July 26, 2007
Whither the Washington GOP?

Former state Republican chairman Chris Vance has a two-part series on Crosscut this week --

(1) "Why Washington Republicans got creamed in 2006 and what they can do about it"

(2) "Dino Rossi + money + smart candidate recruiting + luck = a state GOP comeback"

Read both parts.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 26, 2007 11:11 AM | Email This
Comments
1. 3.none of the above

Posted by: Publicbulldog on July 26, 2007 11:05 AM
2. Don't forget to read the comments by tim.

Vance seems to have articulated what we were saying at SP after the last election. While most Rs were blaming national initially, Vance also placed blame where it is due- on the local leadership and lack of identifying a message.

Very, very good articles and fair assessments.

The current leadership needs to stand up and be counted.

Posted by: swatter on July 26, 2007 11:13 AM
3. Rossi isn't interested enough in winning because he is unwilling to expose Gregoire's racketeering, and the racketeering in the state courts. If he was, he and the Republicans would win in a landslide.

Posted by: Don on July 26, 2007 11:44 AM
4. Well, where do I start: How about Alaska's single House member has just been implicated in CORRUPTION. This is way beyond the point at which I have been able to label the Party as being hopeless. Supporting and voting for people one knows are dishonest, shady and crooked may be O.K. for some, but I have had enough. Couple this with such screwings as were regularly handed to Republican Party supporters at the State level by the likes of Finkbeiner et all. If the Party can not "keep them on the Reservation" the Party is of no use to me.

I have had a belly full of the Republican Party, I will only support individuals from now on.

Posted by: JDH on July 26, 2007 12:47 PM
5. Mr Vance acquired his former position in the GOP because of the time he had on his hands from LOSING his election bid. And the party has been in a tailspin since.
We need more William Wallaces, not Chris Vances.

Posted by: PC on July 26, 2007 01:31 PM
6. They say perception is everything. I perceived the Nethercutt and McGavick campaigns as the dumbest, laziest and least effective I've ever seen. It galls me to think I actually sent these yo-yos money.

The campaign is where the voters find out about the candidate-letting the opposition define you is political suicide. Murray trashed Nethercutt and he didn't do a thing about it.

Cantwell must have given McGavick HER campaign manual because he did everything he could to lose that election.

Reichert better learn to play hard ball if Darcy Burnout or Traitor Tom goes after him. Darcy is a bomb-thrower and Tom is a knife-fighter. Dave better come out swinging and wear a cup.

The vitriol from the left isn't gonna get transformed into civility-ever!

Posted by: John425 on July 26, 2007 01:50 PM
7. I have never really understood the local media's
incessant need to find out from Chris Vance about
what the State GOP needs to do to win. He doesn't
know how to win anymore than the King County GOP
does.


Yet for some reason he keeps running his mouth as
though he is some kind of expert at it.In Mr.Vance's
world its always someone else's fault.To this day
he and his friends take no responsibility for
losing the US senate in 2006.Instead we get one great excuse after another.Chris you don't get
what's wrong and you never will.

Posted by: Phil Spackman on July 26, 2007 03:23 PM
8. Not to be too defensive but...

I beat a Democratic incumbent to win a suburban House seat that had never elected a Republican before. When was the last time that happened?

I was re-elected in the Clinton landslide of 1992.

I beat a former D House member for an open seat on the County Council, and was overwhelmingly re-elected. When I left the Ds won my seat by a wide margin.

I was elected Chairman, and re-elected on the first ballot twice.

During my years as Chairman we won the majority in the State Senate in 2002. In 2004 we won two open congressional races, elected an AG and a Governor - twice!

Yes, I have lost my share of elections as well. But I do know something about winning elections; especially in the King County suburbs.

Posted by: Chris Vance on July 26, 2007 04:01 PM
9. And so Chris Vance's article plays out here. No wonder, Phil, the Rs are in such bad shape.

Phil, I wouldn't call Crosscut a local media. It is a new web site based I believe in Olympia. We are all watching it to see the tone and the topics it covers.

My report on it to date is I hope it is a keeper. Why don't you submit an article to it? It is hoping to appeal to a large front.

Posted by: swatter on July 26, 2007 04:06 PM
10. John425@6 self-parodies: ... dumbest, laziest and least effective ... yo-yos ... Darcy Burnout ... Traitor Tom ... The vitriol from the left (emphasis mine) isn't gonna get transformed into civility-ever!

Posted by: Bruce on July 26, 2007 04:09 PM
11. Chris Vance dreams, In 2004 we ... elected ... a Governor - twice!

You have confused a tally with an election. Is it that you don't know the state's election laws, or you don't think they should be enforced?

Posted by: Bruce on July 26, 2007 04:15 PM
12. Chris Vance do really want to go down that road?
Do you really? First of all most everyone knows
what happen the last time you were "reelected"
State Chair. The fact that you would even bring
that up amazes me. Lets talk about Rob McKenna's
victory in 2004. The State GOP had almost nothing
to do with Rob winning. We both know that the BIAW
and United States chamber of commerce put a lot of
time and money into that race not you.So stop
spinning on that score.


Just because you won a few races doesn't make
you an expert at winning and you sure as hell don't
know how select good candidates.But hey if you
want to sit there and take credit for winning
almost everything the sun. Who I am to stand
in the way of that. In fact why don't we all
just stand and give you a round applause for
a job well done.

Posted by: Phil Spackman on July 26, 2007 04:37 PM
13. The GOP needs a new Iraq policy or else nothing you do localy will even matter and many of your candidates will lose.

It's. Not. Working.

Posted by: Seattle Democrat on July 26, 2007 04:40 PM
14. Phil Spackman -- just out of curiosity, tell us about your track record of electoral victories.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on July 26, 2007 04:42 PM
15. #13: "The GOP needs a new Iraq policy or else nothing you do localy will even matter and many of your candidates will lose."

Politically, you're right, and I think I said that in my article. We need a change in the national atmosphere or local Rs are in big trouble.

Posted by: Chris Vance on July 26, 2007 04:47 PM
16. All politics is local.

Tell me why North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana all vote Republican for President, but usually have Democrat Senators and Representatives.

I do have trouble with self-professed Reaganites who don't follow the 11th commandment.

Posted by: swatter on July 26, 2007 04:50 PM
17. My face is blue from trying to get the R's to adapt a platform that I think will win.
Neo Cons step aside.
Let a west coast Republican platform be adopted.
Fiscal conservative policies no matter what.
Show the people you can give them more by asking for less.
Stand up to the Union mobsters.
Win damn it win...

Posted by: Publicbulldog on July 26, 2007 04:52 PM
18. Stefan,

First of all I have never been a State chair
much less been a state committee member and
as long as I live in King County it will never
happen. Unlike Chris Vance I'm not out there
trying to tell everyone that I'm the greatest
thing since sliced bread.


Now then do I think I know what needs to be
done to fix things here in the State of
Washington? Sure I have some ideas as to
what can be done to turn it around. But as long
the Bellevue mafia crowd continues to think
that they know better than everyone else what
to do. No one will ever listen to me or anyone
else that has ideas for that matter.

Posted by: Phil Spackman on July 26, 2007 05:00 PM
19. Stand for something Phil.
Don't be afraid.

Do not come on this thread,TAKE SHOTS and be a teflon pan that is afraid to stand for something.

We already have those roster spots filled.

Posted by: Publicbulldog on July 26, 2007 06:10 PM
20. "Not to be defensive"? That's pretty defensive, Chris.

Posted by: ram on July 26, 2007 07:27 PM
21. So, Stephan @ 14. Do I have to be a hall-of-fame quarterback before I can criticize a boneheaded play by a player that costs his team the game? Do I have to have a doctorate and twenty years of experience as a teacher before I can find fault with my kid's teacher? I think not. I am sick and tired of voting against Democrats instead of for Republicans. I think it is time for the powers in the Republican party to stop making excuses and start taking responsibility. It's called leadership. Something that's been sadly lacking for a very long time.

Posted by: dw on July 26, 2007 08:59 PM
22. I neither know nor care whether Chris Vance is competent, but it would be more interesting and useful if some of you would discuss what he wrote (the topic of this thread), rather than attacking him personally. He's not running for anything, is he?

Posted by: Bruce on July 26, 2007 09:43 PM
23. I am not sure if it is possible for the queen to be dethroned unless the Republicans do something they seldom do; "Show some chutzpah and backbone". Attack Gregoire's racketeering and they have a chance, but if they take the high road, they will be unsuccessful, no matter who runs.

Posted by: KS on July 26, 2007 09:59 PM
24. Chris-

How about if a few more of the R's in the legislature actually took meetings with PCOs when they come knocking in Olympia? It's really sad when GOP activists can get meetings with random D's on our legislation but large portions our own party give the stiff arm when we come calling.

I will donate to certain GOP candidates. I have no plans to give to the state or national party for the near future.

At the national level, call me when the border fence is finished & we start deporting illegals committing felonies. I'll be in Missouri.

Posted by: Andy on July 26, 2007 10:05 PM
25. Some additional things to consider:

Political Talent - how many top staffers and campaign aides are actually staying in-state? Very few. Of the folks on Reichert's re-elect, zero of his campaign aides remain onboard, with the exception of his consultant Bruce Boram. Of the dozens of McGavick staffers, only Tom Goff, Nathan Johnson and Sarah Dorn remain actively involved in party politics. The state party's entire staff in '06 is gone. If the party wants to win, it needs to keep more of its top talent in state. There was a lot of talent on the McGavick and Reichert campaigns that should have been retained.

Develop Local Brand - All politics is local. We can blame national trends all day long but our success hinges on emulating those who have succeeded despite our many challenges. Look at Reichert for example. In addition to having a strong resume, he has carved out a pragmatic reputation in Congress and softened the party's image. We need to be less of the party of Tim Eyman, and more of the party of suburban friendly faces like Dino Rossi and Dave Reichert. We need to develop a reputation on traditionally Democrat issues, like education, that these voters care about. We need to develop solutions to the problems facing our communities that don't turn people off.

Posted by: Kim on July 27, 2007 01:11 AM
26. I love Seattle Democrat's Iraq policy: Run away and hide and hope nothing goes bump in the night.

Democrats: The punk party. Led by Miss Grundy.

Posted by: Rey Smith on July 27, 2007 09:50 AM
27. I second PBD@17. Let a west coast Republican platform be adopted. I might even be persuaded that the last 15+ years of inversion can be altered.

Posted by: Acid Brain on July 27, 2007 12:06 PM
28. The state party was hamstrung by having the somewhat erratic and mismanaging Diane Tebelius at the helm in 2006. First, she fired the very experienced and talented Mike Sheridan at Executive Director and then she replaced him with the utterly incompetent Brian Maydole. From what I heard of what was going on inside the party office, she was constantly in over her head and meddling in the activities of the political team run by talented political director Tom Roberts, instead of raising desperately needed money. She was distrustful of everyone and very combative with the Reichert and McGavick teams.

Posted by: Chris on July 27, 2007 05:40 PM
29. In his article, Mr. Vance says:

It's simple math: the Republican base is comprised largely of cultural conservatives, and that base is smaller in the Puget Sound area -- where the battles are being fought and lost -- than in almost any other state. [...] The Republican base in the suburban battleground is simply not big enough to allow GOP candidates to survive when national trends are driving independent voters away.

Mr Vance goes on to expound an electoral strategy of offering republican candidates who will appeal to the majority of suburban voters, who by his own definition, are not a part of the base. Now if this crossover candidate has enough emotional appeal to the squishy middle, he can get elected. The glib and attractive person can get elected anywhere urban and suburban voters are in high number. But if the candidate is genuine and at all severe, he will not appeal to the squishies.

Mr Vance describes his own success at winning elective office as "the republican who could get elected by predominantly democrat voters." What does that say about the public perception of Mr. Vance's legislative agenda? He can be expected to perform "just like the democrats do."?

Ultimately, Mr. Vance may be right, that the only way to get elected in urban/suburban Washington State is to pretend you have no values, and that you will tax and spend with the best of them. But you can be assured you will lose the base, the REAL base, when you try to do that. In effect, their is no room for "policy" in Mr. Vance's "politics." It is all about personality and perception.

This is an old topic on SPCOM, and I don't think Mr. Vance's articles shed much new light on the topic. You either believe in the base, and try to grow it, or you reject the base and try to replace it. Which is it going to be?

Posted by: huckleberry on July 27, 2007 06:35 PM
30. I stopped supporting the GOP because it stopped supporting smaller government. Nationally it has led to the largest government increases we have seen since FDR's days (and that is not even counting the war and security measures).

On the state level at best it supports the status quo which is quite frankly about 2-3 times larger than a state government should be at a maximum.

Nationally we got Ron Paul turning things around. I am still looking for the state level version of Ron Paul.

Posted by: Travis Pahl on July 27, 2007 09:30 PM
31. I might Add that Abraham Lincoln lost an election or two before being elected to the presidency.

But I'll tell ya, folks. It ain't goin' nowhere in this state. The moderates and more stolid conservatives don't want to share power. I don't think the moderates have a snowball's chance in hell of bringing the party out of the tailspin that they have put it in through watering down the founding principles of the party. And the moderates sure as hell ain't gonna give way to any of the hated conservatives. What, and lose power?

The mods may be driving the plane into the ground, but by God, they're driving the plane! (Sorry, moderates, for the mention of God. I know that associating with God makes you less electable.)

I personally think that the moment at which the leaders of the WSRP gave a microphone to that piece of shit of a former federale who looked the other way while Washington State's electoral process was being tied down and raped, was the very moment that the WSRP wrote its own obituary.

Enjoy oblivion, WSRP. You brought it on yourself. I'm going independent from now on.

Posted by: ERNurse on July 27, 2007 10:16 PM
32. #29 That is not what I intended to say at all. To boil it down I think we need more candidates like Dino Rossi.

You like Dino, right?

Posted by: Chris Vance on July 27, 2007 10:31 PM
33. Nothing personal, Chris. But if you really cared about this state, you'd let us bury the party that died in 2004-2006 and rebuild a party that can answer the Dems.

Chris, here is what you are not seeing. Having reviewed, as you suggested in our last exchange, the actions taken by the GOP during the contest of our 2004, shall we say, "unpleasantness," I perceive the problem as one of mass political self-immolation on the part of the GOP leadership- yourself included- after the ruling. To put it succintly, y'all just curled up and died. The party (starting with your ill-starred tenure and continuing today) was so hamstrung by the outcome of that contest that they have never recovered. In 2006 there was evidence aplenty of that- much to the detriment of GOP donors and volunteers.

So now (ha ha) you are suggesting (snicker) that we just forget (snort) the whole thing ever happened and give (hoo hoo) the same dilrods who shipwrecked the party (har har) more of our money and time (Hoo hoo ha ha hee hee, oh my sides, my sides...!)?

I suspect that what you really want to do is turn back the clock for good ole Chris so that Dino to come back on his white horse to your fanfare.

And speaking your heroic, yet oh so elusive, Dino Rossi... just where the hell is he? Who does he think he is- Zorro? Is he going to ride into town in the dead of night with a stick of dynamite in his teeth and a bullwhip in his hand? And here you are, A la that stupid Looney Toons "Robin Hood meets Bugs Bunny" schtick chanting, "Duh- Don't you worry, never fear/ Dino Rossi'll soon be here."

I got a news flash for you, Chrissy me boy. Rossi is D-O-N-E. As in, Stick a fork in him done. You ask, "Why?" I'll tell you why, fanboy. Baggage. That's right. Rossi's got too much baggage from the 2004 elephant suicides. (Along with a former WSRP chairman whose name somehow eludes me...)

As far as expecting the people the GOP burned after 2004 to give them more money when the party leaders haven't learned a damn thing from the last election, I sense an answer appearing (flipping over the 8-ball)...

FAT CHANCE.

Chris, Chris, O whither art thou Chris?

Oh, there you are. In the "history" section. While you are there, say hello to Dino for me.

Posted by: ERNurse on July 28, 2007 02:22 AM
34. Chris re: #32...

I find Dino acceptable. In 2004, he was certainly a better choice for governor than Gregoire, and I suspect in 2008 he will be a better choice for governor than anything the dems can throw at us. What does "like" have to do with it?

Do you like him?

Posted by: huckleberry on July 28, 2007 10:11 PM
35. There's very little chance the GOP presidential nominee will appeal to Washington, or help redefine the GOP positively to moderates.

But Dino can do that. Moreso even than needing Dino as governor, we need Dino to lead the party by being governor.

Posted by: pudge on July 30, 2007 03:37 PM
36. Huckleberry wrote:

Ultimately, Mr. Vance may be right, that the only way to get elected in urban/suburban Washington State is to pretend you have no values, and that you will tax and spend with the best of them. But you can be assured you will lose the base, the REAL base, when you try to do that. In effect, their is no room for "policy" in Mr. Vance's "politics." It is all about personality and perception.

You've got that right! This is the balancing act Vance tried so earnestly to play during his tenure as chairman. We need candidates "who are conservaitive enough to keep the base, and moderate enough to appeal to independents." But please tell me how you can be both!

The base loved Dino when he ran because he WAS a proven fiscal conservative and because they believed he was a well known (among Catholics for instance) as a committed pro-lifer and social conservative without compromise. But then, as often happens in a state wide campaign, he had "handlers"; the Chris Vance types who convinced him he needed to "sound more moderate to win." This may have worked to win over the "squishies", but over time, it will have a negative impact on the base. And with the way things have gone since the '04 election, (the law suit, the endorsement of Vance, the campaigning and endorsing of squishy Republicans hasn't endeared him more to his base, but less.

We'll see how this plays out if he decides to run again. Let's see if he gets some new advisors or if he sticks with the same program.

As for the presidential nominee, I suppose if he can win over the west coast, it won't matter if he loses the whole south, and the pro-life base. Right Chris?

Posted by: Michelle on July 30, 2007 08:54 PM
37. The Republicans lost their support base years ago when they turned to the left (moderate).

And they have done little lately to gain back their base on a national and local level. Conservative principles were sacrificed in hopes of gaining favor with the press and moderates. As a party lacking principles the grass roots turn their attention to individual candidates. Rossi is the best local example of a quality candidate that appeals to conservative voters. It would be difficult to renew the party on his coattails as a party must espouse principles of merit and deed that encourage support. Contact on America was the most recent example of unified actions by the Republican Party. Unfortunately their was no follow up.

On a local level, many of the Republican incumbents totally failed their supporters over the past 12 years by voting for a number of programs that insulted conservatives. The long list would include such travesties as:
Sound Transit
Baseball Stadium
Gas Taxes

Although the list may fill pages; the above three clearly demonstrate failures.

The problem is clear; the Republican Party lacks the ability to embrace conservative ideals.

Posted by: Snuffy on August 1, 2007 07:34 AM
38. Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! szxyfaaeyvop

Posted by: teypvpbnyb on August 1, 2007 11:36 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?