To hear some Republicans tell it, the Grand Old Party needs to get with the times.
Some of the early prescriptions offered by officials and operatives to rebuild after devastating elections: retool the party message to appeal to Latinos, women and working-class people; upgrade antiquated get-out-the-vote systems with the latest technology. Teach candidates how to handle the new media landscape. From longtime GOP luminaries to the party’s rising stars, almost everyone asked about the Republicans’ Nov. 6 election drubbing seems to agree that a wholesale update is necessary for a party that appears to be running years behind Democrats in adapting to rapidly changing campaigns and an evolving electorate.
In the final lap to the 13th General Elections, Pakatan Rakyat leaders should focus single-mindedly to win support of the majority of Malaysian voters for the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Programme and not fall into the Umno/barisan Nasional “Divide-and-Rule” trap.
Let us be guided by the Joint Statement of Pakatan Rakyat leaders when Pakatan Rakyat was formed in 2008 which reaffirmed the solidarity, commitment and consensus basis of PR to implement an agenda to develop the nation and create a prosperous society based on justice, freedom, democracy and good governance, irrespective of ethnicity, religion and culture.
Common policy is clear
The Joint Statement of PR leaders dated 12th April 2008, bearing the signatures of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Datin Seri Dr. Wan Azizah Ismail, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang and myself, states:
“The policies of Pakatan Rakyat are centred on objectives that have been agreed upon and accepted by the leaders of the three parties that are keADILan, DAP and PAS. Among these are to develop this country on the basiss of justice, create opportunities for all citizens to enjoy national prosperity and to accord priority to those who are poor and marginalized.
“Pakatan Rakyat is not the forum nor is it the place for any group or individual to champion personal ideologies or that of its component parties. Although there have been individuals who express personal views that differ from the agreed agenda of Pakatan Rakyat, those views are clearly personal. They do not represent that of any of the Parties in Pakatan Rakyat. As such, all leaders and members of Pakatan Rakyat have been directed to desist from expressing views that contradict those that have been mutually agreed upon by Pakatxan Rakyat.
“There is no one party that is the backbone of Pakatan Rakyat. In fact, the strength of Pakatan Rakyat is based on principles of equality and spirit of co-operation among leaders of Pakatan Rakyat in keeping with the mandate that has been given to us by the people during the 12th General Elections.”
Feb or March 2013
For more than two years, the country has been waiting for the holding of the 13th GE but the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s indecisiveness and vacillations because of his lack of confidence in the outcome of the polls have seriously sapped economic confidence in the immediate future for the country.
Time is running out for Najib for the window for him to choose the best timing for dissolution of Parliament has been reduced to a pitiable five months as come April 27, 2013, the current 12th Parliament stands automatically dissolved even if Najib out-Hamlets everyone and still cannot decide when to call for polls.
However, I do not believe Najib wants to make world history as belonging to the rare breed of government leaders who could not even decide when to hold general elections and have to hang on until there is an automatic dissolution of Parliament under the Constitution.
I would expect the 13th General Election to be held in February or March next year. With the final three or four months to the 13GE, this is the time for all Pakatan Rakyat leaders, members and supporters to make the supreme effort to mobilise voters throughout the country to rally behind the PR Common Policy Programme and not to allow Umno/BN and their media, whether printed or electronic, to drive a wedge of division and dissension among and between Pakatan Rakyat parties.
In this connection, it must be pointed out that recent reports that the DAP had agreed that hudud would be implemented if Pakatan Rakyat captures Putrajaya in the 13 GE is completely untrue and baseless.
The DAP stand that hudud is not suitable nor appropriate for Malaysa because it is against the Constitution and the plural characteristics of Malaysia is an open, constant and consistent DAP position for the past 46 years of the party history.
DAP has made our stand clear and this is why it is not part of the PR Common Policy Programme, which can only be amended if there is consensus by all the three PR parties.
Interviews with more than a dozen Republicans at all levels of the party indicated that postelection soul-searching must quickly turn into a period of action.
“We’ve got to have a very brutally honest review from stem to stern of what we did and what we didn’t do, and what worked and what failed,” said former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, who ran the party in the 1990s.
The party “has to modernize in a whole wide range of ways,” added former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who ran against White House nominee Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential primary. “We were clearly wrong on a whole range of fronts.”
To determine what went wrong, the Republican National Committee is examining every detail of the 2012 elections, with the goal of rebuilding the party for the future – much as the Democratic Party did in the 1980s after suffering a series of stinging losses at all levels of government.
Now, as was the case back then, the stakes are enormous for the party that failed to win the White House and has lost the popular vote for several national elections in a row. They’re perhaps even higher for Republicans grappling for ways to court a rapidly changing electorate whose voting groups don’t naturally gravitate toward the GOP. The dangers of failing to act could be severe: permanent minority status.
So it’s little surprise that after the election, some Republicans were quick to sound stark warnings.
The scale of the losses largely shocked a party whose top-shelf operatives went into Election Day believing Republicans had at least a decent chance of capturing the White House and gaining ground in Congress, where Republicans controlled the House and had a sizable minority in the Senate.
Instead, Romney lost all but one of the nine contested states, North Carolina, to President Barack Obama and was trounced in the electoral vote. Republicans also lost ground to Democrats in both houses of Congress, though Republicans retained their House majority.
How to move forward dominated the discussions at last week’s Republican Governors Association meeting in Las Vegas, where some of the party’s leading voices castigated Romney’s assessment – made in what was supposed to be a private telephone call to donors – that Obama won re-election because of the “gifts” the president had provided to blacks, Hispanics and young voters. These governors faulted Romney.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal attributed Romney’s loss to a lack of “a specific vision that connected with the American people.”
Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, who describes himself as a “pro-choice moderate Republican,” echoed Republicans across the spectrum when he said last week: “We need to be a larger-tent party.” Brown lost his seat to Democrat Elizabeth Warren.
Across the board, Republicans say that arguably the most urgent task facing the party is changing its attitude about immigration as it looks to woo Hispanics. This rapidly growing group voted overwhelmingly for Obama, by margins of 7-to-1 over Romney, who had shifted to the right on the issue during the GOP primary.
It didn’t take long after the election for even staunch conservatives to start changing their tune on immigration. Days after the election, even conservative TV host Sean Hannity said he would support an immigration bill.
Said Barbour: “If we would be for good economic policy in terms of immigration, that would go a long way toward solving the political problem.”
It’s not just Hispanics.
Republicans said they also have work to do with single women and younger voters, many of whom tend to be more liberal on social issues than the current Republican Party. These Republicans said a change in tone is needed, though not a change in principles such as opposition to abortion.
“We need to make sure that we’re not perceived as intolerant,” said Ron Kaufman, a veteran Republican strategist who advised Romney’s campaign. “The bottom line is we were perceived to be intolerant on some issues. And tone-deaf on others.”
Republicans also said the party has to work on its relationship with working-class voters.
“Republicans have to start understanding that small business and entrepreneurs are important, but the people who work for them are also important,” said Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H., who lost his seat to Democrat Ann Kuster. “We’ve got to be compassionate conservatives.”
Party leaders also said the GOP needs to change how it communicates its message. Obama’s campaign, they said, was particularly effective at talking directly to voters, and building relationships over long periods of time, whereas the GOP was more focused on top-down communication such as TV ads and direct mail.
“There are whole sections of the American public that we didn’t even engage with,” Gingrich said.
Others pointed to the pressing need to recruit candidates who know how to stick to a carefully honed message, especially in a Twitter-driven era. Among their case studies: Senate candidates Richard Mourdock in Indiana and Todd Akin in Missouri, who both discussed rape and pregnancy during the campaign, to the chagrin of party leaders looking to narrow the Democrats’ advantage among women.
“We need candidates who are capable of articulating their policy positions without alienating massive voting blocs,” said Kevin McLaughlin, a Republican operative who worked on several Senate races for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Many Republicans say the party doesn’t have a choice but to change – and quickly.
“In this business,
“In this business,
It was in September 1998 that the “reformasi” movement started in Malaysia. Since then, the reform movement has grown from a “group” of people pressing for change to that of a formidable opposition coalition.
With this great leap forward, the “reform” movement in Malaysia is bound to make history again in the next general election with massive gains and a potential total defeat of the ruling Barisan National coalition.
A great push forward for the Pakatan Rakyat in the 13th general election will have untold consequences for UMNO, in power since independence in 1957. It will also mean that Malaysia has finally made headway in choosing a “reform” movement that was thought to have run out of steam in the 2004 BN’s historic victory.
In 1998, a majority of the “reformasi” supporters had to hide behind the cloak of the “Internet” to promote the movement or propose ideas on how to rein in the masses against the BN and Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the then Prime Minister.
Since then, the country has made serious gains in “Internet” freedom to the extent that the government of Najib Tun Razak is facing a daily uphill battle against “pro-reform” and “pro-opposition” elements.
With Anwar Ibrahim’s release from jail in 2004, the reform movement made an incredible revival. To many, the release of Anwar, promised by the Abdullah Ahmad Badawi regime in case of a big victory in the election, was an act of divine intervention.
However, to a few observers, it is the intense pressure from some members of the International Islamic Ulema (Muslim religious figures) and the Arab World that led to the release of the most popular political figure in the country.
In 2003, the Abdullah (Badawi) regime was in the midst of wooing the Saudi Arabian, Qatari and UAE regimes to win their favours and gain in respect and investment projects. Attempts by Abdullah to win the Arab world on its side failed as the need to release Anwar became a pressing element in the negotiations.
These were the behind-the-scenes event that were not reported by the local or international media as they were kept under wraps by the Abdullah government.
Nonetheless, after the big win by the BN against an ailing opposition that had decided not to campaign on the “Anwar Ibrahim” issue (particularly by PAS), the Abdullah government decided to free Anwar.
Mahathir’s move
The release of the former Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister was also the culmination of the long and strong campaign led by people like Raja Petra Kamarudin, the Malaysia Today editor in chief and maestro of “citizen journalism” in Malaysia.
It was his hard work, tough writings on the freeanwaribrahim.com blog and his campaigns in the country that helped in Abdullah regime’s consideration.
During the time of Mahathir, negotiations to free Anwar and allow him to have an operation in Germany backfired when the former Prime Minister angrily uttered the now infamous “muktamad”.
Mahathir was being pressed by the local and international media on rumours that Anwar would be freed and that negotiations between the Anwar group and Mahathir’s government were ongoing on the issue.
The fact remains that the Mahathir regime was not prepared to let go of Anwar from its claws as his release and subsequent presence in Germany would have been negative for the regime.
Not only Anwar would be free to campaign against the Mahathir regime from Germany while receiving treatment for his growing back pain, there was also the possibility that Anwar would raise funds through his friends in Germany.
That would have meant a triumphant return of Anwar at the KLIA, a return that would have probably caused tremors within the Mahathir regime at that particular fragile era.
In Germany, Anwar would have been aided by his close “friend” and ally, the former President of Indonesia, Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie. The latter established himself in Germany after his downfall as the “replacement” President following the removal of General Suharto from power in the aftermath of the Indonesian “reformasi”.
This would have meant a lot of support not only for Anwar but also for the “reform” movement in Malaysia.At that particular time what remained of the movement launched by Anwar in 1998, at least in the eyes of the public, were merely echoes of “reformasi” and “memories” of the police beating and tear gas in the streets of Kuala Lumpur.
His flight to Germany would have been an unexpected boost to the Malaysian reform movement. It was, however, just a question of delaying the “tsunami” that would almost wipe out the BN in 2008.
Bigger reform movement today
Are the delays in the 2013 polls in Malaysia yet another ploy by the ruling coalition to simply put off the potential takeover of Putrajaya by the same “reform” movement?
The signs are already written on the walls of Kuala Lumpur, the city that had seen the people – mostly of Malay origin – battling the Police and the Federal Riot Units (FRU) in Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman or in Kampung Baru and elsewhere in the city.
Today, the “reform” movement is a larger group, composed of Malaysians of all origins and expecting a turn of events in the 13th general election.
Will their wish come true?Anwar and the Malaysian reform movement seem to have a touch of “gold” that cannot be denied.
The former henchman of Mahathir has created history not once but multiple times. He was freed almost unconditionally from jail, and he won his seat back in a massive defeat to the BN in Permatang Pauh – the constituency that became historical thanks to the “Permatang Pauh” declaration.
He became the Opposition head in Parliament and his movement in coalition with PAS and DAP won five states in 2008, bagging 82 parliamentary seats. All these feats were never achieved by any other “deposed” leader within the UMNO-BN hierarchy.
History is littered with men of valour who lost their battle with the UMNO-BN and became victims of a terrible system of denial of justice. But Anwar braved the waves against him and rode the “tsunami” he helped create to become a hero of Malaysia.
These are historical facts that cannot be denied and more seems on the way for the making of the modern history in Malaysia.
Said Kaufmann: “In this business, either you learn and grow or you die.”
No comments:
Post a Comment