December 2014 At-Large Senate Election: Winner/Loser

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The Federalists have been a one man show for a long time now. I feel bad for Yankee. He's really running the party alone. By the time I finally went back to The Party, which had been calling for me beyond the hills for months, it was literally the two of us communicating and no one else. Losing Hagrid was pretty much their end, but losing tmth(activity wise at least) and ZuWo hurt very much too.

Not that this will endear me to anyone (that's why it's so great to be an Independent ), but my feeling is that it has always sort of been a one-man show. How well the Federalist Party does just comes down to a combination of the amount of time the "one man" can put in, how frustrated the "one man" becomes, and the raw skill of the "one man." This person hasn't always been me (but it was for a long time), and there have been a few successes here and there that really were rooted in fantastic group efforts, but at the end of the day, getting everyone on the same page and mustering up individuals to actually help is hard. The one man is vital; it all comes down to him. I'm not saying Yankee is ineffectual, but the cards he has been dealt IRL have made it difficult for him to achieve success for the party. Maybe it's time for new leadership, but they've reached the stage where most of the people who could turn things around are too frustrated to do anything about it.

If we're airing everything now, there were sort of four reasons why I left.

1. I was tired of being the "one man."

Even after stepping away from the leadership, it was hard for me to get away from the whole "if you want something done right, do it yourself" thing. Maybe others were capable, but I always felt like the only time the party ever had big successes was when I played a role and got the pieces moving. Sure, we have individuals who've been very successful, but that's no thanks to the "Federalist machine." Lumine and Duke won in spite of their party-ID, not because of it. They won thanks to their own merits.

And if I'm the guy who actually can make it work, why should I attach myself to an organization that only stresses me out and pisses me off? I have good GOTV skills. I can make things happen. If I want to run for office, I'll be fine.

2. It did stress me out.

When you're the one man, it's difficult to separate the party from yourself (or, at least, it was for me). So every criticism of the party was like a wound that only riled me up. I remember the night Griffin posted his bloody coat hanger attack ad. I shouldn't have let it get to me, but f-ck was I pissed. It's not healthy, and I don't wanna deal with this sh-t if I don't have to.

3. The party relies on the support of a few bigoted imbeciles that I often had to molly coddle and sell my soul to for any type of win.

I'm not going to name names because everyone knows what I mean. I'm just tired of supporting these people and trying to balance their personalities, especially when many of them oppose rights for people who are not straight, like me. I don't want my name in with theirs.

4. My views are actually evolving.

I've was hesitant to switch to the green avatar because I do still identify as anti-Democratic, but, again, I'm not the far-right social conservative that people once thought I was. I don't want to tow the party line and I don't want to sit in embarrassed silence as right-wing extremists in the same party as me pass ridiculously misogynistic legislation in the Mideast. I'm done with it.




Anyway, this turned into a giant rant, but leaving the party in silence obviously left some things unanswered. It sucks to see the Federalist Party crumble, but it's a terrible beast of a thing. Being on the right in this game sucks, but being a member of the organized right is even worse. There are many reasons for its lack of success, and I don't think they'll ever be addressed. So if it's going to be a laughing stock election after election, with only Yankee coming out to defend it in another one of his incomprehensible grandpa speeches, I just can't deal. And whether it's the Whig Party, the Federalist Party, or some other big-tent right-wing group, the same problems will always exist. The first step is getting away from even needing "one man" and instead have it actually be a team, but that just doesn't happen.

So all I can say is good luck. When you run people who are decent, I may even vote for ya. Sorry to be so blunt here, but it honestly is kind of personal for me.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

There was a time when I wanted to be president, but obviously that ship has sailed.

Re: my comments on the last page, I do want to clarify that my charged language was not directed to social conservatives in general, but to the two real nutbars who always had some issue I needed to dance around. One being Ben Kenobi, who is fortunately no longer with us.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Based on my understanding of Northeast politics, there's only one person who would have certainly ousted Bore, and that individual ended up voting for him. Matt, who is very popular personally, was actually one of the strongest challengers available.

Yes, except the right has more reason to trust bore than Matt at this point.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Griffin, you seem to subscribe to the idea that the core constituency of the right is social conservatives. It's just not true. That way of thinking may work for the left where, in fact, most people do believe in all the same things and the tent can be smaller, but the thing is, the right doesn't have just one base. A winning right-wing candidate needs the so-cons, the libertarians, the ruthless free-market capitalists, the soft conservatives, the centrists, and a number of left-leaning moderates. That's hard to do, and frankly the only reason it's been able to happen is either because we've run unique candidates who have a personality cult around them (sorry Duke) or because Labor has made itself unelectable.

Now, in a way, I appreciate that Labor has done that, because it means the game is more competitive. They can pander to their most extreme elements and still have 50/50 odds to win. But let's not pretend the same strategy can translate to the right. Labor has a lot more wiggle room to flirt with that line of unelectability. I know Griffin thinks it's more admirable to "win with purpose," but you must understand that just winning for the right is a big enough challenge on its own. And because all of the groups I mentioned are vital to a winning right-wing candidacy, I strongly disagree that catering to the social conservatives will get the party anywhere. The right does that, and it loses all the moderates it worked hard to win over. Unfortunately for the people on the far right, they occupy a fringe position. They know it. If they want to win election to the senate or anything else, they need support from conservatives to their left. And the only way they're going to get it is if they support the larger agenda of the "Atlasian right." So that's what happens: Moderates represent the right and win, with the support of all the core groups they need, including so-cons. Social conservatives run for president and they lose, because the moderates are not as stuck for support and can afford to go shopping for other candidates; they'll always be safe.

And that's just the game.