freedom

Three Ways Republicans Can Win Back the Youth Vote

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.

New face of the GOP

The key to a new and refresed GOP needs to be based in conservative-libertarian beliefs.  The new young face of the GOP will:

1.Be against high taxes, especially income, property, capital gains, and estate taxes.  Not because we hate poor people, or want children to die in the streets for lack of healthcare.  We want to avoid confiscatory taxes because we believe the government essentially wastes money.  We know what the government is gauranteed to deliver, a project that turns out to cost a lot more and take much longer than predicted.

2. We disagree with abortion because we think life is precious.  However we wouldnt advocate banning abortion or jailing doctors of young women who had them.  We simply dont want policy on this subject, or any subject for that matter, dictated from DC.  Lets face it in todays America that most restrictive states at most would ban abortion in all cases except those or rape incest and in the case where the mother is in danger.  And states like that would be the exception, most would simply install common sense laws such as parental notification, bans on atrocious partial birth abotion, and maybe waiting periods.  The main point however is that the people of the states get to decide, not beaucrats in washington, not 9 men in black robes, the people. 

3.  We want to have a strong national defense but we abhour wars that kill young american men and women and kill innocent civilians in the countries where we fight.  If we were more energy indepdent at home, we wouldnt need to ensure the stability of the middle east as much as we do now.  While we would want to ensure that the region didnt become a safe haven for extremism, we would not need to ensure that conditions existed for a consistent supply of oil.  By drilling with environmentally responsilble techniques, researching shale oil extraction technology, taking more advantage of offshore drilling, tap the vast wasteland that is ANWR, and finally go full steam ahead with nuclear power plants.  Replace all domestic electricity with nuclear energy and use fossil fuels for everything else, this would be a great goal. 

4. We dont hate the earth.  The "right" has constantly been smeared as anti environment, as a party that puts large corporate interests ahead of fresh air and clean water.  Bull.  Just because we think Al Gore is snake oil salesmen doesnt mean we want to condemn our children to live in an ozoneless wasteland.  We understand the scientific method and how it works, and therefore that there is ZERO PROOF that global warming is manmade.  We shouldnt condemn ourselves to sky high electric bills and gas prices in an attempt to ween ourselves off of fossil fuels.  See point three above for energy independence plan.

5.  This of course is simply the ranting of one person who supports the GOP.  I dont support them because I think they are right all of the time or even most of the time.  I support them because they are the party that in the past has shown themselves to be able to put into action conservative small goverment policies.  It is the party of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Regan, William F. Buckley, and many other greats.  We are taking very large steps toward socialism.  Things are going to get worse, but remember its always darkest before the dawn.  People say that out of Obama there will be the next Reagan.  I think this optimism is good, however I would prefer to think that out of Obama there will be a president who can accomplish some real change.  Abolish the Department of Education, disban the IRS, permanently ban bans on domestic drilling, return america to a responsible financial policies.  After an Obama administration there will be much opprotunity for the GOP, a new more in touch, invigorated base must be ready to charge ahead with bold new ideas. 

Which way for liberty: Reflections on Personal Democracy Forum 2008

Great thoughts from Mark Tapscott. -Patrick

It's not often that one gets the opportunity to be among and converse with several hundred of the smartest people in the world, but that is precisely what I was able to do last week as a participant at Personal Democracy Forum 2008 at Rose Hall in New York City's Lincoln Center complex.

It was my first PDF and, despite only being able to attend the second day, it was a memorable experience because I came away with a heightened sense that we are on the cusp of profound, even revolutionary changes in government and public policy thanks to the Internet. Being a conservative, I don't use that word "revolution" lightly.

I was in fact continually reminded throughout my time at PDF of Alexander Hamilton's prophetic observation at the outset of The Federalist Papers, America's most important contribution to serious  political thought:

"It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force."

Bobby Jindal Signs Law Allowing Intelligent Design in Louisiana Schools

Teachers can be permitted to supplement textbook discussion on evolution, global warming, human cloning

 

By Peter J. Smith

BATON ROUGE, Louisiana, June 27, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Louisiana public school teachers can now educate their students about the theory of intelligent design and scientific criticisms of Darwinian evolutionary theory thanks to a new law signed this week by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. The Louisiana Science Education Act now allows teachers to supplement the state's curricula with additional scientific materials, but groups opposed to any debate over the "origin of the species" have warned that the new law will become the origin of the lawsuits if they believe it facilitates religion.

Lawmakers, however, were enthusiastically in favor of the Act signed by Jindal. The state Senate had passed the bill (SB733) with a unanimous vote, and the state House had approved it by a vote of 93-4.

The new law requires teachers to follow the standard curriculum, but allows a school district to permit a teacher to supplement his course with additional scientific evidence, analysis, and critiques regarding the scientific topics taught to his students.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08062706.html

'Gay' rights group to Supremes: Don't let people vote

Lawyers try to cut California marriage amendment from ballot
<!-- end deck -->
Posted: June 30, 2008
9:01 pm Eastern

<!-- copyright -->© 2008 WorldNetDaily <!-- end copyright -->


 

 

<!-- begin bodytext -->

Homosexual-rights advocates have asked California's Supreme Court to block citizens from voting this fall on a measure voters originally brought to the ballot: Proposition 8, the California Marriage Protection Act.

Proposition 8, so labeled when Secretary of State Debra Bowen certified it earlier this month for placement on the November 4 ballot, is a constitutional amendment that states, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The amendment was created by voter initiative with the signatures of 1.1 million voters, more than the required 694,354 needed to place an issue on the ballot.

Lawyers representing the ACLU and Equality California, however, filed a petition earlier this month in the state's highest court to strike Proposition 8 from the ballot, claiming the measure is not merely an amendment, but a revision, which a lawyer told WND is defined as a radical rewrite of the Constitution that would drastically upset the social fabric of California and require convening a constitutional convention to approve.

Liberty Counsel founder, Mathew Staver, told WND that if there was any radical rewrite of California's social fabric, it was done last month when the Supreme Court ignored over a century of precedent in the state's definition of marriage with a 4-3 ruling that deemed a law defining marriage between one man and one woman unconstitutional.

"They're suggesting the Supreme Court can rewrite the entire institution of marriage, but people can't amend the Constitution to go back to its historical definition," Staver said. "It's absolutely ridiculous to argue that courts can turn society upside down in 30 days but the people have no right to define it."

Criticizing homosexual marriage's legal advocates, Staver said, "Their agenda is to trample the will of the people and elevate by force the will of four individuals on the Supreme Court over the will of millions of voters."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=68404

Syndicate content