American Conservatives Debate Building a New Movement

October 30th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Increasingly more American conservatives are joining a webdebate about how to prevent massive future losses (in elections), and how to rebuild the once so powerful and successful conservative movement.

The main problem with the Republican Party and its activists is, the consensus seems to be, that they are still acting as if it is 2003. Republican Party strategists seem to believe that the tactics they have used for years will still work in the end, if only voters see that Democratic leadership and control of both Congress and the White House will not result in better policies.

Conservative bloggers and activists, however, argue that this will not be the case. They have studied the way liberal activist sites like Kos (Markos Moulitsas) and Open Left organized themselves, ended up dominating the Democratic Party and, more important, winning elections.

What is necessary, conservative blogger Ace of Spades argued in a post published at his blog recently, is for conservative bloggers to join the fundraising drives, to create lists of candidates for state and national offices, to encourage readers to donate to their campaign, to get out and lobby for them, and conservatives have to present their own viable candidates, even in areas normally controlled by Democrats.

Activist Patrick Ruffini, co-founder of The Next Right, agreed with Ace in a post published shorly after Ace published his. Ruffini wrote: “Building critical mass behind an independent online movement on the right will probably require new people. The old blogs that have been with us since 2003 will not go away. But they’ll need to be joined by people who care more about Indiana’s 8th district than Islamofascism, and MN-SEN more than the MSM.”

“Building this infrastructure is largely human resources issue,” he went on to write. “The three founders of this blog all have permanent day jobs, and this time of year, more like the equivalent of 2 or 3. For my part, I wouldn’t have it any other way, because part of that job is putting into practice some of the ideas I discuss on the blog. But stealing time for a post can be hard, and I’m cognizant of the fact that more good posts always equals more traffic.”

“Almost without exception, conservative bloggers are hobbyists, and those that aren’t are usually employed by old line conservative media. A lack of politically sophisticated full-time bloggers, as well as dependence on existing center-right institutions, is holding the rightroots back from becoming a full-fledged counterpart to the netroots — one that is not beholden to the Republican Party or the offline conservative movement.”

There are problems, however. As Ruffini made clear in his post and which was later confirmed by other conservative bloggers, most of them do not want to become official bloggers for the Republican Party. They want to keep their independence. If the Republican Party invests in such blogs, it means that the blogs are no longer 100% independent, causing them not to become conservative activists as much as Republican activists.

However, that problem could be overcome by encouraging new blogs to be created who will do what Ruffini and Ace said. These blogs can focus completely on getting Republicans elected, in one election after another. At the same time, successful conservative blogs can link to those blogs, help them get readership, encourage readers to donate to the campaigns selected by said new blogs, yet they can remain independent and passionately writing from a conservative not Republican perspective nonetheless.

Of course, such a change will leave room for sites like PoliGazette to become bigger in the right-of-center news and opinion market. This too will help conservatives everywhere in so far that it will provide them with information that is not from a slanted liberal perspective, nor from a hard ideological conservative one. Internet readers too will thrive, for they will have the opportunity to be ‘active’ and to simply read the news, analysis, and opinions from a non-partisan, reasonably moderate (conservative) perspective.

In the end, that market too is important, for as we have seen during this year’s campaign, virtually every major source for news is highly biased. What is needed are websites, such as PoliGazette, that may mostly be written from a right-of-center perspective, but that are non-partisan and not highly ideological nonetheless.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.