In my previous Diary I laid out some Strategies for Victory in 2012, and I want to thank everyone who read it as well as those who provided useful comments. In this, the second part of my 'Strategy for Victory' series, I would like to point out some interesting facts that most folks here probably haven't heard yet, facts that I hope you will find as interesting and useful as I do.
For starters, we always hear a lot about how 'third parties divide the vote and cost us elections', and thats generally true, that sucks, but did you know that, thanks to the power of the 10th Amendment, there's a perfect example out there of how to actually turn 3rd parties into an ADVANTAGE for us? That may sound crazy at first, until you hear what I'm about to tell you. In the state of Georgia, they have a system that should be a model for Conservatives and Republicans nationwide, a system that involves Runoff elections for major races (I don't know how far down the ballot it goes, I don't live there, but obviously the more the better) in which no candidate gets a majority. So imagine that the Democrat and the Republican are tied at 47 percent, there's 1 percent left to come in, and oh darn it went for the Democrat. Thanks to the Libertarian candidate getting 5 percent of the right-leaning vote, we lost, darn that sucks! But wait, because we have a Runoff rule in place, that means that in a few weeks we'll have another vote, with just the Democrat and just the Republican. And here's the HUGE bonus: Runoffs HEAVILY favor Conservatives and Republicans, because they always disproportionately show up for runoff elections! In Georgia I don't know how long exactly they've had the Runoff law, but its well over a decade at least, and in that time LITERALLY EVERY RACE that has gone to runoff, regardless of who led on the night of the General, has been won by the Republican! Every race! Georgia has truly given Conservatives and Republicans a model for vicotry across America, and I hope that every state that is now controlled by Republicans (and there are a lot of them now) will pass a similar law, allowing for Runoffs for any race in which no candidate gets a majority of the vote. As a practical example, such a law would've come in extremely handy in Colorado this year, its incredibly likely that Ken Buck would've won a runoff, if they'd had this law there.
Of course in passing a new Runoff law in various states where we now control the Legislatures and Governorships, we can easily, and accurately, sell this change as an issue of fairness and reasonableness. After all, is it honestly a good idea to have a Representative of the People be elected by a minority of the voters, if such a result can be so easily avoided? Its only right that a Representative, whether he be a Governor, a Senator, or anyone else the law might apply to, have the support of a majority of the voters who actually show up to vote. Also, as perhaps a more practical matter, there are a ton of folks (myself included) who find voting to be a Patriotic and just plain fun activity, we enjoy going and doing our civic duty then going home and watching to see if our guy or gal has won. This would give people like us an extra opportunity to do that, and we'd be willing to support such a law on just that point alone :) .
Now, while its nice to have a law that allows us to win more of the close races, an even better way to win such races is simply to get the most votes in the General Election in the first place. To that end, I'd like to mention a really interesting fact, one that I saw when looking through the Exit Polling, and I haven't heard it mentioned on TV at all. No doubt you've heard that Sharon Angle lost badly among Hispanic voters in Nevada, and you may have also heard that at the same time, the GOP candidate for Governor, who became the state's first Hispanic Governor, won his race against Harry Reid's son, in a landslide. You might think that proves the answer is a simple one, nominate a Hispanic candidate and the candidate will win the Hispanic vote and win the State in a landslide. There's just one important problem with that theory, as nice as it would be if it were true, and the problem is the actual numbers themselves. While Sharon Angle lost the Hispanic vote 68-30, the new GOP Governor, Sandoval, ALSO LOST the Hispanic vote in a LANDSLIDE, 64-33. He literally gained just THREE PERCENT of the Hispanic vote by being Hispanic, and by not being Sharon Angle. That is a stunning number to me, I don't know how anybody would even attempt to explain that, I haven't heard anybody mention it, but it's incredibly relevant. For those who think running a Hispanic candidate is going to be all we need to do to win the Hispanic vote, this really tells us all to 'think again', because this was not only a candidate running to become the first Hispanic Governor of New Mexico, but this was a just plain darn good candidate. Whatever you want to say about Angle good or bad, she wasn't anywhere near as effective a candidate as this guy, he was the real deal, he totally owned his opponent. And yet even so, his share of the Hispanic vote was only slightly better than Angle's. He only won the election because he won the white vote 62-32 while Angle won it 53-41, it wasn't because of his appeal to the Hispanic voters at all. If we're going to win the Hispanic vote in future elections, we're going to need a different strategy, and I have an idea that just might work. More importantly, I believe its a really good policy that would do a lot of good if implemented. This is what it is.
We've all heard stories, positive and negative, out of Afghanistan and Iraq. We all know that we've done a heck of a lot of good over there, we've kicked the terrorists out of power in Afghanistan, and Hussein out of power in Iraq. We've killed tons and tons of terrorists, we've got them on the run bigtime. We've also heard a lot of negative stories lately out of Mexico, about how drug gangs are killing lots of innocent people, how they're even crossing the border and killing Americans, kidnapping Ameicans, they basicly are terrorists themselves, simply by a different name and for a different cause, that cause being their own selfishness and greed and personal evil. My suggestion is to take our troops, which have owned the terrorists overseas, and bring them back home and send them into Mexico to wipe out the drug gangs. Leave enough troops in Afghanistan and Iraq to prevent the terrorists from taking over, and bring the rest over here where they're needed even more right now, to kill these evil gangsters. I believe that by doing this we'll accomplish a bunch of things at once, each of them extremely positive for either political reasons, practical reasons, or both. First the political, we'll gain the support of those who like the idea of most of our troops leaving the middle east and going somewhere closer to home. We'll especially find favor amongst the Hispanic voters, who will appreciate us for being willing to sacrifice the lives of American soldiers, as well as American treasure, for their friends/family in Mexico. On the practical side, once we send in our army and wipe out those drug gangs Mexico will be a safe place to live in/travel to/vacation in again, its economy will zoom back up, and most importantly Americans, as well as Mexicans, on both sides of the border will be safe again. Its just going to make everything so much better, and everybody's going to benefit from that, completely aside from the political considerations.
I do believe that being the Party that is willing to take powerful action to wipe out those evil drug gangs will result in gaining a significant increase in the Hispanic vote, probably a majority. Also worth noting is that its such a VASTLY superior idea compared to doing what the GOP Establishment always wants to do to try to get the Hispanic vote, which of course is amnesty, a just horrible idea and I think that's obvious to pretty much everybody here. However even if this idea unexpectedly fails to gain the major support among Hispanics that you'd think it would get, kind've like poor Sandoval in Nevada failed so epicly to get Hispanics to support him in his bid to become their state's first Hispanic Governor, it's still the right thing to do, something that will help Mexico tremendously, and America as well. And of course after its all done, if things aren't going as well as we'd like in Afghanistan and/or Iraq, and we need to send some or all of the troops back there, obviously we could do that. If everything's still going well over there, then our troops get to finally come home, having won THREE wars, and made their Country incredibly proud, as well as incredibly safe, and they'll come home as heroes not just to Americans but to Mexicans as well.
Now, let's say that you agree that my idea is a good one. You might be thinking that it isn't possible to actually accomplish until after the 2012 Elections. But that's not entirely accurate. The Constitution of the United States provides Congress the power to declare war. If the House of Representatives, which we now control, were to pass a Resolution declaring war on the drug gangs, and ordering the President to send those troops to destroy them, that would be a world-wide news event. Could the Senate, or the President, somehow ignore something like that? It wouldn't be possible. Of course even if we somehow managed to pass it through the Senate as well the President would have the power of the veto (I assume declarations of war are eligible for a veto, I don't know if one has ever been vetoed before), but if he did he would likely be on the wrong side of the VAST majority of the American People, and this close to an election I don't think he'd be willing to do that. So as a practical matter I'd say if we pass it in the House there's a really excellent chance that it becomes law, and thus American Foreign Policy.
I believe that if our State Legislatures follow the first idea I outlined in this Diary, and if our US House of Representatives follows the second idea, then we will be well on our way to a great victory in 2012. Of course there are other important Strategic ideas for Victory as well, and I will be touching on more of them in the next part of this series.