RE: For this we need a panel discussion:

I'm putting my response to the comments of my last post here because it's to long to fit in the comment section and frankly want to push this debate further in hopes to get more people involved because I like hearing peoples opinions.

When I left the last post I was hoping that I would get responses from people other than wacky liberals and I did, which is great. I appreciate your viewpoints and definitely can see how some people in the party could be upset with the Governor. I’m as frustrated as the next person that despite holding both the Governor and Mayor of NYC it hasn’t spilled over to other elected seats. The theory that a rising tide lifts all boats definitely didn’t hold true.

I think whenever anyone is looking for answers to why something didn’t workout it’s always easier to point to the top. I always compare politics to business and this time will be no different. When a company is having problems the CEO is always the one to get the blame. However many times no matter whom the CEO is the forces surrounding the market that company is in is to powerful for them to have a positive effect. As I have said in the past voters are like consumers, that’s your market and you have to know what your customers want. Is it possible that the consumers (voters) of New York like to purchase liberal politics which makes the brand of politics we’re selling harder to gain market share? I don’t know why people just can’t accept the fact that we live in a city and state that agrees with liberal politics. As I mentioned in my original post, we would laugh at the idea of a bunch of Democrats sitting around in Kentucky trying to figure out why they can’t get elected because we know why. The consumers (voters) in that state believe in the Republican creed or brand over what Democrats are offering.

Now no way does this mean we can’t turn this ship around, transform how we deliver our message and slowly pick away at the market share Democrats currently hold but it will take allot of work. Howard, you mention how Pataki didn’t win and Cumo lost and you are 100% correct. Pataki won because the consumer was disgruntled after years of poor service and wanted to try another option. However though he was handed his first election he earned his next two and you shouldn’t take that away from him. It’s the same reason Rudy finally won as mayor, our city after years of poor service said lets try purchasing the Republican brand of politics and see what the results are.

Why we haven’t been able to channel those results into local races could be for a number of reasons including maybe the people in this city view things as going well so don’t see a reason to change their local representatives. That’s why if we’re going to be successful I think we have to learn from Pataki and Rudy and look for when our competitor gives us an opening to exploit like Brian McLaughlin just did in Queens. Here is a guy who is a local assemblyman and head of the NYC Central Labor Union, can you say conflict of interest? Recently both his assembly office and labor office was raided because of his possible implication in bid rigging for electrical work in the city. Locally we should be all over this, mobilizing and pounding away now how the voters aren’t being served right and should choose another option. Besides the initial news of the raid I haven’t heard jack on our side.

Is this the governor’s fault, maybe, maybe not? Again in business, the CEO can’t possibly control everything that is why you have regional and local managers. For McLaughlin’s seat that direction in my opinion should be coming from the Queens County Chairman. My wife runs Manhattan and parts of Queens for a major retail company, when an opportunity comes up she doesn’t wait for the CEO to tell her to move on it, that’s what they pay her for. The Governor’s job is to run the state and delegate the responsibility of party growth to local leaders. If anyone needs to be criticized maybe it should be our county and district leaders.

Finally I just don’t agree that attacking Pataki is the answer just like I don’t agree with Republicans currently attacking Bush as the answer to their 2006 elections concerns. Trying to separate yourself shows dissention, implies weakness not strength as this panel discussion attempted to do and alienates the voter even more from our party, making it harder to deliver our creed.

Speaking of creed I would like to leave one last note, Daniel, you say the NYGOP creed has nothing of “substance” and I frankly have no clue what you’re taking about. Going to the website you directed me to, I read nothing but line after line of why I’m a Republican. If that list isn’t why you’re a Republican then I don’t what list does and maybe is a good look into why we’re having problems. If you can’t look at that list and be convinced why you’re a Republican how can you expect someone who always votes Democrat too look at it and change.