Back in the shadowy days of the Clinton administration of the stained black dress, wagging fingers telling us he did not have sex with that intern, and friends that got murdered with the Park Police in charge, we have a change that happened in 1994 that allowed the Clinton crew to change the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The methodology included an alternative unemployment rate that removed from the unemployment rolls those that were categorized as the long term discouraged workers which the BLS crossed off the list of those that were considered unemployed.

A Politically Skewed Manipulation

With a politically skewed manipulation of the real unemployment figures getting whittled down to 8.3%, when the real unemployed are figured in it looks like a more truthful picture is found at the logical number of 22.5%. The manipulation of the numbers by the BLS makes it look like the Obama Administration is making headway when in fact real unemployment, when you count in the totals for workers that are no longer looking, runs to 1920′s depression levels of the previous real number of 22.5% that John Williams of the “Shadow Government Statistics” who has railed for years that the fed twists the numbers to make them say what they want them to say.

What is a Depression?

The media in the financial world usually defines a financial depression as being a loss of 10% in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) which is more than anything just a rule of thumb. Ronald Reagan once said, “Recession is when a neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose yours.”

Numbers Are Skewed for Political Reasons

In a world where the very thought of trying to analyze a macroeconomic happening measured in dollars in a world where cash is electronic debt, property is still declining in value, capital investments flows freely across economic borders, cheap labor immigrates across our southern borders uninhibited, and politicians leave the government’s biggest expenses off the books has become increasingly absurd over time. How could you ever try to figure out if the economy is expanding or contracting when the numbers used are skewed for political purposes?

News Release Says

A Feb. 2012 news release from BLS told the public that the rate of unemployment had fallen 0.2% from the previous 8.5% we previously had in Dec. of 2011. However, the part of the report that did not make the evening news is the BLS reports the U6 unemployment is 15.6%, U6 meaning those people that were marginally attached to the work force in what is now called the under employed, people looking for full time wages but had to settle for part time jobs. So in not releasing those figures, then dropping those workers who had fallen off the radar after looking for jobs for a year, it is quite clear what the present administration is trying to do. Williams reported that the stats of 8.3% that made the media sound bites were mathematically manipulated and just simply not believable.

Adding Back

Williams put it this way in a report, his official Alternative Unemployment Rate comes out to be 22.5% when you add back into the Bureau of Labor Statistics U6 numbers, the long termed laborers that have fallen off the radar, and have stopped looking for jobs the past year. The BLS of course only reports the U3 stats that are adjusted seasonally which was the 8.3% that was blared out over every news media station.

Keystone Nuked

You can tell just by looking at the BLS own fully reported stats that the nation is in fact in trouble, has been for quite some time, is getting better no time soon, and there seems to be no remedy on the horizon coming down the road. The torpedoing of the Keystone pipeline that was to run from Canada down into Houston Texas would have employed at the peak at least 100,000 jobs directly and another 20,000 jobs indirectly, has been moved to the back burner.

Jobless Recovery

The jobless recovery scenario is a little more nebulous, with the precise timing of the recovery unknown, with little growth for the future estimated, and in danger of turning into a double dip recession, the uncertainty of the foreign export markets, contractions in the European and Asian markets, the double dip looks like the ice cream of the future.

Obama Stimulus a Bust

While the Obama stimulus package looks like a bust, the call for more recovery money not looking good, the pundits and the economists saying that whatever economic growth we do have will not sufficiently reduce the unemployment numbers and the figures will be much higher than normal, the look for economic growth looks grim for 2012 with little or no growth predicted.

The Straight Ahead Future

Looking into this crystal ball into the straight ahead future, while car sales have been good, manufacturing up slightly, and enough money flowing into the treasury to pay the necessary bills on time, if things just stay the same the double dip still looks like it could happen with the jobless recovery in full bloom. Those who adhere to variants of the jobless recovery say the USA is headed for a prolonged jobless recovery where only certain parts of the economy will recover while other segments will remain stagnant.

The Truth Is Different

What we really have waiting for us is historical warning signs that there are increasing numbers of consumer bankruptcies and mortgage defaults, credit debt is out of sight, there is also the unknown impact of enough possible bank failures to render the FDIC insolvent, the possibility of a U.S. state like California going bankrupt, or a possible crash in the derivatives market. Not speaking to the fact that being 4 trillion in debt will do anything good for the future economy or that the out of control printing of money by the Fed might have on our inflation scale when the working class will be unable to keep up. My take on this is the future looks so bright I have to wear shades.

Sincerely,
Gary Kent Boyd | My Blog

Originally seen here.

Florida is the state that makes or breaks a candidate. Since 1972, the winner of the Florida primary has become the party’s nominee. In 2012, this winner was Mitt Romney.

            Romney won Tuesday’s race in a landslide, receiving 47 percent, with Newt Gingrich coming in second place with 32 percent. Rick Santorum and Ron Paul each received 13 and 7 percent, respectively. The results are a major setback for Gingrich, especially after winning in South Carolina last week, ironically a state that also shares the reputation of choosing the nominee. He skyrocketed in early Florida polls, as well.

What reversed Newt’s momentum? I believe one too many negative ads shot him in both feet. Last week, a Gingrich ad called Romney the “the most anti-immigrant” candidate in the race. While Romney expectedly defended himself against the harsh attack, Marco Rubio, Florida’s senator and a Tea Party favorite, defended Romney, calling the ad “inaccurate and inflammatory.”

Newt’s attack on Romney astounded many. Not only was it harsh, but also incredibly vague. When questioned about the ad last Thursday by CNN debate moderator Wolf Blitzer, Gingrich responded that Romney desires to round up and deport illegal families.

While the ad may not seem like a big deal on its own, this incident is part of a larger issue. Before the primaries began, while still a marginal candidate, Gingrich ran on the notion that his was a “positive campaign” and the main objective was to defeat Barack Obama. However, the optimism disappeared as soon as he saw Romney as a threat, and Newt started berating him with characteristically left-wing attacks, from Romney’s record at Bain Capital to his apparent desire to mercilessly deport illegals. Newt’s latest rant was clearly to pander to Florida’s large Latino population, and a harbinger to the fact that he will say whatever it takes to win. He believed that the Hispanic vote would be awarded to the candidate who is lax and “compassionate” on illegal immigration. By painting Romney as the opposite, Gingrich hoped to find favor in the Latino community.

Rubio proves that Hispanics at large do not feel this way. The senator takes pride in the fact that his parents legally emigrated from Cuba and worked hard for their earnings, and that their son, who came from a poor, working-class Latino family, is now one of the most popular Republican politicians. His story personifies the American dream, not to mention the conservative message of individual liberty and prosperity at its best. The Hispanic community doesn’t stand for politicians who believe that tolerance of illegal immigration will win its vote. It confirmed that on Florida by choosing Romney over Gingrich, 54 to 28 percent.

The American public is growing tired of politicians doing whatever it takes to win, no matter the outcome of their actions. The country wants a president that cares more about the country than his own achievement. It needs leadership, pride, and integrity.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/how-mitt-romney-won-florida-5619823.html

Sincerely,
Jeremy Frankel

Jeremy Frankel is a writer for Quantum Networks and The Talk Radio News Service.

Remember that story that consumed our news media three months ago about the U.S. Department of Agriculture manager who was accused of being a racist? Yeah, remember, she was caught on tape saying she wouldn’t be zealous in helping a farmer because he was white? And it turns out those quotes were taken out of context from a speech in which she was talking about something that happened years ago, a story she was using as an exhortation to her audience never to act that way?

Yeah, that was crazy. People trying to drum up more racism in America. While that was going on, another group of “media journalists” were asserting that the “tea party is full of racists” – never mind the troubling facts that the “tea party” is a large, non-centralized movement with no clear identity (“journalists” hate anything that isn’t centralized) and that there was absolutely no evidence anywhere that anyone in association with any tea party event or group ever exhibited any racist behaviors.

No evidence? No problem. Not in this age of what passes as “journalism” in this country.

Here we are now, three weeks before the mid-term U.S. elections, and it’s Stupid Season. Judging from the ads we see and hear in a constant daily bombardment, we are supposed to be stupid enough to believe anything, and evidence would only confuse us.

A commercial in Florida pulls sound-bites from a candidate’s speech that makes him sound like a right-wing Christian zealot who expects his wife to obey him… he was giving a speech in which he was making exactly the opposite point.

A major governor’s race is mired in an accusation that one candidate employed and then heartlessly fired a self-proclaimed illegal immigrant. The candidate’s opponent (who happens to be the state attorney general and has done nothing to prosecute the only sure criminal in the case – the illegal immigrant) asserts that the other candidate knew she was employing an illegal when it was to her economic benefit, and then quickly scrapped the poor unfortunate when she decided to run for governor because it would look bad, of course. There are absolutely no facts to substantiate any of those assertions; in fact, there are a few facts that refute them.

A national ad proclaims that one party’s supporters are taking “secret foreign money” – it even shows a ruffling stack of Chinese yuan bills – and paints the picture for Us Stupid (U.S.) Dummies that, basically, the Chinese are putting forth that evil party’s candidates to take over the country and do their bidding. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is implicated (those capitalist pigs!). David Axelrod, the president’s longtime friend and advisor, appeared on a “media journalism” program over the weekend and was actually asked if he had any evidence of this serious charge – in reply to which Mr. Axelrod asked the “journalist” whether he had any evidence that it WASN’T true.

No evidence? No problem.

These are supposed to be our leaders. Oh, boy. I suggest you not wait around to be led by these people, because you don’t want to go where they’re going! Start a business of your own so you can build your entrepreneurial skills and have an income of your very own… don’t expect your employer to take care of you. Start a health-kick so you can keep yourself energetic and vital… not just because you’ll need that energy to drive your business and run your household, but because you can’t expect the government’s health care program to take care of you. And start getting a real education about the global conspiracy against your money, before it’s too late.

It’s Stupid Season. Let the stupid have their season… meanwhile, take this time to quietly build a future around personal responsibility and personal values. After all, if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.

Sincerely,

Michael D. Hume, M.S.
-
About the Author:
 
Michael Hume is a speaker, writer, and consultant specializing in helping people maximize their potential and enjoy inspiring lives. As part of his inspirational leadership mission, he coaches executives and leaders in growing their personal sense of well-being through wealth creation and management, along with personal vitality.
Those with an entrepreneurial spirit who want to make money “one less thing to worry about” can learn more about working with Michael at http://oneyearplan.net/michaeldhume
Anyone wanting to jump-start their vitality can browse through the best (and most travel-friendly) nutraceuticals on the market at http://shop.enivausa.com/239824
Michael and his wife, Kathryn, divide their time between homes in California and Colorado. They are very proud of their offspring, who grew up to include a homemaker, a rock star, a service talent, and a television expert. Two grandchildren also warm their hearts! Visit Michael’s web site at http://michaelhume.net
Article Source

Democrat Representative John Conyers, husband of the corrupt and convicted former Detroit councilwoman Monica Conyers, has actually said something that makes sense. It is a rare moment indeed for the often bumbling Congressman who I suspect on more than one occasion has had trouble dressing himself because someone wrote “left” on his right shoe, replaced the Velcro with actual laces that needed tied and moved his shirt to where his pants usually are hung while moving his pants to the location usually reserved for his shirt. The man just strikes me as that incompetent. But then again, he is a Congressman and I have to keep reminding myself that expecting intelligence from a career politician is like expecting to come home and finding my dog reading Plato’s “Republic” and sipping Cognac.

But hey, even a nut finds a blind squirrel every now and again as the saying goes.

Mr. Conyers, in a rare moment of lucidity, remarked regarding the current monstrosity of a health care bill currently being rammed through the House by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the President Barack Obama, “What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?” Whether he was making an excuse to not read the bill before voting in favor of it or seriously challenging the culture of insanity that currently presides in Washington is anyone’s guess. I would ask, but shortly after making this statement Mr. Conyers probably became too busy sniffing butts to say hello to others in attendance at the National Pres Club to be bothered.

But I do feel for Mr. Conyers. I indeed feel his pain. And its not a “feel his pain” in a Bill Clinton, how can I use this to my advantage to screw you over kind of way either. Rather I “feel his pain” in a way that only someone that has tried to read the mumbo jumbo, rambling monstrosities that Congress calls bills, filled with so much double speak and legalese that it would take a team of lawyers just to translate one sentence much less the entire thing, could have.

For years I have said that nearly everything that Congress proposes is far too big and complex. Not to mention, these proposals are more often than not unconstitutional as well. These people we elect to represent us compile their master plans into voluminous tomes and expect that everyone should be able to understand them perfectly. Of course we are all familiar with the popular example of the U.S. Tax Code and the fact that year after year people run little experiments where they ask the same question of several different official IRS employees and get wildly different answers.

Most of these laws that they pass are never read by the persons we elect to represent us. Let’s face facts. It is a shame that they would shirk their responsibilities so blatantly and at best have members of their staff read the bills and give them summaries. The reason that many of these bills are not read by our representatives is simply because of their size and their archaic nature of constantly referring to other laws already on the books which means not only do they have to read this bill put before them but often other huge laws just to understand what they are voting on. Then once you tack on all the superfluous crap unrelated to the topics of some of these bills but put in them by other representatives looking to get something for themselves in the end you have a thousand pages of proposed regulation.

So my proposal is simple. And it will help all of our representatives read everything they are going to be voting on. In honor of Rep. John Conyers I am naming it the Help John Conyers Read The Damn Bill Act of 2009 and it is remarkably simple in scope.

Here it is and I propose it be implemented by both houses.

Section I: All bills created by the House of Representatives/the Senate will not be voted on for a total number of days equal to the number of pages in the bill. This procedure begins from the moment any bill is introduced to the full membership and a completed copy is made available to each. The minimum number of days before any vote shall be no less than one and all partial pages will count as one whole page each. All pages of referenced legislation and all references to other legislation within the referenced legislation, etcetera, will add a total of one (1) day per page referenced to the total number of days before a piece of legislation may be voted on by either House of Representatives/the Senate in addition to the number of days required for the new legislation based on its own number of pages.

Section II: No bill will be introduced until it is completely written and a copy distributed to all members of the House of Representatives/the Senate.

Section III: At any time that the bill is modified by amendment or other process, the procedure is reset and the new version of the bill will not be voted on for a total number of days equivalent to the number of new papers in the bill to start from the time that the amended or otherwise changed bill is introduced and provided in full to all members.

Section IV: All bills not voted on by House of Representatives/the Senate by the end of any legislative session will be void, required to be reintroduced, and this procedure will restart again from the moment the bill is reintroduced.

Section V: Before any member of House of Representatives/the Senate may cast a vote on any piece of legislation before their respective chamber they must sign an affidavit swearing or affirming that they have personally read completely and understand the bill they are voting on.

Section VI: The maximum number of pages of legislation that can be required to be read by any member of House of Representatives/the Senate in a given day will be ten (10). If the current number of pages of legislation introduced or proposed to be introduced in either House of Representatives/the Senate requires an elected representative of the people of the United States to read more than ten (10) pages of legislation in a given day, no new legislation may be introduced until the number of pages of legislation required to be read decreases below this level.

Section VII: This legislation may not be overturned and becomes the binding law of both House of Representatives/the Senate for all eternity.

Section VIII: This legislation may not be amended nor may it have any other legislative initiatives attached to it and shall abide by the rules it sets forth for all future proposed legislation.

There you have it. It should fit on about one page and take people like Rep. Conyers a day to go through. I figure our average representative should be able to handle reading a mere ten pages of gobbledygook a day and this will also work to keep bills to reasonable lengths less they would never get voted on at all due to the time and expiration restrictions I have proposed.

Do I think it will ever be adopted and taken seriously? Hell no! Because it is far too logical and simple for those dunderheads leading us down in Washington. And besides, it would make it very hard for them to pass 1,300 pages of massive new regulation and get away without reading or understanding it!

Sincerely,
J.J. Jackson

Jackson is the owner of American Conservative Daily Blog. He is also the lead designer for The Right Things – Conservative Political T-shirts and his weekly articles and exclusive content can be found at Liberty Reborn.

Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/the-help-john-conyers-read-the-damn-bill-act-of-2009-1275534.html

According to some in the news media, I might pass for an “extreme right-wing racist”. Well, when I attended a local tea party here in the nearly bankrupt state of New Jersey, I saw men and women, young and old, black and white, middle class and rich, along with Democrats and Republicans.

Our purpose in gathering was to show the nation’s leaders that we, the owners of this democracy, object to unstrained spending, tyrannical government intrusion into our lives, and massive taxes.

We cannot let others fight our battles for us anymore. The stakes for our children and grandchildren in unsustainable debt are too high for us not to act. 

I call on the “silent majority”, those Americans who make this country work and have sacrificed to keep us safe, to be a part of this movement to reclaim the principles of the founding fathers. These concepts are as old but timeless in their application from colonial times to the present. Fundamentally, Government should live within its means and spend only what it takes from the people. Aside from national defense, public safety, such as enforcement of the borders, health safety concerns and such common “promotion of the general welfare”, the  federal government should not interfere in our everyday lives. Lastly, taxes are a legal method of taking of the fruit of someone’s labor and giving it to another who has not earned it. While necessary to provide for basic services, it should not deter intiative and the free exchange of goods and services.

  The American we know and love must be preserved above all else. It is time to LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD.

Sincerely,
James Wolbert

The autor describes himself as “a conservative man of 51 years born and raised in the sleepy town of Garfield, NJ. As my daughter says, ‘Nothing happens in Garfield.’ I have strong religious and political views. I have written some articles for newspapers and thought I would try here.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/tea-parties-1264165.html

Tony Soprano was the first to publicly espouse the idea, “Dick Cheney for president” (see ‘The Sopranos’ season 5). I’m not saying I’m a card-carrying fan of the former vice president, but many staunch members of the republican party may have to agree with Soprano by the time the 2012 campaigns swing into action.

Who else is a truly viable candidate? The name of Utah’s John Huntsman has received a little attention. Mitt Romney? No one’s quite sure if the Olympic organizer will make another serious run for the presidential office. Alaska’s perky Sarah Palin will probably be busy with her own talk show by that time (pairing with James Dobson on parental advice), and John McCain, rapidly approaching his centennial birthday, will likely be just a bit too old for the opportunity.

In all honesty, Dick could be the best right wing republican bet. He has ample experience already running the country, having essentially done so so for roughly eight years. During his previous tenure, he was a little distracted, being required to also watching over W and practice his famous rifle-handling skills on the side. Heck, making a go of it with ONLY the presidency to worry about might seem like a vacation for the unquestionably confident Cheney.

We’ll review eight great reasons as to why DC could actually be successful in the oval office;

1. He is (as noted above) confident. One has to have an exceedingly strong (even if unrealistic or unwarranted) degree of self-confidence to take on this job.

2. He is not a time waster. Cheney isn’t one to dally over introspective decisions or expend countless hours on an important international matter. The man is all about action.

3. No more worries about health care. It’s actually likely public health care wouldn’t even be available. The matter would be taken off the table as all American residents would be encouraged to explore do-it-yourself solutions for any variety of medical situations. (side note: firearms would be sold with tweezers, a 12-pack of bandages and anti-bacterial ointment).

4. Gay rights would be resolved. Cheney would give his daughter her own state (North Dakota and Louisiana are both under consideration). The junior Chenette would be the leader of the gay state and all registered homosexual persons would be asked to voluntarily move to this locale.

5. Gas price concerns will come to an end. The man’s from Wyoming; they know how to ride horses out there. Cheney’s platform will promote the use of horseback riding as the primary mode of public transportation for all persons who earn less than 600k a year.

6. None of those silly public-scandal distractions. You’ve seen him, right? Not really Monica Lewinsky’s type.

7. Your favorite TV programs will air uninterrupted. Dick isn’t big on speeches. You won’t see his face nightly on your television screen. The public will get their information on a need-to-know (sometimes a demand-to-know) basis.

8. Lynn Cheney will be an entirely competent first lady. She’s been able to handle Dick for all these years. She can certainly handle a few more years in the White House.

Make room on your car for that bumper sticker now; Cheney, 2012.

Sincerely,
Sam Robinson

Sam Robertson has been writing and publishing articles on an assortment of public-interest topics for many years. With vast and varied experience in journalism, Robertson offers an interesting perspective on politics, healthcare and other current social issues.

Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=S._L._Robertson http://EzineArticles.com/?Dick-Cheney-For-President&id=2875090

I will get right to the point; Barack Obama is not Hitler: from the former, who may or may not be educated, such a comparison originates from a misunderstanding of Obama’s fundamental concept of “change”, from the latter, such a comparison originates from a limited fundamental knowledge of history and its uses.

Before I move on to the foundation of my thesis, note that I am not writing to change anyone’s political views. I am writing out of disgust of those who are brazen enough to hold up the picket signs that read, “Hitler wanted ‘change’ too”, and flamboyantly flash the garbage words that make my breakfast bitter as I watch the morning news in my living room. The audience that I write too is unrestricted; maybe I’m the one being narrow-minded and these people actually can back up the messages that they are spreading around.

This is improbable though. My purpose in writing is to shed light to those involved in the happenings of society. I do not seek to influence; In fact, I am a detractor of the concept of “influence”. It is an individual’s responsibility to create his or her own thoughts on certain issues. Now, I’m not sure if republican intellectuals consciously fooled people into categorizing Obama with Hitler, or people truly make this silly comparison, for a word as powerful as “Hitler” can easily sway the mind of a non-intellectual.

As I now set the foundation of my thesis I can only wonder why people would think to compare Obama to Hitler. Certainly not everyone who actively encourages changes in the government is a Nazi. Let me remind you, in case you had forgotten, who Hitler was. Yes, he did want “change”, but not with the respect to the government so much as he wanted it with respect to the German population. He was an evil genius, a nationalist, and a demagogue who was able to convince the German population that it needed “cleansing”. He killed millions of people. Obama on the other hand recognizes a problem with our functional government. He knows that if he does not act as president, if policies were to remain as they are now, our country will fall into shambles! Every democrat and republican knows that this is the truth. It is indisputable, and referencing Obama’s policies to that of Hitler is the most pathetic and desperate attempt thinkable to defame a president who has the best interest of America in mind.

Sincerely,
Rockwell Anyoha

Letter Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/barack-obama-is-not-hitler-1251688.html

President Obama made a great point in a speech to students. He pointed out that some suggest government is trying to take over the healthcare system.  He further pointed out that we have private universities and we have public universities but no one has suggested government wants to take over the university system. Here are some of the GOP leaders who have opposed government health care, making accusations that the program is a move toward socialism.  Yet, they attened public universities.

 Rush Limbaugh – This talk show commentator is constantly accusing the Obama administration of leading us toward socialism. Yet he, himself, got his education from a public program. He attended college at Southeast Missouri State University.

Mitch McConnell – Attended two public universities, the University of Louisville, and the University of Kentucky.

Virginia Foxx – She not only attended a public university, but she attended the oldest public university in the U.S. She attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. And to further demonstrate that, in spite of what she says, she does believe in some public programs, she was a professor at Appalachian State University.

John McCain – Senator McCain got his education from a government run University as well. He graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis.

Sarah Palin – One of the most critical of the Obama healthcare plan, calling it “socialism”. This former governor attended the University of Idaho, Idaho’s oldest public university.

This certainly brings up an interesting question. If we think public universities are okay for educating our citizens, why would we feel a public health option would be socialism? Do we have some hypocricy rearing it’s ugly head in this discussion?

Sincerely, Ron Coleman

Ron Coleman has been a freelance cartoonist and writer for over 40 years. His work has appeared in hundreds of magazines, newspapers, books and on the internet. Samples of his work can be seen at his website:
http://www.colemantoons.com

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/gop-politicians-who-oppose-public-programs-but-attended-public-universities-1243204.html

Town hall meetings are one of the most popular formats for political meetings.  Candidates love them because they provide a chance to press the flesh with regular voters, and voters love them because they get the chance to ask their own questions and hear answers straight from the candidate.

While town hall meetings can be a great part of your grassroots strategy, they are not without risk.  Any time you place your candidate in front of unscripted voters, there’s a chance things could take a wrong turn.  In order to hold great, successful town hall meetings, use the following five tips:

1.     Prepare, Prepare, Prepare – There’s no substitute for a well prepared candidate.  During the week prior to your event, your candidate should carve out a significant amount of time to prepare for the town hall, just as he or she would for a debate.  Know the issues, write out pithy quotes and one-liners, figure out what the tough questions will be, and know how to answer them.

2.    Control the Crowd – One of the main reasons you are holding a town hall meeting is to meet voters and be seen in the community, so it is unlikely that you’re going to be able to hold a “closed” town hall meeting with just your supporters in attendance.  (You could, but unless your goal is footage for an upcoming campaign ad, it will defeat the purpose of your event).  Even so, you’ll want to make sure that if things get hostile, you have a clear base of support in the audience.  For that reason, be sure to hand out tickets to the event to your campaign supporters, volunteers, friends and family.  A good rule of thumb is to make sure at least 25-50% of the crowd are known supporters.  That way, if an ugly question or two come up, you’ll have support in the audience.

3.    Make Sure They’re Comfortable – Nothing make s a crowd hostile like an uncomfortable environment.  Have your campaign staff and volunteers ensure that there’s proper seating, that the temperature is right, that lighting isn’t too bright on the crowd, and that there are restrooms available for your audience.  

4.    Take Names, and Give Info – Town hall meetings are great opportunities to reach out to new supporters, people who may not yet be on your campaign’s radar screen.  Make sure you have a registration table to track who comes to them event – get names, addresses, e-mail addresses, etc.  Ask people if they want to sign up for your campaign newsletter (this is a great way to figure out who is a supporter, and thus ripe for additional follow-up) and be sure to hand out campaign literature to every attendee.  After the event, send a thank you letter or postcard (a form letter is ok) to everyone who attended, pointing them to your campaign website for additional information.

5.    Relax and Have Fun – Town hall meetings should be informal, fun events.  The crowd will know if you’re uptight, nervous, and unhappy to be there.  Practice in front of crowds several times to make sure that you’re comfortable with the format… then go and have fun.  You’ll enjoy the event more, and the crowd will see you as a more “likeable” candidate.

Town hall meetings can and should be a part of your campaign’s grassroots strategy.  Be sure to plan for these events well in advance, practice, and remember to publicize them well – the only thing worse than a hostile crowd is when there’s no crowd at all.

Sincerely,
Joe Garecht

Joe Garecht is the founder of Local Victory, a website which offers hundreds of free articles and tips on winning elections.
A respected political consultant and seminar speaker who has been advising campaigns for over a decade, Joe is the author of several books including The Complete Guide to Getting Your Campaign off the Ground. Click here to learn more or get your copy today.
He started Local Victory to make sure that every campaign, no matter how small, had the tools and information it needs to win. Visit the site to download a free copy of Local Victory’s special report How to Get the Press to Cover Your Campaign. Click here to learn more or get your copy today.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/holding-successful-political-town-hall-meetings-1238408.html

As a professional political consultant, many would-be candidates come to me and say, “I want to run for office.”  My response to them is always the same… “are you sure?”

Now, it may seem odd that I ask that question, given that my income is dependent on new candidates running for office and hiring our firm to help them win.  But the truth is, I’ve worked with a number of candidates that shouldn’t have been running in the first place, and it’s hard on them, and hard on their staff and consulting team… and usually, it’s nearly impossible for them to win.

Before throwing your hat in the ring, ask yourself the following questions:

1.  Is my family behind me?

If your family (wife, kids, other family members you are close to) do not support your run for office, you’re going to have a real uphill battle to win.  Campaigns take time and hard work, and are very stressful.  Did I mention they take time?  Your campaign will keep you away from your family for extended periods and make you tired and stressed out.  If your family didn’t want you to run in the first place, well… let’s just say the dinner table won’t be a fun place, and that angst will spill over into your performance on the campaign trail.

2.  Am I willing to work really hard?

Despite what the media would have you think, running for office isn’t easy.  Campaigning isn’t all about being on TV and going to nice fundraising dinners (and even if it was, those get tedious real fast).  It’s about giving speeches… hundreds of them, to groups of 10 or 20 people, day in and day out.  Usually, it’s the exact same speech you’ve given over and over again.  Running for office is about making phone calls… dozens of them every day, to ask for money, hear people complain, thank your supporters, and to just listen.  When you campaign, you’ll be in the car (or on a plane) for hours a day, shake thousands of hands, and nod your head and smile for 30 out of every 60 minutes.  Are you ready to work hard?

3.  Am I willing to ask people for money?

Nobody likes to fundraise, and I mean nobody.  Sure, some people get good at it (or at least comfortable with it), but very few people would choose fundraising for their campaign as a way to spend their day.  Unfortunately, running for office takes money.  If you don’t have lots of money to put into your own campaign, you’re going to have to ask others to donate it to your effort.  The only real way to do that in a local campaign is for the candidate (that’s you!) to ask.  Your staff, fundraising consultant, and wife can’t do it for you.

Are you willing to get on the phone and ask your friends, family, and those guys you used to hang out with in college to donate money to your campaign?  Are you willing to utter the words, “Will you give $2,000?” and really mean it?  Fundraising is an integral part of every campaign, and the candidate is the fundraiser-in-chief.

If you have good ideas and want to change the direction of your town, city, county, state, or country, you can and should run for office.  But be prepared, and know what you’re getting into.  Use the questions above to make sure that you’re ready to run for office, and then get out there and get started!

Sincerely,
Joe Garecht

Joe Garecht is the founder of Local Victory, a website which offers hundreds of free articles and tips on winning elections.

A respected political consultant and seminar speaker who has been advising campaigns for over a decade, Joe is the author of several books including The Complete Guide to Getting Your Campaign off the Ground. Click here to learn more or get your copy today.

He started Local Victory to make sure that every campaign, no matter how small, had the tools and information it needs to win. Visit the site to download a free copy of Local Victory’s special report How to Get the Press to Cover Your Campaign. Click here to learn more or get your copy today.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/are-you-ready-to-run-for-political-office-1238381.html