I was really hoping that Sharron Angle’s new campaign would at least show some signs of learning from the past. I wasn’t impressed with her “reset” press conference – you can’t just demand respect like a petulant teen, you have to actually earn it all on your own. But it beats not talking to the press at all. I hope she is not the nominee for a number of reasons, but since there’s a chance she might be, I had hoped she would at least show herself to be a humbled, wiser, and more credible candidate.
And then I saw this E-mail from her explaining how the VFW is a bunch of traitors.
As a proud American, I was very disappointed when Veterans of Foreign Wars-PAC (VFW-PAC) betrayed America and American Veterans by endorsing liberal members of Congress…
Could you ever, ever, in a million years, imagine Ronald Reagan writing or saying something like this?
~~~
First of all, as a veteran, I find her E-mail incredibly offensive. Nothing aggravates me more than anyone “speaking” for me. When I was on active duty, I saw plenty of these condescending little bumper stickers or yard signs, and I hated them all. (Right now every week a group of aged hippies puts them in front of the State Capitol while they flash peace signs for a few hours. C’mon, guys. It’s been 50 years.) It’s one thing when there’s a draft, but in an all volunteer force the underlying premise is that people in uniform are simply too stupid to know what’s good for them. Military personnel may not be able to participate in public policy debates directly, although they do with various blogs, votes, and political donations in many cases, but if nothing else they sure can vote with their feet come reenlistment time.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t rigorously debate military policy, or include the fact that military people will likely die in those operations as part of the debate. We absolutely should. We must. But let’s each speak for ourselves while we do it. I don’t need to be told who is on my side or not, in or out of uniform. I can figure it out. And as far as I’m concerned, once you’ve worn a uniform, you get wide deference from me on who you chose to vote for, whether I agree or not.
So when Sharron Angle has to explain to me that I’ve been “betrayed” by certain politicians or organizations, I’m equally annoyed, just on principle. And if you’re willing to risk turning ME off to your putatively conservative campaign, then your tent is way too damned small.
~~~
Then there’s the fact that her facts are wrong, or at least out of date. I don’t personally understand how ANY veteran’s group could in good conscience endorse “The war is lost” Harry Reid , but that’s their right. But the full truth which Sharron doesn’t mention is that even before the November elections in 2010, enough VFW members were upset with these endorsements that the endorsing committee was dissolved and the endorsements effectively pulled.
Did Sharron just not do any homework whatsoever before slagging the VFW as “traitors”? Or did she know about the pulled endorsements and ignore it? Neither alternative is acceptable for anyone, but particularly not a US Congressional candidate.
Besides, I don’t think the VFW has ever claimed to be a conservative organization. It makes sense that they look at funding for VA services and that sort of thing when considering their endorsements, and that big spending Democrats might do well in such an analysis.
And the punctuation and grammar of her E-mail – UGH! A mess. I know I’m not always perfect on this blog, but then, I don’t have a full campaign staff and copy editors to check it before I hit “publish.” Presentation matters to both effective communication and the credibility of the ideas presented. And if Sharron should have learned nothing else in 2010, it’s that her presentation needs a whole truckload of polishing.
~~~
There are two ways of establishing a conservative (or any other) coalition. The first is to be a Gate Keeper, and purge your organization or coalition of any heretics. You “win people over” by creating or uncovering boogymen and enemies, and try to scare them over to your side. All this is fine if you’re happy with a small group and never actually want to, you know, win an election or get conservative laws passed. Even if it works in the short term, in the end it will poison and undermine any movement that employs tactics for generations.
The other is to be an Ambassador, stake out your conservative ground, and then invite people to partake. To do this, you need to actually know how to communicate. You have to give people the benefit of the doubt. You have to be able to tolerate a certain amount of differences of opinion in certain areas without suspicion. And you have to be able to teach and explain why it is that conservative policy benefits the vast majority of all Americans (and indeed, all people). Reagan was such an Ambassador. So was Thatcher. It doesn’t mean you soft-pedal Conservatism, or embrace “pale pastels,” but when you wave your bold colors it should with a message that says, “Follow me!” not “Stay away, unclean!”
You need to talk about “Our liberal friends,” not “Alinskyite traitors.” That doesn’t mean you can’t get aggressive when needed in attacking bad policy. But you don’t win over new supporters when any disagreement might make you an “enemy.”
Currently, all available poll data suggest Sharron can only win a very divided primary. That incentivizes her to sow division within the GOP when unity is more important than ever. Why would anyone support a necessarily divisive candidate has already turned off over half of her districts’ fellow Republicans and activist base, and is showing no ability to win them back in a general election?
If Republicans want to win CD2, and more importantly, get good conservative policies enacted into law, we need an Ambassador. So far, even in the short time she’s declared for this race, Sharron has done nothing to convince me that she can be an effective Ambassador for Conservatism.
~~~
It’s not that Sharron Angle has lost elections before – she’s right, plenty of other important figures in history rebounded from prior defeat. It’s that “press releases” like this show beyond any doubt that she clearly doesn’t understand why she lost, and therefore, will continue – and is in fact continuing – to make the same mistakes that led to Harry Reid’s reelection last year.
And it’s not that Sharron Angle is too conservative. Reagan spent a lot of time being derided for being “too conservative,” and the press was far more universally hostile to him – there was no Fox News in 1980 to provide him refuge! It’s that she’s not a leader. She’s proven herself during her years in the State Assembly and as a perennial candidate simply unable for whatever reason to actually build the kind of coalitions and credibility necessary to turn conservative ideas into policy. It’s that she would rather find new enemies than new friends. It’s that she proved and continues to prove that she cannot wield the tools of politics – words – effectively or even competently. And that means that even if she wins her latest race, it won’t actually benefit the GOP, the Conservative movement, or the United States of America.
Buckley was only half right. Being electable alone isn’t enough. You also have to be effective once elected.
~~~
It might be a different matter if the only other Republicans likely to run are so liberal themselves that they serve only to put a bipartisan face on liberal failure. But there are plenty of other solid, reliable conservatives eyeing CD2.
I’ve known Sharron for years, and I know her heart is in the right place. But that’s not enough – there is no value to a “participation” medal. She needs to rethink her decision to run for this race, and spend some time reflecting on how she can turn her admirable tenacity into effective conservative leadership. If she doesn’t, she will be responsible in part for great harm to the GOP in Nevada and to the country as a whole.
Some might even call that a “betrayal.”
