The Republican Party of Kentucky: A Failure

(Note: This was originally, in part, written before the 2015 elections and after the 2011 elections in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It has been modified accordingly for accuracy) 

Fact: The Republican Party of Kentucky lost most of the offices it ran for in this election.

Fact: The Republican Party of Kentucky failed its constituents in electing Republican candidates.

Let me explain these two premises above in this article. While I am a conglomerate of ideals, I locate myself in the Republican party sights. Now I may occasionally veer towards the center or right of this spectrum in some cases--on a rare occasion I have crossed to the other side. Now, setting that aside, let's talk about the real problem of the Republican Party of Kentucky.

As a Republican, it is usually a hard campaign to fight in a trending state that goes Democrat on the state level, but Republican (except for the first term of Clinton) on the national level. However, it is possible for a Republican to attain control of an office. The problem laid with the Chairman and the people coordinating the front for GOP candidates. While the Chairman and the Party attempted to prepare certain people with the fortitude and capabilities to campaign, they failed miserably.

The most important thing for a political party to do in an election is show that their candidate is out there and make the news want to see it. Political advisors, managers, and strategists know all well that one key point is name recognition. In this cycle, c. 2011, the Republican candidate was known. However, he was known for the state pensions debacle and other notorious little things that have slanted the Senate President's chances of taking the Governor's office. Even from the other offices that could easily have been Republican wins, were lost because of ineptitude from the Republican Party of Kentucky.

The only candidate to win the 2011 state election was the Agricultural Commissioner. Granted, the opponent had made disparaging comments about his own constituencies had a dramatic effect on his election chances. Let's be reminded of some of the most important factors for elections, and these factors can be integrated into any cycle of election.

1. Name Recognition and Public Relations: This is one of the most pivotal things in elections besides money. This area is one that needs to be reaffirmed by any candidate of choice by the Republican Party of Kentucky. Even if their candidate did not have any recognition whatsoever, it would have been more profound to do "media bombs" to introduce the new candidate during strategic moments of air time. Further, to make any kind of advance into Democratic territory, we need to move forward in the internet age. If we fail--which we have--we may not be able to gain our momentum in taking what used to be our territory. 
2. Finance: Money is key, but not completely so. Some campaigns have been well planned with low finances. Now, several key Republicans have been able to use their money effectively and garner much needed funds. Now Senator Rand Paul used a style of "money bombing" to effectively recruit supporters to provide random sums of money. This technique proved valuable and useful for his campaign and winning the election. 
3. Technology Revolution: The KYGOP stays in its door to door mentality when most voters are not at home much, they are the epitome of the Techno Era. They log more hours now on Twitter, Facebook, and Vine than ever. To reach max efficiency, the KYGOP must vigorously ramp up its social media arm and attune to its voters. It needs more bloggers, more flash-mob recuritment, and need to enhance the College Republicans to deal with college students on their own campus while the main party must focus on in-state voters who meet the criteria. 
4. Quality Candidates: We need candidate who match the overall electorate, not what the party thinks it needs. We need candidates who are more moderate, yet principled, who can value their assets and yet call on the opposition--when necessary. A Tea Party candidate would not necessarily fair well--except for Rand Paul, inside a state election.We need candidates who can appeal to all the citizens. 

The KYGOP has failed for too many years because it does not look forward, for the near future or even the future! The Party must shed its visage of the decadent past and mobilize working people to rally for a better Commonwealth that makes us better in all aspects. 

Game of Thrones: Senate Edition

The rolling hills of Kentucky is a vast land, with 120 small municipalities tied to the Iron Throne of the Commonwealth. Alas, the Iron Throne was ousted to move closer to the Capitol, District of Columbia. A Governor now sits on the once majestic throne of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

If only politics were such a game of throne, oh wait, it is. Today's match pair the embattled senior Senator to a recently elected Secretary of the Ballot box. (I use these terms to make this dialogue funny, not to make the actual post degraded or less important.)

Each candidate had the floor to debate the core issues of this state/commonwealth, whichever you prefer--albeit the Commonwealth is the correct term. This debate gets a star rating of 0.5/5 for it performance.

Why? Isn't it clear? No? Well shame on you! Because it is quite clear that neither one of the candidates shone bright like a diamond.

Each candidate sucked beyond belief. This wasn't a debate, it was a televised version of who can be more than the other. Both candidates waited for the last moments to actually strike like the Death Star Mk. II in the Battle of Endor. It was beyond silly.

Let's take each candidate briefly:

I'll start with Sir Mitch McConnell R-KY, Senate Minority Leader. [Caveat, if you continually cry that he's old, look at the Democrat Party for an equal if not more longstanding Senator whose older than Merlin.] Here's Mitch's problem:

1. Obama.
2. Obama
3. Obama
4. Grimes
5. Obama
6. Grimes
7. Obama
8. He can't articulate anything of value, except for,
9. Obama
9a. And his policies which have spent a trillion dollars in less than 2 years (which Bush-43 did in over 8 years combined, excluding certain factors.)

Obama is the mainstay of the Party line for all things. Why? Because he's our villain. He's the Jedi to our Sith, just like we're the Jedi to the Democrats Sith. (Or was that reverse in the Sith to our Jedi?) Either way, the drastic and rather ramrod of a platform of excessive spending, cap and trade, taxation without deficit reduction, and a whole host of things have made the Republican Party become anti-Obama because it works, it worked in 2012 and it will most likely work in 2014. The major problem for Republicans the spending without restraint, attempting to buffer a collapsing Medicare and Social Security that will flatline and bust in the mere decade or less. With the Welfare State rising so high, devaluing the true value of the original programs and their whole worth, the United States will end up like Greece: a royal cluster of so much debt that even a conservative austerity measure will bring the country to its knees.

Alison Grimes, Secretary of State- KY, Democratic Candidate for US Senate. Here's Alison's problems:

1. Mitch
2. Mitch
3. Mitch
4. Mitch
5, Mitch
6. Obama
7. Mitch
8. Mitch
9. Obama
9a, the EPA.

Mitch and the Republicans are her enemy, they are the Empire to her Rebellion, her Targaryen to Baratheon/Lannister. Either way, she wants the Republican Party to end up like Ned Stark or the Targaryens. The constant battle of having to show that Republicans are so out of touch with a can of sardines, tires her. It makes her cringe every time she hears that of all of the polls, only the Bluegrass and Courier-Journal have her up by two points and within the margin of error. Her case of defeating the tenured Senator relies on escaping from Obama's policies and running just to edge of the Party that when she wins, she can race right back and do what she thinks (or the Party Leader). Her fear is that we'll end up like Mussolini's Italy, where the darkness of evil runs deep in fascism and racism against the ones who dirty the blood lines. (Ok, even that was difficult to write because frankly, fascism is so far down the spectrum of the Right, even the Fringe doesn't want it.) But nevertheless, the small government, tax limited society, the return of the 50s. the Dark Ages, are all things this candidate feels will occur if the Republicans recapture control.


Here are a few facts, mostly because my fingers are tired of typing:

1. Neither Party had stood for what it believes. The Republicans abandoned the spirit of Lincoln and his practices. The Democrats ran from their hatred of Blacks in turn to pay them to be quiet in the form of Welfare and the Great Society. The Democrats have done little to nothing to protect the minorities. The Republicans have done nothing to protect the middle class. The Democrats have joined with Republicans in polarizing their philosophies.

2. The Commonwealth of Kentucky hasn't voted for a Democrat on the national election since Clinton's first term--which they voted against in his reelection.

3. The Commonwealth is still stuck in the Southern Democrat mentality of things, that until they escape, the votes will always be Republican on the national level and Democrat on the State level.

4. Claiming in one or two ads that you're against the EPA, for Coal Country, and the NRA, doesn't make you better than your candidate.

5. Records of voting must be taken into full account, not based on one particular amendment that you like and they didn't.

6. Don't wait until your final 30-second closing arguments to say your opinions/goals of your term. Do that in the beginning.

7. If you have to take a cheap shot at an accidental video mistake, you deserve a punch to the face for lowering your standards.

8. Your record shows everything, and when you have none to back your claims on, it hurts you.

In conclusion, neither is a best option, but do educate yourself on your candidates and if they have a record, look at it...if not, good luck.