On the Western Banks of the Shenandoah

I predicted a few days ago that Kentucky’s Republican primary would be one to watch. The race is to fill the seat of outgoing Senator Jim Bunning. Bunning is known for two things. One is his stellar baseball career. He is one of eighteen players to ever pitch a perfect game (read: no opposing players ever got to base) and is currently 17th in total career strike-outs. The second thing he’s most noted for is being a reliable bag of crazy in the Senate.

His career got off to a less than auspicious start when he eked out a half of a percentage point win in 1998. That race was so nasty that former President Clinton made point of it in the interviews he conducted with Taylor Branch that eventually became part of Branch’s book The Clinton Tapes. Things got even worse in 2004, when Bunning ran a miserable campaign that ended up with him winning by just 1% when President Bush was swamping Bunning’s Senate colleague John Kerry by 20 points. Some of the lowlights of the campaign included: Bunning admitting that he only watched Fox News (great red meat for conservatives but probably not a good thing to tell reporters who are crafting a narrative on your race), comparing his opponent Dan Mongirado’s appearance to that of one of Saddam Hussein’s sons, and appearing via sattelite for a debate in which he relied on a teleprompter.

Therefore, it was of little surprise when word got out that Mitch McConnell and others were trying to have the “You ever think about not running, Jim?” conversation with Bunning. Indeed, top Republican even started preparing for a primary challenge if Bunning didn’t want to go quietly. Rather than just go out with a whimper, however, he went out with a bang, accusing McConnell of being a control freak, saying that one of his potential primary competitiors owed him money, kept up his intense focus on steroids in baseball while the economy crashed, and predicted that Ruth Bader Ginsburg would be dead within nine months.

With lackluster funding and his approval at 28%, Bunning eventually got out, leaving McConnell’s pick Secretary of State Trey Grayson as the heir apparent. However, a funny thing happened on the way to Washington. Supporters of Ron Paul, whose firebrand libertarian-oriented campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 raised tons of cash and drew headlines while making little headway (though acute observers will note that he did come close to winning some little noticed contests and straw polls), were attempting to get Paul’s son Rand into the race. Rand had become somewhat of a darling of that wing of the party while on the stump for his dad in 2008. After Bunning stepped aside, Paul made his candidacy official on August 5th.

Again, most Republican insiders paid little attention. However, what they weren’t paying attention to was the groundswell on the internet, both in terms of money and support via social networking sites like Facebook. He currently has over 17k fans to Grayson’s more modest 5k. This is probably more of a testament to the Paulistas national spotlight on Paul, but no strategist would cast a negative light on that many potential supporters who very well may cross state lines to help Paul on the way to a primary win. On May 23rd, before Paul was even officially in the race (though he hinted he would get in if Bunning stayed out on May 1st), supporters raised $25k. On August 20th, another moneybomb raised over $400k.

Still, Grayson appeared the favorite. Then another funny thing happened. Word got out that the NRSC would host a fundraising event in DC for Grayson. That’s when Paul’s supporters got PISSED. They held a counter money-bomb that raised $186k for the campaign. This pushed the campaign over the million mark and meant real media attention for the campaign. On November 2nd, a poll came out showing Paul leading in the primary by 3 points. On November 4th, embarrassed over conservative reaction to this and their backing of Charlie Crist, NRSC Chair John Cornyn announced that the group would sit out contested Republican primaries, a move that was hailed by grassroots conservatives as allowing the people to decide (all the rage in our current populist moment).

Now, there’s further sign that big national attention is being graced on Dr. Paul (yes, he followed in his father’s footsteps in more way than one). From the New York Times (subscription required):

Representative Ron Paul proved to be a surprising presence in the presidential race in 2008. Now his son, Dr. Rand Paul, has become an unexpected contender in the 2010 Senate race in Kentucky.

Dr. Paul — an ophthalmologist and a son of the congressman, a Texas Republican and former presidential candidate — has become a serious challenger in the race to succeed Senator Jim Bunning.

Capitalizing on a hearty distrust of government and an anti-Republican-establishment fervor among conservatives, he has used the Internet to raise more than $1.3 million since he began his campaign in August.

“This primary is really about the future of our party,” said Dr. Paul, 46, who has lived in Kentucky since 1993 and has never run for public office before.

“The Republican platform specifically says we don’t believe in bailing out private business, and yet we did,” Dr. Paul said in a break between cataract operations. “The Republican platform also specifically says we don’t believe in government ownership of private businesses, and yet a lot of Republicans voted for that.”

As I’ve noted before, we’re seeing a new alliance forming between fiscal conservatives and straight up libertarian conservatives, combined with the interesting factor that many social conservatives are drawn to the Paul’s pro-life credentials. Will this continue all the way back to governance? Hard to say–one President already helped disintegrate that already shaky alliance. But a new one is bringing them right back together.

Paul’s race will be one to watch, as the primary seems to have quickly become nationalized beyond the borders of the sleepy commonwealth of Kentucky. This will be a curious race to watch, since Grayson isn’t exactly a Meg Whitman or Charlie Crist in terms of his politics. Still, this race will be a harbinger of things to come in terms of what issues will bring the party back to power and just what sort of candidate activists are seeking out to be their standard-bearer in 2012.

(I noticed this accidentally never got posted, but I’m throwing it up since it gives some background on my thoughts about a potential Dobbs run in 2012)

I’ve been spending the last few days thinking and writing a great deal about the future of the right and the GOP. Naturally, a great deal of this has crossed paths with speculation about who will emerge in 2012. Expect more of that: I find political parties, their formation, and the constant battles for control utterly fascinating. Even though I can’t do nearly as thorough a job as GOP 12 or Race for 2012, I’ll continuing writing about it as long as it piques my interest.

And of course with another day in the race for the White House (what? You really thought it ended last year? You cad, you) comes new faces. Sometimes alarming, sometimes bizarre. I think today’s conversation is a bit of both. First, there’s word that recently departed CNN anchorman and champion of anti-illegal immigration activist Lou Dobbs is perhaps mulling a run:

During an interview on WTOP radio in Washington, Dobbs fueled rumors he’s seeking a bid for public office, possibly the highest office in the land, when asked if speculation about an Oval Office bid is “crazy talk.”

“What’s so crazy about that?” Dobbs, 64, replied. “Golly!”

So, is it crazy talk or is it real, the radio station persisted.

“Well, I’ll tell you this much — it’s one of the discussions that we’re having,” he said. “For the first time, I’m actually listening to some people about politics.”

“I don’t think I’ve got the nature for it,” he added. “[But] we’ve got to do something in this country and I think that being in the public arena means you’ve got to be part of the solution.”

If Dobbs gets into this thing, I think he almost automatically starts as an indy. I think he just couldn’t pass the litmus test on abortion and LGBT issues and wouldn’t readily get corporate backing by any stretch of the imagination, since he both balks at immigration. The New Yorker had a great piece on him a few years back that examines his curious political positioning (which I would label as much more populist than Palin or even Huckabee) Crazy as it seems, though, I think there’s very real room for him in this race. If Democrats continue to overreach, Republicans twiddle their thumbs over what to do about the Tea Party momentum and illegal immigration becomes a hot button issue again (it polls very high in many regions, but enthusiasm ebbs and flows), Dobbs has a custom made base. He’s spoken highly of the movement and has his own degree of popularity (although he isn’t as “respected” a voice as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, his newly free status as another mic jockey and writer). His story of transforming from a Wall Street puppet to a populist firebrand would appeal to alot of disenfranchised voters. He’s Perot-esque without the Perot insanity. Given the overall climate and that both parties seem to be reaching their nadir, the time for candidate like Dobbs may very well be nigh. If someone like Lindsay Graham emerges as the establishment pick for 2012–well, he may very damn well have a shot. Whatever happens, the very fact that Dobbs is being brandied about indicates that even the huge field already emerging for 2012 doesn’t have “someone for everyone.”

Perhaps more shocking: the fact the Rick Santorum is starting to make moves towards a possible bid. From Hotline:

Santorum, who has already visited IA, will stop in Spartanburg, Greenville and Hilton Head to campaign for Rep. Gresham Barrett (R), who is locked in a tough GOP primary for GOV.

Santorum said he is “looking forward to visiting with South Carolina families to discuss the issues that matter to them and the future of this country. Too much is at stake to sit back and not participate in the critical discussion of how to address these issues,” according to a statement he released.

Santorum has been openly toying with a presidential run in ’12. He acknowledged that a trip to IA in late September was designed to gin up interest in his own political future.

“When you give a speech in either Iowa or New Hampshire, as a Republican or a Democrat, people pay attention,” Santorum said on a conference call the day before his trip. “This is an opportunity to speak and lend my voice to what I hope to be a conservative movement and a Republican movement to change the direction Barack Obama wants to take us.”

Lemme put this to bed right now: I CANNOT back Santorum for President. The man was thoroughly whomped in 2006, and he’s just a strange cat to begin with. Recall that his family took home a stillborn child and introduced it to the rest of its family. I’m sure that this scene repeats itself across our nation on a regular basis–indeed, it actually has some historical basis, given that photos of dead infants were once a very common mourning device. However, Santorum openly wrote about it in the book that many considered the starting point for his 2008 run that never came to pass. This would indicate that Santorum believes that this anectdote (probably best left to family) somehow underscores his conservative credentials without taking into consideration his already stellar legislative record on these issues. This gives him that special hint of nuttiness that has doomed many a candidate.  Additionally, the aforementioned campaign tome laid out a view of conservatism that gave bold powers to government to protect the family, which Santorum argued was central to political life. Santorum made little mention of the sort of fiscal and economic policies that have become central to our current political discourse. Santorum would certainly have his fans amongst the sort of conservative Catholics that have come to populate party nominating contests of late, but I believe that a Huckabee run leaves little room for Santorum to mobilize the hard right base towards a win, particularly given the fact that Huckabee appears to be determined to set himself up as Obama’s critic-in-chief on all issues, not just social issues.

Two quick pieces of news from the race for the Senate in 2010. First, polls are out showing Rudy! up over Kirsten Gillibrand from Rassmussen (H/T Surrounded by Idiots):

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of voters in the state finds Giuliani, the former Republican mayor of New York City, leading Gillibrand by 13 points – 53% to 40%. Four percent (4%) like some other candidate, and just two percent (2%) are undecided.

Rudy still hasn’t made his mind up on this race, but I think that this will help nudge him towards the “yes” column. To be above 50% a full year out is enviable territory for any candidate. Rudy is still not my favorite Republican, but in this race, in that state, I sure can stomach him.

Secondly, we may have been a bit premature in hinting towards a Dobbs run for President. It would appear that right now his thoughts are primarily on the Senate. From The Reporter:

HILLSIDE, N.J. (AP) — Former CNN host Lou Dobbs is seriously considering running for U.S. Senate in New Jersey in 2012 as a stepping stone to a possible White House bid — a congressional matchup that would pit one of illegal immigration’s biggest critics against a champion for immigrant rights.

Dobbs spokesman Robert Dilenschneider told The Associated Press Wednesday that Dobbs may challenge Sen. Robert Menendez, a Democrat, but is considering other offers he’s received since his abrupt exit from CNN on Nov. 11 after 29 years on the news network.

“A logical step for Lou, should he choose to go into public life, is to run for the next Senate seat in New Jersey, or to accept some kind of appointed position, nationally or in New Jersey,” Dilenschneider said.

The article itself hints towards the bid as a steppingstone. Political logic would dictate that this is a bad move (Allen ’08, anyone), but when a four year Senator who spent half of his 2/3rds of a term in the Senate running for POTUS is sitting in the White House, hey, anything can happen.

At least its no stranger than Lou Dobbs already trying to make amends with Latinos. From the Wall Street Journal:

First, though, Mr. Dobbs is working to repair what a spokesman conceded is a glaring flaw: His reputation for antipathy toward Latino immigrants. In a little-noticed interview Friday, Mr. Dobbs told Spanish-language network Telemundo he now supports a plan to legalize millions of undocumented workers, a stance he long lambasted as an unfair “amnesty.”

“Whatever you have thought of me in the past, I can tell you right now that I am one of your greatest friends and I mean for us to work together,” he said in a live interview with Telemundo’s Maria Celeste. “I hope that will begin with Maria and me and Telemundo and other media organizations and others in this national debate that we should turn into a solution rather than a continuing debate and factional contest.”

From Ryan Nobles at Richmond’s NBC12 comes this gem about how Governor Kaine will be spending some of his final hours in office:

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine will make a tour of a series of Restaurants on the day one of his signature legislative accomplishments goes into effect. On December 1st, Kaine will make appearances at a number of different restaurants across Virginia in honor of the first day that  Commonwealth’s ban on smoking in bars and eateries will be enforced. One of his stops will be here in Richmond. The Governor will appear at the Home Team Grill on Main Street in the Fan at 4pm.

I won’t go into length about my philosophical opposition to the smoking ban–I already did that here. But how swell is it that His Excellency is touting an increase in nanny state protections while leaving the state with a budget mess that barely covers essential services and even looks like it will leave his other landmark achievment, universal pre-K on the chopping block?

For those who smirk at my railing against statism, here’s a heartwarming Thanksgiving tale from that great bastion of nanny state thinking, Michael Bloomberg’s New York City (h/t Instapundit):

When a small church comes to the Bowery Mission bearing fried chicken with trans fat, unwittingly breaking the law, they’re told “thank you.” Then workers quietly chuck the food, mission director Tom Bastile said.

“It’s always hard for us to do,” Basile said. “We know we have to do it.” . . .

Lines at soup kitchens are up by 21 percent this year, according to a NYC Coalition Against Hunger report released yesterday. The city’s law banishing trans fat took effect in July 2008 and touched everyone with Health Department food licenses — including emergency food providers.

So come January 17th, how about just skedaddling on up to D.C. with your pal the President and work on consolidating statist thinking from the confines of the DNC? Kthanksbai.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone! I know I have much to be thankful for on this, the most American (and therefore bipartisan) of holidays. I won’t bemoan my meager existence in the cosmos by going line by line over everything that I have to be extremely grateful for, but suffice it to say that this past year, from my maternal grandfather’s death last Thanksgiving to my sudden unemployment to my personal struggles on the campaign trail to finally my recent (and continuing) recovery over some of my personal demons has left me a changed person and very grateful to be able to rediscover at a young age just what I posess as individual that I must thank god every day for.

Today I wanted to take a moment to thank Adult Swim for their week-long retrospective of the King of the Hill’s past Thanksgiving shows. Many of you who know me personally know that I am a big fan of the show and of Adult Swim. I was quite happy when Adult Swim picked up the show, despite the fact that its straight ahead satire isn’t a perfect match for the more absurdist comedies the network features. For the uninitated, King of the Hill focuses on the daily life and travails of the Hill family in the fictitious town of Arlen, Texas. Though it is an animated sitcom, it has often been overlooked for its incisive satire (and loving embrace) of small town American life. The program is unique amongst other animated sitcoms (note how I avoid the use of the word cartoon) in that it generally follows the rules of physics and for not being overly reliant on slapstick comedy. However, it still takes great liberty in using its medium to its fullest potential to skewer both the troubling and joyous aspects of our society.

King of the Hill is brilliant in the way that it both embraces and pokes fun at the occasional ignorance of small town Americans of the world writ large while simultaneously skewering both high minded social engineers and profit driven corporations. At its core the show is more populist than conservative, though Hank Hill has many qualities that conservatives should embrace as their own: community spirit, a generous will, and a can-do-it attitude with a genuine love of hard work paying off for those willing to do it.

Read more…

One of the most surreal moments I had on the entire campaign trail was attending the final GOTV rally at the Winchester Airport on November 1st, the Sunday before Election Day. It was surreal for a number of reasons–namely that I was on medical leave from the campaign and not working the same insane hours as many of my colleagues. However, two things also stuck out in my mind. One was that there were a number of people (probably no more than 10%, really) that were MOST excited about Ken Cuccinelli’s bid for Attorney General. I have little doubt in my mind that nearly all of them ended up casting their vote for all three candidates nor that they had worked hard for the entire team. They’re still an interesting bunch, though.

The second thing that stuck out in my mind was the fact that one of the largest cheers of the night came when Ken Cuccinelli pledged to stand up for the state’s 10th Amendment rights. As a refresher:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Even in my years of political involvement, the 10th Amendment has rarely been a rallying cry for many. A few years ago if you asked a conservative to tell you about it, you’d probably get a mumbled explanation about state’s rights. Now, given the mess in Washington, it seems to be every conservatives mission to recite the amendment chapter and verse whenever the specter of increased federal involvement rears its ugly head.

All this makes me rather unsurprised to read, from the FreedomWorks blog, that the Virginia Campaign for Liberty (the remnants of Rep. Ron Paul’s libertarian-oriented 2008 Presidential bid) has launched a new initiative to rally Virginia conservatives around a vigorous defense of the 10th Amendment:

From the head of VAC4L, Donna Holt:

A new campaign called the Virginia 10th Amendment Revolution is sweeping the state of Virginia. This movement is targeting the federal government’s over-reaching powers not delegated to it by the states.

Citizen activist groups are banding together to take this revolution to the 2010 legislative session of the Virginia General Assembly. They are calling on legislators to defend states’ rights under the 10th amendment with the Virginia Firearms Freedom Act (VFFA) and the Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act (VHFA).

FreedomWorks has joined the coalition at VA10thAmendment.org, which is a great place for Virginia voters and activists to keep up with the latest on 10th Amendment initiatives and events.

Some may recall with angst the Paulistas presence at the 2008 convention, where their involvement nearly denied Jim Gilmore the chance to go down in an ignominous defeat against Mark Warner and knocked off John Hager as party chair. The result was a mixed bag at best, and the Paulistas seemed to just not get involved in 2009 (outside of their support for Ken–they did not flock to Patrick Muldoon is nearly the same numbers as they did to Bob Marshall the year before). However, they’re still out there, and they seem to have a number of recruits for the upcoming congressional primaries. Given the vigorous push for health care and various local events around the state, many conservatives are taking a second look at libertarian Republicans and welcoming them with open arms. The war in Iraq remains a key dividing line between establishment conservatives and libertarian conservatives, but domestic events have made the two friends of circumstance. Will this hold out through 2012? Only time will tell, but expect there to be some unlikely bedfellows in various policy disputes and primary fights along the way.

From GetLiberty.org and Americans for Limited Government comes this disturbing story:

Last week, Nick Balzano, an executive board member of the Service Employees International Union’s (SEIU) Allentown Local 32BJ chapter resigned after threatening to file a grievance against the Allentown, PA city council for letting a Boy Scout clean up a walking path. The Scout, 17-year-old Kevin Anderson was attempting to earn an Eagle Scout badge.

As reported by Michelle Malkin in the New York Post, Balzano bellowed at a city council meeting, “We’ll also be looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout who did the trails. We may file another grievance on that… None of them can pick up a hoe. They can’t pick up a shovel. They can’t plant a flower. They can’t clear a bicycle path. They can’t do anything. Our people do that.”

I don’t know what’s more disturbing: the fact that the complaint was filed to begin with or that Balzano so loudly disdains people working to make the world a better simply out of the kindness of their heart. Predictably, the Union said that Balzano had no authority from them on this. However, Fox News points out that he was not alone:

According to Nerzig, the letter came from Balzano and “four or five” employees who were receiving a stipend for their service on a part-time committee, representing a few hundred Allentown workers.

Given that they’re paid employees and that others agreed with him, something within the group’s guiding principles must have driven them to do this. This is not the first instance of intimidation we’ve seen from SEIU. As ALG points out, the President confers often with their President Andy Stern and stated during a rally last year that they would paint the country purple with SEIU.

ALG also points out that the President just recently began signing Eagle Scout certificates, a long standing tradition. Given that we’re less than a year in to his administration, this could very well be a coincidence. Given that the President has already signed into law bills greatly expanding “paid service,” however, I would suspect that America’s grand tradition of helping others and individual initiative may not be part of his guiding vision for our nation.

In my eight years of political involvement, one issue has continually caused me a great deal of consternation: voters perpetual lack of focus on local politics. Certainly given where I’ve been (field work) I’ve heard more of it–the usual moans of “I only vote in presidential elections.” And why not? It’s that quaddrenial affair that gets the most coverage in the mainstream media, a focus that begins almost the minute the final votes are counted in Hawaii. Heck, in 2004 people were already talking about Romney in 2008 BEFORE ANY votes were cast.

I wouldn’t have much of a problem with this if it weren’t for the fact that my anectdotal evidence jives up with the hard fact that turnout is nearly always way down in non-presidential elections. Even here in Virginia, where political conflict is a way of life for many, turnout was down a full 33% from last year. Even in 2006, when the Allen-Webb Senate race got a great deal of national attention, turnout was just 52%, up 7% from the Gubernatorial race the year before but down almost 19% from the 2004 Presidential election.

This trend can play out differently locally. In 2003 in my own Shenandoah County turnout for the five way Sheriff’s race (one Republican, one candidate who had gotten the nomination four years prior, and three who liked to tout their various Republican credentials) was nearly 49%, which was roughly 4% higher than the State Senate race that same year. Yet even given an oddball race where a substantial number of voters turned out given personal connections to the candidates and just didn’t vote in the other races, turnout was still down a full 23% from the prior Presidential election in 2000.

Again, I certainly understand the perspective of voters who stay at home during local races. Some may just not know the candidates that well, given that they may not be natives. Some simply have the perspective that the President, for lack of a better phrase, is leader of the freaking free world, and therefore their vote in that race will have more effect on their lives than any other. More troubling, though, is those who just don’t care about local politics at all.

Yet it is at the local level where the parts of governing that most affects our everyday lives happens. Police, trash pickup, firefighters, building and zoning, business permits–all of these things that intensely affect our day to day living all occur at the local level. Notice anything that I left out? Ah yes–education. Though the influence of state and federal politics on public schools is undeniable, most school districts receive most of their funding at the local level and in many places take up the largest share of the local budget.

That’s why in my recent post about what to do with the tea party movement I showered plaudits upon those groups who have taken it upon themselves to serve as watchdogs ACROSS the spectrum of government. Conservatives understand that local government can nickel and dime us just like any other level of government and that despite their responsibility to “keep the trains on time” they still have a moral obligation to ensure the prosperity of their citizens by not unduly interfering with our lives to a point as to hamper individual initiative. Certainly, these groups have existed before–indeed, an entire book could be written on the history of watchdog groups in both Shenandoah and Augusta counties and how these groups intersect with inter-party conflict. Yet the increased awareness of government intrusion in our lives has brought new life to many of these groups.

That’s why I’m very excited to hear of this development in Staunton. From the Augusta Conservative:

According to the News Virginian, Tea Party Director Richard Armstrong has thrown in his hat for the Staunton City Council seat vacated by now State Delegate Dickie Bell. The Tea Party has gotten much more active as the political atmosphere has become more charged. Armstrong, 63, is a former Detroit police officer and Navy veteran. He stated that Staunton is not friendly to business and he wants to work toward fixing that. The Staunton City Council is interviewing people to fill the seat until a special election in May 2010.

The Augusta Conservative himself is in the running for a local Board of Supervisors seat. I make it my rule not to become too involved in races outside of where I live, as I feel its up to both primary and general election voters to decide who they think best represents their views. However, I think it should hearten any conscientious conservative to see their like minded brethren put their money where their mouth is in local government. I applaud anyone who takes on this challenge.

I still don’t know entirely what to make of the Tea Party movement as a whole, but as long as they are awakening citizens to government’s role at all levels, they’re doing good work.

One of the great “B” stories of the 2008 Presidential campaign was the dog fight between Former Massachussets Governor Mitt Romney and Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Both candidates had their own place in the race: Romney had a good fiscal and economic record, but his “Road to Des Moines” conversion on abortion issues and former peddling to LGBT interests was too much for many social conservatives to handle. Meanwhile, Huckabee has a poor record on fiscal issues, having supported a number of tax increases as Governor, but the former Baptist minister simply could not be questioned on values issues. The end result? An extended fight between the two for conservative voters in which Huckabee eventually prevailed but was left too wounded to make a serious challenge to McCain in the final primaries (in retrospect, Virginia was the Huckster’s last stand).

Now, both are back in the running for the nomination in 2012. Romney is already generating buzz amongst establishment types, and he continues to maintain a high media profile. However, right now it would appear that his reputation amongst Republicans is declining. From Hot Air comes a PPP poll showing Mitt below 50%. Their take:

He’s at 48 percent this month after having hit 63 percent in June, before the fade began. Even PPP doesn’t have any explanation for it. I’ll give you two possibilities. One: Huck and Palin are in the public eye these days much more than Mitt is, even if it is for the wrong reasons. Romney had better be careful that he doesn’t become an afterthought and end up being seen as a “minor candidate.” Two: With Huck and Palin natural rivals for the religious conservative vote, the perception may be building that Romney’s the RINO in the race by default. He’s always had that rep to some extent, of course, but being the odd man out among the big three only cements it.

As I’ve said many, many times here, it’s very early. Romney still has a chance in this thing. I see his roadmap to victory being becoming a solid voice on conservative issues in the media and then surviving the aformentioned Palin/Huck fight. His big place to shine? Venues like CPAC, and by cozying up to Fox News as their “legit” commentator over Huck’s more showbiz orientation.

However, the big problem with that strategy is that right now it would appear that it is the moment for the confrontational conservative. Huck is drawing big ratings, and Sarah is dominating pretty much every media outlet from the blogs to Fox News, from People to Newsweek (they say that no publicity is bad publicity). The Chicago Tribune has a great article up about Huck and Sarah’s tours and the draws they’re bringing in.

“Team Huck” rolls into the bookstore like a NASCAR pit crew, red uniform shirts adorned with the corporate logos of Mike Huckabee’s website, his speaker’s bureau, his publisher, and “Huck” emblazoned on their epaulets.

They strip the protective wrappings off a large, heavy object — a podium they install at all such appearances. Mike Huckabee doesn’t sit at tables. He stands, as a president would, even to sign books.

And sign he does. And sign and sign and sign. As many as 600 copies of “A Simple Christmas” an hour with sales to match, and no time lost to opening remarks.

The contrast between Huck and Palin (subtle but important) would indicate that their fight is where the action is. However, as I said, Romney’s slow but steady effort has merit–if he can stick to it. As Palin and Huckabee have found, celebrity can be intoxicating.

One the biggest surprises on Election Night was Bob McDonnell’s handy win over Creigh Deeds with the youth (18-29) vote–a full 10%. Pundits on the right quickly noted this. From the Weekly Standard:

McDonnell proved that a dynamic candidate with the right ideas, an active youth outreach program, and strategic use of new media technologies, Republican candidates can win the youth vote. The McDonnell campaign deserves credit for its text messaging program, the Young Professionals coalition that leveraged both fundraising and grassroots organizing, and the energy that his daughters brought to the election.The GOP needs to wake up and take note. Bob McDonnell did not invent a new way of campaigning. He was the right candidate with the right message who refused to cede Virginia’s youth to the Democrats and actually reached out to them. Republicans should take this week’s election results as a sign that the Grand Old Party still has a real opportunity to appeal to young voters.

Certainly that was great news. However, it must be pointed out that, in all likelihood, the same youth vote did not come out in 2005 that did in 2009, nor did they come out in the same numbers. In 2004 the youth vote made up 17% of the vote in Virginia; in 2008, it was 21%. In 2006 (the only other off year election I could find results for), they made up 12% of the vote. This year it was a meager 10%. Turnout amongst the bracket itself was 17% versus the 54% the year before–given the exit polls showing a strong R/conservative indy advantage, it would appear that youth voters just stayed home by and large. And with good reason, according to many on the left. From Future Majority:

He did youth outreach. I don’t know if Deeds did, but the consistent narrative around the Deeds campaign was that he wasn’t really for anything. The additional narrative I hear is that VA isn’t that Democratic.This doesn’t mean young voters have gone GOP, it means that when you put forth the effort to get young voters, you speak to their issues, and you get out the vote you get a good result. Further, when you don’t have a strong Democrat at the top of the ticket but you have a strong Republican at the top of the ticket those young Republicans or those young conservative voters turn out. From the numbers I’ve seen the students at Liberty University could have turned out and made the margin of victory for McDonnell.

So while we certainly should cheer this turnaround, it would appear that the youth vote, smaller than in previous years, more closely matched their older peers. That leaves us with the question of why youth 1) don’t turn out by and large and 2) why they tend to be liberal. And it’s not as if liberalism is a knee jerk response to being young. Indeed, the Richmond Times Dispatch that youth are perhaps those with the most to lose in the coming healthcare debate:

Comes now the House-passed health care “reform” bill that, amazingly, would extract more subsidies from the young. It mandates that health insurance premiums for older Americans be no more than twice the level of younger Americans. That’s much less than the actual health spending gap between young and old. Spending for those age 60-64 is four to five times greater than those 18-24. So, the young would overpay for insurance which — under the House bill — people must buy: 20and 30-somethings would subsidize premiums for 50and 60-somethings. (Those 65 and over receive Medicare.)

…..

Although premium changes would apply mainly to people using insurance “exchanges,” the differences would be substantial. A single person 55-64 might save $3,490, estimates an Urban Institute study. By contrast, single people in their 20s and early 30s might pay from about $600 to $1,100 more. For the young, the extra cost might be larger, says economist Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Hudson Institute, because the House bill would require them to purchase fairly generous insurance plans rather than cheaper catastrophic coverage that might better suit their needs.
Whatever the added burden, it would darken the young’s already poor economic prospects. Unemployment among 16 to 24-year-olds is 19 percent. Peter Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, notes on his blog that high joblessness depresses young workers’ wages and that the adverse effect — though diminishing — “is still statistically significant 15 years later.” Lost wages over 20 years could total $100,000. Orszag doesn’t mention that health care “reform” might compound the loss.

So what to do? I think we’re on the right path with campaigns that offer positive solutions. Some would suggest moderation is the key. From our neighbors to the South in Raleigh:

The Republican Party grew rapidly in the ’60s, ’70s and ’80s in North Carolina by courting conservative Democrats.

But North Carolina has maintained the strongest Democratic Party in the South during the past decade by siphoning off moderate Starbucks Republicans.

As conservative British Prime Minister HaroldMcMillan (1957-63) once noted: “A successful party of the right must continue to recruit from the center and even from the left center. Once it begins to shrink into itself like a snail, it will be doomed.”

However, McDonnell showed this year that youth voters will buy into clear policies based on conservative principles when it hews to the voters writ large. The real test will be when the youth vote really shows up–can congressional Republicans such as the eventual nominee in the Fifth make crossroads in places like Albemarle County? Stay tuned.