< Search the Republican Gazette archives!
Abernathy Strategies
New for 2007-08
RepublicanGazette
Monday, September 17, 2007
Submissions welcome
  The Republican Gazette welcomes Emails to the Editor and press releases. All submitted items must include the name and contact information for the author of the article, and all articles will only be published with the author's name included. Thank you for reading and participating in The Republican Gazette, another of West Virginia's most biased publications.
All opinions are those of The Republican Gazette and its editor, Gary Abernathy, except letters or commentary signed by others, and do not reflect the views of anyone else, including clients of Abernathy Strategies.
---
During every presidential cycle of the past two decades, we have seen states growing more concerned with holding their Primary elections sooner rather than later. Their understandable goal is to be a “player” and have a voice in the selection of the presidential nominees. South Carolina is now moving its Republican Primary to January 22, New Hampshire is voting on January 8, and now the possibility exists that there will be an Iowa primary in December of 2007 — outside of the calendar year of the election itself.
So far, West Virginia has largely avoided the temptation, although our state did tinker with moving the Primary from May to June in 1980, then quickly switched back to May in 1986. But today, May is considered late in the Primary process.
Other efforts have been made to make West Virginia more important to presidential candidates, most recently the decision by the West Virginia Republican State Executive Committee to hold a convention in early February to select the majority of its presidential delegates to the Republican National Convention.
If the current trend continues unabated, it won’t be long until nearly every state moves its Primary to February or even earlier. When that happens, the result would be that only the large states would draw the candidates and attention everyone is seeking, and we are back at square one.
For several years, various “rotating Primary” plans have been proposed in an attempt to deal with the problem of Primary favoritism. One such plan was recently introduced by Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Joseph
Re-evaluating election of 2006: Strategy questions overshadow real problem
For some reason, there is some revisiting suddenly of the 2006 election in West Virginia and, particularly, the Don Blankenship role.
The AP's Larry Messina wrote a story during recent interims held in Martinsburg and quoted some Republicans being critical of the Blankenship effort. Sen. John Yoder said, "His whole program and approach were really defective, in many ways. The cookie-cutter approach, I think, was a disaster for House members."
Sen. Clark Barnes said, "I feel that certainly there were some very serious mistakes that the Blankenship people made. Some of the ads we're talking about were just downright silly."
Sen. Vic Sprouse then somewhat came to the defense of the Blankenship effort on his blog, saying, "How in the world do you run 41 (races) and NOT have a 'cookie-cutter' approach? I mean, it’s not possible for one campaign to run that many elections with individual campaign messaging for every part of the state."
It is entirely counter-productive to rehash and second guess the 2006 election in terms of the tactics used by the Blankenship campaign. The fact is, despite popular myth, there is never just one strategy that is correct, with all others being wrong. Many different strategies can be successful for any given campaign or campaigns, and many different ones can be unsuccessful. Choosing one of many that can be successful versus one of many that cannot is the trick.
The mistake that was made by the Blankenship organization came through a decision made long before any particular strategy for the campaign itself was chosen -- the decision to bypass the Republican Party organization.
It was not a new mistake. In fact, it has been made over and over again in West Virginia by various organizations trying to unseat the Democrats at different levels. Many state business and social conservative organizations have done the same over the years, donating money to individual Republican candidates and coming up with strategies of their own, but seldom if ever supporting the state party itself. While many organizations cannot totally "coordinate" campaigns with the state party, they can give and encourage others to give money to the GOP.
Countless Republican-friendly big dollar donors have also taken that same tact, giving to candidates but bypassing the state party.
We are not at the mercy of conjecture to know whether success in West Virginia against the Democrats must include the state Republican Party as the lead organization. It is demonstrable fact. When it occurred that way in 2002 and 2004, Republicans walked away with major victories. When it did not happen that way, in 2006, the results were reflective of the state party being relegated to the sidelines.
In his AP story, Messina wrote that Senator "Barnes said his strategy depends on both candidates and county party committees working in union with state GOP officials."
That is a simple statement, but it is truer and more effective than all the intricate and detailed strategies that can be devised by any one person, no matter how crafty or intelligent, or funded he may be.
If all the various groups and individuals in West Virginia who have a stake in defeating Democrats would put aside egos, pride and, as Reagan said, "worrying about who gets the credit," and decide to be involved by working through, not around, the state Republican Party, victories will be seen again in 2008. If not, they won't. It is just that simple.
I admired Don Blankenship for putting his money where his mouth was and committing millions to bring about change in West Virginia. I wish more individuals of means would do the same. But in 2002 and 2004, Mr. Blankenship largely coupled his personal efforts with a commitment to also raise money for the state party. For some reason, in 2006, he decided to go it alone.
Unlike some, I do not hope Don Blankenship walks away from West Virginia politics. I hope he stays committed to changing the state and committing resources to the cause. I simply hope he -- and everyone else who wants to turn the state around -- will do so through the state Republican Party.
The Republican Party cannot be demonized by the Democrats. Demonizing the GOP can be attempted, but even Democrats understand it is the job of the Republican Party to compete against the Democrat Party.
Dr. Doug McKinney is working hard for the Republican Party in West Virginia as its chairman, but there will be those who do not like him, just as there were those who did not like David Tyson, Kris Warner or Rob Capehart before him. That is completely irrelevant. If we all had to wait until we liked everyone we have to work with, we would wait forever.
The Republican Party is not the person who happens to be chairman, or happens to hold any leadership position at any given time. It is an institution that has been around for about a century and a half, and it will be around another century and a half and beyond. Individuals and other organizations will come and go, but the Republican and Democrat parties will remain, at least for many generations to come.
The main definition of a political party is "an organized group of people with common values and goals, who try to get their candidates elected to office." There are only two main teams in politics today -- the Republican team, and the Democrat team. Joining one of those two teams is the only viable option for long term victory.
Working within the party structure leads to success. Working around it leads to failure. It is just that simple.
As you have often criticized Kent Carper for various reasons, would you not agree that his latest quest - to rid Kanawha County of the neighborhood gambling parlors - is worthy of your consideration and that of others?
Partisan politics can surely be set aside for this cause.  The intrusion of these mini-casinos into Kanawha County neighborhoods is one of the lasting legacies of the Wise administration's solution to the grey machine problem.  They legitimized gambling, enhanced the games that one may play, and made the State an accomplice. 
The natural by-product of this outrageous solution was to cause state government to become institutionally addicted to gambling.  Assuming that the Legislature won't do the right thing and report - en masse - to the nearest Gamblers Anonymous meeting and begin the necessary 12-step program for recovery, it seems to me that Mr. Carper's solution is the next best step.  He should be applauded by both gambling opponents and by limited government advocates.
Kent is a personal friend of mine.  In the past I have managed his campaigns, including the very first cliff-hanger in 1996.  I have often admired his tenacity and prescience on public issues that he considers important.  He has been a tireless advocate for the taxpayers of Kanawha County and has always insisted that Kanawha County government perform at a level commensurate with the taxes they collect.  In short, he has been an excellent county commissioner who places the interest of the citizens above all else.  He is also a master politician, by the way.
I hope that you can agree that the elimination of these parlors, while costly to state government, is necessary for several reasons.  And I hope that your outstanding talents and those of others will assist the Legislature in finding their way.
Best regards,
Mike Greenleaf
Putnam County
Email to the Editor
Carper should be applauded on grey machine issue
Lieberman (I-CT). A plan with similar features has been suggested by the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS), of which I am a member.
A rotating Primary system would establish a changing, regional presidential Primary process which divides the country into sections, with a lottery determining which region goes first.
The plan mandates that states in each region must hold their primaries during the first week of each month in the months of March, April, May and June, depending on the results of the lottery for that year.
The Alexander-Lieberman bill includes Iowa and New Hampshire as part of the regular regions, while the NASS plan maintains Iowa and New Hampshire’s current status.
Regardless of the specifics of various plans, the idea of rotating Primaries is worth considering.
This year, for example, it is entirely possible that the presidential candidates will essentially be chosen by March — a full seven to eight months before the General Election.
The electorate is increasingly exhausted by what already is seen as a never-ending presidential campaign which, in turn, has caused other candidates at both the federal and state levels to launch their campaigns much earlier than even just a few years ago.
There are flaws and issues to be worked out with every plan being offered, including the question of states’ rights and political party rules. But with every presidential cycle bringing a new battle among states to be first or to have the biggest voice, a rotating Primary plan is well worth serious consideration and study.
By
Betty Ireland
Secretary
of State
Rotating primaries may be idea whose time has come
Having Fun
With Mojo
Meeting my
biggest supporters!
Hey kids! Mojo here! With an election coming up next year, I recently told my staff I wanted them to find my biggest supporters! One day, they told me they had found them! As you can see from the picture above, their idea was a little different from the one I had in mind! But still, gotta admit, they are big! And, they vote! So it all worked out!