Michael Steele, recently elected RNC chair, has announced his plan for moving the Republican Party forward.
As Steve Benen noted at the Washington Monthly it appears that the Republicans think that rebranding is all that they need. He also mocks Steele’s promise to go “beyond the cutting edge,” to great amusement.
Does this really suggest that the focus of the Republicans is on rebranding and not on showing accountability for their errors and convincing voters to trust them in the future?
Does anyone really think that a hip-hop image will help the Republican party win elections? Why should young “urban suburban hip-hop” voters be swayed by an update of the party’s image on radio, television and in print?
Could this result in some of the funniest non-parody political ads you’ve ever seen?
I’ve said here before that I didn’t think the Republicans had even begun their long walk in the woods to consider what they needed to do in the future. I didn’t even dream that they were as far from actual thoughtful introspection as this proposal makes them seem.
This will be embarassing. But if they’re going to win elections they have to make an effort, and such efforts always have embarassing missteps. Steele is, at least, doing something. I realize, Hentor, that this proposal seems silly, but you don’t start your education by writing your Ph.D dissertation. You don’t start learning golf by making the cut at the Masters.
The danger for the GOP, and I suspect they’ll still do it for awhile, is the “We weren’t conservative enough!” idea might lead to bad results in 2010 and the nomination of someone like Mike Huckabee in 2012. Steele demonstrates at least some understanding that the party needs to do something other than more of the same.
True, but it’s not like these guys are amateurs just starting out. They’re a political party with a century and a half of experience, and one that’s been very successful in getting itself elected to the White House over the past thirty years. I think it’s fair to expect them to operate at a pretty high level of sophistication.
Any one remember Hippity Hops? Man those were fun.
ISTM that the Republican strategy is largely premised on casting the past administration as not being true Scotsmen. That ostensibly conservative principles such as small government, lower taxes, etc., weren’t upheld or promoted by Bush. Talk radio often hits the point (talking, marketing, or otherwise) that Bush “abandoned his conservative roots” and the like. In many ways they are correct; note, for example, there are many conservative posters here who disagreed with the administrations actions.
So take the basic principles of some of those conservative posters and consider them in a Bush-less vacuum for a moment. Disagree, fine, but note that the principles themselves are not necessarily absurd, nor are they necessarily antiquated. Now, consider taking those core values and putting them before large audiences that have never really been reached out to before. Why is it far-fetched, say, to believe that an urban youth could hold the same thoughts on Constitutional interpretation as Bricker?
Perhaps not antiquated, but when you try to pack them in with the rubber stamp Republican congress of the Bush years, you get a sound like a Hippity Hop* hittin the pavement.
That was in the past. All over now. The USA is going through changes that fundamentally alter the way political campaigns will be fought, won and lost, especially with regards to demographics and the technical aspects of fundraising and campaigning. It’s like when the British invented the dreadnought; it changed naval warfare at a fundamental level and everyone was sent back to square one.
(Interestingly, perhaps only to you and I, I don’t think any Canadian party has picked up on the lessons of the amazing, groundbreaking Obama campaign, and why the Clinton and McCain campaigns were so hopeless and pathetic by comparison. The new Liberal leadership, with a new leader and a change at a new start, instead appears absolutely determined to re-create the 1990s, as opposed to finding ways to create the 2010s.)
This danger cuts both ways, frankly. We all remember that the Democrats ran a congressional campaign in 2006 against Republican corruption, explicitly promising to be a cleaner party. In the wake of several recent scandals and some brewing on the horizon, this promise looks plenty hollow.
Are you equating a party running against corruption with a party running on a hip-hop platform?
Why are you doing that? Oh, maybe you are keying on the hipocrisy of a party of almost entirely old white guys running on a hip-hop platform.
Here’s hoping it works, because the GOP convention would sure be a lot cooler.
(Kind of lame stab at a tu quoque by the way. Call me when there are any real scandals. Tom Daschle ain’t quite Jack Abramoff. He’s not even a Randy Cunningham. Nor is he a Tom DeLay , Rep. Bob Ney , Tony Rudy, Mike Scanlon, Mark Foley, Dennis Hastert, Scooter Libby, David Safavian, Brian Doyle, James Tobin, Susan Ralston, John Doolittle, Conrad Burns, Jim Kolbe, Bill Frist, Lester Crawford, Curt Weldon, or Tom Noe. He might be a Claude Allen. Okay, I’ll give you that. You’ve got your Claude Allen. We’ll see what other “scandals are brewing on the horizon.”)
This. Yes, Steele’s rhetoric sounds pretty silly in spots, but that doesn’t mean that “rebranding” isn’t going to be an important part of the GOP’s next phase.
Remember back in 2000 when the Republicans were rebranding themselves for the next new power bloc, namely Latino voters? Lotta talk about the natural convergence of Republican doctrine with socially conservative, religiously observant, hard-working Hispanic small-business types, yadda yadda. Big hype about Bush being able to speak Spanish (sort of), etc. etc. Well, it made sense, and in fact it was working pretty well for them until the nativist wing of the party made such a vocal fuss about immigration issues and seriously pissed off a lot of Hispanic potential Republicans.
So now the Republicans have discovered the next new power bloc, namely urban blacks. For several decades the GOP has been content to let urban blacks remain a “naturally Democratic” constituency, relying on their low levels of political participation and their usefulness as scary propaganda for non-urban-black voters to offset the effect of their Democratic votes.
Well hello, it’s a new ball game. Now that there’s an urban black man actually sitting in the Oval Office, many urban blacks are newly aware of the political process and newly ready to believe that it’s relevant to them. Result: millions of new registered voters and a historic high in black voter turnout, due partly to voter outreach efforts by rappers and other nontraditional political spokespeople.
The Republicans want a piece of that, and why wouldn’t they? Result: the quest for a new Republican image with which to reach these voters. Yeah, the initial awkwardness of the “hip-GOP” fusion looks kind of funny, but don’t imagine that they just have no idea what they’re doing.
And no, I’m not arguing that rebranding will be an adequate substitute for Republican rethinking of their platform and/or party structure. I’m just saying that this effort is not a pointless irrelevance or an exercise in rearranging deck chairs: it has a definite purpose.
I have it on good authority that Obama is a Muslim who faked his birth certificate and it was Hillary, on the Grassy Knoll with the Sniper’s rifle that did for JFK.
Pretty much what flashed into my mind when I saw this on CNN (check out the photo). I also thought, hey, don’t they have a substantial base that will object to ‘urbanization’? But the I realized that they were already bringing the ‘flava’, and I for one think it’s about time they check themselves before they wreck themselves.