Just in the past few months, Speaker Boehner chose him to be one of the conferee’s of the payroll-tax bill (don’t get me started), and Politico named him runner-up of the Freshman classes “Most Likely to Succeed.”

As his sophomore year starts, Reed recently interviewed with National Journal to reflect back on his time so far in Washington…

My expectation coming to D.C. was that it was going to be a place where people tell you how to vote, tell you what you’re going to do, and rule over you with an iron-fist mentality. I have been pleasantly surprised by our leadership. They really do listen, they let us speak, and let us be an active part of the governing process.

The hardest part of the job is being away from my family. I have an 11- and 13-year-old. They have adjusted to me being a way a bit, but it’s still hard. I tell them that we are trying to do something so America is here for them. I’ve created an internal rule that Sunday is off-limits unless I put it on the schedule myself. That’s family time. I also got the kids iPhones. We’re learning FaceTime and Skype. It’s not the same as seeing them face to face, but being able to see their face is a lot better than just being on the phone.

We’ll all be paying closer attention to the entire New York delegation this year, but Tom Reed is definitely top of the list.

Of course we’re still waiting to see what the new redistricting map looks like, but this makes Westchester an interesting battleground. Yes, it’s a heavily Democrat area, and President Obama won with 60%+ last time. But let’s look what has happened since then…

2009 –Rob Astorino (R-NY) wins his county executive race
2010 – Nan Hayworth (R-NY) wins her congressional race
2011 – (R-NY) picks up two seats in the Westchester legislature.

2012 – Bob Cohen (R-NY) winning his state senate race? Maybe even Mark Rosen (R-NY), whose opponent has been rumoured to be considering retirement, winning in the NY-18?

As they say on teh internets, DEVELOPING…

There’s an opening here though. See, as much as it makes me uncomfortable to see other Republicans attacking their opponents as liberals, I’m glad they did because it lets primary voters see a) what’s waiting for him from the Democrats, and b) see how Romney reacts to the attacks. And therein lies his opening to unify everyone, because the biggest issue many of us have with Romney is that we don’t think he’s going to have the balls to punch back and go after President Obama, the Democrats, and the usual Obama Media Complex.

Let’s see Mitt give a full throated defense of capitalism and conservatism as a whole. Defend his record. Point out that while having to fire people may have sucked, in the long run it helped the companies grow and hire more people in the long run. Show conservatives who don’t trust him that he’s not going to accept the liberal premise behind every issue, and hit back against any and all class warfare rhetoric thrown at him…which in this case are coming at him from people on our own side.

I want to see Mitt Romney show us that he’s more than just slightly better than Obama, and here’s his chance. It’s the difference between simply voting for him in November, and actively campaigning for him before then.

Much like his economic and financial reform plans, it’s bold and full of everything conservative would want. It kind of makes you wonder why he wouldn’t have been talking aboot it all last year BEFORE people started voting. He may have gained traction in the polls and New Hampshire might actually be too close to call (I know, you’re shocked my headline was misleading).

Some bulletpoints of note:

Introducing Market Forces into Education System. Governor Huntsman supports an “all of the above” approach to education. The federal role should be acting as a clearinghouse for information and ideas, empowering states and local communities to take ownership of education reform. To this end, the federal government should attempt to minimize its role in trying to deliver outcomes, and instead encourage the growth of a more innovative educational system.

Creating Transparency. The key first step toward deregulation of education is introducing competition and transparency; free markets work best when given access to clear information. Jon Huntsman’s administration will establish meaningful and transparent national standards benchmarked to the world’s highest achieving educational systems and let states compete on how best to get there. Governor Huntsman believes that American students should be setting international standards, not aspiring to meet them. Our current standards are superficial, embarrassingly unambitious, and confusing for teachers.

Real Accountability. The federal government shouldn’t be in the business of running local schools or picking winners. President Huntsman will make sure schools, their administrators, and their boards are held accountable through data-driven measures of processes and achievement. Incentives matter, and communities whose schools fail to meet Common Core benchmarks should not be rewarded. A possible consequence could be restricting access to federal resources. President Huntsman will also use his bully pulpit to encourage adaptation of a parent trigger wherein a significant number of concerned parents could induce state action. On the other hand, principals who demonstrate sustained innovation and success should be rewarded and held up as models for other educators.

Department of Education Reform. The Department of Education has grown too large and powerful, and is restricting the flexibility of states and local communities to implement education reforms. Massively scaling down the department will clear the way for necessary reforms at the local level and free up precious resources.

Acknowledging Hard Truths. Public policy must be driven by reality. We need an education system that is designed to equip all students to be informed citizens and allows all children to maximize their God-given talents. Governor Huntsman believes that every child has a genius within; the challenge lies in empowering it. In preparing our youth to join an able citizenry, our education system should both provide generous opportunity for students to achieve their highest level of performance, while simultaneously acknowledging economic realities and making graduates both “college” and “career” ready. We need to reevaluate our “at all costs” emphasis on higher education for everyone in an environment where that emphasis only disadvantages individuals in the long run.

I have been waiting for any of the candidates to bring up Education Reform in any of the debates, or to speak on it in detail on the campaign trail. And while some reporters/blggers from the right are feeling a “Huntsman surge” on the ground, apparently the only way I may get to hear it is if he mangaes to not come in behind Ron Paul in tomorrow’s primaries.

#headdesk

There’s hasn’t been a quote that has better summed up Romney’s base of support then from one of his surrogates yesterday, “It’s not even about picking someone with your own beliefs and principles.” Say what you will about Ron Paul supporters, but they at least have specific domestic and foreign policy beliefs that they advocate for. Romney supporters? All they tell you is that “he can win” without any evidence that can back it up.

What is a single accomplishment he had as governor? HE CAN WIN! What’s a single conservative principle that he is passionate about? HE CAN WIN! Have you ever taken a close look at his “job creation” record? HE CAN WIN!

And this is where the frustration for us activists (or as one Mittbot called me, “conservative wack jobs”) comes from. For a lot of us, we started to get involved after the debacle of the McCain campaign and our first taste was 2010. There we found dynamic leaders with bold ideas for turning the country around, advocated for them, and got them elected. Now we find ourselves with a candidate who is slightly better than Obama and thinks simply not being Obama will get him a victory, and that seems to be the one principle the Mittbots support. Democrats supported the same principle in 2004 with John Kerry.

This is where the Mittbots usually start with their indignant, “well, who are you gonna support when YOUR candidate drops out?” I’ll vote for slightly better for Obama. But support? Show any enthusiasm or energy for? There are hundreds of other candidates running in other races who share my own “beliefs and principles.” I’ll support them.

P.S. Don’t get me wrong, none of this is to say that he other candidates haven’t all been different shades of terrible.

Unlike most of the other rumoured NY Senate candidates I left myself get excited by (::cough::dansenor::cough::), Mark Cendella seems more serious than the rest and while a definitive announcement hasn’t been made yet, he’s hired the guy who led Bob Turner to victory, and has been making the rounds talking to GOP heads and even grabbed some time with journalist Fed Dicker at the recent State of the State.

Cendella, who supported Ron Paul in ’08 and sits on the board of the club for growth, plans a jumping starting his own campaign with his own millions (a necessity if you’re running state wide in New York). He plans on drawing from his background as a young entrepreneur and job creator as the cornerstone of his campaign…

After Yale, according to the book The Intelligent Entrepreneur, which tells the story of three successful Harvard Business School grads, he moved to California and began a career importing and exporting, capitalizing on Japan’s interest in American pet food. He turned down Harvard Business School on account of his new company, but lying in a hotel bed in Tokyo one day, decided that even being the king of Japanese pet food wouldn’t exactly satisfy his ambitions. So he re-applied to Harvard Business School and ultimately enrolled. After Harvard, he rose to become a senior vice president at the employment site HotJobs.com, before it was sold in 2002.

But the cornerstone of Cenedella’s Senate campaign would be his own company, TheLadders.com, an employment site Cenedella founded in 2003 that now counts 270 employees.

“Marc is a populist scientist of employment,” reads his bio on the Ladders site, which also says that his “passion in life is jobs,” and calls him a “widely recognized thought leader on job search, career management, recruiting and business.”

As the say in the biz, DEVELOPING…

He’s 2nd in most of the new polls (or statistically tied for second, I don’t count Ron Paul) and has two debates to wow a NH elecorate who is know for surprises. You can ask Hillary Clinton aboot that. I guess stranger things have happened. For now, here’s the commercial he’s airing in New Hampshire right now…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r8z0uag5mI

It reminded me of a column my good friend (and former broadcast partner) Mark Radulich wrote back in 2007. This was the impression the gave four years ago. They’ve gotten worse…

Dear Friends,

Hi! How are you? It’s great that you are out there making viral videos and throwing “Tea Parties” to raise money for your man, Ron Paul. It is outstanding that you are so invested in the coming election and that you’re willing to get behind a clear dark horse candidate like Dr. Ron Paul. I applaud you, I really do, for your passionate support and undying struggle to give the vast American voting public a better choice than, “a giant douche and a turd sandwich.” Hats off to you.

I understand your enthusiasm for Ron Paul. I really do and I think it’s great, truly. Much of what Ron Paul stands for is worth embracing and he makes many salient points in the debates, despite being painted as a Kucinich-like lunatic. I agree with Ron Paul on issues such as the economy and our ever sinking dollar, especially in the face of the rising euro. Certainly a vote for Ron Paul is a vote for restoring stability to the falling dollar. I agree with Ron Paul on his ideas about reducing government spending and the overall size of government. Surely a government that spends millions on a bridge to nowhere is one that is far out of control and apparently living on planet “Money Tree.” Now I disagree with Ron Paul on his isolationist foreign policy ideas and specifically his assertion that Iran is not a direct threat to the United States, while they are still the main financial and political support for the terrorist group Hezbollah, but that’s OK. This is America and we can be free to disagree.

Now do you see what I just did there friends? I stated simply that I disagreed with one of Ron Paul’s positions and gave a reason for my disagreement. You’ll notice the absence of shrill language and name calling. You’ll also notice that I didn’t call him or anyone else a fascist, a communist, a fag, a Nazi, a racist, Britney Spears or insane in the membrane. You’ll notice that I didn’t insinuate that Ron Paul hates children or the poor. I didn’t even make a “Yo Momma” joke. That’s called having a rational discussion.

My dear friends, Ron Paul supporters big and small, a political election is all about convincing people to stand behind a certain point of view and electing someone who will represent that point of view in Washington. Generally speaking, and maybe you all don’t know this because while you may be true to the game, you are still new to the game, attacking the people who you seek to lobby or are trying to convince is usually counterproductive. One might even say that insulting the people who you would want to vote with you is downright stupid. It’s like being in court and telling the judge and jury to suck a…well you get the idea.

This extends to the those in the media as well who give folks like Ron Paul a platform to speak from and share his views. I am trying to help here so let me give you a few examples of what not to say when you are trying to lobby people to your campaign or ideology:

Medved is just yet another neocon Likud jew. Now how is that helpful?

Giuliani is a wanker. Thought he was sooo tough standing their smug in front of a fox chosen crowd clearly showing the ignorance of a half bake who does not understand how to engage with someone on the topic area, totally misconstrue the statements by Paul and behave like an overindulgent prick. This refers to the exchange between Paul and Giuliani from the Fox Debate back in May that was instrumental in getting Paul noticed. While Giuliani was patently pandering to the pro-national security crowd in the audience and misconstruing history in the process, calling him a wanker doesn’t really help convince people that Giuliani was dead wrong and Paul was right.

apparently the whole nation is behind him. anybody with a brain and a conscience is absolutely intoxicated by him; americans r too stupid to choose him; wow, rudy is a real pile ‘ sheeeawt; and my personal favorite, RON PAUL IS SO FUCKIN ON HIS SHIT THAT AINT NOBODY GUNNA FUX WIT HIM! DAT MUFUKKA IS A GANGSTA! (In a good way, you know… urban slang?)

There are plenty of you who write comments that are not as caustic and shrill as the ones above but there are many more worse comments that are peppered throughout the blogosphere. Ridiculing those who disagree with you or being condescending toward those who don’t completely buy 100% of what Ron Paul says is not the way to promote this man to the presidency. In fact, this behavior is exactly what drove people with progressive leanings like myself away from the Green Party. Simply put, we didn’t want to be seen standing next to a bunch of nut cases screaming on top of Mount Pompous.

And let’s face facts here. Ron Paul consistently polls last in all serious election polls from Zogby to Marist and Rasmussen. He’s a deep third in New Hampshire where he has the strongest chance of winning…not a Mike Huckabee in Iowa chance but a chance of not coming in dead last. I would think that Ron Paul supporters would concentrate more on building up more supports for a candidate that consistently polls third to last rather than pronouncing him the winner when mathematically he isn’t a contender. Frankly, when your guy is in last place, it seems silly to the rest of the world to act and treat others like you’ve already won, not to mention it doesn’t help the cause of actually winning anything.

You don’t have the luxury that Clinton supporters do. She’s so far in the lead that some of her supporters can afford to be complete assholes like this fellow, “I piss on your face, you shit-for-brains. WHo the fuck cares what you have to say? You’re a fucking nobody!!! VOTE FOR HILLARY OR LOSE YOUR FREEDOMS, AMERICA!!!” When Ron Paul is leading in national polls then you can act like the above child, but not before.

My dear friends, you can have tea parties and one day fund raisers until the cows come home and all you’ll accomplish is making Ron Paul a little wealthier than he was before but you won’t succeed necessarily in making him the GOP nominee. Money helps win an election but it is not the last word, see Howard Dean circa 2004.

I realize you are all not neo-Nazi, 9/11 Truthers and secessionist as Medved once wrote but you are dangerously close to doing more damage than good when you are as shrill and caustic as you have been. Learn from the Naderites instead of stampeding down the path of becoming them and thus permanently sinking Ron Paul’s candidacy for good.

Your Friend in Conversation, Candor and Goodwill,

Mark Radulich, MSW