gop

UPDATE: Jonathan Singer at MyDD has another take on the problem with today's GOP, arguing that the party is in the middle of a dangerous cycle, with its own burgeoning regionalism serving as the nail in the coffin. Good stuff. Check it out.

While this site has carefully examined the overlap between the tendencies and characteristics of the Millennial Generation and the ascent of the Democratic Party (also the fall of the GOP), we've focused less on what impact a surge of youth activism within the GOP might do. What would a Millennial-led Republican Party look like?

The Christian Science Monitor published an article on Wednesday that chronicled the Republican youth's desire to get away from the socially conservative politics that has driven the GOP for many decades now. Millennial party activists interviewed in this article want more pragmatism and diversity -- surprise, surprise -- and they want to see this woven into a narrative that also contains traditional Republican principles: small government and low taxes. The story paints those interviewed as inspired by Obama -- not alienated -- leading to the grand project of saving the Grand Old Party.

More inspired than dejected about the meteoric rise of Barack Obama to the presidency, young Republicans, often working from state capitals in the Democratic heartland, are mounting an ideological and technological insurgency to change the course of the GOP.

Their goal is to use lessons from the historic 2008 drubbing to tie political pragmatism, diversity, and idealism to traditional conservative values like small government and low taxes. Their aim is to broaden the Republican base and ensure its relevancy as a national party. Winning that internal debate over the party’s future, though, won’t be easy.

“I think young people could play a very central role in creating a more moderate and more pragmatic Republican notion of conservatism that is about change, but about change that is more consistent with traditional Republican principles,” says Professor Michael Delli Carpini, an expert on generational differences in politics at the University of Pennsylvania. “The Republican party has to figure out what it’s going to be, and you can see that battle taking place right now … and young people can be very influential in [that debate].”

We know that intra-party battles can be a good thing, given the squabbling that went on in 2005 and 2006 within the Democratic Party and the success that we saw in the 2006 midterms and this past Election Day. And given the demographics, the GOP would certainly be smart to embrace an effort to recapture some technological -- and therefore, political -- relevancy led by youth party activists.

The problem with the GOP, though, is that it can't stand losing. And so to maybe toss the 2010/2012 election cycle to the side in order to get its house in order is unthinkable and unmentionable. As long as there is no long-term adjustment, the Republican Party will continue to pursue the white, old, Southern male -- a shrinking minority in today's political equation. And the longer the GOP remains stubborn, the more time the Democratic Party has to use its technological and demographic advantages to solidify connections to the largest generation in American history.

And let's say the GOP did adjust its strategy, becoming a more calm, mild, pragmatic party focused on doing America better. What might this look like? Well, assuming the Democratic Party has even a little bit of success while in power, the Republicans, should they be willing to make deals and exert a bit of influence on the Democratic agenda, will be largely furthering Democratic policy. Obama and the Democratic Congress would get the credit for the patient deal-making these youth GOP are advocating. Republicans would participate in the hardening of a New Deal-like Coalition that could govern America for the next half century.

What happened? The Republican Party missed the boat. It cast its lot with the Southern Strategy like it was 1968 (and 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1994, 2000, 2002, and 2004). What it failed to realize was that the "Silent" Majority in 2008 was actually made up of young, progressive Americans who were already being engaged by a diverse, technologically-advanced Democratic Party. Even if Millennials take the helm of the GOP ship, the Democrats might be too far ahead (providing we continually invest in our own youth movement) for it to make any difference.

When Barack Obama was elected a little over a month ago, he spoke on the shores of Lake Michigan about what it would take to reassemble our country.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can't solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

What began twenty-one months ago in the depths of winter must not end on this autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek - it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you.

So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us remember that if this financial crisis taught us anything, it's that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers - in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people.

And with that context, I'd like to take a look at something Mike brought to our attention on Thursday. Thomas Bates and Jason Carter from Democrats Work, an organization that aims to mobilize grassroots Democrats to work on visible, tangible service projects in their local communities, penned a piece in Roll Call this week encouraging the DNC to restructure itself to emphasize service instead of politics as usual.

This would be a brilliant move for a couple of reasons.

1. It obviously keeps the large grassroots activism of the Obama campaign alive. Many of those people who were in Obama's organization were some of the most fervent supporters we have seen in recent campaigns. We can't afford to let them fall by the wayside as past campaigns have done. We need to harness their energy by asking them to do something. As they invest more time into these projects and the Democratic Party, we build brand loyalty with the Democratic Party. These supporters are not only watching the Democratic stars on TV, hoping they'll vote the right way, or sign this bill into law, etc.; they're out in the streets, donating their own time and taking ownership of their party.
2. As we all know, Millennials are fanatical about service. There is no better way to not only maintain -- but increase -- the number of those identifying with the Democratic Party among 18-29 year olds. There are many people our age who have the typical Millennial progressive views on issues, but they don't see them in the operation of the Democratic Party because the fundraising and ads look too much like the GOP in action. A party rooted in service to others would be a large magnet for most Millennial voters -- already one of the most important voting blocs in our electorate. This approach would it make much harder for people to say Democrats don't stand for anything.
3. Finally, it would make the Republican Party look incredibly self-centered and ancient. While the Democrats would be doing canned food drives, cleaning up communities, and establishing relationships with residents at the street level all over the country, the GOP would be relying on the classic 20th Century direct mail-fundraising and ad strategy. Fox News, subtly telling voters that Democrats are angry people who want to orchestrate the demise of the United States from within, would suddenly turn into a parody of itself, thanks to these voters looking out their windows and seeing young, impressive Democrats having fun outside, picking up litter. People would see Democrats doing something. Alternatively, Republicans, trying to pick between Neiman Marcus-wearing Sarah Palin and venture capitalist Mitt Romney to find a standard-bearer for 2012, would alternatively seem too focused on achieving short-term political gain to responsibly take control of the country.

Back in the middle part of the Nineteenth Century, party organizations were a community affair. Picnics and dances and dinners were held, not just to get votes, but to cultivate relationships in the local community. Of course, this social dedication to one's party through the investment of time would lead to increased support on election day.

At a time when the nation again seems to be trending toward being more civically engaged, the Democratic Party has a chance to re-define patriotism, restoring it to something closer to its original meaning: the service and responsibility Obama called for in his Election Night address. Should the party fail to do this, it would be doing itself and all of us a disservice. (No pun intended.)

The College Republicans are freaking out about Obama's 66 - 32% margin over John McCain among Millennials. See also here and here.

The first post, written by Ethan Eilon, the Executive Director of the College Republicans, is probably the most level headed of the three, all of which offer basically two types of solutions to the giant cracks in the GOP foundation exposed by this election:

1. Double down on conservative principles
2. Build up new infrastructure to reach out to youth

As I've said previously, in some respects (infrastructure) these posts read like the stuff I was writing two years ago. In others, though, the crazy talk is a little hard to get past. Without going into too much detail, I basically draw three conclusions from these posts:

1. The youth vote was basically uncontested this year.
2. Assuming the College Republicans, Rebuild the GOP, and Next Gen GOP types are actually listened to by their party, that won't be the case in 2012.
3. Even then it's not clear how much it will matter because young voters are more progressive than previous generations. Without a recognition of that fact, and subsequent movement towards the left, it's hard to see the GOP gaining back more than a few points among young voters.

Apologies for the light (read: no) posting today. I'm taking care of some personal stuff. Tomorrow I plan to blog about the following stories. I figure you can read them directly now and get a head start:

• Taking on the System and the Prop 8 Protests: Kos talks about his new book and how the Prop 8 demonstrations showed us 1) How demonstrations could be relevant in the 21st C; and 2) How a 26 year old from Seattle used decentralized organizing and put traditional LGBT groups to shame.
• Be + Cause Strategies discusses Obama's win and the importance of infrastructure and organizing.
• Progressive States Network tells us why, even in the wake of a national win, we should continue to strengthen our efforts at the state level.
• Next Gen GOP wants to win back the youth vote. Part I and Part II.
• Amplify Your Voice brings us word of another Millennial elected to office with a little help from Facebook.

Sen. Obama's impressive 66 - 32% margin among young voters represents the culmination of 4 years of aggressive youth outreach by progressives aimed at young voters. But it's important to remember that we pretty much ran uncontested in those years. While the conservatives have an impressive leadership pipeline in for the form of groups like the Leadership Institute, YAF, and the Heritage Foundation program, and while I think we've all thrown food at our TV when Jason Mattera's mug came into view, conservatives really didn't have much game when it came to GOTV, and they threw far less muscle into youth GOTV than we did.

That may be about to change. Some of the smartest young operatives in the Republican Party have thrown down the gauntlet, demanding that the GOP modernize and Rebuild the Party. Part of that effort includes upping the ante on young voter outreach:

2008 made one thing clear: if allowed to go unchecked, the Democrats' structural advantages, including their use of the Internet, their more than 2-to-1 advantage with young voters, their discovery of a better grassroots model -- will be as big a threat to the future of the GOP as the toxic political environment we have faced the last few years. [...]

At the same time, waiting for a political savior to materialize out of thin air is not an option. Eventually, strong new leaders will emerge. And when they do, they must inherit a party stronger than the one in its current state. Our grassroots must be stronger and more open. We must inspire young leaders to want to run for office as Republicans. [...]

A "40 Under 40" initiative. Undoing the damage to our party's brand among America's youth will take more than new slogans and hip spokespeople. It will mean making young voters the face of the Republican Party, and not just another target group with its own bulleted list of "outreach" talking points. To that end, the next Chairman should commit to a simple goal: working towards a Republican Party where at least 40% of our challenger and open seat candidates for Congress are under 40. Such a party will send a signal to all Americans that the GOP is once again the party of the future.

We can't yet be sure, but it seems likely that young McCain supporters decided to sit out this last election. If Rebuild the Party gains traction within the GOP, that might not be the case in 2010.

The Discovery Channel YouTube channel Why? Tell me Why? Addressed the question of why young voters vote the way they do and old voters vote the way they do.

Irwin Morris from the University of Maryland says these are tendencies that develop depending on the political environment. Young people have come of age in an era with unpopular Republicanism thus they are more inclined to harness those anti-republican sentiments and carry them with them throughout the course of their lives.

The same is/has been true for older voters who he said came of age in an era of anti-democratic tendencies which is why they lean more toward republicans. This might also account for the messages republicans used nearing election day about communism and socialism etc... because those were real threats that older voters faced when they were first beginning to cast ballots.

These kinds of arguments of course flopped on young voters who only know about socialism within the context of republican finger pointing and communism with regard to Cuban relations or history classes about the former Soviet Union.

With "reliable seniors" as a major voting demographic in the past, this was a good strategy, but as we saw with the new data, young voters surpassed those seniors in turnout and at least a third of the seniors voted for Obama.

My hope is that this means we are finally beyond the idea that crying "socialism" and "communist" are helpful to a campaign.

Matthew Segal from SAVE sent me this video of a debate that his organization the Student Association for Voter Empowerment had with the College Republicans three months ago. In the debate, Segal remembered that the GOP was attacking ACORN spreading the same misinformation they are today. As you can see in the short clip the allegations are thrown out there, and Segal corrects the record for what ACORN really does.

One of today's Quick Hits was a piece by Ari Melber in The Nation examining Obama's tech-savvy campaign and its operation. I thought Melber did a great job of penetrating behind the scenes to clarify how the toys and gadgets help Obama put together a one-of-a-kind grassroots organization. But Melber also succeeded at looking into the future and explaining why Obama's technological operation is so crucial to presidential politics.

We know McCain's thinking on technology from an article published in the San Francisco Chronicle this summer:

GOP presidential candidate John McCain, fundraising in the San Francisco Bay Area, one of the nation's technology capitals, acknowledged Monday that he isn't a "tech freak" or entirely comfortable with the Internet, BlackBerrys or e-mail. But he strongly disputed criticism that he is "out of the loop" as unfair.

As former head of the U.S. Senate Commerce committee, McCain said, he has been a driving force to oversee legislation that helped the Internet flourish - even as he is still learning to get comfortable with it himself.

"Am I a tech freak? No," he said in an interview Monday with The Chronicle. "And I don't like to text message because I'd rather call somebody on the telephone."

"I do understand the importance of the computer. I understand the importance of the blogs," he said.

McCain said he is well aware that technology "does drive the news. It is changing the shape of the news. ... It's changing the information age, and I've got to stay up with it."

He added, "But I am forcing myself ... let me put it this way, I am using the computer more and more every day."

Melber's closing reminds us why having a candidate who understands technology is so important to this nation:

If his strategy succeeds, all presidential politics could change. First-time voters--both this generation of the young, black or marginalized as well as future rookie cohorts--might become a constituency that candidates pursue. The long shot, if Obama wins big, is a larger electoral universe that forces Republicans to play catch-up. The party that spent decades stifling voter turnout, from illegal suppression to court-sanctioned ploys like ID requirements, could find electoral salvation depends on the ability to register its own new voters. Couple that grassroots pressure with an economic crisis stoking intense bipartisan populism, and a "new politics" might really be on the horizon.

The vision is obvious, and frankly, kind of Rovian: strike at the heart of your opponent's strengths and force them to run on something else. I love the fact that Melber pointed out the Republicans' strategy of squashing participation, because I think that it really gets to the heart of why technological development is such a Democratic issue. With technology boosting political participation and engagement all across America, we suddenly are toeing a new political landscape, one the Republicans have worked against for years. By refusing to adapt and be -- gasp! -- progressive, the GOP created an opening for someone to supply the enthusiasm, dedication, and the message to create a self-sustaining system that is immune to most "wedge" tactics, in which society is turned against itself for partisan advantage. Obama has put this vision forward, and it's paying dividends, registering unbelievable numbers of new voters this year and flooding the campaign coffers with cash. As a result, an Obama presidency might just be the tip of the iceberg for the GOP.

Some reading to supplement your weekend down time:

• The Daily Trojan's recent piece covering each candidate's youth vote operation can be found here (and yes, the fact that they think McCain has any outreach to youth points to the accuracy of the article and the competence of those interviewed. Look at this:
  

  Ann Crigler, director of the Department of Political Science and a professor of political science at USC, agreed that youth voters are targeted because they are not yet devoted to either party.

  "The youth vote is really important because it is traditionally not aligned with a party or candidate yet, so people want to get them to participate because they haven't traditionally," Crigler said. "It is easier to attract those who aren't already committed to a party."

  I don't think that's why it's important, and I don't think that's true. A recent poll in swing state Ohio, for instance, shows that Obama is preferred over McCain by a margin of 60-33 percent.

• Florida is now requiring that all potential voters have an ID in order to vote.
• What a difference having a Democratic head of elections makes in Ohio -- Secretary of State Jennifer Bruner is attempting to prevent vote caging.
• Apparently the GOP doesn't care about copyright law when their power is threatened.
• PowerVote: getting one million green youth voters to the polls.
• The 2008 presidential campaign invades college orientations.
• An excellent piece in the Cornell Daily Sun finds that McCain is in favor of cutting and running -- from the youth vote.

I’ve landed in Nashville. I’m sure I’ll be seeing some of you at the YDA conference tomorrow. For the rest of you, I’ll be live-blogging as I can depending on the WiFi access, which wasn’t all that great at the last YDA conference.

Over at The Next Right (sort of an “Open Left” for conservatives), Ethan Eilon, the Executive Director of the College Republicans is saying some smart things about young people and their relation ship to the GOP. Specifically, he’s calling on the Republican Party to wake up and start reaching out to young voters. The whole thing reads very much like stuff you heard out of Democratic youth circles 4 years ago (and still do today though people seem to be getting the message).

His advice to the party is good and will be familiar to many here: go where young people congregate (online), make an effort to promote effective youth leaders in the party. Address youth issues on the stump, etc. The piece is valuable reading for anyone in either party looking to court young voters. But he’s got two huge problems.

First is the straight up math of what we’re seeing now:

Now, I'm not naive enough to suggest that we make these changes and all of a sudden we are going to win the 18-19 vote 80/20, but we don't need to. We just need to not lose it by that margin, which is exactly what current trends, if left unchecked, will yield.

That’s really the crux of it. There’s very little chance that the Republicans will eat into Democratic gains among Millennials unless the Democrats drop youth outreach altogether and/or severely mess something up policy wise. McCain was probably the best candidate choice for Republicans to make an attempt at courting youth, but eve he won’t be enough and he’ll likely have little influence down-ticket in an environment so toxic to traditional Republicans. The GOP is now in the unenviable position of doing electoral triage for a generation. It’s not about winning anymore; it’s about losing as little (young) blood as possible.

The problem is that the Republican brand is not just tarnished – that in itself is a tough hurdle to overcome (see Democrats: National Security) – but the governing philosophies of conservatism itself are rejected by Millennials. That’s why this is more than a little wishful thinking:

We need to get very serious about making our brand more appealing to young voters, and to get young people bought into the overall concept of what this party is about: limited government and individual liberty. This is not a hard sell, but when the Democrats and their affiliates are outspending us in the demographic by 25 to 1 we are going to have an uphill battle.

Culture war issues promoted by the Republican Party restrict individual liberty (gay rights, right to choose, etc.) in ways that the multicultural, tolerant Millennials find repellent, and limited government is a failed proposition. For a generation that lived through Katrina (and exhortations from Grover Norquist to “drown the government in a bathtub), limited government fails to recognize the responsibility that a government has to its citizens to provide opportunity and security. These will not be winning talking points for reaching out to today’s youngest voters.

Finally, I would just like to point out that the 25 – 1 number cited by Eilon is highly disputable. The College Republicans had well over $20 million in expenditures over the last 4 years: dwarfing spending by the College and Young Democrats (from Open Secrets):

And while it is true that Democrats have focused far more than Republicans on GOTV in recent years, the amount of money going through the conservative leadership pipeline is about 5 – 10 times more than what equivalent progressive organizations have to work with. Campus Progress thoroughly debunked similar claims made by Young America Foundation Alum Jason Mattera earlier this year (below). There are rumors that the CRNC is nothing more than a money funnel conservatives use to direct money to other “grown up” projects, and that the College Republicans actually see little to no of their tens of millions raised/spent. So perhaps there is a grain of truth here, but if so doesn’t that just speak to the moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party?