That was the winning combination we came up with in class.
I just completed a group-project for a senior political science class. The objective of the project was to craft a third party candidacy which attempted to achieve one of three goals (from a project at the Kennedy School of Government):
1) You plan to throw the election into the House of Representatives;
2) Your campaign intends to capture the so-called "radical middle" vote, the bloc of independent voters roused by Ross Perot in 1992; or
3) Your newly-formed party targets the presidential campaign as a vehicle to establish national visibility and as a means of laying the foundation for Congressional candidacies in future elections.
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/case/3pt/assignment.html#goalsMy group was composed of two Republicans and two Democrats, and all of us are on a first-name basis with our respective Congress reps and state legislators--we are very politically aware.
We chose to attempt to win the whole 2008 election outright with the Family Values Party. The idea was inspired by another professor of mine, Ken Hoover (
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index%3Dstripbooks%26field-author%3Dkenneth%20hoover%26results-process%3Ddefault%26dispatch%3Dsearch/ref%3Dpd%5Fsl%5Faw%5Ftops-1%5Fstripbooks%5F8852949%5F2/002-6255727-5280062), who told me his thoughts on what would happen if Instant-Runoff Voting were allowed--"The most powerful party in America would be the Conservative Christians."
Our strategy statement began this way:
The Family Values Party-A Strategy StatementThis party will exploit the cleavage of voters who share common American political values, and who also feel their respective mainstream parties have made it difficult to express those values in the voting booth. The increasingly polarized nature of national politics has left Democrats wondering, “What, exactly, are the values of my party?” and Republicans asking, “Why do our values have to be so rigid that they exclude any and all differences of opinion?”
The FVP’s message provides a fundamental elegance: The values that made this nation great are neither Democratic values nor Republican values—they are Family Values.
The current turmoil in the Democratic organization would be ameliorated if they could agree on a set of shared values—but they cannot—and party members will depart. Furthermore, since the GOP has successfully conveyed its values to the people, Democrats feel they must stand for something different—even though they cannot seem to define what that is. An opposite sort of turmoil looms for the Republicans: They have so decisively captured “Family Values,” and so viciously attacked whenever any deviation from their set ideology is detected in the ranks, that many party loyalists are uncomfortable with continuing affiliation. This pattern will worsen as the next cycle approaches.
The Family Values Party will reach and appeal to moderate members of both major parties, as well as to the group of Americans that self-identify as Independent. When we succeed, protest voters from the last two election cycles (for Nader, Buchanan, etc.) will join us, providing the final, important push in tightly-contested swing states.
Our single focus will be on the Presidential election victory in 2008, and nothing less. After victory in that contest, we begin the long task of building a majority in Congress, starting with the 2010 mid-term elections.We chose Bayh as our candidate and McCain as his running mate for a couple of reasons. Bayh is the chair of the DLC, and has a strong appeal to centrist Democrats. He is acceptable to moderate Republicans as well, and in combination with McCain, would tear the heart out of the Democratic party in the 2008 cycle----PROVIDED that the two team up immediately after the mid-term elections and announce the insurgency. This move would start the grassroots fundraising (ala Dean) for a whole year in advance of GOP and Dem primaries.
We projected that the duo could raise from $30-110 million in that period alone.
We proposed a campaign that would triangulate on the cultural and fiscal issues used by the major parties to divide rather than unite the electorate.
For example: (The percentages represent polling data aligning with the third party positions, while the parenthetical numbers are polling data in opposition)
• Stem-Cell Research- This is a valuable and necessary method of investigation into the diseases that have scourged mankind for millennia—it would be irresponsible to turn away from methods of discovery that might save millions of lives. 56% (32%)
• Teaching of Creationism- Ours is a culture arising from multiple traditions, and among them is the story of creation. An education system that fails to recognize such traditions also fails to serve its community—All traditions ought to be included in public education—including the story of creation. 57% (33%)
• Public Display of the Ten Commandments- The history of Western Civilization cannot be written without reference to our Judeo-Christian origins. A public display of the cornerstone of these origins is no endorsement of a religion, but is an acknowledgement of the ethical foundation of our government. 74% (22%)
• Abortion- Our current laws provide for adequate protection of the rights of citizens while also allowing for judicial review of statutes that may be at odds with our ethical center. The FVP will let the Constitutionally-appointed Judiciary sort out all of these difficulties. We propose no laws making it more difficult to get an abortion. 55% (36%)In our analysis, the Republicans would be crippled from retaining the White House, and the Democrats would be so wounded that they would need an election thrown to the house.
On the other hand, our projections were that the Family Values Party (or whatever name was chosen) would have the best opprtunity to win, gaining 215 electoral votes outright, and having 100 votes left in states we could not project a clear winner in. (We used Hypothetical pairings of Edwards-Clinton for the Dems, and Pataki Gingrich for the GOP)
The whole exercise was merely academic, but I believe that unless the Democrats get to managing their message effectively pretty darned soon, we'll be in big trouble in 2008....
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
