John Thune to be big part of GOP re-branding effort. Why do we need to re-brand?

I agree, PP, that we cannot leave behind our conservative ideals. Hopefully the “rebranding” effort will simply try to present our tried-and-true conservative beliefs in a new way – to show that they are a positive plan, not just a “Vote no on Obama”

Sort of related. (Axe it if you want, PP.) Nice little peek behind the scenes from Tom Katus in Sam Hurst’s on-line paper.

http://www.dakotaday.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61:mr-smith-returns-to-washington-views-from-the-gallery-congress-a-executive-departments&catid=1:column-two-catigory&Itemid=19

Perhaps the brand is in trouble. It is sort of like buying a Rolls and having all kinds of problems with it. The brand gets damaged. The Republican brand has been damaged. I am not so sure they need re-branding, but instead more of a commitment to what got them into power. If we continue to have a choice between Democrats and Democrats lite, there is no real choice.

How about real fiscal conservatism (smaller government that we can pay for out of this year’s budget) and an emphasis on social liberty? Where the republican brand gets tarnished is where they attempt to assert control over peoples’ personal lives. That is usually the tipping point for the political pendulum to swing the other way.
When the democrats doing the same, it will swing back again. If the republican party wants the government back, they need to have this plan in place before the mid-terms.

Err… that should be “when the democrats start doing the same”

I for one am glad to see this. I’m a conservative and think Obama is leading the whole nation down the wrong road and saddling us with huge debt. But I believe the Republicans have also overspent. I want to see what this group defines as its goals. I particpated in the tea party in Sioux Falls, and there are a whole lot of people out there that are looking for something to turn this country around. We want a fiscally conservative, pro smaller gov’t, more personal responsibility type of party. Let’s see where this goes. We don’t need to change our basic beliefs, but we do need to develop a strategy to get that across to the voters in a positive way, and we need to do it before the next election.

So the first issue to get government “out of people lives”, or keep it out, would be abortion rights, no?

Hmm, “lipstick on a pig”?

So the first issue to get government “out of people lives”, or keep it out, would be abortion rights, no?

I don’t see why the government needs to tell people what they can or can’t do with their own bodies.
To me, that includes abortion, sexual behavior, blue laws, and the less dangerous recreational drugs.
At the very most, those should be state and local issues.

Anon 12:23, that would be the case for those focusing on a selfish, irresponsible woman. For those of us who see the unborn baby, and their right to life, it’s not a matter of privacy and staying out of her life but the baby’s right to life.

Back to the point of the post: re-branding is a marketing term. Basically, the GOP is saying that the way people see us is bad (think AMWAY), and we need them to view us in a different light (Cabela’s). I think we need two things, a new image (which we too often allow to be set by others) and a new product: actually being fiscally conservative, small government, and there to represent individual rights (yes, even those of unborn children over selfish, irresponsible women).

“Why do we need to rebrand?”

Because you are always asking stupid questions like that.

MSNBC, CNN Ratings Plunge as O’Reilly Reigns

Wednesday, April 29, 2009 11:30 AM

By: Jim Meyers Article Font Size

MSNBC and CNN’s primetime news programs have suffered an incredible nosedive in ratings since Barack Obama was elected president, Newsmax has learned.

Ratings for “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” on MSNBC at 8 p.m. have plunged a dizzying 42 percent since October, shortly before the election. CNN’s 8 p.m. show, now being hosted by Roland Martin, has seen a 49 percent plunge over that time period, while “The O’Reilly Factor” on Fox News has dipped only 15 percent, according to Nielsen Media Research.

Bill O’Reilly’s 8 p.m. show remains the top-rated cable news program, averaging 2,650,000 million households per night in April, more than the combined totals for Olbermann’s program (938,000) and CNN’s 8 p.m. offering (613,000) — with more than a million households to spare.

In the key demographic of viewers 25 to 54 years old, Olbermann has lost 53 percent of his average nightly audience, a precipitous plunge. Rachel Maddow, who follows him at 9 p.m. on MSNBC, has lost an astounding 65 percent of her 25-to-54 audience since October, and her 819,000 households in April compare poorly to Sean Hannity’s 1,953,000 households on Fox.

O’Reilly has also trounced Olbermann among viewers aged 35 to 64 in April, with 1,724,000 viewers, down 19 percent since October. Olbermann suffered a 49 percent drop in that demographic and had 1,151,000 viewers.

The solid showing of “The O’Reilly Factor” and the plunging numbers for Keith Olbermann further belie Olbermann and MSNBC’s occasional claim that he is winning the ratings war in his time slot.

MSNBC took out a full-page ad in The New York Times last November proclaiming “A Sweeping Victory” for its ratings and declaring “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” the No. 1 cable news program.

But fine print at the bottom of the ad acknowledged that the “victory” referred only to the 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. time slot for the dates Oct. 27 through Oct. 31, for viewers between 25 and 54 years of age.

Overall, however, O’Reilly’s show averaged twice as many viewers as Olbermann’s.

Earlier last year, the liberal press crowed loudly when Olbermann narrowly beat out O’Reilly in the 25 to 54 demographic one week in June. But the rating results were misleading. On Tuesday of that week, the cable stations covered that day’s primaries, and on Friday, O’Reilly was on vacation, with Laura Ingraham filling in. Ratings for “The Factor” dip when O’Reilly is not the host.

On the three days when O’Reilly and Olbermann went head to head, O’Reilly won the 25 to 54 demographic. And he trounced Olbermann in total viewers, with 2,193,000 per night to Olbermann’s 1,031,000.

The O’Reilly-Olbermann feud has been ongoing for years. O’Reilly denies that there is a feud, and says he won’t even mention Olbermann by name. But Olbermann for his part has made O’Reilly the frequent recipient of his nightly “Worst Person in the World” award.

In a recent interview with Broadcasting & Cable magazine, O’Reilly said “The O’Reilly Factor” has fared well since Obama entered the White House because CNN and MSNBC comprise the “Obama cheerleading crew,” and viewers are tuning in to Fox because it is “more skeptical of the president.”

And Newsmax reported earlier that Obama’s win on Election Day “may be a Pyrrhic victory” for Olbermann, who “had positioned himself as the anti-Bush, anti-Republican news source on MSNBC. With Democrats firmly in control of the White House and Congress, it’s questionable that his audience will grow.”

Of course they need to re-brand, re-invent, and hardest of all – divest themselves of the hate, fear-mongering and spite. It is the epitome of hubris to run a card-carrying zealot against a senior senator as is Sen Spector. The senators’ job is to represent a jurisdictional constituency and not to represent a narrow sliver of zealous banksters and extremists. Yet that is moat the modern republicans created for themselves and all by themselves.

They need to do little engineering, but rather need to return to their roots which they’ve willfully ignored.
They need to: 1) return to the principles of equal justice and charity espoused and practiced by Lincoln; 2) to the the conservation and environmental practices of TR and Nixon; 3) the freedom of choice espoused by Goldwater; 4) the public works under federal stewardship practiced by Ike; and the desire for national health care first raised by TR. Until the repubs return to their moorings they are destined to wander in the wilderness as republicants.

Jeff J. –

Calling people selfish and irresponsible is no way to win supporters.
WWJD?

Calling a spade a spade is just fine. Getting pregnant when you don’t want to have a child despite having options to prevent it is irresponsible. I’m not against birth control in any form prior to conception. Wouldn’t you agree that a man who refuses to wear protection and impregnates a woman is being irresponsible? And she is selfish for putting her own desires ahead of the life of another person. Saving a life at the cost of personal inconvenience is exactly WJWD.

By the way Anon Dude, I happen to agree with the rest of your assessment (sexual behavior, blue laws, less dangerous recreational drugs). They are not practiced at the expense of another life. The government should absolutely stay out of it.

Let’s not start another pointless and endless abortion thread, but since the Repblicans posting here don’t think they need rebranding, they will probably continue down that path.

ABORTION IS MURDER! ABORTION IS MURDER!

Abortion is murder. No matter what you call the killing of an unborn infant, the child is still dead.

Two comments:

1) I’m sorry to see Rachel fall in her numbers so much. Unlike her cynical and mean spiteful cohort (olberman), Rachel is funny and appears to be a pretty nice person. Yes she can be sarcastic about the GOP and Republicans and is giddy about Obama and liberals (not all Democrats) but she isn’t mean about it. Just funny.

2) The context of this “re-branding” is an attempt to position the party’s message as more than just against Obama’s radical programs and not a continuation of Bush’s economic stewardship. My hope is they will refocus on traditional GOP economic priorities of a smaller, more nimble government, lower taxes that encourage economic growth, and balanced budgets. My hope is they will refocus the traditional GOP social priorities in ways that highlight the benefits to families and children. My hope is they will refocus on the traditional GOP foreign policy priorities on direct national security interests.

Parties are, in my mind, first vehicles for the development of broad ideas, messages and policies, second vehicles for accountability to the citizenry with regard to election and nomination integrity, and third vehicles for electing candidates.

Both parties have gotten this backwards right now. Changing the focus upside down would be good for the GOP. If the Dems did the same thing, it would be good for the country. But, if the Dems want to stay upside down, it is their choice and make it easier for the GOP to become the majority party.

Troy-

That has to be one of the funniest posts you ever wrote (yes I read the whole thing.) I especially liked this line;

“My hope is they will refocus the traditional GOP social priorities in ways that highlight the benefits to families and children.”

Because the opinions of Americans who don’t have children don’t count? I’ll remember that the next time I pay my income and property taxes (that go to educate your children).

To Hell with rebranding, you guys need a freaking exorcist!

If you have a wife Detroit, you are a family of two. If you don’t have a wife or children, you are a family of one. It goes to the principle of subsidiarity (providing the greatest authority and respect possible for the lowest level of social organization).

Detroit, this is implied when talking about “social” priorities. If your first knee-jerk response was to assume that was devoid of single Americans, you jump to conclusions way too quick. Didn’t your mom ever tell you to count to ten before you speak? You are supposed to use those ten seconds to think.

Abortion is murder. No matter what you call the killing of an unborn infant, the child is still dead.

Good luck getting into office outside of the Bible belt with that one…

My hope is they will refocus the traditional GOP social priorities in ways that highlight the benefits to families and children.

Really? So how do you brand interference with peoples’ personal decisions as a benefit without becoming a nanny state?

Saving a life at the cost of personal inconvenience is exactly WJWD.

But would he do it through the use of government power, or through personal intervention by people close to to person in question? I don’t recall Jesus ever asking for the government to ban things for peoples’ own good. That is entirely a human idea.

Well, you gotta do somethin’ fellas:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/party-of-nobody.html

Thanks for the ‘knee-jerk’ inspiration Troy;

http://www.southdacola.com/blog/2009/04/the-gop-to-rebrand-themselves-i-have-a-suggestion/

You can say what you want, I know what the ‘veiled’ family values talking points mean, and they have nothing to do with ’single’ Americans.

Thi thread probably explains why less than 21% of Americans identify with the GOP. I’m afraid we have become a minority religious party as opposed to a political party. One of the only places this works is South Dakota. For how long I don’t know.

We need to rebrand because we have no power and want it back.

The Democrats in South Dakota are out-registering Republicans at a shameful rate. Young people have little or no identification with the G.O.P. If it is to return to prominence, the Republican Party is going to need to realize that they can only hang their hat on free enterprise and low taxes. The Christian Right no longer holds a majority on their own. The party is going to need to embrace freedom and ease up on the rigid social issues that have turned away voters for years.

The National Council for a New America…

So far it’s McCain, Romney, Jeb Bush, Jindal…

The guy who lost, the guy who lost to the guy who lost, another Bush, and the Exorcist that made fun of volcano monitoring a few short months before Mount Redoubt in Alaska erupted…

Palin/Bachmann in 2012!

The GOP put up a Presidential candidate who was pretty much everything the Dems say the Republicans need to be — play nice, pander, “reach out,” and on and on and on. Guess what. We lost.

We need to wake up. We let Bush get away with overspending, which handed Obama a gift (an excuse for tripling said spending and putting the goverment in charge of everything).

We need to be real conservatives, much like many Dems are real liberals. We need to give Americans a choice. There’s wasn’t a real choice in 2008.

Emergency!

Does anyone here know CPR?

The Republican Party will not “rebrand”. They will come up with some fancy new slogans and push old leaders aside, but they will reach farther and farther to the right. The Party seems convinced they need to stay as far to the right as the possibly can despite electoral evidence to the contrary (21% of voters now self identify as Republican. After a string of electoral losses, they still can’t see the obvious evidence.

It’s exactly what happened to the Democrats: They nominated Michael Dukakis 16 years after McGovern lost!

It could be a long haul.

By golly, I think the rebranding has already begun! I am sure this will draw more independents and moderate Republicans back under our tent: Republican Bill Cunningham on Fox News Sean Hannity” “what we have here is this little boy who grew up in Jakarta, Indonesia, at the age of 6 to 10, rejected by his own father, rejected by his own mother, rejected by his stepfather, raised by his grandparents, bowing before the King of Saudi Arabia, kissing the behind of every European socialist, saying okay to people like Ahmenijad — we have the most dishonest, the most disreputable 100 days in American history, and this guy actually believes it’s good!” “I say the Statue of Liberty belongs in Cuba, and it belongs in Venezuela.”

Here’s the problem with my GOP: God is dead.

Whatever the “progressives” and Democrats say the Republican party needs to do to “correct itself”, the Republicans need to do the opposite.

BHO narrowly won the election by the strength of his persona and image, his actual policies and political background were virtually unknown to many of the voters, particularly the “swing votes” that don’t really think about politics until it’s time to vote.

The Republican candidate was the “moderate” Democrats always said they respected and supported. won’t actually VOTE for him, but they’re “supporters” none the less.

The fact that Obama’s relationships to Bill Ayers, Rev J Wright, ACORN, etc were “mentioned” in the MSM doesn’t diminish the fact that the MSM portrayed these relationships in the most favorable manner possible and as seldom as possible on their “back pages”.

Because of the cheerleading of the New York Times, Boston Globe, etc. the MSM’s biggest powers are rapidly going bankrupt. Once a news organization has lost its credibility it has nothing to sell the public. NYT, MSNBC, etc have become echo chambers for the left and because of that, are managing themselves into oblivion.

I think most people recognize that the country can’t “borrow its way out of debt” and that government (particularly at the most (remote / Federal) level can’t “manage” our path to recovery.

The overall unpopularity of GWB and his policies gave BHO the election. I know of no “conservative” that supported the GWB social spending orgy or the expansion of Medicare benefits under his term.

GWB = Conservative, I think not!

There’s really been no concerted, organized and focused effort by the GOP to truly attack the Democrats on their own policies when the POTUS is leading the charge to expand government influence.

PP, I’m surprised you and other Republicans don’t think your party needs to re-brand. This country’s demographics have drastically changed and in a way that gives Democrats the advantage.

In 2008, the youth vote overwhelmingly went to Obama and most youth lean to the left on many issues like gay marriage. McCain was one of the few Republicans that was liked by the latino community, but that vote went to Obama too. Do Republicans have a plan to reach out to those demographics?

I’m not sure “stick with our conservative principles” will do it.

John,

The problem is, if we don’t stick to our conservative principles, then we give up on what makes us who we are. When the Dems got hammered in ‘94, ‘02, and ‘04, did they stop being liberal? No, they widened the tent and allowed more than a few issues to govern their choices.

Unfortunately the abortion issue got dragged into this post, and I helped it stick. The fact is, I’m not even particularly religious and am a fiscal, national security conservative and social moderate. Reagan was happy to include people who agreed with him 90% of the time and work with them on the other 10%. I am in full agreement. I agree with most of what the GOP stands for, but not all. The problem is, too many people are all about one issue. I’m happy to have pro-lifers in the big tent. We can work together on everything else. I’m also fine with being in a party that insists on having recreational drugs and gay marriage illegal. I can vote with them on the things we agree on, and vote the other way on those we don’t.

Jeff, What conservative principles? The “throw the constitution under the bus” principle? The “invade nations under false pretenses and then set up occupation puppet governments” principle. The “3-day work-week” principle? The “budgets and deficits don’t matter” principle?

Everything I listed @2:02 was, at one time, a conservative principle. Everything. Those trying to reform my former party should embrace TR’s principle of trust busting – shred the big five banks as being too large for America and for their own good.

Instead, the repubs, like the demos, are not interested in doing what is right for the nation; rather they are only worried about getting (re)elected. State demos caving to the consumer hostile credit card industry is further evidence of the perversion of interests.

In honor of the GOP’s second re-branding this year, here’s their re-branded mascot.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/1/726714/-Open-Thread

The national roll out of the re-branding is a grand failure. It’s the equivalent of putting lipstick on the same old pigs.

From our state perspective there is a glimmer of hope in the emerging citizen-centric campaigns of Munsterman and Chris Nelson. On the other hand rolling out the failed legacies of Daugaard, Napoli, Apa, Knudson, et. al., merely reinforces failure.

Palin/Bachmann in 2012!

That sound you hear is Obama laughing.

BHO narrowly won the election by the strength of his persona and image,

“Narrow” would be the 2000 and 2004 elections. This one wasn’t even close. Obama was declared the winner about an hour after the polls closed.

The Republican candidate was the “moderate” Democrats always said they respected and supported. won’t actually VOTE for him, but they’re “supporters” none the less.

Yeah. They had their own guy they liked better. And really, I liked the John McCain who bucked his own party and actually was a moderate, not the guy who pandered to the base of his party during the general election.

There’s really been no concerted, organized and focused effort by the GOP to truly attack the Democrats on their own policies when the POTUS is leading the charge to expand government influence.

It would really help if you had a plan of your own to present to the american people instead of going around yelling “OMG SOCIALISM! TEH LIBRULS ARE GONNA STEAL YUR MONEY! THEY’RE EVIL ATHIESTS!”.

I’m not sure “stick with our conservative principles” will do it.

But you have to admit, it is a very conservative solution.

this may explin it:

http://driftglass.blogspot.com/2009/05/2012-republican-national-convention.html

This is exactly what I meant when I said that we let other people define us too often. And Jon, did I site specifically the conservative principles that I wrote of? Certainly not the strawmen you put up. Had we been following our true conservative principles and not done the things you mention, we would be just fine. That’s my argument

I happen to be a big TR fan, and agree with trust-busting. The “Too big to fail” argument always rang hollow to me, but if we are going to strongly regulate the banks, hedge funds, etc (and I believe this is what the government is here for on the domestic side), you better be ready for heavy regulation of Fanny and Freddie, and all the other democratic friends too. Here is my Republican Party:

1. Small, limited government primarily focused on international affairs and national security (The constitution, TR, etc)
2. Respect for states’ and individual rights (if the constitution does not specifically grant a power to the Feds, it lies with the states and the people… 10th ammendment)
3. Respect for the diversity of people and equal rights and opportunity to all (Dec. of Independence, Lincoln, etc)

Some of these went south in the 50’s and ’60s and some later, but we do need to get back to them.

To give the conservatives a good reference on the idea of rebranding (you know, not liberal blogs and post sites) see this one… I think it’s pretty good:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124112865488674761.html

“I’m not sure we need to “re-brand.”

Americans who believe they can communicate through ESP- 48%

Americans who believe they’ve seen a ghost- 36%

Americans who identify with the GOP- 20%

I’d strongly suggest it… maybe you could become the party of ghost whisperers and extra-sensory perception?

I switch parties for Jennifer Love Hewitt ANY DAY!

Braden, your data suggest that a significant majority of the people you site (believers in ESP, ghosts) come from the other side of the aisle… What’s that tell you about your following?

Braden, your data suggest that a significant majority of the people you site (believers in ESP, ghosts) come from the other side of the aisle… What’s that tell you about your following?

For starters, that it’s larger than yours.

Funny, Braden. Psychics and Ancestors for Congress! The right Repubs could maybe channel Ronald Reagan.

More people believe in ghosts then Republicans, how ironic, considering that’s all that will be left in the party by next year.

…now that Norm Coleman (R-MN) is running out of bogus excuses to keep Franken from being seated…

Isn’t it ironic that one of the first things Franken may vote on is approving a new Supreme Court Judge?

…I mean…I’m just saying…

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison when asked about what’s happened to the Republican party and if she’s worried after Arlen Specter’s defection: “Of course we’re worried. I think we would have to be ostriches with our heads in the sand if we weren’t worried. We need to look at ourselves thoroughly inside out and anyone who is whistling past the graveyard saying “Oh, we need to do exactly what we’re doing. We’re right by god” is wrong.

Whoa! I see another visit and apology coming to Rush Limbaugh tomorrow for daring to say there might be anything wrong with the way the GOP is doing business these days!

A few hours after Rush Limbaugh told listeners GOP leaders launching a Republican re-branding effort hated and feared Sarah Palin, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor announced that the Alaska governor had finally accepted an invitation to join the group. (CNN)

LOL Good Old Rush, you gotta love the guy. When he says jump the whole Republican leadership falls all over themselves!