginia, Colorado and New Hampshire. I completely agree with this assessment and if the GOP wants to at least have some voting muscle in the Senate, they need to win these races.

This isn’t new information, but for some reason it seems that these top three campaigns haven’t even moved into full gear yet, even though there is only a little more than 6 months until the November election.

To give you an idea of what I’m talking about, here is just a glimpse into some of the things (primarily problems) I’ve noticed amongst the ‘top 3’ campaigns, focusing primarily on the Republican side.

Virginia – Jim Gilmore:

Problem: It wasn’t until about two weeks ago that I actually started receiving frequent updates from the campaign letting me know what was happening. However, even though I signed up to be a volunteer on multiple occasions, I have yet to receive any communications from the campaign providing me with opportunities to get involved.

Bigger Problem: Someone from Mark Warner’s campaign got back to me quite quickly with a variety of things that I can do to get involved with the campaign.

Side note: this is almost the exact same problem I’ve had with the McCain campaign; however the McCain campaign at least sends updates for volunteer opportunities.

This was a race that was once considered ‘too close to call,’ however many are now saying it’s leaning favorably towards a Democratic win. I think this can be changed, but not at the pace they’re currently moving.

Colorado – Bob Schaffer

Problem: Despite the fact of knowing that this is going to be an extremely tough race for a Republican to win, it appears that this campaign has done very little (almost nothing) in terms of marketing themselves on the internet.

Even though their race will be expensive, they don’t seem to understand that one of the first places people go to get information on their candidate is the candidate’s website.

This is usually a good thing, unless you’re Bob Schaffer.

Please click here to see Bob Schaffer’s website.

Now, click here to see his opponent, Mark Udall’s website.

To Bob Schaffer, or anyone else on his campaign: set up a meeting with David All, Joe Mansour and Patrick Ruffini… fast. Marketing and web-overhaul, priority #1.

Just to give you an idea of how the two candidate’s sites perform against each other, check out this chart.

Side note, here is a great blog in Colorado evaluating many of the details of this race. 

New Hampshire: John Sununu

Problem: Exactly the same problem that Bob Schaffer is having. Even though his site isn’t as bad, in comparison to his opponents, it’s lagging severely.

Please click here to view John Sununu’s site.

Now, click here to view his opponent, Jeanne Shaheen’s site.

If you looked at both of those sites, I’m sure that this graph doesn’t really surprise you.

While this is obviously pessimistic, I think that if they made some simple adjustments and paid attention to what was working for the left (particularly Barack Obama) and implemented that into their strategy, both the candidates and the party as a whole would be in a much better position heading into November.

For most up-to-date post: click here