Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Mitch Daniels’ Category

As this Newsweek piece reminds us, there are still 21 of them. I’m really not in the mood to talk about Bobby Jindal right now, since for the first time in my life a key figure in the Republican Party is younger than me, and I’m still stinging from the blow. (They don’t call in the Grand Old Party for nothing.)

It’s worth a read. The party has a great deal to figure out, in terms of policy and, as Mike Huckabee reminds us, process.

Read Full Post »

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels says his mind is made up and he won’t make another run for public office.

[…]

Governor Daniels says, “I don’t aspire to anything further. I do aspire to four more years, I hope, of motion and change and innovation and I hope delivering good responsible government to the people of Indiana. That’s what we set out to do, I was never interested in any other office, and we’re just going to try to give every day of four years to this state.”

And asked if he’d reconsider in any way, Governor Daniels replied, “No means no.”

Read the rest here. It is only natural that, in our brief run here, we have only covered Mitch Daniels briefly, including this post here.

Read Full Post »

Many post-mortems in the past month have espoused upon the GOP’s failures in embracing technology and message dissemination. I took a look at the 2012 candidates’ website to see if they have learned anything from these lessons. I rated these websites on a scale of 1 to 5 in three areas: Issues pages, Web 2.0 Goodies and Website Design.

Issues Page
A voter can only make an informed decision about a candidate if that candidate clearly states his or her position on those issues. A candidacy website is a great place for a candidate to lay out his or her positions. In this review I set the bar deliberately low. I simply looked for an issues page that was east to find, comprehensive and well-written. I’ll review the actual content of those candidate positions in a later article. This time around, even though, I set the bar low, many of the candidates still couldn’t clear it! Some didn’t even have an issues page. Others had pages that discussed the issues vaguely and in general terms. Admittedly, a well-written issues page is an exercise in spin. Even so, if a candidate is incapable of doing that, how is he or she supposed to influence a voter’s decision? Only three candidates had issues pages on their websites that compared to Obama’s issues page. (Please keep in mind that I’m not praising Obama’s message. I’m simply acknowledging that one reason he won the 2008 election is because he was much more effective than McCain in articulating that message.) Mitch Daniels, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich all have issues pages that can compete with Obama’s for clarity, thoroughness and user-friendliness.

Social Networking
The candidate who is best able to articulate and disseminate his message to like-minded voters has a huge advantage over a candidate who falls short in this area. Web 2.0 technology is the cutting edge of social networking. Why are so many GOP candidates in denial about Web 2.0? Probably because their base is older and not plugged in to it. Well, that’s a big problem! A candidate can’t concede an entire generation to the other candidate. That’s like a marathoner giving his opponent a two-mile head start. Too many Republican candidates in our survey fell short in this are. A few rose to the top: Mitch Daniels, Ron Paul and Steve Poizner. A trail pack of Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Eric Cantor and Bobby Jindal showed well in this category.

Website Design
This category is the least important of the three but still worth a mention. Why do so many politicians insist on a gaudy Red, White & Blue theme that screams patriotism? It seems like they all read the same book, one that told them that, unless they wrapped themselves in the American flag, people would question their patriotism. That’s silly. A website design says something about a candidate’s personality. Is she a maverick? Is he a conformist? Too many websites in our survey conformed to the I’m a Patriot School of Web Design. There were a couple of standouts, however. Instead of the usual cookie-cutter, run-of-the-mill, I’m Proud To Be An American design displayed by way too many of our candidates, Mitch Daniels went with an ultra modern blue and green theme that was a refreshing change of pace. Ron Paul has the edgiest, most youth-oriented site. It seems to whisper Revolution. He’s probably the real maverick in the GOP.
(more…)

Read Full Post »

(You guys go easy on me today, alright? I’m still outgrabed by the battering De La Hoya took last night.)

After decades of [state] legislators “fixing” the property tax system only to see it backslide years later, supporters of permanent property tax caps want those caps enshrined in the Indiana Constitution.

…Lawmakers took the first step in the amendment process – passing a joint resolution in the 2008 legislative session to add the caps to the Indiana Constitution.

…“As a general rule, putting limiting numbers in a Constitution can be very dangerous in the long run. It’s high risk,” said Rep. Win Moses, D-Fort Wayne. “It is my very strong opinion that we need to let the effects percolate.”

…But Gov. Mitch Daniels doesn’t buy the argument, using strong language last week to point out that Democrats passed the resolution in 2008, an election year.

“Every taxpayer ought to worry about a double-cross,” he said. “The legislature should simply live up to what it did just a few months ago and take the second step.”

Read it all here. I’m certainly no scholar of all state procedural matters, but tax hikes and cuts sound like matters for the state code, not constitution. Even so, one can certainly understand the ends, if not the means. Property tax rates are becoming abusive in some regions, especially considering the collapse in real estate prices and the economic downturn.

Read Full Post »

Chris Cillizza has a new entry in the Washington Post blog in which he reveals a GOP top 10 list that he insists is not a presidential candidates list. This is a list of Republicans, he writes, to “to keep an eye on over the coming months and years.” Uh… okay. You decide if the is a list or “The” List:

1. Bobby Jindal
2. John Thune
3. Mitt Romney
4. Mitch Daniels
5. Bob McDonnell
6. Mark Sanford
7. Eric Cantor
8. Jon Huntsman, Jr.
9. Haley Barbour
10. Steve Poizner

Curiously, he names two people, Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee, on whom, I suppose, we are not NOT to keep an eye. Aren’t those the biggest elephants in the room?

Read Full Post »

Sarah PalinAs someone who sat out the latter half of the 2008 presidential election, I never really got the Palin phenomenon.  I’m not sure if conservatives got it, either.  Ask a self-confessed Sarah Palin supporter for his views on the matter, and he might say, “Palin energized the base.”  Ask for a name and phone number of one of those base voters whom Palin energized and give one a call.  He, in turn, will also answer, “Palin energized the base.”  All this is to say that Palin’s views on the issues didn’t energize: Palin’s energizing is what energized.

(more…)

Read Full Post »