TEA Partier Explains “Awesome” Campaign Strategy

A week before the election, TEA Party Republican Derek Skees wrote a lengthy defense of his campaign strategy after the TEA Party blog PolyMontana pointed out flaws in his tactics.

Skees said there wasn’t a problem with his campaign for statewide office, rather “things are just where I want them.”   Thesaurus firmly in hand, Skees explained that the facts did not support “the conclusions you are blindly flailing for.”  He said his critics had no idea “how well received I am state wide.”

Skees explained that he wasn’t raising money and contacting voters on purpose.  He said he is so reviled by the left that were he to campaign it would actually harm his chances.

Suffice to say, the left hates me, and would have rallied HUGE against me were I to come out swinging big in emails, press releases and social media, as well as massive early fund raising.

I will not circulate email blogs that would just frenzy the left: I have left them in the dark and bask in the quiet of the blogs while the press hammers home the fact I stand against Obamacare, all the while spelling my name as it appears on the ballot perfectly. Awesome!

Skees predicted that in the unlikely event that he lost, it would be the fault of those who question this awesome strategy:

If I lose, it will be attributed to failed political pundits like yourself questioning my ability to win for any of a hundred reasons, convincing just enough people to ballot fatigue me down ticket.

You can read Skees’ entire response on the PolyMontana blog. It’s also pasted below in case they take it down.  Skees lost to current state auditor Monica Lindeen 53-46.

  1. Derek says:

    Dr. Ed,

    I am sorry to report that your ignorance is complete, and this open letter of yours catches me in a foul mood to your total lack of information to support the conclusions you are blindly flailing for.
    It has finally come to this letter as proof positive sir that you should stick entirely to what you are great at: climate physics. This has been the whisper campaign against what this site could have been for years and the source of the mass defections you are currently saddled with. In the game of politics and limited political capital sir, you are running a federal like deficit.
    You have no idea the strategy behind my campaign, or any idea of how well received I am state wide, nor frankly the efforts we have given in this campaign. I will not discuss this strategy with you and blow any attempt I have at winning just because you vent your foolishness here. When it is all over, and I gain victory (not thanks to your efforts here I might add) I will explain how we did it. Suffice to say, the left hates me, and would have rallied HUGE against me were I to come out swinging big in emails, press releases and social media, as well as massive early fund raising (ever hear the phrase “since you don’t have a primary, we will get you later”? I have, hundreds of times in fact).

    As it is, things are just where I want them: My opponent is asleep with false overconfidence fed by money in the bank (call Will Hammerquist on that perspective and how well it worked out for him), all the while ignorant of the failure of their messaging while we are winning the ground war and riding a very strong Republican wave… and then I get to read this foolishness (honestly, if I am so unknown and ineffective, how can you conclude these efforts you suppose will miraculously “turn my campaign” around in just 2 weeks and guarantee me victory by EARNED media efforts alone? Not even to mention attempt to “save” the mainstream campaigns you suggest I “start” supporting in order to do so?) How quick you forget that we received 21,000 more votes than the incumbent in the primary, and things look worse for the Dems today without Soros money to buy the lies to recover.

    If I lose, it will be attributed to failed political pundits like yourself questioning my ability to win for any of a hundred reasons, convincing just enough people to ballot fatigue me down ticket. Sad, because the left is failing horribly at the attack, yet elements like you within my own Party could lead to my loss.
    As to the details in your open letter:
    Quoting PP polls my old friend? If you were in fact politically savvy, you would understand that most polls are designed to engineer public opinion before an event and do not truly reflect the electorate nor have any tie to veracity. When viewed with hindsight they are almost always wrong, skewed to the leftist candidates by at least 6 point on average (PP polls). Their results only have a chance to mean something when the biased individual reprints them or use them to prove a failed position; Sad that these facts escaped your comprehension.

    You must realize sir that the press WILL not print anything I send to them (unless I pay). The past year proves that point, if you only knew the relevant facts. I will not circulate email blogs that would just frenzy the left: I have left them in the dark and bask in the quiet of the blogs while the press hammers home the fact I stand against Obamacare, all the while spelling my name as it appears on the ballot perfectly. Awesome! The Republicans who are involved in this party knows me very well by my efforts over the last year and a half, as well as those supporters in the Republican Freedom caucus, Libertarians, Constitutionalists and even some Democrats. They are working hard to help me gain victory as I humbly contribute to the Republican wave that could push all of us to victory. It speaks volumes that in your circles, you do not know this…

    You do realize sir that Betty Babcock is my treasurer (on all my literature and radio) and a very dear friend (and one of the most well know “establishment” personalities in the state), and we meet with her and the Governor often during our travels. They have been a huge help gaining us legitimacy with the mainstream republicans, as well as our many friends and allies such as the state president of Pachyderms Thelma Baker, and legislators such as Jessie O’Hara in Great Falls and Bob Lake in Ravalli County. They are just a few whom we have networked great things with in the last year. I have labeled just a few of the mainstream folks you suggest I “must get”. I agree and have been working very well with most of them for over a year now.

    You have no clue as to the countless speeches I have always given supporting the “whole ticket” and the “We” in this Republican Party (in fact I have developed a God gifted ability to provide a rousing closing to most of the Republican events to get folks fired up, and have been asked at most of them to do so. I am proud of my suggested title by Senator Essman, “the red meat finisher”), nor the fact that the entire second tier has been supporting each other in most of the speeches we all give separate from one another. (I know this because it seems my Intel network is superior to yours). Nor the efforts I have given and continue to offer the Rehberg campaign (nor their reciprocity in their effort to support me), nor the strong alliances I have with the Daines campaign and our mutual efforts to support each other.

    You obviously have no idea of the support I have received to date because I (like everyone else in this Party) chose a candidate in the primary, but then circled the wagons on June 7th. I offered all my talents and time to help Hill reunite this party on that date, and have done so by my methods since then.

    Using Mark French? You’re as bad as James Connor in the Flathead Memo with your “degrees of separation” and “guilt by association” confusion regarding people who support me openly. Mark supports me, praises to God, and so do so many others. Why did you selectively exclude any of them? How could this one person be a “disaster” for my campaign? Seriously? (It only serves to show your bias in the open letter to the conclusion you ignorantly held before you put pen to paper).

    You have no clue as to my efforts with Dan Cox, before he filed, trying to dissuade him and prove with the Freedom Index that Denny is vastly better when compared to Tester, nor my efforts since with the Liberty caucus trying to bring them back after failed mainstream leadership threw them out of the Big Tent at the convention in both Missoula and Tampa… again. (Your complete ignorance on that topic again forces one to see your myopic perspectives supporting your current cause du jour.)

    Lastly, your information network seems to extend to just the dwindling membership here, and the few folks left in the Flathead who don’t view you as politically toxic (of which I was to be included before this misguided and uninformed letter. Why did you not call me, as we have done countless times before, to at least fact check your conclusions? That answer leads me to this needed separation).

  2. 2
    Derek says:

    In conclusion:
    Just a short while ago, if I may traverse memory lane, you started your recently transplanted career here in the Flathead by saddling up to the good Tea Party folks in the Freedom Action Rally. You rode the coat tails of our hard work and made a name for yourself in the joined effort. Then you threw us and many mainstreamers (remember your virulent attacks against Senator Verdell and many others?) to obscurity to support a litany of failed conclusions during the last Legislative session, but this reply is already too long to go there.

    Then this election cycle began, finding you in the beginning flirting with Ken Miller, switching shortly you “ran the campaign” for Fanning/Baldwin until you jumped ship when the water came in faster than the pumps could expel, damaging all to save your “reputation” and taking no responsibility for their failure. Then to Neil Livingstone as you claimed he was the only one who could beat Bullock and ranted often that Hill could not, remember? Then finally after the victory, threw in with the primary winner Rick Hill. You struck blows for and against everyone during that process (including your Tea Party friends), foolishly aiming your ignorance shotgun against all comers, and doing an excellent job at convincing us all that you really have no clue about political insiders or building alliances.

    Everything you suggested I do in this campaign “to win”, I have done since the primary concluded, and many of them before that date. The fact that you deign to share with me these vaunted secretes of your views as to the “only” chance I have to win, and offered at the 12th hour proves only this:
    That your writing plan begins with the biased conclusion you want your reader to discover, and then you use poor logic, unassociated conjecture and failed conclusions in a sophomoric attempt to direct public opinion to the misinformed conclusion you never had the factual support nor the true understanding to make in the first place.

    In reality, you just want something (my support for the mainstream guaranteeing a victory), then fail to draw an informed conclusion as to how I can do it (and in fact just achieve the opposite by suggesting the lie that I have not done so to date and could lose because of it) all in a thinly veiled desperate attempt to seem relevant and informed on these subjects so folks will visit your site. This travesty can only be described by using the words of my teenager; “Epic Fail”.

    You sir are no better than the repeaters at the Gazette or the propagandists in the AP; Self serving, blinded by the biased supremacy of their own opinion and ignorant of the real story. How could this letter do anything but damage my efforts with your uninformed opinion poorly concluded as to me having not done any of the things you suggest to reunite this party? Luckily for me, no one really reads this blog anymore (someone had to call and tell me of this letter), nor treats any of your oft ridiculous treatises with anything but morbid curiosity. Not to mention, the state based support I have worked so hard to gain: They know what I am and what I have said in front of them all.

    It saddens me to join the countless hundreds who have abandoned this site, because you could have done so much better with it, were you more able.

    Please remove me from your Polymontana email lists, and I will be deleting this site location from my computer, labeling it as the spam it truly is. Good day to you sir, and I pray your misguided efforts only serve to continue to harm yourself and not the intended subjects you purport to help and so often malign.

  3. 3

Posted: November 13, 2012 at 9:44 pm

6 thoughts on “TEA Partier Explains “Awesome” Campaign Strategy

  1. Charlie Talis

    Another gem from Mr. Skees:

    most polls are designed to engineer public opinion before an event and do not truly reflect the electorate nor have any tie to veracity. When viewed with hindsight they are almost always wrong, skewed to the leftist candidates by at least 6 point on average

  2. Havre Voter

    If the toastmasters found out Skees tout’s his membership in the group they aren’t going to be pleased. I also love how he things comparing the TEA Party blog to the AP and the Gazette is an insult and threatens to “delete this site location” from his computer.

  3. Sarah

    Who could fail to see the logic in this sentence?

    The fact that you deign to share with me these vaunted secretes of your views as to the “only” chance I have to win, and offered at the 12th hour proves only this:
    That your writing plan begins with the biased conclusion you want your reader to discover, and then you use poor logic, unassociated conjecture and failed conclusions in a sophomoric attempt to direct public opinion to the misinformed conclusion you never had the factual support nor the true understanding to make in the first place.

  4. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

    Here, allow me. I’m looking for a legislator to carry a bill for me in the next session HONORING all our Teatard pals like Gen. Robert E. Skees, Gen. David Duke Howard, and Pastord Gen. Bulbdim.

    Here’s my idea. We’ve got a state bird, a state flower, a state song, so why not a state weed?!

    Yes, we’ve got plenty to choose from, and some are quite colorful. We’ve got the spotted knapweed, and leafy spurge. But I don’t want to select one of those for the state weed. No, I prefer the MUCH more colorful weed found all OVER Montana. No, not the leafy spurge, not the spotted knapweed, but the noxious DICKweed! Yes, the most colorful of all is the ever prevelant noxious dickweed!

    How do you know if you’ve got the noxious dickweed in your area? Easy answer. You must just ask a few simple questions. Like:

    First you say you love America, and now you say you want to secede. Well, which IS it dickweed? (see how simple it is? you’ve got noxious dickweed nearby!)

    Or, you say you hate the gubmint, yet you’re the very FIRST to suck offn’ Unca Sugartit. Well, which IS it, dickweed?

    Or maybe, you say you love democracy, yet you want to supress the vote. Well, which IS it, dickweed?

    You see, how easy it is to spot the noxious dickweed? Heck, invent your OWN questions!

    You say you luv the Constitution, but you want a theocracy. Well, which IS it, dickweed?

    See how pervasive the noxious dickweed is? Hence, any legislator out there that would like to sponsor my bill, please contact me. And thanks in advance. My state WEED bill makes as much sense as the code of the west! Well actually, MORE so!

Comments are closed.