Independence Minnesota

Blog

How the IP Can Win

by Jack Uldrich

Malcolm Gladwell has an outstanding article in this month's New Yorker entitled "How David Beats Goliath." It is an excellent primer on how I believe the IP can win and I can't recommendBird-on-no-bird-sign the article highly enough. If, however, you don't have time to read the full article here's the operative quote: "When underdogs choose not to play by Goliath's rules, they win."

According to some scientific research Gladwell cites, "David's" (i.e the underdog) winning percentage against "Goliath's" increases from 28.5% to 63.6% when they play by unconventional rules!

Think about that for a moment, folks. What the article is really telling us is that if we want to win against a bigger, stronger and more well-funded opponent one of the first things we should do is stop playing by the same rules as the Democrats and Republicans.

As party chair, I truly welcome your "unconventional" ideas.

Comments (6)

How Democrats and Republicans win
written by Laura Kundsen , May 28, 2009

Democrats and Republicans win by:
1. Engaging people in their fears.
2. Treating the public as if they are unintelligent.
3. Disrespectful negative attacks on opposition.
4. Spending large amounts of special interest money.

So...we win by:
1. Engaging people in their hopes.
2. Treating the public with intelligence.
3. Being respectful and positive.
4. Not taking special interest money and funding reasonably priced campaigns with small public donations.

It is completely unfortunate that hope, intelligence, respect, and positivity are "unconventional" in the world of politics. We are changing that!

Combating the special interest money is harder. Click here to contribute to the IPMN http://www.independenceminneso...ontribute.


Those that have the power set the rules
written by Tom Schunk , May 31, 2009

As with most things in life, those with the power are those that decide on the rules which the game is played.

In my honest opinion, there are three big hurdles that the IP need to win:

1) Public perception that the IP candidate is a spoiler and is not electable.

2) Lack of public visibility of the IP in the news concerning issues in front of the state Legislature and Governor. For example, how many times has the IP been interviewed on the state budget crisis? Yet, nearly every television news show piece shows clips of comments of a DFL'er and Republican.

Where does the IP stand on the budget shortfall? And on Gov. Pawlenty's approach to resolving the issue? And on how the state legislature spent their entire session without coming to an agreement on a balanced budget?

3) Money, money, money. Believe it or not, lots of money does buy elections. Lots of money equates to a larger media blitz and larger campaign for the candidate. This makes me sick because special interest groups end up buying politicans who represent their interests and not necessarily the intersts of the poilitican's constituency.

I think that the St. Paul Saints fundraiser is a good step in the right direction. However, the amount of money to run the party's office alone will completely consume the amount raised wihin a few months.



...
written by William McGaughey , June 25, 2009

I think a third party can succeed by taking on the tough issues and risking vilification - that means, not caring what the Star Tribune thinks of you. When I ran in the 2002 U.S. Senate primary, I chose two issues that I thought would be the opposite of the Democrats' and Republicans' core values. I said (1) I was in favor of dignity for white males and (2) supported a 4-day, 32-hour workweek by 2010. This "extremist" platform gained nearly one third of the IP primary vote.

Race and gender issues obviously matter to people. If you're not in favor of the status quo, what do you favor?

The big issue now is jobs. Is job loss merely cyclical, offering some hope that lots of good jobs will return some day? Or is the loss of a more permanent nature - because automation permanently destroys jobs as does the flow of production to low-wage areas? If the latter, what do we do? At the IP's last statewide issues meeting, I offered a plank for "trade protectionism", which was defeated. But that does not mean the problem will go away.

If you want to retain a "good guy" image, then promoting significant change is not for you. But I do think in the long run voters will appreciate a political party that is willing to fly in the face of conventional wisdom and take on the tough questions in a more honest way.


Open Source Political Discussion
written by Mark Jewell , July 13, 2009

I've been swishing this idea around for some time. Many of the most popular software products that exist today are created on an open source platform. That is to say, people that like to program, can log in from just about any where, and make changes or suggestions to the code that makes programs work.

Why don't we apply the same idea to solutions to the political problems we face today. Create a website and allow people to post their solutions to the political conundrums - and if someone doesn't like it, they can vote the idea down. On the flip side, if the majority think the addition progresses the idea it sticks. This can all be accompanied by forums and chats for people to discuss.

For the IP to come to power - we must live on the fringe. Say the things people are afraid to say. Do things everyone else is afraid to do. Scuff up some special interest shoes. Knock down some big doors. Get creative - and empower people to do so.

This has to happen now - it can't wait until the next election. Its an every day battle, and we have to fight it with our creativity, passion, love for country, and wits.

Mark Jewell
GDI
Gosh. Darn. Independent.

P.S. Can someone please contact me about getting the Independence Party started in Iowa? I'm ready.


Contact
written by Mark Jewell , July 13, 2009

I mistyped my address in the last post - apologies.




Are you serious?
written by Brian , November 09, 2009

I'm an IP voter that thinks the IP needs to ask itself how serious it is about winning. Does it hope to become a legitimate political force such as the Progressive Party in Vermont or will it simply be satisfied with becoming another place for people to lodge protest votes like the state libertarian, constitution, and green parties?

If it is serious about winning it needs to reexamine the strategy it has used in the last couple of federal and gubernatorial elections. It needs to nominate candidates that are serious about campaigning and not simply satisfied with handing out business cards. Also, it cannot hope to fly under the radar for the entire campaign and stage a last minute upset win. The IP should examine the model used by independent Angus Young to get elected governor of Maine. Young ran ads and campaigned extensively during the primaries of the other two parties. As a result he emerged on an even playing field with the two major party candidates. Some see the tendency of the IP to nominate candidates later than the other two major parties as a strength, allowing its candidates to stay above the fray. I disagree and think that this results in an even steeper uphill battle for IP candidates.

The IP can complain all it wants to about the length of election cycles, the role of money in politics, and unfair electoral structures and institutions but ultimately it needs to awaken and adapt to the realities of the political system that it is a participant of.

(I'm not advocating accepting lobbyist money or adopting the corrupt practices of the other two major parties. I simply believe that the IP needs to reexamine its strategy)



Write comment


busy
Log in to comment. New? Create an account.
Close



The Authors

Jim
Moore

Peter Tharaldson

Jack Uldrich

...here's the operative quote: 'When underdogs choose not to play by Goliath's rules, they win.'

Jack Uldrich in "How the IP Can Win" Join the discussion

All events

Upcoming Events

March 14–27, 2010

Next

  • S
  • M
  • Tu
  • W
  • Th
  • F
  • Sa
  • S
  • M
  • Tu
  • W
  • Th
  • F
  • Sa
  1. 14
  2. 15
  3. 16
  4. 17
  5. 18
  6. 19
  7. 20
  8. 21
  9. 22
  10. 23
  11. 24
  12. 25
  13. 26
  14. 27