National GOP Chairman Calls for More Volunteers, While Illinois GOP Ignores Issue That Led to Volunteer Recruitment in Ohio
Left Stream Sunday Chicago Tribune columnist Rick Pearson says that National Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman was in Illinois last week. Mehlman urged "a return to the traditional grass-roots style of organizing that proved so successful for the Bush campaign in Ohio last year.”
Mehlman wants to recruit “40,000 volunteers” and establish “a system of voter recruitment, registration and ID based on old-style, door-to-door canvassing combined with telephone banks,” Pearson writes.
It appears that either Mehlman did not tell the audience of party leaders about the spark plug that ignited the firestorm of volunteers or that Peason did not report it.
To find out the issue that inspired thousands to volunteer in Ohio, click McHenry County Blog.
13 comments:
Nothing will ensure JBT's losing the election more than 40,00 out-of-state freaks who came here to ban gay marriage.
I'm not saying all people who oppose gay marriage are freaks, but those who would be willing to go to a state that they don't live in to volunteer to prevent it clearly are.
Anon 2:54, why do you assume that the 40,000 volunteer will be from out of state? I know that IL has been trending Dem over the last few cycles, but I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that at least 0.3% of the population of this state might be willing to volunteer for the GOP.
Oh, btw, the only think more ignorant than boiling down the Republican Party platform to the issue of gay marraige would be boiling down the Democratic Platform to pro-abortion rights. But thanks for playing!
And Reddbyrd, I thought you were smarter than that. Of course the National Party isn't going to leave behind any money RIGHT NOW. Who are they going to leave it too? Wait until after a nominee is elected in the primary before you start talking about how the IL Party has been foresaken by the RNC.
JBT deserves a break today.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/schad/61138629/
I'm not saying the GOP boils down to gay marriage, Cal is saying that it's the issue that inspired thousands to vote in Ohio.
I don't think the GOP boils down to gay marriage, and it's evidenced by the fact that their candidate for Gov next year will be pro-gay rights.
Mehlman, his advice and the IL-GOP are 17 years and millions of dollars short.
The National GOP and it's IL-GOP RINO cohorts haven't contested a Presidential election here in 17 years. The last one that was really contested -- 1988 -- we won!
THEY are a big part of the reason for the decline of the IL-GOP.
Mehlman has a lot of gall to come her and offer advice; it should have been an apology.
Anon, Mehlman urged "a return to the traditional grass-roots style of organizing that proved so successful for the Bush campaign in Ohio last year.”
Perhaps the reason that Mehlman didn't mention that, and Pearson didn't report it, is that it is ultimately not the point of his comments. He was talking about the need for forming a grassroots organization. to counter the unions in Cook County. This grassroots organization can be organized around whatever issue(s) are most relevant to them. It just so happened that in Ohio, that issue was gay marraige. That certainly would not be a winning issue statewide for the GOP to adopt.
Anon 4:07, I certainly appreciate your frustration, but I would argue that the decline of the IL GOP started with Ryan's election in 1998 (Edgar may have been pro-choice, but I think you'd be hard pressed to call him a RINO). So how do you explain that the IL GOP, under Edgar, reached the height of power in this state in 1994, despite having been foresaken by the RNC for 6 years?
If the GOP in Illinois were to follow the National Platform they would find a treasure trove of grassroots groups that would work their fingers to the bone to elect Illinois Republicans. The problem is that the GOP in Illinois has missed the Reagan Revolution and is still in the Rockafeller mode of the mid 70's.
As Peter Fitzgerald proved there are enough people in Illinois to elect Republicans as long as they STAND for something. After Peter won 2 elections (Primary and general) there was a grassroots organization in place but the party NEVER contacted ANY of them to help in another election. Think of that not one from 102 counties! Why they were conservative thats why. BTW the whole country has now become a majority "conservative" it is JBT and the Illinois GOP leadership that are out of touch
Considering the shocking stories surrounding Cal Skinner's divorce, I'm surprised to hear him peddling the "Defense of Marriage Act".
But true conservative GOP activists are correct: your party doesn't want you.
I know you feel alone, but you're not -- and that's where the joke is on you.
You see, the national GOP isn't anymore committed to social conservative values than the Illinois GOP -- that's why they are supporting Topinka.
In fact, as long as their friends are getting rich and getting their tax breaks, the National GOP doesn't really care about protecting the sanctity of life. If they did, they'd expand access to health care. They don't care about defending marriage really either. If they did, they'd expand economic opportunity for the middle class and working poor -- since money troubles are the main reason for divorce in America.
Yes, Illinois conservatives are dupes. But you're being duped even more than you know.
Ironically, it's House Democrats that are pushing efforts to end gambling in Illinois. Maybe conservatives are riding the wrong horse? I mean, wouldn't Jesus want you to help the poor and be a good steward for the environment?
If you believe that the Democrats are going to end gamblin--after the original casino bill was passed without a single House Republican vote--you are not as sage as you think you are.
Trust me Cal, I am no more and no less sage than I think. I'll simply point out that Democrat John Bradley is championing efforts to rid Illinois of casinos, a righteous cause supported by nearly every Christian faith I can think of, and Republicans are no where to be found on the issue.
I'll also point out that the Bible mentions caring for the poor over 2,000 times, and sodomy....what, three? Republicans have disengeniously managed to miss the Main Idea of the New Testament, but every one can quote Romans 1:26-7 word for word.
Where's your Constitutional amendment to defend the poor?
the idea that the gay marriage ballot initiative won ohio for bush (or dramatically increased his volunteer base) is unsupported, on a number of grounds.
first of all, it misrepresents the bush ground strategy, which was the culmination of years of development of the gop grassroots. the bush strategy for attracting volunteers relied upon the social networks of republican activists, which undoubtedly included its religious base (or the social conservatives). but much of this development occurred *before* the concept of anti-gay marriage amendments were considered. bush's field plan (and volunteer base) goes all the way back to 2001, a time in which gay marriage was at most a fringe subject.
secondly, the anti-gay marriage concept had more to do with the likes of james dobson, gary bauer and the religious right than with the bush campaign. an accurate portrayal of history would note that social conservatives brought this issue to karl rove, not the other way around. it was they who believed that ant-gay marriage amendments would drive voter turnout increases among *their* base (the religious right's).
they were wrong (well, studies show that any increase in the turnout of the religious right's base was matched by increases in turnout on the other side).
in fact, most pols consider the anti-gay marriage amendments in every state but georgia to have been a drain *away* from the field operations of the bush campaign. only the religious right considers them a net-plus for bush (evidence indicating otherwise notwithstanding).
regardless, "the religious vote was *not* the key to the electoral outcome.... the referenda do not appear to have boosted relative conservative turnout in those states above the overall national increase to any substantial extent." (divided states of america, p 222 & 230) in states with the anti-gay marriage referenda, republicans increased their turnout by 5.16% compared to the national increase of 4.76%. democrats in those states increased their turnout by 3.88%, compared to the national increase of 2.98%.
you can see this more starkly in the hard numbers. everyone knows that the bush campaign set a goal of mobilizing more than 4 million *additional* evangelical voters in 2004 (over 2000). but turnout overall increased by more than 17 million additional voters in 2004. yet what is important is where these increases came from:
* those who attended church weekly or more often comprised the same percentage of the electorate in 2004 as in 2000 (42%). george bush had a mere 0.4% gain in share of the total electorate among those in this category.
* george bush gained 0.6% in the share of the electorate who attend church monthly.
* george bush gained *best* among those who attend church seldomly or never was 1.6%.
thus almost two-thirds of bush's gains came from infrequent worshipers -- not exactly the base of the religious right nor social conservatives nor anti-gay marriage supporters.
while we cannot conclusively discuss the makeup of bush's volunteer base (since no scientific studies were conducted that we know of at this time), anecdotal evidence from those who volunteered for bush in ohio and other swing states coincides with the conclusions above.
YDD - I don't remember Jesus advocating redistributive tax policy. According to the Catalogue For Philanthropy, red states are far ahead of blue states in charitable giving adjusted for average income. So I don’t think Republicans have missed anything in the New Testament.
http://www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cfp/db/generosity.php?year=2004
Post a Comment