Discussion with an RNC staffer.

[Sparkly]

Husb and I had occasion to meet a young RNC staffer today at an event. The staffer was a guest of one of the attendees. Here are some of the highlights, for what it's worth. (To protect identities, I'm just going to refer to this person here as "TS" for "The Staffer.")

First, TS is not interested in policy, but rather is embarking on a career in political campaigning. Second, TS seemed genuine, but take this with however large a grain of salt as you'd like, for obvious reasons.

We asked who the RNC would least like to run against in 2008. The first reply was that Gore or Kerry would be easiest to defeat. After a pause, the second reply was "maybe Evan Bayh." (!) And after that, Hillary Clinton.

The rationale was that Hillary has "high negatives" but that she's also strong as a candidate and the negatives could be overcome with a good campaign.

We asked what TS thought of Wesley Clark. Answer: a great story, great bio, but not a "smooth" politician on the retail side. Perhaps working with a media consultant for awhile would make him viable.

(To which I had to ask whether Chimpy is a "smooth" politician on the retail side. Answer: No, but being governor provides experience, and despite his money people see him as a "regular guy.")

TS showed some unfamiliarity with the pre-Iowa Democratic primaries last year, stating that Dean and Clark didn't raise much money, although acknowledging strong grassroots and internet structures.

TS conveyed little concern about 2006, but greater concern about 2008.

About our theory that Cheney will resign and the 2008 candidate will be appointed in his place, TS doubted that.

About the CIA leak investigation: TS doesn't think they "have enough on Rove" to indict him. (Notice that choice of wording.) But TS thinks indictments will come down to somebody. Also, TS said that if Rove comes out with a real stench of wrongdoing, he'll likely be gone, criminal indictment or not.

About Hackett: lots of money went in to help Schmidt once it became evident it was getting close. Seemed like that came as a surprise.

That's it -- again, just for what it's worth.

[Fridays Child]

1. Would it be safe to assume that TS doesn't believe Bush is involved...

...in Rovegate?

[Sparkly]

2. Hard to say.

We didn't ask, and I doubt we'd have gotten a straight answer on that one.

[Skwmom]

30. Do you really think you got a straight answer on anything?

The Hillary comment was the exact same talking point an RNC rep said on one of the cable shows today. Do you really think the RNC staff doesn't already have a list of talking points for 08?

[Cosmocat]

3. Replies ...

* I know there are a lot of people here who are partial to Kerry and Gore ... I felt they were decent and intelligent men who were FAR superior candidates that the chimp ... However, I have to agree with this staffer that those two would be the easiest to defeat ... They are marked losers, and as ridicuous as this will be, I can tell you how the R/Cons will spin it, and it will work ...

They were SO bad they lost to W ... They won't say it directly, but that will be what it boils down to ...

* The Ds have to WIN something in 2006, at worst a split in one side of the house ...

* Rove will at best be indicted with perjury ... But, the chimp will stand by him until the bloody end ... NO WAY, if the ridiculious happens and he faces no charges, NO WAY, Bobo cuts him loose ... Bobo gets mad when people are mean to his friends ...

[safi0]

7. I half agree

With you. I think Kerry is a complete no-no and we should stay away from him with a 10 foot pole. But I think with Moveon, his TV channel and appearances on things like SNL Gore has made almost a complete 180 in his public image and I'm not saying he would win but I think he could win.

[FreedomAngel82]

15. Gore has really changed a lot

If I can't have Kerry I would have Gore. Like Jon Stewart said: "losing the presidency really agrees with him." He's really changed a lot. I saw one of his MoveOn speeches about Iraq and the courts and he was great! I think he would be the best if it can't be Kerry.

[newyawker99]

33. Hi Cosmocat!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[ThoughtCriminal]

4. These guys

Whether they're working for Republicans or Democrats, they don't seem to really care about our country, it's just a paycheck. For all they care it might as well be a brand of soap.

[Stinky The Clown]

5. In some ways you're quite right

I asked TS about ideology and how important that is to doing the job. TS said ideology matters. Hard to do what they do and not be ideological. That said, I got the impression is was also a competitive sport and success is measured as wins and losses.

So yeah ..... in that regard, I would have to say TS saw it all in many ways as the same as selling soap.

[FreedomAngel82]

16. Look at Karl Rove

That's a perfect example. He doesn't really care about anything. Everything he does is strictly political and to be remembered in history (for being a thug!).

[Samantha]

6. I don't think "TS" knows too much about politics or in the alternative

showed a distinct lack of candor.

Gore and Kerry would not be the easiest to defeat. Gore won in 2000. Bush* and thus his coattails as of this date are less now than then.

I thought Kerry would be easy to defeat in 2004. I also thought this was why he got the nomination -- it was in the Clintons' best interests for the Dem to lose in 2004 because Hillary could not take on an incumbent Dem in 2008. 2008 is pretty much her last chance.

Back to Kerry, I do believe he like Gore won in 2004. I honestly believe the Republicans stole Ohio. I believe "TS" spewed that bullshit because that's what Republicans want Dems to think they believe. Hillary would be easier to defeat than either Gore or Kerry. The only thing she really has going for her is the DLC and the under-the-radar dealmaking Bill has made to grease her wheels. In the process of that under-the-radar dealmaking, some of our best candidates, particular Al Gore, have been eased out of the political limelight to make room for the spotlight to shine on Hillary. It's all about self-interests, not what is best for the Country.

Yes, all politics is local, but beyond that it's much more personal. What is in my personal best interests trumps all in this game, including what is best for the party or what is best for the Country. The only question for those who are not true statesmen, is what is best for ME.

Bush*s tenure as governor of Texas lent no experience towards occupying the Oval Office. That's a pure PR stint. The State of Texas is not run by the Governor. It's run by the Lieutenant Governor. Bush* had absolutely no practical experience to run this Country or the free world. The only things he had were (1) a name; (2) money; (3) the ruthlessness to do whatever it took to get where he wanted. And that he did with the help of Karl Rove.

I think our one last hope for recovery lies with whom the Dems run in 2008 and whether or not that person succeeds. And I hope to God we don't let the Republicans or the DLC influence that choice.

[Stinky The Clown]

8. Just to clarify ........

Our question to TS was who the RNC would most like as an opponent. TS's answer was a bit muddled, but in the moment clearer than stated in the OP. The feeling was that Kerry or Gore would be the easiest to beat. The feeling was Bayh (later, not now) and Clinton (now) would be the hardest to beat. I did an eyeroll at that response, but that is what was said.

As to idiot son's governor experience, it was not an answer about his **qualifications** to be pres, but rather, was about why he is better at retail politics than, specifically, Wesley Clark. TS felt idiot son learned to 'connect' with the voters as a 'regular guy' while he was governor. Again, the discussion was not about his governorship qualifying him as president.

[FreedomAngel82]

23. Just something I'm wondering

what does TS mean about Bayh with later not now? Do they mean after 2008 or something?

[Skwmom]

31. There was article on Bayh being terrible at retail politics (that he

needs to learn how to talk to the regular guy- and I don't believe it was written by a conservative). This TS gave you the RNC talking points.

[rainbow4321]

9. Yep..TX gov job=hood ornament

Which is why the battle between the TX Lt Gov and his Dem opponent for chimp's 2nd gov term was a ***total*** bloodbath--if the Dem candidate had won Lt Gov, chimp could NOT have run for Prez in 2000 as it would have left TX in the hands of a Dem gov. The repuke won only by some 60,000 votes, I believe....think of the lives that could have been saved had those 60,000 people voted Dem (or, given what we know NOW about the repuke regime, had those votes not been stolen)

[ten]

10. Of course he doesn't know much about politics

Nobody takes jobs as a staffer with either party if they know a lot about politics. If they knew a lot, they'd be out working as a consultant or some such thing. "TS" is probably somebody fresh out college looking for experience or some idiot who lacks the brainpower to do anything better. There's a non-trivial chance, actually, that both apply

[Stinky The Clown]

13. Consider this ......

TS is, indeed, young and if not 'fresh out of college' has a year or two experience at most.

What I took from our conversation was not so much what TS had to say specifically, but the themes. TS works as an assistant to a high placed RNC operative. Surely TS's views are, to a great degree, parroting of, or strongly influenced by, what's being discussed in the office.

TS was no idiot. Rather, TS struck me as bright, smart, articulate, and earnest. If forced to choose between your two postulations - idiot ... or looking for experience - I'd have to say TS is looking for experience; nurturing a resume.

Our conversation was perhaps 15 or 20 minutes. Surely long enough to form a pretty good opinion of the person. It was also pleasant and non-confrontational. I was looking for opinion ..... and, to be honest, some good dish ..... but not to convert or preach.

[FreedomAngel82]

20. I think what you got from TS

could be helpful. As I mentioned in this thread already everything these people say is backwards. If they aren't worried about 2006 then they are. Look at what happened with Ohio Tuesday! They always try to down play things and not make them to be a big deal. Remember how the media did to Dean and Kerry. I highly believe the republicans want us to run Hillary so they can win again. Why else are they proping her up so much with all these 2008 spectulations? We all know who the media favors and why they have this liberal media myth out there. They think we're going to fall for their tricks and elect Hillary as our canidate. I like Hillary as a person but not for president now. She has hardly any experience (just a few years in the Senate).

[FreedomAngel82]

17. Exactly!

I've learned with these people EVERYTHING, and I mean everything, they say where it concerns politics you turn backwards. If she says Hillary Clinton is hard to beat it's the opposite. Only thing Hillary has going for her is her husband and her name. I remember reading how in the primaries a lot of people didn't know who George Bush was and they thought he was his father (huh?!) and they just recognized the last name. Don't forget all of the smearing.

[election_2004]

11. Look at his credibility

Everyone go back and reread TS's responses to the rest of Sparkly and her husband's questions that they'd posed to him.

That should tell you how informed and savvy (or not) TS is.

[barb162]

12. notice the analysis, very strange but right on the mark at the same

time. They have everyone labelled like robots. Already tagged before they are announced candidates. I bet the GOP already has game books in place on how to run against every possible candidate

[FreedomAngel82]

25. Oh yes

The good old talking points.

[Skwmom]

29. Do you think the RNC staffers aren't counseled on what to say

when they are asked questions about 08?

[FreedomAngel82]

14. Interesting conversation

We can use this for next year and 2008. Since they aren't that worried about 2006 I think they really are. They can see the polls themselves in the news and how people are. This is good for us. You should send your conversation to the DNC or DFA who can pass it onto the DNC and they can maybe use this. I think if we concentrate on 2006 we can really pick up a lot. There are still areas that don't use voting machine's and have paper trails (we don't, but have paper trails). Even if we do lose in 2008 what matters is the House and Senate I think. It'll be nice to have a democratic administration again though. I didn't even know Evan Bayh was thinking of running. :shrug: I don't think Cheney is going to resign either. He likes getting his money and making his pockets richer. Only reason why he would resign is if he's on his death bed. I personally think whatever happens with Fitzgerald we'll all be surprised.

[Stinky The Clown]

18. Your take on 2006 ......

..... pretty much matches mine. After TS said there was little worry about 06, I said I thought we would make gains but not win either house. TS pretty much agreed with that, which was a bit at odds with the initial expression of lack of concern for 06. Unsaid, but how I read TS's body language at this exchange, they're worried.

Mind you, we were very up front that we're Dems ... and strongly so. Maybe it would have been smarter on our part to not have been so forthcoming with that info ... but that's the way it went.

[FreedomAngel82]

21. Of course they're worried

Lying and talking points only get you so far. If you go back to your original post and turn everything around you can see their plans right there. This person basically gave it to you!

[Renew Deal]

19. I would mostly agree.

I think that there's nothing on Bayh. He's young and super popular in a red state. He'd be hard to nail down.

[FreedomAngel82]

22. Exactly

I've never heard of Bayh before until I was in a neighborhood here in town and someone had a sticker of him on their car. :shrug: But they want us to run Bayh or Hillary. They know they can beat them. Turn everything this TS person said backwards and you have their whole plans. Someone should send this to Dean.

[Renew Deal]

24. Maybe they know you will think they are giving you the opposite

so they are saying the opposite of the opposite. :shrug:

I wouldn't think too hard on this. It's a conversation between two regular people, not much more.

[FreedomAngel82]

26. Could be

I don't know, but why else would they have these talking points and stay on message with each other? :shrug: But what does count is there's something to work with. We should really concentrate on 2006 I think. Then if we take back the House and Senate we can hold real hearings for major issues that are important from Iraq to voting.

[Stinky The Clown]

27. Hahahaha .........

...... you're sooooo right! :)

We can sure overthink things every now and again. I would tend to take TS's words at face value. Again, I was there and an active participant. TS was in many ways flattered that an old fart like me would actually deign to even talk with TS. TS's escort knew who I was and, without going into any details, knows I was a bit of a big shot at this event and someone many others would want to speak with. And yet here was young TS getting undivided face time with me. All in all, I take TS at face value .... at least in this particular conversation.

[Skwmom]

28. A "smooth politician?"

Voters like Bush because he is a "regular guy" but Clark should get a media consultant and become a smooth politician? The last thing the Democrats need is another "smooth politician." Obviously the RNC staffer has been advised what to say when asked about 08. On one of the cable shows an RNC representative repeated the same line about Hillary today. They are really consistent with their talking points.

[Stinky The Clown]

34. This notion of a 'smooth' politician vs 'regular guy' politician ......

I just don't get it.

They love labels. They create labels. They use labels to great effect.

'Limousine Liberal', for example. How is that any different from Jack Abramoff? I'll tell ya ..... one of them doesn't bribe politicans.

"Hollywood Elite' ...... how is Barbara Streisand different from Charlton Heston? If one needs an answer to that, one isn't paying attention.

'Partisan Hack' ..... how is Karl Rove different from Bob Shrum (except for ability)?

[Swamp Rat]

32. Why isn't "TS" in iraq?