Diversify Your Freedom Portfolio (Part One)

While this is the first time I have read this contributor, and as I should be leaving my house as of now for work, I felt it necessary to give a reasoned response to the proposal because I think it both tempting and dangerous. This is the direction we should NOT go.

First, while Max acknowledges that the left has a considerable advantage in that their think tanks are the universities, I don't think he realizes the implications of taking resources from those who try to find principled conservative answers to the problems we face. Groups like Heritage and AEI, among others are so respected exactly because they do not involve themselves in activism. I don't see how taking or re-distributing resources away from the "thinkers" and "educators" of our core principles are going to help us win races. It seems to me that to do so would mean we have less of a chance of winning. We have always been the party of ideas, not coalitions. I agree, the left has made considerable head-way in its coalition building over the past few years, but they have only become able to do this because the Republican Party has begun focusing on "coalitions" as well. When the question is: "Why can build the best coalition?" we are going to lose over and over again because the way that you build a coalition is to give people what they want from government. Thus, the left is made up of environmentalists, labor, trial lawyers, etc. The question instead needs to be "What party has the better ideas?" as it was in 1994.

Further, Max claims that this idea would eventually lead to the "decentralization" of campaigns as it did with Obama. I reject this as well. Talk of mass media, branding, marketing, etc. are all top down efforts. Yes, they lead to exactly what Max wants: one single, unifying vision—get human beings to the polls to vote for your party. Which is what Obama did in the last election. However, this is not sustainable. It worked with Obama because the Republican Party (especially in governing) has not been able to get out of its own way in the past 8 years. Thats it. You didn't see anything like the top down branding of Obama in 2006, yet the Democrats still won.

Finally, I do agree with Max on one point. If the individuals who were so energized about Re. Ron Paul want to do something productive, now is the time to get involved with their local parties and make a difference. The only thing that will lead to BEST PRACTICES, DECENTRALIZATION, and a rising to the top of good ideas is to re-invigorate the party at the very local level. Start with your family and talk to them about the long term effects of not being involved. Next, sign up to be a committee person, ward leader, etc. in your local party and if the party does not want to change, then begin gathering a group of volunteers who think like you in your area and change the local party yourself. Don't wait for branding, or tactics to be relayed from the top, because guess what? More than likely its not coming. The best thing about our party, and this country, is that we aim to convince the other side, not to trick them into voting for our ideas because they are "excited" by eye candy. Appealing to the worst in the demos will get you demagogues. Exactly what we got in Obama.

If you want to attract ideas from moderates, I'd suggest renaming your coalition. The "Freedom coalition" is offputting, as it implies that those who don't agree with yourviews are, ipso facto, AGAINST freedom. Not to mention that it sounds a bit... strident?

Even "Coalition FOR freedom" would sound better. At least it wouldn't make you sound like a 3rd rate superhero team.

Max,

I have to disagree that there is a "think tank bubble".  Yes, Heritage and AEI are well funded (and as Jay Greene points out, not also working for limited government) as are some other national think tanks.  But state level think tanks are rarely so well endowed (the Commonwealth Foundation is among the better funded, as we have a handful of paid staff).  Your criticism seems more pointed at how think tanks operate - more efforts should be put into new media, viral videos, and communicating a message, rather than policy reports - which I would view as constructive criticism.

But the idea that "too many resources are going to think tanks" is laughable.  In contrast, too many resources are going to politics.  John McCain raised $370 million for this election, and the national Republican Party raised $720 million.  The same trend is occuring at the state level (PA Gubernatorial candiates raised over $40 million last cycle). Imagine what a think tank could do with that $1 billion.

i believe he saying ........................Air Jordan Nike Air Max shox shoes Nike Kobe jordans