I attended the Bangor GOP Committee meeting and I came away with several very enlightening experiences. I will start by explaining my growing but now more complete understanding of what a politician thinks they should tell a group of people. Sometimes they try the personal story approach, which is what both Charlie Webster and Bruce Poliquin did this evening. This is not a bad thing. It is just a tactic that forms to get favorable opinions of people. It creates a personal connection and explains their viewpoint on a topic, which helps if the topic and story are related.
Often with Charlie Webster he appeared passionate about what he was talking about. This is a good quality because it shows he is not only connecting with us and the issue, but means what he says.
He had the speech mostly memorized or it was done very spontaneously as he only had guiding note cards. His is very aware and knew facts by heart on most occassions in his speeches. He asserted "Maine is not liberal" many times.
He discussed the reasons the Republican Party has lost elections. One of the major reasons was that Democratic candidates could focus on being men of the people and target previous voting records of Republican candidates. In connecting with the people the discussion left the issues. When discussing the Republican voting record, one person in the attending group commented (I believe he was John Frary but I cannot be certain at this moment), Republicans did not question the Democratic candidate's voting record. The new approach was to make elections issue debate and discussion oriented to bring awareness to the electorate to where Republican's stood on the issues the common working person had to deal with.
This is where another point was made in that the Republican Party is the party of the working people. In Maine there are not many very wealthy people. So in order to continue the often mentioned "welfare state" that Maine has become the taxes fall on everyone in order to support the spending programs. Republican's oppose the loose entry programs and the high taxes but support a continued necessary safety net for those who do need it.
Bruce Poliquin, one of the gubernatorial candidates for Maine, also gave a speech. It was pre-written and a standard political speech. His heritage in Maine, life story, and the other personal connection stories that rarely connect to a political issue were discussed. This too is not a bad thing. It is standard for the values that guide a person's life decisions such as honesty and hard working nature to be excellent qualities in leadership. These personal stories of their lives give politicians a place to explain those values and Bruce connected them strongly.
Then there was a discussion by the group and a later interview that I had with him and there will be specific items I analyze in a couple days when I get a transcript of our conversation written. However one thing that stood out to me was the pure honesty of his responses to questions. Some of the statements were premade from his website which are good points but can get redundant for those who are so obsessed with politics (like me) who will look at every speech and every statement and see the repetition. Although here early in the running doing that presents a similar point to create awareness among a generally large number of people it should be altered before (in a time I've not figured out yet) new lines or ideas are almost a necessity to talk from in order to keep the eyes of the listeners from glossing over.
His points were well known by himself and it was his honesty when questioned about things he was unaware of. He was willing to admit he didn't know something. Politicians as a rule seem arrogant, know-it-all attitude kinds of people. The examples are astounding due to all the back tracking politicians do as a daily exercise routine these days. This man was honest, open, and if people disagree with him I feel confident that he will not back track. I feel he would accept disagreement with his position but not compromise his values to appease those with dissent. I feel he makes a good candidate for office. I do not know if he is the best choice at this time.
I will explain the specific points of our meeting in a transcript (harder to do than you think) that I am going to make of our conversation and of the evening's discussions as a whole. Disclaimer: I am not going to make profit off these transcripts and anyone who does is doing so against my will but I do allow the comments to be used by news organizations as I feel they (Charlie Webster and Bruce Poliquin) would allow the comments to be public as well since the meeting was open to all. That said, I don't feel (basing this on my memory right now) that they would be ashamed of their comments in any way. It was a very professional evening and my reactions to the people attending are that there is a sense of common purpose among everyone there. It was an experience I rarely have because when I accomplish something I do not always feel like I am doing so with the support of others doing the same thing and that is what this meeting was: accomplishing the same thing with the same people.
Tomorrow I will still be decyphering the transcript so I will address the prospect of war with North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela and their allies. Meanwhile, make yourself aware and check out Bruce Poliquin's website:
http://www.bruceforme.com/index.php
and Matt Jacobson's website:
http://www.jacobsonforgovernor.com/content/index.php