Now let us discourse upon SUB-OPTIMIZATION * . . .

The measure of dismay and disappointment

with The Won

is the measure of the GOP's failure.

Blah . . .blah . . .blah.  No excuses are acceptable.  The GOP – from McCain to the precinct captain – failed in 2008 – failed to win and failed to protect the Republic.

Headlines like USA Today’s – ONE YEAR LATER, PUBLIC'S VIEW OF OBAMA HAS CHANGED – are a measure of that failure.  

What the past year has demonstrated is precisely 

what the GOP failed to make real during the election.  

It doesn’t matter that everybody tried.  Everybody failed and has come perilously close to losing The Republic.  How could everybody be so dumb?  Yes, dumb.  Dumb.

Sub-optimization* is a concept of systems analysis where parts of the system may be running optimally but the over-all system could be running better.  In plain language, each department is doing its best but the entire organization could be doing better if each department did things differently.

That’s a best-case characterization.  In the real world, each department is probably screwing up in its own special way without recognizing how detrimental their efforts are to overall success.

For example, McCain honoring his word to use public campaign financing after Obama broke his word to do the same, outspending McCain 2:1.

For example, McCain racing back to the Senate to deal with the financial meltdown, proving to the electorate that he was a tired, old fire-horse who couldn’t learn new tricks.

For example, ACORN doing systematic destruction to the electoral process while a)local folks were screaming and b)nobody in charge took the charges seriously.  Why does the Titanic come to mind?  Why do flight-students not interested in take-offs and landings come to mind?

For example, the “Bob Dole/John McCain Selection Process” that guarantees that the senior old fart in Washington has a clear shot at losing the Presidency.

Next time we have to do better.  

How do we do better?

We focus on over-all maximization.

For example, GOP hacks in Upstate New York put up an Arlen-Specter-wannabe for next week’s special election for Congress in the 23^rd District . . .and everyone from the rank-and-file to 2012 Presidential hopefuls cries “NO!”  Very well done!

And Newt Gingrich threw his lot in with the hacks.

Bye, Newt!

How do we do it?  Here are a few ideas:

1. Stop using XIX^th century communication techniques.  Don’t think that adding a Facebook and a Twitter button makes you cool.  Things aren’t that easy.
2. All politics are local.  Give local GOP politics a combination of education and support.  Al Franken was elected by ACORN.
3. Forget the folks you are never going to convince.  Don’t listen to them and don’t try to convince them.
4. The 2012 campaign has already begun.  What have you done and what has the GOP done for it?  Next week’s election is a skirmish.  The 2010 election is a battle.  The war has already begun.  No excuses for coming late to the war.

Not Swine Flu.

Not “busy with the current election.”

Not “the dog ate my homework.” 

5. Details are very difficult for many voters to grasp.  Think memetics k marketing™.  Think The Witch-Doctor.  Think me.

*This concept from systems theory refers to the extent to which attempts to improve the performance of a sub-system by its own criteria may act to the detriment of the total system which includes that sub-system, and even to the defeat of its objectives.

A Little Leadership, Please . . .

My blog-post of Sept 8 received a lot of hits. My point was that economic recovery requires stability more than anything else . . .and the Obama government is providing chaos, instead.

On the daily level of ordinary mortals, the ability to plan underlies any economic decision beyond the purchase of food.

The private sector, large and small, must have some idea of tax and wage-rates before undertaking the risks inherent in expansion and growth.

The Lords of the Universe want some assurance that their financial empires are jeopardized by nothing but their own greed and imagination. They want some assurance that the Obama government isn't going to destroy the value of its currency with spending and debt and weak will.

As I posted yesterday,

a little memetics and

a little leadership can save the universe.

Values Voters Vex Validity, Verity & Verisimilitude !

Attention Values Voters !

With the very best of intentions, you are often highly detrimental to your own causes. I don't like to say it. I wish it weren't true. But, it is true.

You don't have to read to the bottom to find my punch line. Here it is:

Your arguments will not convince

the voters in the middle

who determine the outcome of elections.

That doesn't mean you're wrong. Your arguments just won't convince the good folks in the middle; they just won't. If you want to win, you must find/embrace another point of view from which to espouse your convictions. That's it. That's all. Tell your tale from a different perspective.

Gatherings like the recent "Voters Value Summit 2009" are "feel good" events for attendees. They are profit-making events for promoters and participants. Everybody gets a chance to preach to the choir and everybody feels great.

None of this helps.

From the outside, it's scary.

That's right; it's frightening to see gatherings of people who are so sure they are right and where the speakers are so clearly tailoring their messages to tell people what they want to hear. It's scares me. It scares the conscientious, well-meaning people in the middle who will decide whether your side wins or loses. They begin to worry that the vats of drugged kool-aid are just behind the curtain. This behavior will not win the middle-ground.

George Will noted in 2006 how "this phrase {values voters} diminishes our understanding of politics. It also is arrogant on the part of social conservatives and insulting to everyone else because it implies that only social conservatives vote to advance their values and everyone else votes to . . . well, it is unclear what they supposedly think they are doing with their ballots.">link<

I'm not giving the answer to this conundrum away for free, as I did the Nancy Reagan campaign yesterday. Someone will have to pay for this one. However, permit me to summarize:

• You look like a bunch of rubes being swindled by itinerant preachers. You should know better. You should get smarter, fast.
• The "leaders" who pander to you should become better and get smarter fast, too.
• Ask yourselves if you think Bob Dole can beat Barack Obama in 2012? Neither can Mitt Romney; no matter how handsome and rich and smart he is, he can't win with his current point of view. Can't you see that something, someone, more is needed?