Home › Blogs › Patrick Ruffini's blog ›

We Need All of the Above

Submitted by Patrick Ruffini on Sun, 11/02/2008 - 21:50

I will happily defer to the tour de forces offered by Jon, Soren, Mark Tapscott, and Erick Erickson on the rightroots, not to mention Sean Oxendine's broad how-we-got-here post.

But allow me to add two cents, and perhaps some perspective.

If I may sum up the arguments, Jon says we need an overarching narrative. Soren and Mark says we need new information distribution channels. John Hawkins and I have been tagged in the more fundraising and activism camp.

Ultimately, though, we need all of the above. And we can't get bogged down in an argument over which is more important. We represent one of two major ideologies in the world's most advanced democracy. We should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. The left certainly isn't picking and choosing between driving original narratives and driving activism. Each reinforces the other. Sure, one element of the left's online machine may have emerged earlier than the other, but the sheer size of the ecosystem allows it to support subsystems for information distribution, activism, and fundraising. We shouldn't be focused on which of these pieces we need first so much as we are on growing the size of the ecosystem.

The Pew report on media consumption confirms the urgency behind this task. The Internet has taken its place alongside radio and newspapers as a major medium where people get their news, second now to television. And Republicans are just as likely to get their news online as Democrats. This means that the next 5 years will continue a trend we've seen in the last two, namely a huge push to displace dying newspaper properties with online newsgathering and chatter sites. This is essentially what the Huffington Post and Politico are. The next 5 years will bring HUGE changes in who the major news sources are. Conservatives will need a voice in this process or risk getting shut out in a period of media ferment. This isn't a question of getting some benevolent donors involved, so much as it is a solid business opportunity. Fox showed the potential for a different perspective on TV, one that was culturally aware and entertaining to boot. In a sense, this is what Drudge offered early on -- he was 180 degrees removed from being too wonkish or agitprop having gotten into this by posting box office numbers. It's only a matter of time before someone aggregates the conservative audience online the way HuffPo has for the left.

Jon makes a compelling point about needing the right narrative and unifying grievance. But I'd also argue that without an infrastructure at the ready to absorb the enormous outflow of activism, we risk missing opportunities. The Right has seen its share of big moments in the last 18 months -- immigration, Drill Now, the Palin pick, and on the fringes, Ron Paul. And each time something like it happens, we see huge bursts of online activity... and then nothing. We seem to have no infrastructure to capture the enthusiasm of the moment and carry it forward to the next battle. By this point in the netroots' development, MoveOn was already two years old. 

And I would add the following point to Erick's point about funding: he is dead on that no one in their right mind is going to throw money at a disparate group of 20 and 30 year olds. While I've agreed with John Hawkins's idea for funding and hiring bloggers, we have to focus on building platforms rather than individual websites. Daily Kos, the Huffington Post, and TPM are not so much websites as platforms where anyone can get involved in a different aspect of the left's project, whether it's community, driving the news cycle, or hard-hitting investigation.

Giving $25,000 to Joe and his crappy Blogspot site isn't likely to do much, but dedicating $500,000 to hire twenty of the best Joes out there and put them on a single website cum platform is more likely to quickly build critical mass. But as Erick posits, this will require an extra layer of management and due diligence. 

0
Your rating: None

Comments

Agreement

Submitted by Jon Henke on Sun, 11/02/2008 - 22:39.

I think most of us discussing this are pretty much in agreement.  We're putting an emphasis on different components, all of which are important.   As I see it, we need...

  • ...better information organization, which helps create coalesce a movement around...
  • ...the organizing agenda, out of which flows...
  • ...the storyline, narrative, which motivates...
  • ...the grassroots/netroots to get engaged, mobilized and donating, all of which is channeled effectively by...
  • ...the infrastructure, both online and offline.

I think it probably has to happen in that order.  Each of the items is a necessary precursor to the next.  Without more effective information organization, we'll never fix on a coherent agenda; without a coherent agenda, we'll never have a really good story to tell; without a really good story to tell, we'll never energize the grassroots and netroots; without an energized grassroots/netroots, all the infrastructure in the world will be for naught.

"You have not because you ask not"

Submitted by Darvin Dowdy on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 00:18.

"he is dead on that no one in their right mind is going to throw money at a disparate group of 20 and 30 year olds."

If those brilliant 20-30 somethings would get their fingers on the pulse of Middle America, they'd find a plenty of donors/customers.  Why? Because they'd have millions of hits.  Its all about numbers.  Numbersroots. Ha!  Instead they seem to want to banter back and forth and out intellectualize each other.  Its fun for each other but mostly boring to the outsiders.  Find out  the 5 or 6 biggest hot issues.  Not the issues you think are hot but  actual hot button issues.  Not necessarily political issues.  Mom/Pop America issues and how they might relate to politics.  Focus on those issues. 

But you're going to have to have infrastructure/facilities, professions and above all time to kick something off.  There are people willing and able to help with the dissemination of truth/facts. I mentioned one person in a post I made in the last few days.  What was his name?  But he's an ultra conservative guy who puts his pants on one leg at a time, just like you.   Just happens to have billions, however. .  And what does it hurt to ask.  Write him a letter. But 1st you'd need a plan, a TO&E and someone in authority.   Your ducks in order.    Who was it that said, "ye have not because ye ask not" ?   Go for it. 

Starting slow, one brick at a time sounds admirable, but not in desperate times like these.  You need a quick start-up & done right.  And that takes $$.  My opinion. Do what you want. DD

One thing we need to avoid...

Submitted by Evil Conservative on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 00:19.

Out of the many things we need we cannot let ourselves develop the tone, hatred, and paranoia that makes places like Kos and HuffPo so vulnerable to the most knee-jerk conspiracy theories that the most zealous partisans can be prone to.

I honestly think that the relentless negativity and harsh aggressive tactics used in their activism will make the Kos collapse under its own weight and will ultimately marginalize what moderates and conservatives will agree to commonly call the "nutroots" by 2012.

I'm saying this now so we don't ultimately have a structure in place that leaves our side vulnerable to the worst aspects of liberal grassroots' organization. We will be under a microscope, even without control of the Presidency and Congress. The media will be much more prone to illuminating our worst aspects versus their eagerness to ignore or excuse the worst behavior of the left-wing netroots.

Couldn't agree more. . .

Submitted by Walt Gilbert on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 03:57.

. . .with this post.  One thing that Kos did finally catch onto was the fact that the 9/11 conspiracy kooks were harming his goals, and he went about banning them from the site until they could behave themselves.

Whatever shape the reformation takes, I think it will be necessary to institute a purge of the elements that do damage to the movement in much the same way that William F. Buckley had to rid the conservative corpus of John Birch fleas.  It won't be easy as there's a fairly sizable contingent of NAU/CFR/NWO conspiracy theorists in our midst.  But, I think it will be essential to the rebuilding process.

Unless there's a bright line of distinction drawn between the conservative movement and that particular brand of conservative, I don't see how it will be possible to develop a message that is mainstream enough to sell to the average voter.  As things stand now, we're too easily caricatured as a motley crew of paranoiacs driven to complete distraction by Obama's birth certificate.

 

 

help is coming

Submitted by kelleng16 on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 00:22.

this brand is launching on Feb. 2nd 2009.

www.parcbench.com

pop-culture and lifestyle to battle the liberal stranglehold on the youth in our country.

The Democrats reached out to us youths

Submitted by TCDem2 on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 08:13.

The GOP doesn't because we youths on average are alot more liberal then your party.

I bet if you polled youths we aren't as opposed to gay marriage then your party as a whole, so then obviously gay marraige bans aren't the best reach out for us.

Youths care about their environment, and we are looking at this country wondering what you guys will leave for us. obviuosly then we dont have capital gains right now.

 

so ignoring healthcare, and climate change, and infact even denying there is a climate change problem becaues you want to cut capital gains from 20% to 15% once again not the best way to reach out to youths.

 

you want the next generation of voters, you have to make your party actually appeal to them.

You assume all youths think like you and your wrong

Submitted by Big Ben 4 liberty on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 09:09.

I have never shared those views and none of my friends ever did (I just turn 34 this year) besides maybe the abortion issue and their position on that was very strong.  As I have said eleswhere on this blog the GOP will never win elections by moving to the left, you simply can't out-Democrat the Democrats.

Tuesday will decide.

Submitted by davidfarrar on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 09:39.

Political motivation is, of course, the key element missing in the rightroot equation at present. But come Tuesday we will all know just how much motivation will be out there to give any noteworthy rightroot blogger their meal ticket, which, apparently, is the only thing many here are really interested in pursuing under the guise of rightwing political activism.

Are you really interested in righting the wrongs of the left, or addressing the short comings of the right so that we all can move forward?  Not really. You are interested in ginning up the masses to hit your website in ever greater numbers to sell just a few more ads.

What we have here, in fact, is a bunch of bottom- feeders waiting to exploit the political anxiety of the party out of power  -- just like the left did with their netroot. What you haven't asked yourselves is: Do we really want to achieve the same political ends as the left has achieved  -- nothing but political extremism and a further widening of the political divide between the people?

I am here to try and make the Republican Party more accuratly reflect the political asperations of its members. "For when people's true political aspirations are accurately reflected by their political parties," as Frederic Bastiat pointed out in his seminal work: 'The Law,' "all will seek the common good." Empowering our members within our party is the quickest way to create a New Right for the common good of all.

I realize, of course, nobody here will listen to these comments. Your goal is simple political exploitation for commerical gain, as is your right.

Gentlemen, I wish you luck.

 

           ex animo

 Operation Rednet  

           davidfarrar

 

If you really believe that...

Submitted by Jon Henke on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 10:12.

....then why don't you stop posting your inane GIF's and trollery here, depriving us of some hits? I promise, we'll be fine with that. 

And since you challenge our integrity, I will respond: the revenue we get from ads is trivial.  None of us are in the least dependent upon it.  In fact, I don't know that any of us have seen a dime from it.  I have not.  It is not a motivation for what we post.

But again, if you think we lack that much integrity, you are welcome to stop contributing.

Notwithstanding your ad homen attack upon me,

Submitted by davidfarrar on Tue, 11/04/2008 - 11:27.

allow me to point out, the record speaks for itself in this regard. You want to imitate the Left's netroots in all its glory. I can only assume you have thought this through and decided, for whatever reason, achieving the same political ends the Left has achieved is a good thing, one that deserves emulation. Fair enough. But why, if not for some commerical gain or other valuable consideration now or in the very near future?

I say, lets work on getting our own house in order before we start rooting out the other side. I can assure you, this will not be an easy task. It may not even be possible. There are many entrenched power centers within the Republican Party who will fight such a movement every step of the way. And, yes, who might even pay some bright, young rightrooter to attack those who would devote themselves to giving grassroot Republicans their voice within the Party --  a fact you might want to consider before hastening my departure from this site, insane gifs and all.

           ex animo

 Operation Rednet  

           davidfarrar 

 

Inane not insane

Submitted by johnson springs on Tue, 11/04/2008 - 13:27.

And they are pretty annoying, David. However, I hope you will stick around and continue to contribute even if you bring your gifs. :)