Sunday, July 10, 2011

The tactics of the small political party

Your weakness is your strength- you have no need to try and appease the great unwashed, as you will not have the numbers to win an election outright.

So don't try.

Do the bidding of your party members and appeal to those who may be persuaded to swing in your direction. When I write a book, I intend it to appeal to a certain market- you can't please everybody and it is futile to try.

To win a war, you have to win a series of battles first. Focus on holding your 5%, then on growing it.

ACT- you got it right in raising the point of pandering to radicals who will NEVER support you. Total stupidity and a kick in the teeth to your party faithful. NEVER support or make deals with those who are 180 degrees apart from your core values.

Never forget KISS- don't put too many issues on the table. This is a mistake the Libertarians make- they put the whole deal out there. Have it easily accessible on a website, but use the MSM to focus on no more than three key issues:
  • One set of rules for ALL
  • Reduced government
  • Reduced taxation

That's enough for the proles to take on.

KNOW your demographic. What they like, what they don't like- on and off the record.
REMEMBER- if the opposition isn't screaming, you ain't hurting them enough. Make those piggies SQUEAL!
DON'T let them dictate the terms of debate. Call a spade a fucking shovel and don't be so bloody timid about it.
WIN- they will not play nice- don't bother trying and the best time to get the boot in is when the other player is down. This is not cricket. Politics is war.


Tim said...

Dead right! And don't bother ever looking for a fair representation of ACT on either of the main news channels, national socialist radio or the papers. ACT needs someone with the balls to just take it to them when the op's arise - maybe Cactus??

Regards Tim

Anonymous said...

I would hate CK to be in charge of anything political. To do so would, in my view, require a significant shift in attitude and significant compromise of what (I think) are her fundamental beliefs. I think it would cost her much emotionally and we would lose that independant comment.

The system is not going to change uless the people running it want it to. Our mistake is thinking we know who runs it and voting for them.