What We Can Learn From Howard Dean

in his application for the RNC chair (it's too bad that he has that club problem or else I would support him).  It's pretty similar to Dean's in scope and purpose.

Given the changing demographics of the U.S., more districts have become friendly to Democratic candidates.  The Democrats know that there are at least 100 districts where the Democrats will win no matter how the Republicans run.  However, the Repulbicans have few districts where they dominate so much that the Democrats do not bother to run a candidate.  IN addition, the massive failures of the Bush ADministraiton have denied many issues to future Republican candidates.

The MSM are loathe to go looking for or promote Democrats who break ranks on a major issue. Only exception I can think of is Joe Lieberman on Iraq.  So a Childers or a Shuler can play to the locals on guns and God and then vote down the line in DC for the rest of San Fran Nan's agenda. See "tree falling in forest".....

On the other hand, the quickest way to become a perceived DC player in the eyes of the media is for a Republican to take off against his leadership or against conservatives. Sadly, we have a lot of narcissists who love the attention and play along.  And I don;t expect the sad saga of John McCain, turned on by the press when he might actually have a shot at defeating a Democrat, to impress our grandstanders.

You bring up many valid points here, especially regarding the campaign of Ron Paul. There was a widespread grassroots effort on the internet (and somewhat on talk radio) for months that led to some record-breaking fundraising results. In fact, for some time, Ron Paul was the top internet candidate as far as the video and social networking sites went, especially before the Democratic primary battle really heated up in early 2008. This was more of an authentic grassroots phenomenon than those of the other candidates, as Ron Paul lacked the advantages of mainstream media support, huge corporate donations and Hollywood star endorsements (even months before announcing his candidacy).

This is definitely an approach to consider, especially seeing as Barack Obama is going to continue to use technology during his presidency in new innovative ways, such as the new iPhone app for his site change.gov. This is a newly set standard that the right needs to acknowledge and implement for the future.

To validate Cahnman....  yes - yes - yes.

GO Local - Compete everywhere - Work the locals - Increase funds - Develop and Support new Candidates - Win the Counties and States... while the dems struggle with 'their mess' in Washington.

GO Local - We are already starting in Northeast Wisconsin .  We were up against a 'perfect storm' in 2008. But 2010 and 2012 will be different when we effectively message our principles to the middle of the roaders.

Let's go.

We shouldn't fall into the trap of presuming that Dean's 50-state strategy worked.  It may have, but we also have plenty of reasons to think that this was just a really tough couple of years for the GOP. 

"3) Apostates are OK; Grandstanding RINO's are not"

Part of Dean's strategy is to embrace local "blue dog" candidates who do not "agree on every issue".  Republicans demanding ideological purity will narrow their base and never win a majority.  Colin Powell (your Grandstanding RINO) is a case in point.  He's conservative and loyal.  He objected to Republican sleaze (in the youtube clip you linked to) and incompetence.  If fair play and competence make you inelligable to be a Republican, you'll have a whole party full of Cheneys and Brownies.  Good luck with that.

I can't name a single issue he's been conservative on ever, particularly on foreign policy (Skocroft may be many things but a conservative he is not, and Powell's a Skocroft boy through and through). Oh, and I'd hardly say Powell was objecting to "sleeze". He's a very effective bureaucratic fighter who managed to play the victim for large portions of the media and so cement his reputation as a "good Republican". Even in Gulf 1, Powell was partially responsible for leaving Saddam in power, which is hardly a ringing endorsement.

Maybe you should, ya know, actually meet some people who are, ya know, not caucasian Because that might help with that not knowing what the crap you're talking about problem you're having. I love the assumption that Hispanics are (A)all the same, (B) all vote Democrat and (C) all want to soak the government for money. Not so much actually; Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Mexicans and Cubans all have very different voting profiles, and the most reliably Democrat voting-block for the Dems among these communities is Puerto Ricans, who are, news flash, not immigrants. As for the African-American community; since we haven't tried running serious conservative candidates in these districts very often over the past forty years how exactly would we know? Time was when "everybody" knew the black vote was solidly Republican; oddly enough that's changed, and it can change back. Oh, and if you really think middle-class whites are going to vote (social) Democrat because they don't like the Republicans trying to expand their base, you're insane. As I recall a pretty substantial portion of middle-class white voters pulled the lever for that guy in the presidential race who's not exactly Arian industry standard and all...