Walking Back the Blues, Pumping up the Reds, An Overview

This will appear in three parts, beginning with this Overview.

Why I’m posting this on RedState is that 1) it entails a slightly different way of analyzing how to “get to” some would-be voters, 2) is the basis for the actions we (and others) will be involved in over the remainder of the election season, and 3) involves some things you can actually do at home.

Interestingly, just three days ago I was only considering “walking back the Blues”, for which we’ve gotten a little financial support, and which I will lay out in detail later in the week. That involves planting seeds of discord against the Democrats among certain groups in solid Blue districts which may assist in walking back their numbers in that district, say from 70% to 60%, something like that. You’ll agree, unless a win is possible there no one wants to throw much money that way, but still some poor GOP schlub has to march out there and take one on the chin for the party. You may wonder “What’s the point?” But by walking back those numbers, especially if They know it wasn’t an accident and some invisible hand had a hand in even a slight deterioration of Democrat power in a district, it has its own ripple effect that can carry over, cycle-to-cycle, from causing them to have to redirect their own assets, to eventually a district that is once again in play.

But just a few days ago, in my most recent post, “Citizens With the Bark On”, a LIfetime-NRA member from Missouri (Remnant60) mentioned that over half of NRA aren’t registered. He reminded me of something we tried to do locally here with small business in 2008, (where there is a lot of overlap with that same group of unregistered NRA members). Again, something that can be done close to home, and for little or no money.

It also put into clearer focus for me that the dynamics of registering and voting patterns are different for many voting sub-groups as defined by economic status, status vis a vis government, education, race/ethnicity, religion etc. This in turn highlights why the other side has to cheat, cajole and intimidate. In many ways we (who the hell are we?) have the “natural” advantage, meaning much of the Dem’s strategy is to get us to ignore or squander our own advantages while doing what needs to be done to maximize theirs. You’ve heard the old phrase “if the dead could speak”. In many Democrat districts they do, they have to. But the Democrats and their conspirators are very good at this, so don’t take this comment as being the least bit cavalier.

But this “pumping up” the Red numbers excites me because I believe this may mean there could be as many as a million new votes out there for us, and not a single one of them has to sneak across the Rio Grande or take a day off from his busy schedule in eternal repose in the cemetery of St John’s Trinity Church in East St Louis….in order to vote in two states. And we probably won’t need to spend millions to go get them.

Our analyses are “simple” (simplistic?) and unconventional in part because we don’t have a large staff, and while we have access to most of the voter data that’s in the public domain, all those numbers eventually reduce themselves to a few very narrow, simple decisions: Go or Don’t Go, Tackle or Don’t Tackle, Spend or Don’t Spend. Target or Don’t Target. It still depends on what you’re looking for when you look at them. Gen Eisenhower once said that asking the right question is 75% of the answer. It is also predicated on the notion that the parties, Dem and GOP, have their ducks (and money) more or less in a row, with scheduled fund raising planned, and even now only have to execute those plans according to a pre-determined timetable. To paraphrase Yogi Berra, winning is 90% hard work and the other half, having the right strategy. Only on our side, there’s the rub. Where the GOP is concerned, well, you can understand our worries, both about hard work and proper strategy. That’s why some people have decided to take things in their own hands. I’d rather hand over the entire GOP GOTV effort to some rather sophisticated folks right here on RedState than go to bed at night believing the RNC all by itself has all its bases covered.

What we’ll be doing, with our divining rod, will be to look for chinks in the defenses, (and crooks) in the interstices of that hell called the Democrat Party, as well as some Republican districts, who’re just not sure they really want “that kind of person” registering GOP.

Just take note: this election will defy conventional predictions or analysis, and possibly rewrite the whole process of analyzing election results. Using “Registered Voter” and “Likely Voter” categories the vast percentage of election time, media money and effort will be spent trying to execute plans to get those people to the polls…forgetting perhaps that a dynamic is already at play that is historic in nature (therefore unmeasurable against past elections) and that is the high percentage of citizens who have been engaged politically (outraged, if you prefer) for such a long, extended period before an election. Never happens. Most voters don”t wake up until October. That’s part of the standard equation for spending and serious polling. But by this election day it will have been a year and a half of steady drumbeat for millions of Americans who usually sleep until the last week of October.

(To be fair, sort of, In 2004, starting with the GOP convention, the Dem’s, with the help of Code Pink, “manufactured” a similar outrage that indeed did make it all the way to the 2008 election. Four whole years. They perfectly vilified Bush, and then they found the “perfect” candidate. They thought. Now, in a back handed sort of way, it can be said they also have “manufactured” this most recent explosion, and it’s from their own Hate-Bush projects that they have to believe that the Tea Party movement was “manufactured” just as theirs was, only by the VRWC. Unable to see “politics” in any other way, this may be the greatest and most costly mistake the Left has made…if we can only decide how best to capitalize on it. No matter, history will note, at least in folk memory from father to son, if we lose, the magnitude of this genuinely spontaneous, mass popular uprising, probably unlike anything since 1776. Let’s pray that beat goes on for another 30 months at least.)

The Natural Constituencies of the Democrats and Republicans.

Actually there are none. Rather, both parties are natural constituencies of the Constitution and the Republic, and have both evolved from that spot.  (There is a third, a real third party which I’ll mention.) This is important to understand if only to properly fix your sextant. It was not until the Johnson Administration, possibly even later, that the Democrats totally dumped the Constitution, except as a symbolic relic, completely embracing a new god in its place.

The Republican Party was only formed in the 1850s, and was a righteous, constitutional party from the beginning, but that is not to say the older Democrats then were less-constitutional in their foundation. (Human rights vs States rights.) It was not until the late 1800s that both began taking on trappings, and developing constituencies, which today, we call “natural” but are really quite manufactured. At the same time they both began drifting away from the Constitutional promise.

The Republican Party simply was the party-in-power at the time of the great industrial expansion in the United States in the post Civil War era. So, by default, it became the party of capital. It’s natural constituency then were capitalists, who, while making up a tiny percentage of the population, owned or controlled well over half the total wealth of the country. To the extent that free markets are inextricably tied to the Constitution, it was (still is) easy to tie capitalism (a word I personally do not like, too many double-nintendos) to the purposes of the Founders and the overall pursuit of Liberty. But many capitalists looked at business and therefore the Constitution in a Darwinian sort of a way. You didn’t have to be a Mellon to see, when viewed from the higher perches of capitalism in those days, that the pursuit of profit might strain its relationship with the more noble purposes of the Founders. Between 1870 and 1900 I doubt if the Constitution could ever get a fair flip of the coin with the mercantilist, monopolistic interests of capitalism …who always carried a two-headed double eagle in their watch pocket.

So then, if the GOP naturally inherited capital, it fell to the Democrats to inherit labor….which by the 1880s-1890s was taking on a more continental aspect, arising out of the various ‘isms (socialism, Marxism) of Europe’s academies. So, standing opposite one another, we had 5% of the population controlling 50% of the wealth, and 25% of the population owning perhaps 10% of it…the “natural constituencies” of the Republican and Democrat parties. And of course, by 1900 the total farm population of the United States dropped to 38%, the majority of those (by population, not acreage) in the South. They too became a “natural constituency” of the Democrats. (That has since changed.)

I mention this, because both parties were shaped in this period, Capital vs Labor, the boss vs the working man, the townie vs the rube, the university man vs the store clerk, but both clinging to a self-interested understanding of where their vision fit into the Constitutional scheme. See, still, it was a constitutional viewpoint.

What is often overlooked in our more recent revisiting of history from 1900 forward through the Depression and WWII, is how far away both parties fell from the Constitution. Progressivism reflected both a cultural (noblesse oblige) view of government vis a vis society (Republican) and a engineering and management (socialist) view, which Achance laid out so well here on RS a few weeks back, and which seems to be misinterpreted by many today, inasmuch that by 1930 the Constitution, and it promises of individual liberty had become almost de classe in both parties, except for the legal scholars in the court system…and those teeming millions of immigrants who totally tore up all the Marxist notions of “worker” and capitalist notions of “free enterprise” …and went their own way.

I’ve said this elsewhere, in other contexts, but the greatest voting bloc out there are these people, (actually their children) they are still the real natural constituencies of the Constitution, and no one else. Of late, as you’ve probably noticed, many of them didn’t (still don’t) know this anymore, and many had forgotten. They’ve been reminded, and now make up the bulk of the Tea Party movement. Historically they have been the despoilers of almost all economic theories of the day.

Marx saw the “worker” as a fixed class, like a Hindu caste, unable to move forward. Serfs. Tied to the job, which, incidentally, fit in well with the trade union idea of organizing labor, skilled and unskilled.

But unlike Europe, the American worker rarely stayed a worker very long, rarely beyond two generations, unless an Irish cop, Irish hook and ladder, Irish truck driver…a curious race, knocks on the door one day, starving and bedraggled, asking for work, three days later knocks again, hat in hand, saying “Begging your lardship’s pardon, but me and the boys here was wondering if we could speak ta ye about warking conditions…”.

The American worker turned Marx on his ear. They also turned the “capitalist establishment” (country club Republicans) into near irrelevance. From American labor in 1880-1930 arose a worker-class who stood for fair wages, decent hours, safety on the job, and thus good Democrats and good union men when there was one around to represent them. But they refused to sign that socialist contract, since taken up by the Democrats, that would bind their children and their grandchildren. They had grander plans, and most of us are the beneficiaries of those. We either have a dirt farmer or a factory immigrant in our tree.  They refused to be lifetime constituents of any party. They had no intention of ever sending their children into that factory, that mill, that mine. It was to college they’d go. Or least enough schooling to get “outside” work, and maybe wear a white shirt, and marry up.  Eventually, after WWII, and thanks to one of the few really good federal programs, the GI Bill, they formed the backbone of what was to become the bulk of the small business sector in the US. Until Obama this was the greatest mobility in America, unchecked from 1946 to 2008, even under Carter and Johnson…men who worked for day wages but who looked around and say to themselves, “i can do this better”…and strike out on their own….then prove it. Look in any city, and any business line, you will find the majority of companies on down the line from #1 to have been former employees of #1, often after #1 passed it off to his useless son. Nature’s ways, you gotta love it.

So, even as Democrats, as Ronald Reagan proved, they turned out not to be very reliable Democrats, for even as they voted for Labor on economic issues, they loved America, and refused to become what marked Labor worldwide, i.e., communist. Until the rise of the government employees union. These old rust belt unions were the “Guy Unions” (the others the “Skirts”). And each day, in one manner or another, they bowed down and blessed their fortune that their children could aspire to be anything, anything, in part in gratitude to their parents who first came here, but also in gratitude to “system” called America that it all possible. (Moses Sands once told me this was his only criteria on immigration…that every immigrant kiss the ground and thank God, the Founders, the Constitution, and the million or so who died preparing this table for them, for them and their generations, to use. “If they thank La Raza or the Democrat Party, we don’t want ’em.”)

In short, these are not “natural constituencies” of the Democrats. The lesson they learned? Lock them into those jobs and those constituencies. This has been the Democrat playbook for many years now, and you must understand this…it is against all the natural inclinations of those people…even their black plantations.

But neither are these people naturally Republicans. Generationally they run back and forth, usually based on economic issues, taxes, wages, but it has been so long, so very long indeed, since there has been a “spiritual element” put on their plate to digest. Still we know, this is the most appetizing meal in America, FREEDOM, and fully a third of Americans are now denied a bite of this apple.

Only who is to offer it to them?

The problem is the dynamic of the parties themselves. Republicans, from their capitalist “country club” roots, tend to be exclusivists. As we’ve seen, people of faith, farmers, even small business, are invited into the Party, but only in a sort of junior membership sort of a way. They throw out issues that will make you vote their way, taxes, national defense, but really don’t want to sit down to dinner with you. Dick Gregory, my favorite black activist from the 60’s, said about race in the North and South, “In the South they don’t care how close you get just so long as you don’t get too big. In the North they don’t care how big you get, just so long as you don’t get too close.” He also described the Democrat and Republicans in their quest for constituencies.

Unlike the GOP, Democrats are inclusivists to the nth degree…only once in, you can’t get out. They will use every trick in the book to get you to sign up, then every form or bribery and coercion (If necessary) to keep you there once on board. That is, after all, how all socialists see their mission. When the Sandinistas took over Nicaragua they offered up what we call “the contract” to the mass poor of that country, and all signed on…until they read the fine print…that their contract bound over not only themselves, but their children and their generations. Hell no, the people said, and the fight was on. Many Americans have not yet understood the fine print. We have to find ways to make sure they do.

So, of the two, the Democrats are the more insidious, for obvious reasons. In a world where the Constitution ruled, they would be by far the more popular, for no one likes a snob. Only now they have their own upper class; wealthy, urbane, educated people, some inherited, some from sports, Hollywood, but very few from ever having actually built a thing…a company, a better mouse trap, even a really great tasting pastry…although their granddad might have…and it is this class their Republican counterparts (you call them RINOS, I call them Blue GOP, inasmuch as they are probably the true Republicans, not us)…most want to siphon off. I’ve done the numbers here. In the famous words of Joe Biden (and he’ been quoted by so many) BFD.

In other words, the natural constituencies of both parties are relatively small, and we approach them that way. It’s their territories we care about. Fair game.

I’ll carry this theme over into more specific categories in the following articles. We’ll deal with the specific constituencies in the following articles.

(Final note: If you want to take academic issue with some of my conclusions, these are merely the foundations for what we intend to accomplish this year. If you disagree, please feel free to make a note here, which I will in turn acknowledge, but then, please remind me again on June 21st, 2013, while Nancy, Harry, Barney, Chris and a few others are awaiting their first appeal, and Brother Barry is either in asylum in Tripoli, or trying to help his brother build another bedroom on the back of the shed so he can move in. I’m on a deadline for several people out there who have to kick off their own little “fire starting campaigns”, so I apologize in advance.)