Paul Ryan to Republicans: ‘Go into Inner Cities, Go into Minority Communities’

Jennifer Jacobs, Des Moines Register, November 16, 2013

Former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan thinks Republicans need to take their limited-government message to voters who are “unfamiliar with hearing us.”

“Go into inner cities, go into minority communities,” Ryan, who speaks in Iowa tonight, told The Des Moines Register in a telephone interview on Monday. “Go into communities that have not seen or heard from Republicans in a long time.”

Ryan, a congressman from Wisconsin, was responding to a question about whether lessons can be learned from Republican wins in blue states, like Gov. Chris Christie’s victory in the governor’s race in Democratic-leaning New Jersey on Nov. 5.

“Absolutely,” Ryan answered. “It shows that we have to go and campaign in non-traditional areas, non-traditional neighborhoods, and by showing up not just a few months before the election, but by being in these communities all year round, that will make a difference.

“What Chris’s victory shows is that conservatives can win blue states if we focus on being inclusive and campaigning in every facet of this country, we can open up the electoral map, far more than where it has been.”

Today, Ryan returned to politically important Iowa for the first time since he and Mitt Romney barnstormed through the state a year ago trying to win the White House. The occasion: a speech tonight at a fundraiser for Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, a fellow Republican. {snip}

{snip}

Asked last week about his ambitions for the White House in 2016, Ryan told the Register that once he finishes his current term in Congress (his eighth), “I’m going to give a hard look at it.”

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • You know why they “haven’t heard it in a long time?” (Even though they’re telling us that we have to do this seemingly every other day). It’s because it has already been done, and failed spectacularly.

    This was the playbook for one of Paul Ryan’s mentors, that being Jack Kemp, when he ran for President in 1988, and doing so while only a Congressman, as Ryan would be if he runs in 2016, presuming he wins re-election to another term in Congress in 2014, (hopefully some immigration patriot will knock him out). And how well did it work? Kemp won no states, averaged 5% in primaries while he was actually running and supposedly “competitive,” and 2.72% or 331k votes overall, the percentage inevitably decreased after he dropped out, because, you know, constantly getting 5% of the primary vote in each state isn’t going to win you many Presidential nominations.

    The only big difference this time is that the immigration issue is hot now while it wasn’t in 1988, so Ryan is making “immigration reform” (amnesty and open borders) a centerpiece of his speculative Presidential campaign, the same amnesty and open borders we just screamed at the top of our lungs to stop at least for awhile.

    He’ll be lucky to get 5% in his own state much less any state with that as his prime issue.

    • Pro_Whitey

      Yes, all that blather is straight out of the Kemp playbook. I can think of just two good things about Kemp: (1) popularizing the Laffer Curve, which I understand is supposed to be “discredited” because it makes too much sense, and (2) popularizing the phrase that if you tax something, you get less of it, and if you subsidize something, you get more of it. Everything else about Kemp is less than worthless, actually harmful. He had one play, the Kemp Hail Mary of tax cuts. However, the spark from tax cuts was never enough to outrun welfare spending to get to the goal line of a balanced budget. It takes a lot of smash mouth cuts to spending to do that, and Kemp never had the guts for it.
      Kemp also claimed that he won a lot of minority votes, but I wonder if that proposition was ever truly tested. It is quite possible he won because his Dem opponents were black, and the whites in his district voted in a block for him as the lesser evil.
      Ryan is dead to me. Last year I did not know that he and Kemp actually opposed Prop 187 in Cali back in 1994, the referendum to deny welfare to illegal aliens. How can anyone but a fraud pretend to be “fiscally conservative” when wanting to give welfare to people who should not even be in the country?

      • Kemp was a three-term Congressman from a western New York State district near (but not constituting) Buffalo. If he “won minority votes,” he probably got two of the ten blacks that lived in his district. And I don’t know what minorities voted for him in the 1988 Republican Presidential primaries and caucuses, because the blacks that season were all flooding out on the Democrat side for Jesse Jackson.

        You bought up a good point. Kemp was for open borders. When California was considering Prop 187, he and Bill Bennett ran all over the state admonishing the state’s voters not to be so “racist” and “bigoted” as to vote for it. For proof, here is Sam Francis, “Racialpolitik,” from Chronicles in February 1995, that happens to be the definitive takedown of this whole notion of a propositional or credal nation:

        ***

        Of course, not all whites supported [California Proposition] 187, and most prominent among those who actually attacked it were presidential perennial Jack Kemp and Bill “Mr. Virtue” Bennett himself. The two neo-conservatives hastened to California to harangue the masses with their insight that “the American national identity is not based on ethnicity, or race, or national origin, or religion. The American national identity is based on a creed, on a set of principles and ideas.” Of course, that is a common view of the American identity, one that has been repeatedly expressed throughout our history, though there are at least two problems with it. In the first place it happens to be untrue. In the second place it happens to be a dangerous and even suicidal claim.

        It is untrue because the major fact about American national identity is that it is an identity created by British settlers and later European immigrants and therefore is almost exclusively the achievement of whites. Whatever wise pleasantries of universalism may turn up in the patriotic oratory and public documents of American history, no one can claim that the American identity is really the kind of watery abstraction the Kemp-Bennett statement purports it to be. Behind and beneath those pleasantries lie the concrete identity, experience, and aspirations of a homogeneous people “of a common blood,” as Jefferson put it in his draft of the Declaration of Independence, and to reduce that essentially racial as well as cultural heritage to the bloodless “principles and ideals” that Mr. Kemp and Mr. Bennett busy themselves tooting is not only a confession of the most dismal ignorance but also a trumpeting of the most brazen betrayal.

        Moreover, the Kemp-Bennett claim is dangerous because it fundamentally misunderstands the nature of a nation or of any collective political identity other than a debating society. If indeed being an American were “based on a creed, on a set of principles and ideas,” then any person in the world who adhered to that creed would be an American. That might be fine with the open borders crowd whom the Kemp-Bennett statement was designed to please, but it also means that any person who does not adhere to the creed is not an American, and in asserting the credal identity of the United States, the Kemp-Bennett statement comes close to formulating the grounds of a new totalitarianism. The Soviet Union was “based on a creed,” and Russians who dissented from the creed were punished severely. How else indeed could a state defining itself through a creed cohere? So far from opening the national gates to anyone who wants to come here, defining American national identity in terms of a creed actually guarantees a closed and perhaps brutally repressive regime and implies nothing whatsoever about what kind of welcome we might give to immigrants.

        In the first place, if you believe in the Creed, you can be a perfectly good American in the slums of Buenos Aires or the jungles of Rwanda, just as you can be a perfectly good Christian or a perfectly good libertarian or a perfectly good communist, and there’s no reason at all for you to come here or go anywhere. In the second place, if adhering to the Creed is what makes you an American, then why not give creed tests to all immigrants, or indeed to native Americans, and if they don’t subscribe to the Gospel according to Jack and Bill, round ‘em up and send ‘em back.

        No one knows what any of the immigrants to this country, legal or illegal, past or present, believe or have believed, and there is no reason for anyone to be examined or tested as to what they believe before being admitted. The credal basis of national identity that Mr. Kemp and Mr. Bennett blather about may sound both high-minded and broad-minded, but upon any but the most superficial examination, it (like so much else of what they have to say) turns out to be transparently false and, if it were taken any more seriously than most of the slogans and bumper-stickers that pass for high political theory among neo-conservatives, could serve as the basis of a far more restrictive regime than any nativist has ever conceived.

        ***

      • JohnEngelman

        The Laffer Curve lead to the Republican delusion that tax cuts generate more tax revenue than tax increases, that it is always a good idea to cut taxes, and ever a good idea to raise them.

        That delusion has led to the increase in the national debt which Republican leaders are using in efforts to cut domestic spending programs they have never liked that have always been popular with the voters.

        • Jesse James

          Actually given that Obama has added more debt than all preceding President’s including debt incurred during the Civil War, Two World Wars, Vietnam and the whole preceding seven years in the Middle East the debt level is insane. What do we have to show for it? Not one tangible thing, just one giant orgy of looting, wealth transfer and bogus leftist fantasy programs. They didn’t even have the decency to put much of the money into the not “shovel ready” infrastructure programs that they promised. Where are the new bridges, repaired roads and water systems? A half fought war in Afghanistan where the casualties are less per year than the black chaos in a single one of our major cities? I am not making light of our casualties, one is too many if it is your kin or loved one, just trying to give you the scale of disorder that we are ignoring in our country. A monstrosity of a Department of Homeland Security where a black man can be paid $100,000 year to daydream about genocide against the whites who pay his salary. We hardly need to go overseas to find savages to fight, there are more than enough just down the road. We didn’t go to Mars and have basically mothballed our entire space program. Where is the new alternative energy economy that we paid so much to build? Pigford is our new food security? Scads of money wasted to pay blacks who never dreamed of farming, had no farms or any intention of ever farming back door reparations – open theft, unpunished, ignored. Massive fraud in all the social welfare boondoggles. We let a narcissistic communist rabble rouser wreck the rule of law and beggar our nation and for what? So a bunch of yuppie white do-gooders could embrace their “Civil Rights” moment of electing the first “blackish” President. Somewhere Satan must be laughing.

          • JohnEngelman

            Obama’s big mistake was in not raising taxes for the well to do right after his inauguration, when his approval rating was about 65 percent. His second mistake was to address health care before reducing unemployment.

            The way FDR ended the Great Depression was to expand government spending and employment while making the rich pay for it.

            For several years public opinion polls have indicated popular support for a more progressive tax system, and little support for cutting Social Security and Medicare, or any domestic spending programs at all.

        • JustSomeDude78

          JohnEngelman, you always point to the popularity of social programs as evidence of their effectiveness. That’s a mistake for five reasons:

          1) The vast majority of people have no meaningful political opinions at all. Surveys routinely show widespread ignorance about basic features of the political system.
          2) Polls show conflicting attitudes toward social programs; people give different answers based on how the questions are asked.
          3) Every government program develops a constituency
          that lobbies for its continued existence, hiring small armies of intellectuals to convince to the public that what serves a special interest actually serves the general interest.
          4) Once a government program has existed for a long
          period of time, it becomes impossible for people to imagine life without it; myths develop about how bad things were in the old days; etc. For example, many people believe that old people starved in the streets before Social Security. That’s simply not true. Most people worked into old age, then moved in with their children when they couldn’t work any longer. In fact, Social Security was passed to lower unemployment by pushing old folks out of the workforce.
          5) The welfare state has never been as popular as most liberals seem to think: The tax-and-spend policies of the 1930s faced fierce, populist opposition from large segments of the American public; tax strikes nearly brought down several city and state governments; the anti-New Deal coalition didn’t dissolve until the 1960s; Social Security didn’t become politically untouchable until the the 1980s; and majority of young people today would opt out of Social Security if they could.

          • JohnEngelman

            Franklin Roosevelt was elected president four times. He always had comfortable majorities in both houses of Congress.

    • redfeathers

      How I despised Kemp! All his nonsense about home ownership (giveaways) for minorities, enterprise zones in their neighborhoods, tax breaks for their businesses. He was as bad as any democrat when at HUD. He adored Charlie Rangel and was a La Raza supporter. I’m with you in hoping Ryan gets a primary opponent. I never liked him and was disappointed Romney picked him.

      • “Home ownership for minorities”

        And those are the Republican “conservative” ideological roots of the policies which gave us the subprime mortgage crisis. The notion that blacks and later Hispanics are the horrible way they are because they didn’t “own” their residential domicile. Democrats do have that blood on their hands, too, but their angle is that they just love giving way freebies to their favored minority groups.

  • Jesse James

    How about the GOP trying a really novel tactic – actually representing the working and middle class white people who provide the vast majority of their votes.

    • JohnEngelman

      The GOP could not do that while advancing the economic interests of employers. Employers like open borders and a reasonably high degree of unemployment because it enables them to hold the line on pay increases.

      • Jesse James

        Supporting a political party is all a matter of degree John, I dislike the GOP but I HATE the Democrats. I have to admit though you are correct and it is very unlikely we will able be able to get the GOP to represent us, they are an inseparable part of the system that is destroying us. The controlled opposition, the reverse side of the coin, the Republican Judy to the Democratic Punch. The entire puppet show has become loathsome.

    • Cairdeas

      What happened to my earlier comment applauding Jesse’s comment? It was slightly off-topic. Did I take too many slaps at Ryan and republicans in general?
      Would some kind soul tell me how to get line spacing (as in between paragraphs) in these comments?

  • bubo

    Thanks to our government, I don’t have to “go” into those communities to experience vibrant blackness. Sirens, police helicopters, shuffling black males, black women with 7 kids are quite common in my once upper middle class neighborhood thanks to people like Mr. Ryan.

    • Jefferson

      Why are they common ? Was your upper middle class neighborhood injected with section 8 housing ?

      • bubo

        Yes. Tons of vibrant diversity when the nearby apartments became exclusively section 8.

        • kjh64

          I’m luckier than you. I don’t have tons of Blacks but I do now live in Mexico Norte. I don’t have to go to Mexico, I can just go to my local Walmart or hospital emergency room.

  • Lewis33

    Go to the inner cities, offer your daughters up for sacrifice…follow the lead of Mccain and Boehner!

    • And if you don’t have daughters to offer “drill oil”..

  • D.B. Cooper

    So, the GOP is stupid enough to listen to a guy who couldn’t beat a candidate like Obama.
    HEY, Republican Party! Look at ME! How about going after MY vote? It’s also up for grabs.
    Let me guess, you are assuming I’m an automatic lock just because I read these racist websites like AMREN?

    HERE is what makes me vote for your Democratic opponent:
    1. Reaching out to minorities when you don’t even have more than 70% of the white vote.
    2. Too afraid to tell the reverends Jesse and Al to shut up.
    3. Groveling and shivering in fear of being called the R word.
    4. No track record of actually doing something to stop Affirmative Action. Your “promises” alone are no longer good enough. I need to see what you have actually done
    5. No track record of actually stopping illegal immigration.

    What do you say, Ryan? I’m worse than the conservative who sits at home on election day. I’ll vote democrat which will essentially be taking TWO votes away from you.
    If your ideas are what you want the future of the GOP to be, then this is what I want your elephant mascot to turn into.

    • D.B. Cooper

      OK, so my picture didn’t post. Paul Ryan reminds my of the dead, rotting elephants left behind by poachers.

    • Jefferson

      Why do you have to vote Democrat ? Why can’t you just vote 3rd party instead like The Constitution Party for example ? The Democratic Party is a cancer to the White race.

      Maybe you are a left wing informant sent by by Big Brother to spy on American Renaissance.

      You seem way too enthusiastic about your support for The Democratic Party.

      • I’m not going to talk D.B. out of his disgust for the Stupid Party, the RINOs. Because I have the same disgust.

        But if he’s trying to send a message to the political class, or if anyone else wants to send the same message, we have a better chance of getting that message across accurately if we don’t vote than if we vote for the Democrat or vote for a third party.

        • Rhialto

          It’s not necessary to vote for a candidate for every office. If my only choice is Repub, Dem, or Libatarial, I don’t select any candidate. This sends an explicit message of rejection to the professional political analysts.
          In the last presidential election, I voted for only one candidate, Reform for a minor state office.

          • I think we’re trying to make the same point.

            The point I’m trying to make in saying that not voting gets our message across better than voting for a Democrat or a third party is that it’s obvious to everyone but the intellectually dishonest that Romney didn’t win because several million white people who voted for McCain four years before didn’t show up to vote, and it’s easy to figure out where these white people are and fairly easy to figure out the reason, and should be just as easy to figure out how to get them to turn out in future elections.

            If those several million missing whites had voted third party, the people that run that third party would be living under a delusion to day that the tide is turning and the time is coming for them. If they had voted Democrat, the left would be thinking that they’re really winning, white people are starting to come back to liberalism. It’s only by not voting (at least not for President, and in Presidential cycles, not wanting to cast a vote for President makes someone far more likely not to vote at all), that these people got closest to getting their message across.

  • libertarian1234

    “Pro-amnesty Republican thinks his party can win over non-whites.”

    And lose about a third of his base by doing it.

    Rush is right. These establishment Republicans haven’t a clue about what the real world is all about.

    All they have to do is concentrate on getting their entire base to the polls. They’re still a majority of voters.

  • Truthseeker

    Non-whites generally aren’t in favor of limited government, because the free stuff the Democrats promise them is so much more appealing.

    If you’re a low-IQ non-white individual living in a country founded by white people and designed with white people in mind, you probably feel like “the system” is against you, and you’re at an unfair disadvantage. In reality, “the system” just wasn’t created by or for people who think like you. No one’s trying to keep you down, you’re just a piece to a different puzzle.

    However, the Democrats will say “We’re for you, you outsiders! We’ll fight for whatever you want!” The non-whites hear it and think “Great! They’re on our side! They’ll make sure we have it good even though this system is working against us!” What are they supposed to take away from a limited-government message? That they’re going to have to work hard and make it on their own? They don’t want it because they think the deck has been stacked against them and they’ll never get to reap any benefits from it. They’ll just take the free stuff. It’s easier.

    • kjh64

      Truthseeker hit the nail on the head. A lot of these low IQ minorities CAN’T compete with higher on average IQ Whites or Asians for that matter, as they do not have the ability to. As such. limited government works against them, especially in the absence of well paying low level factory jobs we once had before they were shipped overseas. They are too dimwitted to see this and think that they are being “kept down” by a “racist system”.

  • Extropico

    Callow Republicans like Paul Ryan will vote for amnesty to get the non-White vote, and then the Democrats will lock them up by giving them ever greater amounts of racial quotas and other pandering.

    • WR_the_realist

      Most blacks believe that the purpose of government is to give them free stuff and over paid affirmative action jobs. Very few find any appeal to limited government.

    • Erasmus

      Is Ryan’s stupidity laugh-out-loud funny or just pathetic? I’m not really sure which.

      • Sick of it

        Even worse – It’s a danger to our survival.

    • NordicHeritage

      Both democrats and republicans are corporatists and only do what their handlers tell them to do. They are like puppets and the sad fact is that most people do not understand this simple statement.

      • Extropico

        Yes, I played nice in my original post and didn’t accuse Mr. Ryan of being paid off by the bipartisan business community looking for greater financial transactions.

  • alex

    I have a dream:
    White Republican presidential candidate at NAACP convention, responding to usual angry speeches about black poverty and black incarceration
    “Get jobs and stop committing crimes, m…….rs!!!!!”

  • dave

    how much longer are the republicrats going to make the same stupid mistakes. they will never get the minority vote. they will however lose alot of the white votes. most will do what they did with romney,stay home.

  • Spartacus

    The United States is dead, and this imbecile is just one more proof among many. Seceed, and you will be safe. Stand idly by like a moron, and your children will pay the price. The choice is yours .

  • bigone4u

    The Republican Party has a death wish, symbolized by Ryan and McCain. Ann Coulter sounds more like a white nationalist every day. They should listen to THE WOMAN.

    • M.

      Ann Coulter is a white nationalist. I even think she’s a race-realist.
      When she was invited on the Bill Maher show ten years ago, Bill asked her if she thought that blacks were more prone to crime because they were black.
      She paused, then said, “… I don’t know!”
      To me, she kind of answered the question.

      • Kenner

        Coulter has questioned our white-minority future more than anyone except Pat Buchanon, and she does it with a wicked edge.

  • Chris Granzow XI

    Judging from the last election, it would be a better idea to try to get more whites instead.

  • sbuffalonative

    So THAT’S our problem with blacks! They just haven’t heard speeches about lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, and non-deficit spending! Problem solved!

  • Erasmus

    Poor stupid Paul Ryan. The only thing minorities want to hear is what big government is going to give them.

    Sorry, Ryan, George W. Bush and the other new-world-orderers killed the GOP and the country. I suggest you go down to Crawdad or wherever it is the idiot prince is passed out drunk and give him the horse-whipping he so richly deserves.

  • Pelagian

    I’m telling you, go to a socially conservative, economically socialist, anti-immigrant political third-party, and do it quick, or all hope is lost. Think Greece and “The Golden Dawn”. The Republican Party of a bunch of warmed over libertarians is toast. Do the math. There is no other way.

    Sorry, I know were not going to be able to have our white Tradition of free market and free enterprise, total freedom, blah blah. But it’s the 11th hour. So F that.

    • Carney3

      But the Golden Dawn is so toxic that no one will form a coalition government with them, or set immigration policy that would please them, quite the contrary.

      For all the attention those strutting clowns have attracted, the reality is that the party they outflanked and wiped out, the Popular Orthodox Rally (Greek acronym LAOS), was much more effective. Unlike the GD, the LAOS was part of a governing coalition, IN government, IN power, SETTING policy, in the Cabinet. The ministry it got was Infrastructure, Transport, and Networks, rather than the key one of the Ministry of Public Order or the Ministry of Justice, but hey, it was a foot in the door and a way to get SOME good things done. The party supported expelling all illegals and banning all immigration from outside the EU for goodness sake. Then the country went bonkers over the austerity it had to undergo to pay the debt it stupidly wracked up, and the government fell, and the Golden Dawn being outsiders grabbed all of LAOS’s seats in parliament, guaranteeing that Greek nationalism will accomplish nothing, ever.

  • Greg Thomas

    “Go into communities that have not seen or heard from Republicans in a long time.”

    What about kissing up to the White community for a change?

  • george williams

    I totally agree with Paul Ryan. I am a black male who grew up in the inner city of New Orleans. Not all African Americans support the democratic party. I am a registered republican but I will changing to independent because I have lost faith in both parties. I personally wanted Ron Paul to be president.
    In my humble opinion some whites must get over the mentality that all blacks think alike. I am a proud American who believes in personal responsibility and less government. I am a student at the University of Southern Mississippi!

    • WR_the_realist

      I’m happy to hear that you don’t believe that the purpose of government is to give you free stuff and affirmative action jobs. I just wish that you weren’t a member of such a small minority within your racial group.

      OTOH, too many whites keep voting for the business as usual, war mongering branch of the Republican Party. I wish the party would get a clue and realize that a state of constant warfare is inconsistent with both balanced budges and the Bill of Rights.

  • OhWow

    Unless you marry a black woman, have a black kid with a huge afro, and guarantee them gibsmedats as a white man, good luck. Blacks vote along ethnic lines, not political ones.