House Republicans: Act Like NetFlix to Find Your Brand
By David All Posted in 2008 — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
[Cross-posted from TechRepublican]
Front-page of the Politico - House Republicans yet to seek consensus on an "agenda." An agenda is a small, limited set of core principles that everyone in the Conference should get behind and support.
I get the importance of agreeing to a core set of principles. In January 2006, I worked with Congressman Kingston on his American Renewal Project which was embraced, but not widely.
Indeed, six months before an election, it seems like everyone has a plan of ideas for the "limited" agenda items that they will, together, take forth to the American people. Everyone thinks their ideas are the way to go forward.
Among other plans out there:
* John Boehner has a Republican Agenda to fix a broken Washington.
* Mark Kirk has a Suburban Agenda.
* Jeb Hensarling has an Action Plan for House Republicans.
Gone are the days of Newt Gingrich's Contract for America, a plan which every Republican got behind and backed. A unified agenda back in 1994 was possible because of Newt Gingrich's intoxicating personality and strong leadership style; but it was also a different time, a time before the Internet inspired a culture of choice and information.
Today, thanks to the Internet, each Member of Congress can and should be fighting in the trenches for the hundreds of issues which drive their voters to the polls under the banner of the Republican Party. The Internet provides a medium to distribute our message like never before. We can fight on thousands of fronts.
Rather than being forced to to pick a few, limited set of agenda items, House Republicans should change the game and act more like iTunes and NetFlix -- offering conservative, libertarian, and independent voters a lot of different choices -- all of which can only be found under the larger brand -- Republican.
err on the side of greater liberty? Funny thing, but it just might work, sure as hell better than what we have been doing.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
But I can see too where those that are adamant on an issue would be more than willing to dig their heels in and stand no mater what. There are elements of conservatism that would not budge on (to continue the previous example) legalizing drugs like marijuana or legalizing prostitution. But the argument can be made that doing so would increase liberty to make choices, good or bad. What happens then? Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to see this idea from all angles...
there is just too much bad emotions connected with this sort of things, But I can wish.
In the area of vice law, it is my observation that this is where a lot of conservatives think, and reason like liberals. Take drug laws for instance. You will inevitably get a lot of people commenting negatively on any sort of decriminalization. and they are absolutely certain of their positions
However, if you challenge them have they ever read any of the leading books on the subject you find out that they just do not know anything about the debate. Here, they are like liberals are on economic matters, they think with their emotions and not their intellect.
See for yourself if what I am saying is not true.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
What happens when those three categories come into conflict? Off the top of my head, "conservatives" might want to crack down on marijuana, but "libertarians" might want to legalize it. How would we proceed withough splintering the coalition?