DCRepublican.com

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.

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.

I hope this storyline changes soon (from CNN.com):

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama raised millions more than his Democratic rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, and presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain in April. Obama brought in $31 million, his campaign announced Tuesday.

 Clinton, the New York senator and former first lady, raised $22 million in April, campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson said. McCain’s take of more than $18.5 million was a new high for the Arizona senator, according to his campaign’s monthly finance report.

Though it’s not so bad for the party as a whole (from AOLNews.com/AP).

The RNC, which is the party’s main political arm, had nearly 10 times more cash on hand than its Democratic counterpart at the end of April, a notable GOP advantage in what has otherwise been Democratic fundraising dominance this election.

The committee on Tuesday reported having $40.1 million in the bank. The Democratic National Committee had $4.4 million.

The RNC raised $15.7 million in April compared to $4.7 million by the DNC.

Significantly, the financial disparity comes in a presidential election year when the candidates rely on the parties to mobilize voters and promote their message. Overall this year, the RNC has raised more than $52 million, the DNC has raised more than $22 million.

This shouldn’t be a reason for us to get cocky, because once the Democrats have their nominee, it should be no shock to anyone that they will probably match us dollar for dollar, especially if their Democratic White House Victory Fund idea actually takes off. This new concept will give the DNC the ability to maximize donor potential even before there is a nominee.

As part of the unusual pact, donors can contribute up to $33,100 to the newly created Democratic White House Victory Fund. The money would benefit whichever candidate becomes the nominee. Some Democrats said the deal would permit some of Clinton donors to get behind Obama without having to write a check directly to his campaign.

The fundraising success of the RNC is something that should be evaluated further. Does this suggest that the RNC is simply being more aggressive in their fundraising tactics? Does this mean that Republicans are more comfortable giving their money to the RNC than they are to John McCain?

Or, does this simply mean that the McCain campaign is doing its fundraising in segments - building the RNC war chest now, and waiting to do the more aggressive campaign fundraising when more people are mobilized behind his campaign and the mud starts flying?

I think it’s probably a little of each.

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.

Yes, the fact that Democrat Don Cazayoux beat Republican Woody Jenkins in an expensive race to replace Richard Baker in Louisiana’s 6th Congressional District isn’t news that the Republican Party is looking for.

However, is this something that we (Republicans) should be worried about?

I know that for many, this race was going to be seen as an early indicator of how things might play out in November, however I don’t think that this race is one that can be seen as representative of the national electorate.

The one thing that people seem to overlook in this race is the fact that Woody Jenkins was by no means a lifelong Republican.

A simple Google search will show anyone that Woody Jenkins was first a Republican in his early years, then switched to being a Democrat for 22 years, and then when he got the ambition to run for Senate, he switched back to the Republican Party.

While there is no doubt that Woody Jenkins is a strong conservative, who has pushed conservative reforms for both parties, these switches can often times make people uncomfortable and even resentful when they seek higher offices.

An example of this would be with Norm Coleman in Minnesota, who ran for Mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota and won as a Democrat, later to switch to the Republican Party. There are many who would argue that had Paul Wellstone not died in that plane crash in October (less than 2 weeks before the election), that Norm Coleman would have lost.

Be it no surprise that it’s Norm Coleman’s race against Al Franken in Minnesota that is being labeled as one of the top Senate races of the 2008 election.

The fact of the matter is that the 6th district race in Louisiana, as well as the Minnesota Senate Race cannot be looked at as determining factors in the upcoming elections.

You can’t take life-long Democrats, match them up against inconsistent Republicans (though sometimes consistent conservatives) and expect there to be an outcome that represents the national electorate.

The 2008 Presidential Election is going to have a life-long Republican, who is also a solid conservative (John McCain) and whoever the Democratic nominee is will be a stark contrast to Senator McCain.

It’s impossible to determine any race as the one that sets the tone for the 2008 election when there isn’t even a nominee for the Democrats. Even amongst Senators Clinton and Obama, there are stark differences that could yield certain blocks of undecided voters going towards a certain candidate.

We won’t be able to make any educated guesses until we at least know who the nominee is.

For Republicans, that makes it tough for us to fundraise with, but I would imagine that it will be even tougher for the Democrats once they choose their nominee.

As it stands now, I’m sure both candidates are tapping out some of their regular donors and bringing many more close to the federal campaign contribution limits.

Either way, this definitely shows that 2008 will be an unorthodox and exciting election year.

As the summer draws near and the Democratic Primaries slowly wind down, campaign season is going to quickly roll into overdrive.

Soon enough, your mailbox is going to be flooded with fundraising pieces, your phone will be ringing off the hook with robo-calls and you’ll probably have a new series of commercials taunting you as you watch your favorite TV shows, all from candidates you can’t stand.

Yes, the season nerds like me love more than any other quickly approaching.

However, as this “full swing” campaign time draws near, I’ve been noticing that there are many people questioning whether or not the GOP will have enough muscle to successfully challenge the Democrats this fall.

Today’s questioning comes from the Cafferty File Blog, where Jack Cafferty points to new research showing that amongst people under 30, Democrats are going to have a much larger advantage over Republicans than they did in 2004. Citing Pew Research Data, Cafferty asks why the GOP can’t attract more young voters:

The Pew research Center did a survey of young people between October of last year and March of this year. What they found was that the current generation of young voters who came of age during the George W. Bush years is giving the Democrats a wide advantage in party identification.

58% of voters under the age of 30 surveyed during that time identified or leaned toward the democratic party-compared with just 33% who identified or leaned toward the Republican party. In fact, the Democratic party’s current lead in party identification among young voters has more than doubled since the 2004 campaign — from 11 points then to 25 points now.

Should this be a cause of concern for Republicans? Sure, especially with the article being released today showing President Bush’s approval ratings as the lowest of any President ever. But it shouldn’t appear to be the end of the world.

The fact of the matter is that there is plenty of time for the GOP to brand itself in such a way that it has some appeal to younger voters.

I would argue that the GOP is currently doing many things that would be appealing to young people, however there has been very little marketing in terms of reaching beyond those who are identified and registered Republicans.

Without this marketing and outreach, the GOP carries the stereotype of being a party of old, rich, white men.

When you look at the issues that are really going to effect those who are under the age of 30, the biggest issue seems to be the most silent.

It’s not Iraq, its not Darfur, it’s Social Security.

I know that this was an issue that President Bush campaigned hard on in 2004, but courtesy of the Congress, he couldn’t get much done with it in 2005.

I also know that this was an issue that some would argue wasted a lot of ‘political capital’ for the administration, but I truly believe that if the GOP can bring this issue back, market it well and show young people why they need to demand change on this, we will win more young voters. We just need to be more creative.

As it stands now, neither of the Democrats will support any form of comprehensive Social Security reform, so it isn’t going to be hard to make a distinction, showing who is really looking to protect their future.

Another way that the GOP can attract more young voters is by returning to the roots of the early Republican Party, where decision and platforms were made on ideas, not polling trends and electability studies.

If the GOP can show themselves as the true party for limited government and personal responsibility, I don’t see any reason that they wouldn’t be able to attract some of the undecided voters, but more importantly tap into some of the Ron Paul base, which still seems to be strong.

Even something as simple as looking at issues from a different angle (like stopping bills that would make renters pay for the mistakes of some homeowners) will help people realize that the GOP isn’t what the stereotype suggests, and that we can actually create positive change both domestically and abroad.

There are a lot of things that the GOP can and will do to attract young voters to support the Republican candidates in November.

It’s going to take a lot of work, money and creativity, but these steps aren’t taken, the outcome of the November elections can be predicted now: we’ll lose.

With the start of the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary just hours away, I’ve found myself in a reflective state, looking back at what has really been accomplished by the two candidates over the past six weeks.

Of all of the tours had by both candidates around the state, I can’t think that of one new policy idea that was completely rolled out. Furthermore, even after all of the debate and media coverage, I still can’t find myself in a position where I can tell you why one candidate is better than the other.

From what I’ve seen, there are a lot of people who have found themselves in the same position and these are people who live in Pennsylvania.

It’s quite clear that this hasn’t gone unnoticed by the candidate’s campaigns either. Instead of going after statements that were made by either candidate in Pennsylvania, most of the attack ads are focusing on something that has been drawn out too long already – special interest dollars.

Here is a quick video summary:

When the race is between three Senators, as much people might hate it, special interest money is going to come up. All of the candidates have received money from a PAC or PAC affiliated donor at some point. All of the candidates have met with lobbyists, and yes, I guarantee you all of the candidates are friends with at least a handful of DC “power lobbyists.”

Aside from the special interest attack ads, the other attack seems to be on universal health care. What’s funny about these attacks is that they are going after each others plans, when in reality none of them will ever be implemented.

All candidates, Democrats and Republicans, make big plans for when they get elected, in terms of implementing different policies. However, the reality is that the majority of those plans never make it through the legislature.

Just as an example, take President Bush’s 2004 Social Security plans. Even when Republicans had control, they weren’t able to pass one of his biggest campaign pushes.

People shouldn’t be surprised to find that the same will probably hold true if a Democrat is elected, even with a Democratic majority in the House.

These plans, while they might sound good in their initial proposals will never make it through the bodies as they appear now. Each member of Congress wants their stamp on it and will do what they can to make sure it’s there.

This is where almost all legislation seems to fail.

I guess that’s why I’ve found it so odd that this is how the Democrats chose to wind down their races leading into the election.

Instead of driving hard key issue, like the economy, or going after Senator McCain more aggressively, they’ve chosen the path that only highlights both of their weaknesses against each other, instead of showing their viability against Senator McCain.

But, from a Republican perspective – this is great. They’re going to have their donor based maxed and polarized before they even have a presumed nominee. That’s something that even one of Howard Deans spin-cycle emails cant downplay.

Just look at what CNN.com is reporting on their front page today:

Obama has outspent his rival in Pennsylvania, thanks in part to his hefty fundraising.

He raised $41 million in March, compared with Clinton’s $20 million, according to the latest campaign finance report.

In March, Obama spent about $31 million on his presidential campaign, compared with Clinton’s $22 million.

I don’t see any way that Obama or Clinton can raise that much money without their donors reaching the FEC limits.

The Republicans should really start taking advantage of this… soon.

I haven’t seen all that many mail pieces of phone calls going from the McCain camp, or the RNC talking about how we’re at an advantage here.

When a party has been beaten down over the last 8 years, this is positive news that will make people want to make an investment in the GOP.

But you can’t get money if you don’t ask… so hopefully they’ll start soon.

As the Democrats start to see that this election probably wont be as predictable as they once thought, the DNC has found itself in a position where they now MUST focus on trying to convince the Federal Elections Commission that Senator McCain did in fact lock himself into campaign spending limits before he became the presumptive nominee.

From CNN.com:

The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court in Washington, is the latest move by the Democratic National Committee that seeks to prove the Arizona senator locked himself into campaign spending limits earlier this year.

The DNC claims McCain did so when he used the prospect of $6 million in federal matching funds as collateral for a December bank loan to his campaign.

But after it became apparent he would be the Republican presidential nominee, McCain notified the FEC in early February that he was not claiming federal matching funds. Claiming those funds would limit his spending on the primary campaign to $54 million.

To be exact, the maximum figure that he could spent, according to the FEC is $56,757,500.

However, Senator McCain has spent well over that amount.

The reality is that at this point, the FEC really doesn’t have the ability or manpower to carryout the request of the DNC, which is why the Democrats must now rely on the courts. But does the DNC think that it’s likely that for the court to take action? It’s the end of an administration, so you can never predict these things.

The Republican National Committee called the lawsuit “total nonsense.”

“It is now clear that the trial-lawyer Democrats’ idea of campaigning for president is to hire lawyers and file frivolous lawsuits,” RNC spokesman Alex Conant said. “It’s unfortunate the DNC is now trying to drag the federal courts into their circus as well.”

This is a good point. Instead of focusing on their candidates and ensuring that all their delegates have a voice at the convention, they are trying to create a distraction to rile up their base and hope they focus on Senator McCain, instead of the back-and-fourth mudslinging going on between Senator Obama and Senator McCain.

For those of us who have, are or will be working on campaigns, this is going to be an interesting case to watch. What I think the most significant thing to watch is how the FEC decided to address this. They are understaffed and essentially have no power. If both sides see that the oversight and enforcement is going to be weak, this could be an even more interesting campaign.

No, we won’t be seeing Howard Dean on the ice anytime soon, but it looks like there is some friendly competition brewing between the Republican National Convention and the Democratic National Convention Committee.

Somehow I have a feeling that this will probably be one of the last “friendly” competitions before things really start to get ugly between the parties.

Nonetheless, it’s still a good way to generate buzz about both conventions, which will be, without a doubt,  more eventful than any in the last twenty years.

From the Republican National Convention:

GOP, DEMOCRATIC CONVENTIONS FACE OFF AS
NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE’S STANLEY CUP PLAYOFFS BEGIN
Convention Leaders Make Friendly Wager on Minnesota Wild vs. Colorado Avalanche Series

(SAINT PAUL, Minn.) – The National Hockey League’s Stanley Cup Playoffs commence this week, and the cities hosting the 2008 Republican and Democratic National Conventions will be at the center of the action when the Minnesota Wild and Colorado Avalanche face off. Today, the two leaders planning the political conventions agreed to a friendly wager on the series.

Republican National Convention President and CEO Maria Cino and Democratic National Convention Committee (DCCC) CEO Leah Daughtry agreed to the stakes earlier today. The losing city’s convention team will send a “taste” of that city’s local delicacy for the winning city’s convention staff to enjoy. If the Wild win, the DNCC will send the Republican National Convention staff a selection of delectable Colorado-raised beef steaks. If the Avalanche win, the Republican team will send the DNCC staff an assortment of walleye from the lakes of Minnesota.

“Minnesota is the ‘State of Hockey,’ and I am proud that we have become part of the ‘Team of 18,000,” Cino said, using the term the Wild coined to describe its consistent sellout crowds. “It is only fitting that we stand with our new community in Minneapolis-Saint Paul and enter into this friendly wager with my friend in Denver, where she and her staff are working equally as hard.

“Our staff in Minneapolis-Saint Paul is pretty excited that the roads to the White House and the Stanley Cup Championship will both lead through the Xcel Energy Center in Saint Paul,” Cino added.

“To my friend Maria and her fine team in Minnesota: get ready to be buried by our Avalanche,” said Daughtry. “Denver has welcomed us with open arms, and I’m now proud to ante up on behalf of the hometown team. Fortunately for me, the Avs know what it takes to win a championship. Soon enough, the Pepsi Center will be home to the Stanley Cup once again. And just five months from now, it’ll play host to another winner – our nominee for President of the United States.”

The Northwest Division Champion Wild play at the Xcel Energy Center, which is also home of the 2008 Republican National Convention. The Avalanche makes its home at the Pepsi Center in Denver – site of the 2008 Democratic National Convention, to be held August 25-28.

About the 2008 Republican National Convention

The 2008 Republican National Convention will be held at Saint Paul’s Xcel Energy Center from September 1-4, 2008. Approximately 45,000 delegates, alternate delegates, volunteers, members of the media and other guests are expected to attend the convention. Minneapolis-Saint Paul is expected to receive an estimated $150-$160 million positive economic boost from the four-day event. For more information about the 2008 Republican National Convention, please visit our website at www.GOPConvention2008.com.

About the DNCC:
The 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee is the official arm of the Democratic National Committee responsible for planning and organizing the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver.