With appropriate deference and thanks to those candidates and volunteers who worked hard in the last election, there are really no “silver linings” for the California Republican Party in the aftermath of the recent blowout, resulting in a loss of all statewide offices and even a seat in the state assembly, just as a GOP sweep (except in New York) ran across the nation. Our “rainbow coalition” of statewide candidates made one of the collectively poorest showings in the history of California politics, probably the worst for the statewide GOP ever. The fact is California Republicans have now embarked on an era which I have dubbed “permanent super minority status,” statewide, where relevance of the GOP in Sacramento will rest only with the tenious possibility of holding the line on future tax and fee increases, that require a 2/3rds vote of the Legislature and just a couple of Republican votes. Our ability to do that will be complicated by the advent of the open primary system in 2012, which will allow Democrats to vote in Republican primaries, and the added unpredictable result of the coming reapportionment of districts. None of this bodes well for Cailfornia Republicans, and we will surely not climb out of permanent super minority status unless there is real change in voter attitudes. There is plenty of blame to go around, but the simple fact is, other that potentially being able to help our dwindling business community to launch meaningful initiative measures, there is no bright horizon for the GOP statewide at all. There is of course an answer, but the California GOP’s more recent curricular firing squad activities, such as focusing time and energy that could have been used to fight Democrats, instead on unsuccessful recalls of Republicans, makes embracing the obvious unlikely. The obvious need for us to become a competitive party is to broaden appeal and especially to capture more Latino votes. What is the best way to do that? Well, it doesn’t mean abandoning principle, it means being smart. We have a choice: we can continue to lose elections by fooling ourselves with jabber about communicating better with voters about values. But what we really need to do is embrace high quality Latino leadership in the GOP. I am not talking about just anybody. What we need is a California version of Florida’s Marco Rubio, a firebrand conservative of Cuban heritage who just was elected to the U. S. Senate. If such a leader emerged, who could generate support in the Latino community and at the same time effectively communicate principles that reflect GOP values and unite a majority of voters, we’d be wise to simply give that person the keys to the state party headquarters. I do not know who that person is. Paul Rodriquez? Are you listening? But should such a leader emerge, as one who doesn’t like the idea of permanent super minority status, sign me up!
November 27th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Well…the “establishment”in total flight, battered, hang dogged and liberally whipped seeing the merits of “normal” Californians as candidates for major office in the “Blue Blood” party!!!!
Now RINOS and rich/powerfully connected cocktail party grazers….step aside….you screwed us up royally since the Prop. 187 inquisition and the constant recoils toward regulating social behavior by the very government controllers you seemingly shun!!
The first step….resign from pundit and political operative activities….your damaged goods…your proven irrelevant….your just plain burnt toast!!!!
November 27th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Allan Hoffenblum was talking about the failure of the state GOP to embrace highly capable, intelligent Latino leaders twenty years ago. Few listened. The few leaders that were promoted, like Rosario Marin, were maliable, content to cash-in their status, and ethical disappointments. There now is simply no future for a state Republican party that does not include Latinos in key roles. I read John Seiler’s piece today and I fully agree with him: California is a deeply blue state, in statewide elections. It can become competitive again, it may take a generation of Democrat misrule, but general voter attitudes about our GOP need to change; and attitudes among current parry leaders need to change, too
November 27th, 2010 at 12:00 am
James Lacy is on the right track, namely fixing the Hispanic issue for California Republicans. Here are some additional thoughts on that.
Some refuse to comprehend the seriousness of the lack of Hispanic support for Republicans. If they would just recognize that now the majority of California’s school children are Hispanic and that these kids will register upon adulthood about 4 to 1 or worse Democrat.
These realities dictate that California Republicans better start emulating the Florida, Texas and even New Mexico Republicans in working better with Hispanics. Florida just elected another Hispanic U.S.Senator, the “messianic” Rubio, Texas Republicans are disproportionately successful (partly because of the work of Governor Bush) in attracting Hispanics and New Mexico just elected the first Hispanic female governor, a Republican.
Finally, whenever the Republican candidate is clearly the better alternate to a weak or tainted Democrat, that Republican will have a good chance of getting elected regardless of Republican registration numbers.
Yes! There is some basis for California Republican hope but it is rather thin gruel.
Former Member, U.S. Congress
November 27th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Perhaps we should stop playing the game the dems play with the race and gender politics. I for one am really sick of it and find it insulting and offensive.
The race and gender of the candidate should not matter at all.
The character of the candidate and their ideas are what matter to most Americans.
I truly believe if our candidates unabashedly and confidently articulate Conservative principles and how those ideas better the lives of ALL Californians/Americans,they will win like Reagan did no matter what race or gender the voters are.
I am actually ashamed that my Party feels they have to act like democrats to win elections. Believe me, it is not inspiring!
November 27th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Dr. MaryRose, via her post above, apparently wants to keep losing. Those politics do matter in the real world and can’t be ignored unless you’re using your own DEA Title II supply. Banging your head against the wall doesn’t win elections.
The only chance CA Rs remotely have to be cognizant of Lacy’s comments above, and more importantly stop the demonization of LGBT folks and to STFU on abortion/choice. Those are LOSING issues even if party donors want to pursue these losing strategies. (CA R party is only short of enough money to buy perfume to cover its stench with the swing votes.)
If the CA Rs focus SOLELY on fiscal rectitude and small gov’t they may have a chance in a decade or less
Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
November 28th, 2010 at 12:00 am
“STFU”…a 4-letter summary of the Wiese plan for state Politics.
LOL
BTW, Tom Campbell has applied the “fiscal only” approach and
lost every one of his statewide races since 1992, including a
2-million-vote crushing by Dianne Feinstein in 2000. Don’t let
the facts get in the way.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:00 am
James,
Yes, James – I want to win.
James Lacy outlined some of the problem and I some additional issues. These key issues stop Rs from winning the middle ground.
Appealing to the far religious right will only keep the Rs where they are and we see where that got us.
I’m sorry you let your love of religion and hate for gays getting in the way of tax cuts, right-sizing state government and reducing gun control.
James, your example of Tom Campbell is not really relevant to the discussion. Campbell is a loser because he’s not a conservative on money issues – he’s willing to support Big Gov’t if taxes are raised to pay for it. I seem to recall him making noises about how Prop 13 was bad, etc. too.
The left & big gov’t overspenders have defined him as a ‘fiscal conservative’ because THEY like him for that – he’d be their mole in the R party. They don’t give a cr*p about his other positions, they want their money flow kept going.
Tom Campbell is also virulently antigun (there’s somewhere around ~500K NRA members + 50K CRPA members and a couple hundred K Calguns readers in a state population that owns at least 5+ million guns. I think we can get more of these out to vote in suburban districts. Campbell (or a staffer that writes exactly like he does) visited Calguns to ‘explain his position’ and was roundly sent off as being an anti.
Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
November 28th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Lacy is right. We will be an irrelevant minority party in California unless we not only get Latinos into Party leadership, but convince Latino voters that our message makes sense. We have allowed Democrats to paint us as uncompassionate anti-Hispanic xenophobes. Why have we not made the effort to correct that erroneous characterization and tried to win the hearts and minds of Latino voters in California? That is something that we need to do if we ever want to be relevant in California again.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:00 am
“STFU” is Mr. Wiese’s constant refrain here, trying (and failing) to
silence the Jews and Christians who make up an overwhelming majority
of Californians in all political parties.
Nothing is more certain to bring defeat than telling men and women
of Faith to “STFU”. Without Christians and Jews, the GOP would
be an empty shell.
Please note that OUR side does not tell secular Republicans to shut
up. That kind of belligerent hissing is the monopoly of Mr. Wiese.
Tom Campbell is from Wiese’s part of the State, and is the nearest
thing to an ideal Wiese candidate at the state GOP level. He is also
a perennial loser in State politics.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:00 am
I honestly had to go to Wikipedia to figure out what STFU means. I was thinking it was a very new emerging minority group I had missed, otherwise well in evidence at a Black Eyed Peas concert.
But, IMO, the key issues that should bind us and that everyone who professes a leadership role in the Republican party must honor is to support lower taxes and less government spending, and a reduction of government regulation in our lives.
From there, we must understand that a MAJORITY political party is indeed a coalition of diverse interests. Ronald Reagan built his majority coalition by adding swing voters in suburban and rural areas that were interested in: military defense (opposed communism), opposed gun control and abortion, and generally supported stronger family values, among other single issue areas. In that mileau, Reagan also hired gays to work in his administrations and the White House, and compromised when he thought it necessary to sign a state bill that allowed abortion, and to get a tax bill.
The nation and especially the demographics of California today are different from the Reagan era. Polls demonstrate that on some single issues, such as Proposition 8, that Latinos and the black community have more in common with the Republican party position than the Democrat position. Especially with Latino small business owners, there is a path for the GOP to emerge from permanent super minority status statewide in California, but it will never happen if the Democrats can, as Gary Aminoff says above “paint us as uncompassionate and anti-Hispanic xenophobes.” We need high-quality, highly-capable Latino leadership to partner with us, and lead, and not just go along for the ride.
Jim Sills is of course right about the fact that Tom Campbell, a good guy personally, has never vigorously embraced the “lower taxes, less government spending” mantra the way Reagan did.
I want to say I appreciate Bill Wiese being a Republican and where he wants us to go — which is to win elections. We need to be compassionate for all human beings, not just Latinos, for example. The idea of getting government out of everyone’s private lives is a Republican philosophy that is not inconsistent at all with also supporting family values. There are clearly some issues we will not agree on. But those differences on issues should always be secondary to our basic freedom philosophy of lower taxes, less spending, and less regulation.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Jim,
I agree in part and disagree in part.
You and I go way back in California and population demographics have changed a good deal since our days at USC.
Here is a piece I have written:
http://flapsblog.com/2010/11/19/california-poll-watch-one-in-five-california-voters-would-never-cast-a-ballot-for-a-republican/
The fact is the California GOP will not win any statewide elections for the foreseeable future.
This is not to say we cannot pick up a few Congressional seats depending upon reapportionment.
The Democrats have become an ethnic and two state regional party (New York and California) nationally.
http://flapsblog.com/2010/11/17/has-the-democratic-party-become-a-regional-or-two-state-party/
The Right has been successful – just not in California.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:00 am
So good to hear from you Flap!
I think you are really right on this…..and that is not so good for the national Democrats, is it!
I’m just attempting to articulate what the California state party really needs to do to be smart, and to try to be a real state party; and expressing the view that it probably, and sadly, won’t!
November 29th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Jim,
I think the state GOP must be smart and understand appropriately placed resources will go further.
A good place to start would be a regional/precinct analysis of GOP voter demographic strength and then prioritize voter registration, fundraising, GOTV at election time, etc.
Recruiting excellent conservative candidates to run in a limited number of districts while waiting for political opportunities is the smart course of action.
Take some easy wins, groom some young candidates and wait. Contribute to the national GOP majority while waiting for another California voter swing to the right – if and when it comes.
Then, use the initiative/referendum to consolidate policy/legal gains.
The national Dems have BIG problems with an Obama re-election looking more remote with each week. The Electoral votes for Obama will have to come from battleground states where he is now losing.
Do you ever hear from Pat and Stu?
November 30th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Greg, Pat and Stu have attended some of the “YAF Alumni Reunions” after Western CPAC. Think about attending next year!
November 30th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Jim,
Yes, I will have to make an effort to do that this next year.
You have some good speakers at Western CPAC and it is always a treat to head out to the OC.
Besides, my oldest daughter, recently married and an attorney lives in Irvine and I can visit (stalk) her.
Will you be attending the DC CPAC this year?