"Party of Yes" sounds weird, but it's still a positive branding move. I suspect that standing for negation doesn't exactly excite voters. 
As the first paragraph of the article explains, this was a deliberate effort to counter their labeling by the CA Democrats as the 'Party of No'. The problem is that their very first act as the 'Party of Yes' is to ask voters to say 'no' to Jerry Brown's tax proposition.
Addressing the self-evident does not interest me. Commenting on the surprising competence of the CAGOP's strategy (even if it is really rather hypocritical) does.
Contradicting their brand new slogan at its press launch doesn't really strike me as very competent, tbh.
It's pretty good for them; at least they recognized the problem & attacked it. In general, their operations have been a strategic trainwreck for years. They've struggled to maintain what little power they've had, while eliminating any future opportunities for growth in the process.
The CA GOP's problem is that they are a bunch of extreme lunatics. They probably wouldn't be so dead if they took a page from the Rhode Island Republicans and stopped being extreme right-wingers in a liberal state.
Why are the ideologies for the Rhode Island parties so similar?
