Aaron Marks's blog

We simply cannot afford to lose a generation of young voters to the Democrats. As a follow-up to my first post from a few days back, I’d like to propose some specific changes that would better serve the Republican Party in recapturing the youth vote.

Establish a Young Voter Outreach arm of the Republican National Committee

We need to fight tooth and nail to bring young voters back to the Republican Party. Yes, the Young Republican National Federation and College Republican National Committee exist. The problem is that neither of these organizations actively serve to “sell” the Republican Party to young voters – rather, their purpose is to engage young voters who are already affiliated with the GOP. Thus, the Young Voter Outreach arm would serve to accomplish this, demonstrating to young voters that the Republican Party actually cares about winning their vote and is not just the party of older generations.

This arm of the RNC must be overseen by – surprise – a Republican under the age of 30. It would be responsible for working with the RNC’s eCampaign folks to launch new, state-of-the-art websites, blogs, and other online projects that are designed specifically to appeal to young voters who are not necessarily Republicans. One of the goals of these projects should be to serve to answer crucial questions like, “Why is the Republican Party’s platform the right one for me as a young voter?” or “Why should I, as a young voter, be alarmed about the Democrats’ plan to [insert bad policy here – redistribute the wealth, raise taxes, etc.]?”

But there’s more. As a Party, we need to begin building and then maintaining a strong base of young, up-and-coming Republicans, who in the near future can begin running for the U.S. House and Senate. These young candidates will help allow us to pursue a 435 district strategy while bringing new, fresh faces to the table. Therefore, the Young Voter Outreach arm would be responsible for identifying and recruiting these folks, but more importantly, it would encourage them to begin running for local offices and provide training sessions to show them how to run for an office and win.

Differentiate from Democrats Through Ideals of Limited Government

Over the next two years, the Democrats will look to expand government in many ways. As I noted in my first column, many young voters are decidedly libertarian, and thus they’ll frown on these changes – a circumstance that Republicans, as the party of free-markets and personal liberty, can capitalize upon.

Despite this, young voters are going to find it difficult to support the Republican Party if it remains the party that condones government intervention in such issues as gay marriage or the behavior of two consenting adults in their own bedroom. These socially conservative issues may be important to voters in the other generations, but in the eyes of many of my peers, government has no place in getting involved in these matters. Indeed, the Republican Party’s continued support of government involvement in these issues continues to reinforce the notion to many young voters that the GOP is the party of the older generations.

Clearly, some sort of common ground needs to be reached if the Republican Party wishes to appeal to the young voting bloc while not losing social conservatives. In terms of policy, what could this balance look like? On issues such as gay marriage, Republicans could advocate the voters in each state making their own statewide decision. Specifically, California’s Proposition 8 is a phenomenal example of how the voters – rather than the government – can determine their state’s position on this sort of issue. Abortion, however, is a slightly different animal. If you believe (as I do) that life begins at conception, then abortion is, quite simply, the infringement of another human being’s right to life. Since the federal government is charged with protecting people’s “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Republicans can fairly argue that it is the federal government’s responsibility to fight to limit abortion.

Taking this all into account, a forward-looking, pro-young voter platform statement for the Republican Party of the future should look something like this:

The Republican Party is the party of individual freedom, limited government, and personal choice. At the federal level, we will fight to reduce the size of government and make it more accountable to the people who fund it. We will fight to protect every human being’s God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And at the statewide level, we will work with the citizens to protect and preserve the traditional values upon which this great nation was built.

Rethink Our Branding and Organizational Identity

This one’s so simple, yet we cannot underestimate its importance: the fact is that a huge part of what drew young voters to Barack Obama was his hip, corporate-like branding and identity. Some might argue that this is shallow, but I strongly disagree. Instead, this is the reality of effective marketing. Indeed, it is the same reason that some brands flourish and while others fail miserably. Marketing is one of the most critical topics in the business world, and Barack Obama has taught us that it can be equally as significant in politics.

Just look at a side-by-side of the two candidate’s logos. Obama’s “O” logo probably has near 100% brand recognition – you don’t need the “Obama ‘08″ below it to know what it represents. On the other hand, if you took away McCain-Palin and left only the star at the top with the two lines extending out from it, would anyone have a clue what it represents? Nope.

Further, Obama’s simplistic yet impeccably memorable slogan of “hope” and “change” were consistent and didn’t change in the slightest since he entered the race. McCain didn’t maintain such a consistent message, and unfortunately, his “Country First” slogan that was implemented near the end of the race does not have the appeal of “hope” and “change.”

Fortunately, the Democratic Party itself does not have a branding or identity advantage over the Republican Party. This creates a unique opening for the GOP to take the initiative. Redesign the RNC’s logo and GOP.com to reflect the trends of Web 2.0. Find a unifying, clear-cut message for the party that carries wide-spread appeal. And most importantly, offer resources so that our candidates as well as our state and local parties can do the same.

Conclusion

The changes that I’ve identified in this post are necessary for the Republican Party to transform itself as the party of the future. A huge component that will be necessary to accomplishing this is the GOP’s ability to attract younger, fresh faces – the people who are this country’s future. Ultimately, the changes I propose all add up to one overreaching goal: to transform the Republican Party into one that represents all generations and embodies the core principles that make this nation so great.

This entry is cross-posted at NextGenGOP.

Crossposted at NextGenGOP.com.

A few hours ago, I received an e-mail from a Ron Paul supporter, and although the majority of the e-mail was rather condescending, the author makes an important statement that I do believe merits exploration:

You guys [at NextGenGOP] are … ignoring Ron Paul … and his contribution to gathering sincere and dedicated enthusiasm in American politics.

Indeed, the author is correct – our contributors have not really discussed the Ron Paul Revolution, despite the fact that there are a number of crucial lessons for the Republican Party to learn from his successes. Thus, without further ado, I will take this post to thoroughly explore this matter.

To his credit, Ron Paul’s campaign demonstrated that Republicans can indeed keep up with Democrats in the era of Web 2.0, particularly in the areas of grassroots organization and fundraising. In addition, his campaign won the hearts of many young voters in a way quite similar to that of President-elect Obama. This begs two critical questions: how did Ron Paul manage to accomplish these significant feats despite being widely regarded as a “fringe candidate,” and more importantly, what lessons must the Republican Party take from his success?

Ron Paul’s Successes

Let us begin by looking at the many successes of the Paul campaign, and how his performance compares to that of the two most significant candidates of the cycle: John McCain and Barack Obama.

1. Ron Paul energized his supporters, resulting in an incredible outpouring of enthusiasm for his candidacy despite being supported by an extremely small percentage of voters. McCain’s campaign created a short burst of energy during his selection of Sarah Palin and the convention, but it proceeded to fizzle out as time passed. Obama’s campaign continuously energized its supporters, resulting in unbelievably massive crowds at his campaign events. A Gallup poll from October 2008 confirms this phenomenon, clearly indicating the enthusiasm gap that Democrats had over Republicans.
2. Ron Paul effectively used the Internet to organize his grassroots efforts. Relying on existing infrastructures like Meetup.com – where he was able to recruit over 86,600 members in 1,150 groups that planned and held over 51,000 offline campaign events – the Paul campaign had enormous success in this arena. McCain’s website had its own network called McCainSpace, but at many levels it was not especially groundbreaking, and in contrast to the online outreach by Obama and Paul, it seemed to be used fairly lightly by supporters. In contrast, Barack Obama successfully built an incredible network at my.barackobama.com by bringing on Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes. Ask almost any Obama supporter, and they’ll tell you that they used Obama’s online tools in one way or another. What’s unique about Ron Paul’s success, however, is that his campaign didn’t spend enormous resources building its own tools. Instead, it successfully took advantage of tools that already existed and thus was able to build an incredibly comprehensive national grassroots network without having to spend a significant amount of its own money.
3. Ron Paul’s ability to raise funds online is unparalleled in the Republican Party. Indeed, for the final quarter of 2007, Ron Paul outraised all of the other Republican Presidential candidates. McCain’s fundraising was generally unexceptional, and his strategic error in choosing to take public funding will almost certainly never happen again. And of course, we all know that Obama was a fundraising juggernaut, particularly online.
4. Ron Paul strongly appealed to young voters. Exit polls for early primary states like NH, MI, SC, and FL show that a disproportionately large percentage of younger voters pulled the lever for Ron Paul (in many cases, roughly twice the percentage of votes he received from other age groups). As we know from the exit polling of the general election, these young voters overwhelmingly supported Barack Obama over John McCain: CNN pegs Obama’s advantage at 66% - 32%.

How Ron Paul’s Successes Came to Fruition

At the most basic level, it was Ron Paul’s common-sense and decidedly libertarian platform that created so much interest in his campaign. While some of his positions, such as his staunch opposition to the Iraq war, stand in stark contrast to the Republican agenda, the fact is that the core of his message is quite in line with the traditional Republican message: reducing the federal government’s size and cutting its spending.

What made Ron Paul distinct, however, was his passion and commitment to accomplishing this. If you had to identify the single most important policy issue in a hypothetical Paul administration, it would unquestionably be reduction of government. Unfortunately, you cannot unequivocally say the same about any of the other Republican candidates, and certainly not of John McCain (read: McCain-Feingold, among other things).

Ron Paul’s steadfast and unwavering commitment to his limited government principles brought a huge influx of dedicated supporters to his campaign. The resulting enthusiasm among these supporters translated into impeccable successes.

Lessons for the Republican Party

1. Democrats aren’t the only ones who can fully take advantage of the Internet, both in donations and in building a grassroots organization. Indeed, you don’t even necessarily need to build new tools to win the battle online. That said, in order to see Ron Paul-like success, there are two crucial components that must exist. First, you must have enthusiastic supporters who are not only willing but excited to help the organization. Second, you must be willing to allow online tools to step into areas that have traditionally been controlled internally, such as grassroots organization.
2. We cannot underestimate the importance of our ideals of smaller, less expensive government – and our candidates’ commitment to these ideals. To paraphrase a McCain stump line, Republicans were elected due to their promises to change Washington, but instead they let Washington change them. As a result, the voters turned to Democrats in 2006 and 2008, at least in part because they simply don’t trust us to keep our word. In 2010 and beyond, we need to run candidates who have a proven commitment to these principles – perhaps signing off on a Contract with America 2.0 similar to what I’ve previously suggested – and in doing so we will generate an incredible amount of enthusiasm for our candidates.
3. Successfully using the Internet saves money. A lot of money. Of the major Presidential candidates, Ron Paul’s campaign devoted by far the smallest percentage of its budget to paying staffers. One of the most important reasons for this is simple: by successfully using the Internet to build the grassroots backbone of the campaign, there was considerably less need to pay staffers to organize outreach efforts. Yes, the sheer notion of such a decentralized campaign may be unsettling to those who are used to running traditional campaigns. However, Web 2.0 is shaking up the foundations of many traditional infrastructures with resounding success. If we want to survive in this new era, we need to allow it to shake up our organizations, too. Just imagine if John McCain had been able to slash his campaign’s payrolls by just 15% due to such decentralization – in fiscal year 2007 alone (well before McCain was the presumptive nominee), McCain would have been able to save $2.3 million.
4. Republicans can win back the younger voting bloc. My experience has been that the vast majority of my peers – voters age 18-29 – fundamentally agree that they want the government in their lives as little as possible. The Republican Party is the party of individual freedoms and liberties, and if we can manage to resecure the public’s faith in this, we can win back young voters.

The bottom line is that we simply cannot afford to discount Ron Paul as a “fringe candidate” whose successes hold no lessons of value for the Republican Party. Instead, we must to adapt these successes into the new Republican Party. Viva la revolución!

Historically, it is not very frequent that we see an incumbent United States Senator get elected President of the United States.  It is even rarer that we see a U.S. Senator elected to both the Presidency and the Vice Presidency.

Bucking this historic tradition, our President-elect and Vice President-elect are incumbent United States Senators.  And now, Illinois Representative Rahm Emanuel has been offered the Chief of Staff position in the Obama administration.

This development that we are witnessing is largely unprecedented: a Presidential administration filled with incumbents from Congress.

So why is this a big deal? Well, we all know from elementary school history that the founding fathers built this great nation with three separate branches built into our Constitution: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial.  This level of participation by legislators in the executive branch will serve to eliminate the barriers between the executive office and the Congress – already low due to the Democrats’ increased control of both Houses – threatening the entire premise of separation of powers that has helped make this country so great.

Thus, this begs the question, "How many more Congressional officials will we see in the Obama administration?"  Regardless of the answer, in seeing an Obama administration composed of Democratic officials from the previous Congress, we are witnessing President-elect Obama's mantra of change get thrown out the window.

This entry has been cross-posted at NextGenGOP.com.

Cross-posted from NextGenGOP.

At this point, I don’t think that any of us can effectively predict what the outcome of tomorrow’s elections will be. Quite frankly, I’m not even sure that we’ll know the who the next President of the United States is going to be for many hours, if not days, after polls close. That said, it seems that there are three possible scenarios that could play out in tomorrow’s Presidential election:

1. Barack Obama wins in a huge landslide.
2. Barack Obama wins in a close race.
3. John McCain pulls off an historical upset in a close race.

Barack Obama Wins in a Huge Landslide

This seems to be the narrative that the Leftosphere would like us to believe. This scenario seems to be the most unlikely due to a number of factors, including the huge percentage of undecided voters (which should break for McCain), McCain’s success in raising doubts in the minds of voters about Barack Obama, and Obama’s struggles with working-class voters in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Nonetheless, if current polling is to be believed, then we should see a such a landslide with an electoral map looking something like this (this is pulled straight from the RCP “No Toss Up States” map):

Barack Obama Wins in a Close Race

Unfortunately, I strongly believe that this scenario is the most likely. Basically, I see Florida and Ohio departing from their current polling numbers and going for McCain. Obama is polling near, but not at, the 50% mark in each of the states, and I think that the vast majority of undecided voters will swing to McCain in these states, allowing him to win each of them, albeit closely. Thus, the final electoral map in this scenario would look like this:

John McCain Pulls of an Historic Upset in a Close Race

I am extremely hopeful that John McCain can pull off an upset tomorrow. Unfortunately, looking at the electoral maps above, it’s hard to imagine a scenario in which he can accomplish such a difficult feat. However, if it’s going to happen, I think that in addition to Ohio and Florida bucking the current polling trends, so will Pennsylvania and, out of necessity, another state with a couple of electoral votes. Based on current RCP averages, I’m of the opinion that Nevada is the other state most likely to swing.

First, let’s talk about Pennsylvania. I’m Pittsburgh born and raised, and so I’ve lived in Pennsylvania my entire life. As a former Santorum 2006 staffer, I know that accomplishing a statewide victory in Pennsylvania is an incredible challenge for Republicans. However, I also believe that the dynamics of Pennsylvania’s electorate make it the next most likely state to flip from polling projections after Ohio and Florida. No, this isn’t because we’re racist or a bunch of rednecks (although I believe that Murtha’s comments may drive an increased number of Republicans in his district to the polls tomorrow, which is undoubtedly in McCain’s favor). Rather, I believe that the blue collar voters of Pennsylvania, although reliably Democrat, find it extremely difficult to swallow Barack Obama’s “spread the wealth around” policies – and as a result, they may either decide to not vote at all, or to pull the lever for John McCain. Additionally, there are a number of highly competitive Congressional races in PA in which an outcry of Republican voters could help turn the race in favor of McCain. Specifically, I look to William Russell’s race against John Murtha (which I mentioned above), but also to Lou Barletta’s race against the filthy Paul Kanjorski, in which I think Lou will defeat Kanjorski. With Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida going against polling trends, the electoral college stands at 270 for Obama-Biden to 268 for McCain-Palin, requiring one more state to flip for a McCain-Palin victory.

In my eyes, there are two other states that potentially could end up becoming red despite polling that indicates otherwise: Virginia and Nevada. Winning in either of these states will prove difficult for John McCain. However, he only has to flip one of them from its polling trends in order to win. So a McCain-Palin victory might look something like this:

The roadmap to victory for the McCain-Palin ticket is enormously difficult and quite improbable, although certainly not impossible. Some important questions to ponder over the next day or so: Can Barack Obama close? Will the GOP’s vaunted GOTV machine have the success we’ve seen in previous elections? Will young voters turn out in droves, and if so, will they really disproportionately vote for Obama? And, most importantly, does John McCain’s campaign have the ability to pull off an unprecedented and historic electoral victory?

This entry is cross-posted at NextGenGOP.com.

Today, the question at the forefront of the minds of Republicans seems to be, "How can the Republican Party get back on the right track?" The path to a GOP resurgence after a devastating four years is not an easy one. Ordinary folks are disgusted with President Bush, and despite Democratic control of the Congress, most of the blame has been pinned on Republicans.

Worse, there is no clear Republican message. While the Democratic Party has unified around Barack Obama’s message of “hope” and “change,” there is simply no unified message present in the Republican Party. How will we be different than Democrats? What does the Republican Party stand for? Why should you elect us instead of them? Unfortunately, these questions have gone unanswered, and with the current negative perceptions of the Republican Party, Democrats are poised to win unprecedented control of the federal government.

As a result, the Republican Party is desperately in need of reform if it ever wants to regain its rightful place as the majority party in this country. We are not talking about a few simple policy shifts, but rather sweeping reforms that remake the entire image of the Republican Party. Specifically, there are three steps that we need to take if we want to recover from these difficult times: establishing a clear message, increasing the effectiveness of our use of new media, and establishing a RightRoots movement.

Establishing a Clear Message

Establishing our message is perhaps the most crucial step for a GOP resurgence. In 1994, our message of the “Contract with America” propelled us to incredible electoral victory. This concept is so powerful because it allows us to include many “sub-messages” (such as cutting taxes, reducing government, and protecting national security) within a single comprehensive message: the Contract. Going forward, we need a Contract version “2.0″ that guarantees to deliver and restore the values shared by the vast majority of Americans. Specifically, this Contract 2.0 should promise the following (in no particular order):

1. The Republican Party will not stand for corruption at any level. Elected officials who are even accused of corruption (read: Ted Stevens) will be publicly lambasted by the Party’s leadership and will be immediately asked to resign. Dirty politicians are not and will never be welcome in the Republican Party.
2. The Republican Party is the party of free markets. We will fight to make it easier and more affordable for ordinary folks like Joe the Plumber to start their own businesses and succeed. Additionally, we will ensure that federal regulation of our industries is minimized as much as possible.
3. Our judges and justices have no business legislating from the bench. Extremist judges who impose their views from the bench are a danger to society as we know it. The Republican Party will only support highly qualified judicial nominees who will not legislate from the bench.
4. The Republican Party promises to work to reduce the tax burden on all Americans, regardless of income. We will never stand for a tax increase for any American. Additionally, we promise to fight tooth and nail against any form of socialist income redistribution.
5. We promise to reduce the size and spending of the federal government. In addition, we will vote against any bill that includes unnecessary “pork-barrel” spending, and we will publicly distance ourselves from any elected official who attempts to procure such “pork-barrel” money.
6. This country faces the gravest threats it has ever seen. We will take any and all necessary action to defend this great country, and we will not relent until every single terrorist has been brought to justice. Finally, we will not, under any circumstances, meet without precondition with our enemies, such as Iran or Venezuela.

Increasing the Effectiveness of Our Use of New Media

I have been privileged to have the opportunity to speak about New Media at a number of conferences – most recently, I spoke on a panel at Americans for Prosperity’s 2008 Defending the American Dream Summit on “The State of the Conservative Movement Online.” I began my thoughts on this panel by making a very important observation: Barack Obama was the first candidate in U.S. history to win a Presidential nomination almost entirely through the use of new media.

I have been reading the book Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything (which I highly recommend as a read for anyone). The basic premise of the book is that Web 2.0 has created a new age, an “Age of Participation.” This Age of Participation is facilitated by “peer production,” “which describes what happens when masses of people … collaborate openly to drive innovation and growth.” Following this line of thinking, Barack Obama’s website fuels participation and collaboration, while John McCain’s primarily serves to provide information and educate.

For example, Obama’s social networks allows you to see a breakdown of all of your friends: how many calls they’ve made, how much money they’ve donated, and so forth. From there, you can send your friends a message encouraging them to donate more or make more calls. This level of person-to-person collaboration has never been seen before in politics.

If we want to win, we need to gain the upper hand online. To do this, we need to engage people online at the same level that Barack Obama does.

Establishing a RightRoots Movement

Jon Henke, John Hawkins, Patrick Ruffini, and many others have commented on the necessity of constructing a RightRoots Movement, along with how we can accomplish doing this. These brilliant folks have managed to cover many of the points I would normally discuss. However, there is one point that I would like to contribute to the discussion. Above, I talk about the differences between Obama and McCain’s website: namely, that Obama’s promotes peer production but McCain’s does not. The same is true of the Right vs. the Left: the Left successfully established a collaborative “LeftRoots” movement long ago, while to this day nothing of the sort exists for the Right.

Does this translate into electoral failures? You better believe it. In building a RightRoots Movement, the authors of Wikinomics put it best: “We must collaborate or perish.”

Conclusion

The current state of the Republican Party is a sad one. It has lost its identity, its message, and in turn, its electoral prominence. The GOP needs new ideas, new messages, and new leaders if it wishes to return to the “Grand Old” days. I believe that the core values of the Republican Party are much more in line with the core values of the average American than the values of the Democratic Party. And I think that the GOP can have its resurgence sooner rather than later. And because of this, I for one am a firm believer that our best days lie ahead, not behind.

There has been a lot of talk about the potential impact of the Bradley Effect on this year's election.  On top of that, I just read a short but nonetheless interesting article in which Father Jonathan Morris, a Fox News contributor, argues why this election is going to be close.  All of this discussion got me thinking:  what if the unexpected happens?  What if going into Election Day, Barack Obama maintains a lead in all of the polls, and state polling indicates he's going to win an electoral college landslide (as it does currently)?  And what if, as the polls begin to close on Election Day, all the major media networks' exit polls show Obama trouncing McCain, resulting in the networks calling the race early for Obama?  But what if when the results come in, something astonishing happens: John McCain, in one hell of a nailbiter, edges out Senator Obama and becomes the next President of the United States?

History and anecdotal evidence suggest that this situation, as improbable as it may be, is certainly not out of the question.  But how would the country – particularly Democrats and Obama supporters, including the mainstream media – react?

I'm not entirely sure what the answer is, but after what we witnessed with the Florida fiasco in 2000, I think that this scenario is a troubling one.  It also is one for which we should be prepared.

Aaron Marks is President of Three Group, LLC, a Pittsburgh-based new media firm that focuses on providing technology-based solutions for Republican candidates and organizations, and in particular has built Web 2.0 campaign management software called Mission Control.  Aaron also worked in new media and voter outreach on Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign.

Sarah Palin decisively won the VP debate tonight.  And no, it wasn't due to Biden's annoying smirk, or his claim that he understands our needs because he's always at Home Depot, or his condescending "Let me say it again!" attitude that persisted throughout.  Rather, quite simply, Palin connected with every day, middle-class voters in a way that none of the other candidates could.

Hugh Hewitt points out that, "The Luntz focus group picked up the decisive Palin win, and Luntz is predicting a move towards McCain in the polls as a result."  I articulated this same thought right after the debate on Twitter.

In the last debate, Obama seriously solidified his position in the polls on the point of which candidate better "understands their needs and problems."  With the economy in the tank, this is going to be a critical factor when people come out to vote – and so McCain cannot afford to have tepid numbers in this area.  And unfortunately, I don't think there was much McCain himself could do to improve these numbers.

Enter Sarah Palin, the only one of the four Presidential and VP candidates who currently has actual ties to average middle class Americans.  For this debate to have been success for McCain, she needed to connect with these voters and demonstrate that the McCain-Palin ticket understands their needs.  She did so in a knock-out fashion.  For his part, Biden looked, well, Senatorial, boring, and uninspiring – all the while, Palin came across as a regular, hard-working American, a mother of five – certainly not as a politician.

Her immense success in tonight's debate will re-energize the Right, but more importantly, it will also reassure many Americans in two ways:  first, that she is absolutely, unquestionably ready to, if called upon, step up as President; and second, that the McCain-Palin ticket understands and will fight for everday Americans.  As a result, I expect to see a modest boost in the polls for McCain over the next few days.

The critical question, however, remains:  can McCain maintain this momentum in the last two debates?  The answer is yes, but McCain will need to drive home the points raised by Palin in tonight's debate.  He needs to continue to demonstrate that he understands the middle class' needs and problems, while at the same time showing that Obama does not.  But McCain the Maverick should not have much trouble doing that.

So much for people criticizing Sarah Palin for not being ready for the spotlight.  Tonight, she had a chance to talk directly to everyday Americans – and she shined like the star she is.

Aaron Marks is President of Three Group, LLC, a Pittsburgh-based new media firm that focuses on providing technology-based solutions for Republican candidates and organizations, and in particular has built Web 2.0 campaign management software called Mission Control.  Aaron also worked in new media and voter outreach on Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign.

As a so-called "young voter" in the 18-29 age bracket, I have long been skeptical of Barack Obama's supposedly massive advantage with voters my age – an advantage that the mainstream media's hype would have you believe to be exceedingly insurmountable for John McCain.

Well, today's InsiderAdvantage poll confirms that my skepticism has been warranted:

So where exactly is Obama's big lead here? Quite frankly, his lead is negligible, if not non-existant.  In fact, factoring in both the margin of error and the 7 perecent of undecided voters, it is entirely conceivable that McCain could actually tie or even outperform Obama among voters age 18-29.

Recently, Joe Trippi argued that a large turnout of young voters could serve as a tie-breaking factor in favor of Obama.  As much as Democrats like Trippi and the mainstream media want you to believe that young folks such as myself are flocking to Barack Obama – please, don't count us out yet.

Aaron Marks is President of Three Group, LLC, a Pittsburgh-based new media firm that focuses on providing technology-based solutions for Republican candidates and organizations, and in particular has built Web 2.0 campaign management software called Mission Control.  Aaron also worked in new media and voter outreach on Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign.

As a former staffer for Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign, I distinctly recall the false attacks brought against Santorum for his supposed belief that women were meant to remain at home.  The attack was based upon a distortion of a quotation from his book It Takes a Family.  The actual quote from the book was:

“In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might find they don’t both need to.

"“What happened in America so that mothers and fathers who leave their children in the care of someone else – or worse yet, home alone after school between three and six in the afternoon – find themselves more affirmed by society? Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism."

Of course, the Left distorted these passages, claiming to be outraged that by Senator Santorum's sexism – because of the lies they had spread claiming that he believed that women belonged at home and not at work.

Now, we have Howard Gutman, a former member of Barack Obama's finance committee, saying with regard to Sarah Palin:

"If you take a daughter who’s got this emotional strife and subject her to the most intense scrutiny of the world at this time in her life, I think you’ve put your career above your family."

So where is the outrage from the Left?  The Obama campaign disavowed Gutman's comments, saying:

"Obviously these comments do not reflect our frequently stated, crystal-clear view that families of the candidates should be off limits, and we hope that supporters on both sides will act accordingly."

These statements reflect the typical, insincere disavowals that we have come to expect from Senator Obama's campaign.

Quite frankly, statements like these are outrageous, dirty, and entirely unacceptable.  So I ask again:  where is the outrage from the Left?  Well, the answer is apparent – they only take offense to when it is politically convenient for them.

Aaron Marks is President of Three Group, LLC, a Pittsburgh-based new media firm that focuses on providing technology-based solutions for Republican candidates and organizations, and in particular has built Web 2.0 campaign management software called Mission Control.  Aaron also worked in new media and voter outreach on Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign.

I've been a longtime supporter of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate (see here and here) – but I was honestly expecting a boring pick (read: Romney or Pawlenty) for McCain's running mate.  Suffice it to say, I'm thoroughly excited that McCain picked Palin.  Her pick was brilliant political strategy, and now the McCain campaign stands to make significant inroads among the disallusioned, and in many cases angry, former Clinton supporters.

She fits the bill perfectly, and is a perfect counter to Obama's yawner of a running mate in Joe Biden.

So there are some questions still to be answered: how will she fare versus Biden in a debate? What about the potential "scandal" revolving around her brother-in-law?

But despite this, McCain did something that Obama would not: he took a risk, but in doing so, he picked a running mate with enormous upside potential.  So here's to McCain-Palin 2008!

Aaron Marks is President of Three Group, LLC, a Pittsburgh-based new media firm that focuses on providing technology-based solutions for Republican candidates and organizations, and in particular has built Web 2.0 campaign management software called Mission Control.  Aaron also worked in new media and voter outreach on Senator Rick Santorum's 2006 re-election campaign.