Jonathan Wallace

American politics is cyclical. Public opinion changes and the other party takes over. The party that lost has to play catch up until the political atmosphere is recreated with new ideas, or at least new ways of presenting them. The problem Adam Kokesh, and every other Republican has to face now is how to reinvent the brand without alienating the base.

A few assumptions are the basis of this piece: (1) Kokesh will seek a Republican nomination, (2) his base must include the hard R’s to win, and (3) the district he chooses to run in will make or break the message Kokesh is trying to convey.

Kokesh is running in the 3rd Congressional District in New Mexico. District 2 is a rural, southwestern district. District 3 is similar to district 2, geographically and population wise. Both districts are separated by a small urban District 1, located in the middle of the state, including Albuquerque.

NM-3 is a decidedly blue, and Gov. Bill Richardson’s old Congressional seat; the district with the greatest incumbent lead (23 pts).

Kokesh could choose the recently Democrat NM 2nd Congressional district. It has been Republican for 11 terms & then 3 terms until 2008.

The smaller geographically, urban District 1 is also recently blue being previously Republican from 68′ to 08′.

Kokesh supporters like to think the party or district he chooses doesn’t matter because: “People are getting stiffed on the change thing and abandoning labels in droves.”

Labels matter to voters. They matter to parties and therefore winning. Any seasoned vet can tell you stories about that one guy, our average voter; “I’m a _____ but I’ll vote for you.” That person is the exception not the rule. We can count on people like that to vote the candidate, not the party. Yet consistently, the party label is the determining factor at the poll booth. Labels matter to a precinct committeeman that determines the outcome of a party’s nomination process and therefore the election.

The voting demographics have changed radically since ACORN has added thousands to the voting rolls as Democrats. We know the guy who held up the “You can’t win an occupation” sign during a McCain’s acceptance speech will have some pull with those purple people.*

Kokesh is seeking a Republican nomination in the hardest district for a Republican, promoting a Ron Paul brand of conservatism that is not (yet?) popular with even mainstream Republicans. How does Kokesh create a new brand without disenfranchising the current base? Continued in part II….

————
*purple people: Brink Lindsay’seconomically conservative, social liberal types.

“Democrats realize it’s their own majority in Congress holding up health care reform, right? They’re scared it’s potential political suicide.” Source

The internet just might be the worst and best thing for the field of public relations.

Congressman Hare has a twitter page that just might be real.

Some bits of wisdom include:
“All I have to do is call my guys in Chicago and boom! I got an extra million dollars for my campaign.”

“Wow. Just looked at the tax data-I guess the rich don’t have enough money to pay for the stimulus..sorry middle class.”

What ultimately lends credibility to this faux twitter page is that the real Rep. Mike Michaud (D-Maine) is following it. Of the 6 people that Congressman Michaud is following, one is Phil Hare’s page. Apparently Michaud’s staff thought it was real too.

God I love the internet.

If the internet is Plato’s cavern, then a blogger is the person chained inside, facing a blank wall.

Imagine the typical user walking past the shadows, hearing a cacophony of voices (websites). The people chained to the wall who want to be heard talk loudly and frequently (new updates, twitter). Search engines are designed to report the most frequently linked or loudest site.

That is to say, new and frequent posts get attention. Remember how many blogs, twitter feeds, and facebook statuses reminded us that Michael Jackson was dead? Frequency is then reinforced by search engines (keywords), creating a huge overlap of information that dilutes itself by volume.

Is it human nature to listen to the loudest shouts even if it is as irrelevant as the latest Gawker post? I don’t think so. Eventually, the cacophony of voices on the internet will be tuned out like ads on TiVo. Aggregators will create virtual bookshelves, and the “web 3.0” user will collect content based on its value, and not how loud or frequent it occurs.

The reality behind the illusion is that ideas are what will move and shake on the internet.

Unless, of course, the illusion is thinking that a quiet, infrequent voice will get anyone’s attention.