Right On The Right

I had the opportunity a few days ago to interview Jo Ann Davidson, the Co-Chair of the Republican National Committee, and it was a very interesting conversation. To give you a little background, Jo Ann is from Ohio, and spent a lot of time in the state, in both elected office and organizing successful campaigns. She has a lot of knowledge about what it's going to take to win in Ohio, both nationally and locally. We got to talk a strategy a bit.

Jo Ann repeated something I've heard time and again from various Republican strategists. She said we have to win the "collar counties", or the counties that make rings around the metropolitan areas to win the state. We're going to lose Cleveland, but we should be able to win Lake and Geauga counties. We can underperform in Cincinatti, but we should win Butler and Warren counties. In addition, Southeast Ohio has long been the swing area that makes or breaks campaigns. Winning SE Ohio and "collar counties" will once again be key in 2008.

She also talked about John McCain as the nominee, and said he has unique appeal that really gives us a fighting chance this election cycle. When questioned about Conservative angst, she said she's confident he'll make an appeal and said his pro-life record and his record on judges (Gang of 14 being an exception) are vastly superior to Obama's. I asked her if McCain will put counties like mine, Trumbull, into play, and she said he'll fight everywhere, harkening back to his Youngstown visit. I'd say she had a cautiously optimistic tone about Ohio in 2008, and she described the political environment as "better than 2006", which is surely pleasant to hear. On 2006, she said Ohio had a mix of local issues (Bob Ney, rare coins, etc.) that worsened the environment, and that's no longer an issue. As a whole, the 15-minute phone interview gave me some great insight into how the RNC thinks about Ohio, and I'm eager to talk about this more on the state and national level.

Update: The interview has since been moved from 8 PM Eastern to 9 PM Eastern. I apologize for the change, but hope you'll tune in.

I'm going to be interviewing Paul Phillips, candidate for Congress, on the Justin Higgins Program next Thursday at 8 PM Eastern. Bookmark this link so that you don't forget it, but there will be plenty of reminders before the day of the interview. Paul is running for the Republican nod for the 18th district, and he's running against a few other strong Republicans. I recently praised Phillips for some economic policy points. The interview will run half an hour, and it'll focus mainly on domestic issues (he's a military man, so perhaps we'll get to the War on Terror some other time). If you want anything asked about, feel free to leave a note in the comments.

The following is my interview with Vlad Val Cymbal, the Vice President of the San Fernando Valley Republican Club.

Q: You're the Vice President of the San Fernando Valley Republican Club. What's it like being a Conservative in such a blue state?

A: It's a lot easier and more gratifying than one would think. The left wingers just don't make sense with their glib sound bites. But those Democrats that will consider FACTS, good JUDGEMENT, and REASON are very easy to talk to and I find that their values, goals and consernce are the same as mine.

Q: You talked about Democrats that will consider facts, etc. and that these Democrats have goals and concerns similar to yours. Do you think these are former "Reagan Democrats?" If so, than what happened that made us lose them. If not, could these be the "Romney Democrats" or "Giuliani Democrats" of the future?

A: Some are J. F. Kennedy Democrats and others are the sixties generation grown up. Most of them have families, mortgages, and other responsibilities they pickup on the way up the economic ladder. They see that all they have achieved is in danger of being withered away. They want to leave a better legacy behind.

Q: What issue is most important to voters in your state as a whole, and has the GOP done enough?

A: That depends on what you use to decide. On one hand you see the voters vote for capital punishment, limits to property taxes, fiscal responsibility, English as the only language, and then they vote for people that want just the opposite like Jerry Brown and elect a mayor who is too sympathetic to illegal aliens. Again the GOP is not informing the people and countering the special interests especially union members. They are not getting out the message.

Q: What issue is most important to you personally, and are you satisfied with what our party is doing on that issue?

A: I know that the biggest threat facing the U. S. and the world is Islamic inspired terrorism. All the other issues of both parties will have no meaning if the world falls to a Caliphate conquest. A world run by shriveled up old men like those of the Taliban, will deteriorate humanity to a life of ignorance and misery. Just like it happened in Afghanistan and now is happening in Lebanon. No I don't think that my party is doing enough, primarily in educating us all about this real threat.

Q: You mentioned Islamic inspired terrorism in Afghanistan and Lebanon. What do you think about Iran? How serious is the situation and what would a Val Cymbal administration do?

A: First of all Sharia Law would be dispensed of. It is the one thing that has dropped Iran into a hole of ignorance, terrorized (eliminated in some cases) a vast number of its citizens, stifled enlightenment, and eroded the economy. Iran is heading to disaster. It is spending all its resources on blowing up the world.

Q: I agree with you quite a bit that the major problem with the GOP is not getting the message out. Do you chalk up major losses in 06 to the War in Iraq, or to badly ran campaigns from the RNC?

A: It is a combination of things. First our President is a very poor communicator. People don't really want to listen him. His style is not appealing, he does not say the right things, and mainly his themes change speech to speech. At one time it was "You are with us or against us". The next time "we want to work with you". Look, if you start out tough, stay tough until they come to you or you have accomplished your task. Define the task clearly and purposely.

Second the GOP did not fulfill its promises of lower taxes, no pork, and homeland security. Taxes were lowered but they left a big loop hole to raise them. That does not show confidence in their action. The amount of pork in the bills they passed was enormous. So gross was it that as the public found out about them (bridge to nowhere; etc.), they had to back up. Then all the shady deals and scandals were the frosting on the cake. If a conservative can't trust the GOP, well he might as well stay home or vote for a change. Vote for a change the Republicans did. Most of the newly elected Democrats purported to be conservatives (that changed with the first vote of Congress.)

Part one of the war (defeating Sadam's regime) went very well. It was quick and forceful. A gun fight at the OK Coral to be proud of. Then things went into the toilet. Although many Iraqis have a western mind set, many others (probably most) still feel that might makes right. That is were modern Judo-Christian values have failed us. The slightest show of resistance should have been put down immediately, forcefully, and conclusively. The people should have been put to work immediately to rebuild the infrastructure. Keep them too busy to be discontent and pay any attention to outside (or internal old hard line) forces. The first time a group would come in and destroy a water purification or electricity generation plant, those who built it would not be so inclined to harbor them. They could not wait for the Iraqi and Coalition forces to put an end to terror. They would probably take up arms to protect what they built. Under these conditions a democratic Iraq would have been built much quicker and would have been stable at this juncture.

Q: Who are you looking at, nationally, to lead the country in 2008? Does your organization endorse a specific candidate or do anything along those lines?

A: I like Giuliani but he does not have the charisma to generate enthusiasm. Romney looks better. He has a better presence but also needs to be more animated. He also has to over come the prejudice against being a Mormon. Fred Thomson is too stiff and Newt is a great strategist but does not have the ability inject enthusiasm. Romney and Giuliani have my interest at this time. There is support for all four mentioned in the SFVRC but as one of them starts looking more presidential, we will unite and support him.

Q: On the 2008 front, what about Hunter? Do you think he's just too far behind to make a strong run?

A: Yes. Most Republicans feel good about him but are almost desperate to find some a true conservative with the means to win and that includes the plan, the organization, and the money. They don't want to waste any time, money, or energy on a campaign that starts out as a failure. He does have time to build the organization, make his plan heard (and palatable to all), and raise money. If he can do it, he has a better chance than any of the others.

Thank you to Vlad, and more interviews with SFVRC members and other prominent Republicans will follow. I think it's important that we look at what others in the party are thinking, and hopefully, we can open a discourse about how to fix our party's problems. We have the ideas, now we just need the plan.