We expect to launch a network of webspaces in the relatively new future, probably by mid-October.  The services will remain the same.  The organization, however, will appear differently on the outside.

Four months ago when OCPAC members endorsed Kevin Calvey
over 5 other candidates, this race was about issues.

This reflects the Calvey campaign’s early success, controlling the message and keeping the election focused on Calvey’s strengths: the issues and experience.  Back to our Campaign Tactics, Differences post, the easiest way to counter an opponent’s strength is to make it a weakness.  OCPAC notes:

However, in the past few days, this race has really turned ugly and
gone past the veil of drawing important distinctions between
candidates. It has now digressed to trying to create issues that are
irrelevant or that just simply do not represent the truth.

Bingo.  As the campaign boils down to a muddy mess, the issues and experience no longer matter.  Once the steam clears, it will be a personality contest, leaving OCPAC to inch away from its endorsement.

I know and like both of these two
men and am sorely disappointed the campaign has denigrated to this
point. As I have said many times, I believe either of them would make
a good congressman. If I had to make a choice, I would now be leaning
toward Lankford, but as I said at the beginning, “what to do, what to
do, it is up to you, up to you.”

Quite a remarkable turnaround in a matter of weeks.  With the media on Lankford’s side, the continual smear of Calvey will most likely put Lankford ahead at the polls tomorrow.

Had Calvey kept on point with the messages suggested here a week ago, then the story of this election would be much different.  Instead, Calvey’s consultants pushed the candidate towards going relentlessly negative, falling further into Lankford’s trap.  Calvey’s consulting team should be ashamed.  They will not be, as they are the same group who worked with Lance Cargill during one of the more corrupt eras in state politics.

Beyond the Oklahoma History project, a guide to using social media in politics looks like the next major project.  Writing looks to be an outlet for synergy, as the Oklahoma History project buttresses the Teachador mentality while the social media work will help Politiconsult.  Good times had by all.

Efforts behind the scenes on revising the Moonlight Patriot network continue to push forward.  Hopefully we will have several functional, independent websites in the near future.

Work continues on supplementing the TeachersPayTeachers page with successful lessons in a consistent format.  More information as it comes available.

James Lankford’s campaign involves a two-pronged approach: borrow from the tried-and-true witnessing techniques in his successful youth ministry while the big business establishment uses corporate media power to smear the opponent.

Kevin Calvey’s campaign involves a two-pronged approach as well: tap into previously existing grassroots networks via organizations while hiring the incorporated consultants that helped to build the majority in the Oklahoma legislatures.

Calvey spent a significant portion of the early campaign courting rather influential groups, including regional authorities concerning gun rights, veterans, fiscal conservatism, and veterans issues.  Beyond the traditionally Republican leaning organizations, Calvey also courted the Oklahoma TEA party to some success.  Using the Republican ideology of use the grassroots network in place to sod your campaign, Calvey developed a wide base of support, bringing in hundreds of thousands in campaign donations.

While working the streets for endorsements, Calvey also picked up consultants that led to the rise of Republicans Lance Cargill and Chris Benge into the Oklahoma Speaker, the first Republicans to earn that role in nearly a century.  The old school Republican playbook, run by the old school Republican coaches put Calvey into the runoff.  Calvey’s communication team placed the focus of their campaign on the bread-and-butter issues for Oklahoma conservatives… anti-abortion, anti-tax, anti-spending.  Beyond the issues, however, the voice of the campaign clearly lies in Lankford’s camp.

Lankford supporters suggest that these old school tacticians used some under-the-table tactics.  Calvey denies this attack at face value.  At best, Calvey’s team is innocent.  At worst, Calvey hired a bad apple and axed the program upon notification.

Meanwhile, the face of Lankford’s campaign transplants the same communication plan that Falls Creek administrators use to convince teens to accept Jesus to convince voters to accept James.  Further, Lankford’s camp extensively communicates with their volunteers through social media.  Fertilizing a homegrown grassroots campaign, Lankford’s front porch looks like a classical underfunded campaign doing well.

Behind the scenes, however, it appears as though many more wheels turn.  Relationships with the social conservative consultants allows the Lankford campaign to benefit from years of political experience while promoting the face of a newcomer. Residue of Google-bombs, the online equivalent of a robocall, sparsely populate the Internet, conveniently pointing people towards pro-Lankford sites.  Most importantly to Lankford’s chances, however, is the gift that usually keeps on giving, the media.

Lankford’s campaign follows the two central commandments of running a successful campaign: make your weaknesses a strength while making your opponent’s strength a weakness.  Lankford’s biggest weakness by far is a complete lack of experience.  One beautiful spinjob later and voila, Lankford’s brand becomes the political outsider.  Calvey’s biggest strength, conversely, is his public service experience, both as a legislator and with the national guard.  Lankford’s camp quite keenly approached tearing down their opponent’s strength by using the backdoor, the Oklahoma City newspaper the Oklahoman.

Calvey repeatedly buttressed his brand by taking stands on local issues.  As an ardent fiscal conservative, Calvey opposed MAPs 3, the reason being against a tax increase extension.  This endorsement is the mosting damning blow against Calvey, at least in the head shed of the Oklahoman.

In their outright endorsement of Lankford, the Oklahoman paraphrases the entire Lankford campaign:  James is a nice guy, and Kevin joined “an anti-progress chorus that failed to defeat the [MAPs 3] initiative…. and it was ill-advised for a congressional candidate to take any stand on MAPS 3.”  The only substantive issue raised by the entire piece is Calvey’s sustaining a fiscal conservatism principle, standing with 45.7% of Oklahoma City.  The rest is spin to cover Lankford’s weakness.

If Lankford’s campaign’s de facto media wing continues to bombard the conversation with sleet on Calvey, then it will be very difficult for the former State Representative to win.  Calvey’s best chance is to redirect his campaign’s voice to counter Lankford’s attack with a two-tiered spin.  First, Calvey must parry the blow by playing the victim of Lankford’s de facto political hitman, the Oklahoman.  By promoting himself as a fiscal conservative, even when it is not popular by the vocal media, Kevin can reassign the focus of the campaign to his strength: experience.  Second, Calvey must contrast that his record is 99% solid and that Lankford’s is non-existent.

With the birth of a son, candidate Calvey delegated power to his campaign management and consultants.  All quiet from camp Calvey means that either the leadership incompetently waited to fire back, or Team Calvey has a master plan to sharply strike back.  Either way, the next several days will provide layers of intrigue.

We are looking into producing smaller numbers of our main titles, and hope to be selling them by mid-September.  With any luck, production costs will continue to decrease as we continue to search for more economical alternatives.  With any luck, we can launch quality prototype sales in the $30 ballpark.

The organic response to big business the Oklahoman’s attack on Calvey is remarkable, especially considering the state of the Calvey campaign.  The candidate is concerned with family issues, as his wife is expecting the imminent arrival of their second child, leaving the helm to the suboptimal, a campaign consultant Trebor Worthen.

While the near defenseless Calvey campaign seems marshal-less to attacks from all directions, the response seems to come from every direction as well.  400 pound gorilla Ron Black buttresses OCPAC’s blog concerning the issue, pointing out the clear bias of those attacking Calvey.  It appears that OCPAC came to the same conclusion of previous posts.  Apparently Calvey’s honest response stating opposition to MAPs III led to a blood vendetta held by big business.  The money spent by big business is a long term investment in Lankford delivering pork to contributors.

Beyond the more conservative blogs, theLostOgle takes a more humorous approach to the blatant spin paraded as investigative journalism.  Even Oklahoma’s favorite center-left  blog — which supported MAPs III — criticizes the piece as flimsy, three decades late, and outright illogical.

The response, without coordination of the Calvey campaign, shows the potential strength facing the political newcomer.  Lankford should consider pressing big business to call off the dogs and hit Calvey on issues that actually matter to 2010 Oklahomans, not an outdated ideological struggle from the era of Reagan.

McCarville provides campaign finance data from Calvey’s brother.  Providing a guilt by association argument, McCarville links Calvey’s brother to various Democratic party funds, including the sitting President.

Using this guilt-by-associate logic, Senator John McCain is for gay marriage, former President George W. Bush supports Roe v. Wade, and Republican hero Sarah Palin is for birth control.  All of these are clearly not true, just as Kevin Calvey does not support Barack Obama’s policies.

Acting like a tool for big business, McCarville maintains his blogspot spin machine in a pro-Lankford world.  Beyond childish, illogical assertions,  McCarville outright misconstrues the facts, suggesting that Calvey paid nothing for his share of the Russian capital partnership.  Calvey admits to paying a “nominal” fee to work for his brother, but has consistently worked as a consultant to the firm.

At some point, the voters of Oklahoma’s fifth will clue in on the gang tackle orchestrated by big business in Oklahoma City.  Pawns like Kirk Humphreys on KFOR’s “Flashpoint” and McCarvillle will continue to stir mud.  The question remains, will Calvey’s base of Reagan-era Republicans go to the polls?

While the blogosphere circus continues, Lankford continues to pick up endorsements of single-digit-support candidates.  Lankford should enjoy the media support in the short run, but be very weary if voters smell the bacon frying in the background.

Even if Lankford wanted the Calvey smear to stop, it would continue.  Big business wants a yes man in Washington to bring home the pork.  Calvey’s record proves that he is as fiscally conservative as Senator Coburn.  Lankford, on the other hand, says that he will not do earmarks, yet remains a blank slate.

The media gangtackle has hurt Calvey, but he is not out of the fight just yet.

Lankford scored a rather large upset as a political newcomer polling highest in the primary.  Utilizing a similar playbook to his youth ministry, Lankford used social networking prowess to deliver a new brand of primary voter.  Playing the outsider role, Lankford’s finish at the top of the heap is rather remarkable, considering some of the competition.  Calvey, on the other hand, courted more traditional parts of the Republican establishment, including the ever-growing TEA partiers.  With a healthy war chest and experience, Calvey expected to make a runoff and set in for the long haul.

That said, the press is definitely on Lankford’s side.  In a scathingly anti-Calvey piece, the Oklahoman attempted to pin the former State Representative with ties to the KGB.  Maybe James Lankford can resurrect Joseph McCarthy from the dead.

Big oil darling, third-place candidate Mike Thompson endorsed Lankford.  This makes sense as the biggest Thompson supporters, big business, will want the maximum amount of pork to come back to Oklahoma City.  Lankford will sell out to those calls much more easily than Calvey.  As a result, the print media and big business seems to have fallen in line behind the Baptist minister.  The virtual dead heat in July means that each candidate will have to deliver twice in one primary season.  With the media acting as Lankford’s de facto plumber, pulling crazy allegations out against the former State Representative, one has to ask “can Calvey win?”

Looking at the crosstabs from a rival poll in July, Calvey scored well in a “second choice” question.  Calvey’s support tends to be with older, wealthier voters.  Those two credentials stand as hallmarks of runoff voters.

The runoff election will be decided on two fronts: can Lankford sustain the “good guy” image while supporters of influence torpedo Calvey on his behalf and can Lankford deliver non-traditional voters to the polls a second time.  If the election remains a battle between the Party of Reagan or the Party of Bush, then Calvey will win.  If the press continues to smear Calvey and Lankford motivates his Falls Creek crew, then Lankford will win.

In addition to outlining written products, Moonlight Patriot will be producing a line of clothing.  One should not expect fashion forward, rather one should expect tongue-in-cheek humor.  Check back for information in the near future.