| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
We Don't Need a Chairman. We Need Leaders. Part 2: An Open Letter to Chairman Michael Steele
In Part 1, written earlier this month, I focused on the need for not only the chairman, but all members of the RNC, to develop multiple leaders in campaign operations, policy, communications, fundraising and technology.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Congratulations on your victory today. Your ascension to the chairmanship of the GOP is not only historic in nature; it also shows that many of the members of the RNC (as well as many of us in the grassroots and netroots of the party) were yearning for something different.
As someone who cares deeply about the issues surrounding ethnicity in America, I sincerely hope that the legacy of your chairmanship is not defined by your race, but by your efforts to move this party in a new direction. May you be remembered many election cycles from now, not as the first African-American chairman, but as a chairman who led with conviction and creativity during a time of transition.
One interesting thing to note is the process that we witnessed today. It took six ballots to get yourself elected, and it was still a close vote: 91-77. Whether this shows a split within the committee when it comes to strategy or personality, there does seem to be a split. I not only encourage you to reach out to all members of the RNC; I not only encourage you to reach out to conservative grassroots leaders that work within or without their state and local parties. I encourage you to have an honest exchange of ideas with Republicans across this country, and move this party from one that feeds off of anti-intellectualism to one that encourages political innovation and entrepreneurship.
You have endorsed the Rebuild the Party plan, and I will hold you to your pledge to implement this plan. There are many components to the plan that Patrick Ruffini and Mindy Finn have built. Let me focus on three things that I feel are especially important.
Hold campaigns and local parties accountable. Patrick and Mindy give specific goals for Congressional and Senate races when it comes to raising money and recruiting online activists. Here's what I would like to see. Ask every state and local party to give specific grassroots, electoral and fundraising goals. Publish those goals online. Reward parties that exceed expectations. Hold accountable those parties that fail to meet their goals. Shame works just as well as potential victory when it comes to incentivizing hard work and smart strategy.
Time for a new fundraising model. The plan calls for our 2012 Presidential nominee to be in a position to raise over 50% of their money online. The old model relies on the assumption that you have to raise money first in order to win supporters. Wrong! The Obama campaign taught us that with a true "movement" campaign, you want to gain supporters, and then get them to donate and volunteer, not necessarily in large amounts, but in smaller amounts over and over again. Qualitative characteristics of a fundraising model should matter just as much (maybe even more) than the quantitative characteristics. Just as "online activities" should not be a separate department within any party, fundraising and "the ask" should be integrated in as many facets of a campaign as possible.
When it comes to keeping state parties accountable, don't stop at Congress. It should be obvious to us that the state legislative and city council seats must be our farm team to develop leaders that can move up politically. But there's another important reason to focus on positions like Secretary of State and smaller legislative bodies like school boards. Decisions made closest to the people are critical, yet underreported. State and local governments truly are the laboratories of democracy, and we need good conservatives to run the public policy experiments.
Mr. Steele, promise me you will do two simple things: lead and develop leaders. Provide objectives and a vision, and inspire our grassroots to find new ways to achieve those objectives. Once again, congratulations!
Sincerely,
Matt Moon
- Matt Moon's blog
- Login or register to post comments


Comments
Clear win for rebuild the party today.
Matt:
I think your letter is on-point. I also think there's a broader take-away from the RNC elections. The newly elected chairman and co-chair endorsed rebuild the party, with the co-chair becoming the first candidate in her race to do so. The RNC secretary was endorsed by Patrick Ruffini, and is a blogger. I'd say the leadership, and much of the grass roots at rebuild the party have got to be feeling pretty good about their efforts today. Congrats guys: you hit the ground running on November 5th and took the party by storm. And now the real hard stuff starts. <g>
Where's the beef?
Winning elections is not only about organization and image. It's about the product. What are Republicans going to stand for? How are they going to fix the problems that not only to Bush being a disaster, but Repubicans enabling him?
It looks bad that people who questioned the patriotism of anyone who opposed Bush on anything not say they didn't like Bush after all.
Can we cut the "questioning my patriotism" crap already?
I think I recall a lot of conservatives opposing Bush on steel tariffs, the proscription drug bill, Hariet Miers and immigration, just to name a few issues. I think I'd question the patriotism of someone who rushed to label our troops as murderers a couple days after the war started. I'd certainly question the patriotism of anti-war types who basically pulled for us to lose the war. I question, not the patriotism but the intelligence of people who try to compare Bush to Hitler or a dictator, but you can't question the patriotism of people who have demonstrated insufficient capacity to make basic adult judgments in the first place. Calling Bush the worst president in history doesn't make you unpatriotic, it just makes you a person with no sense of history. Disagreeing with everything Bush did reflexively doesn't make you unpatriotic, it just makes you a thoughtless partisan who's bound to be wrong frequently. Calling Bush names doesn't make you unpatriotic, it makes you childish. Rooting for your country to lose a war, well, makes you unpatriotic. If you were happy or felt justified when things went to hell in Iraq in 06, you're probably not patriotic. If you thought the war was wrong but took no satisfaction in it and didn't run down the people trying to fight it, you're probably not. If you, for example, place the interests of unions above the interests of national security, you're damn right I'm going to question, at the very least, your judgment.
Cut it or keep it up?
You write:
People who said we were losing the war were not "pulling" for us to lose, just stating obvious facts.
Do you know anything about this man?
It seems as though you don't.
Check out news from his 2006 Maryland Senatorial race. He ran pretty much as a democrat. There's lots and lots of effluvia out there to support it, too. Signs, ads, etc.
Talk about waffling.
Listen to his interview with Bruce Elliott
Go to http://www.wbal.com/shows/elliott/ it is about 3/4 of the way down