Self Funding? Not a bad thing.
Earlier today, i read a post from Double E on [url=http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/07/06/my-concerns-with-eric-hovde/]Eric Hovde[/url]. My antennae went up while reading it. While I agree with it, I am also reminded of a saying from Morton Blackwell when I attended the Leadership Institute in 1988: “Don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good”. Though we all might like Mr. Neumann, is he the person to stop the political tidal wave that may be forming in the image of Tammy Baldwin? Now, I am not saying that Baldwin is invincible. Far from that. But, I also know that Wisconsin is going to be Ground Zero this November. Let us say that either Thompson or Neumann win, can they raise the money to defeat the hurricane that Obama and his minions will be aiming at Wisconsin in November? So, if Hovde can write himself a check, how does this hurt the movement?
It only hurts the movement when we as conservatives see these people as the savior of our movement on the local level. You see, what many people forget is that the reason Republicans tend to go with people with means to run for office is that in many cases we have failed to build a workable bench in order to have candidates ready for battle. If Hovde, McMahon and other “self-funders” are at the top of the ticket, it gives Republicans, conservatives, and fellow patriots the opportunity to channel funds to candidates on the local level. This leads to Blackwell’s other maxim: “Unless you have money, you are not a candidate.”
For too long, Republican leaders in many states have sent out candidates out into the field of battle with great fanfare and a pat on the back, saying “You the Man/Woman!”. And….that is it. The candidate is left on his or her own. The party disappears. With them, the hopes of raising money. Then, the agony of defeat. This leaves the party apparatchiks wringing their hands saying, “That seat was not winnable.” How can it be? If the GOP refuse to build districts that are “fight-able”, how can you make any district “winnable”? And, if you do not pump money into seats that are winnable, how do you build a bench? This has been our movement’s biggest Achilles heel: We focus to much on the cherry up top, but not on the ice cream and the hot fudge under it! In order to build a movement, we have to help those candidates in districts that are fight-able. Even if they lose, they set the table for someone else to take the seat. Furthermore, it builds an army of committed loyal soldiers to the cause, which eventually creates your Block Captains, District Leaders and State GOP Officials. As committed conservatives, the only way to engage in the houses of power is to fully envelope the houses of power. This is how we can establish the true conservative movement as our philosophy on the local level.
However, this strategy has a risk. Hovde may be another Maes or Paladino. Hovde may turn out to be another Romney. But, the question remains: Would you rather another Romney in the U.S. Senate? Or, Tammy Baldwin? Now, in no means am I conceding the Primary to Hovde. Not by a longshot. But, remember, if you have a self-funder, you have money to build strong bench around him. This is why New York (where I live) and California have become such black holes. Everyone concentrated on Pataki and Wilson (forget Schwarzenegger, the atrophy set in before he came to power), and forgot the bench to the point where both states GOP organizations must start from scratch. Hovde may not be perfect. However, for long-term conservative growth, he may be the good.
Now, do not get me started on Blackwell’s “Jackass One and Jackass Two” story