Importance of getting involved in your local GOP

[tsai3904]

In Iowa's House District 37, there were six candidates in the Republican primary.

These were the results:

http://electionresults.sos.iowa.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=HOU&map=DIST&lValue=050&gValue=026

Robidoux 34.16%
DeVries 29.81%
Landon 17.51%
Wright 15.36%
Mason 1.67%
Rogers 1.44%

Because no candidate received 35% of the vote, state law requires the Republican central committee members in House District 37 to hold a nominating convention to nominate a candidate for the general election.

What's at stake:

Matt DeVries came in second in the primary. He was the 3rd District Co-Chairman for Ron Paul's Iowa campaign.

There is no Democratic candidate for House District 37.

Whoever the central committee members nominate on July 18 will most likely become the next State Representative for House District 37 in Iowa.

The central committee members were elected during the Presidential caucus on January 3. According to reports, only 12 of the 22 positions were filled that night. Anyone who spoke up and volunteered for the position that night could have became a central committee member. I think all 22 positions are now filled but if Ron Paul supporters would have volunteered for the 10 vacant positions that night, there is no doubt we could be fairly certain who the next State Representative will be in this district.

This is just one example of the influence local Republican activists have. Other examples include some states only allowing central committee members eligible to become delegates to county and state conventions and only allowing central committee members eligible to elect people to leadership positions within the GOP.

In most states, these central committee member positions are fairly easy to obtain. If you're interested, let me know what state you're in and I can help you dig up information.

 

[AJ Antimony]

The more of the GOP you control, the easier it is to nominate candidates for local office. As this example illustrates, when you control the party, primary elections aren't as vital as they used to be. Right now, if we want a Ron Paul Republican to be nominated, then we have to engage in the painstaking process of campaigning, which consumes a lot of time and money. It would be much easier for us in the future if we have more Kurt Bills candidates (those nominated/endorsed by the party activists) rather than only Rand Paul candidates (newbies who run against the GOP establishment in an expensive election).

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

And every week there's a thread on here questioning our involvement within the republican party, in an attempt to derail all our efforts. Of course these posters offer nothing viable as an alternative.

 

[cajuncocoa]

And every week there's a thread on here questioning our involvement within the republican party, in an attempt to derail all our efforts. Of course these posters offer nothing viable as an alternative.

It's not an "attempt to derail your efforts". It's an attempt to warn all of you that your efforts will be co-opted, your group will be infiltrated, and the movement will be hijacked. Watch for neocon candidates in liberty clothing. These people in the GOP don't play nice.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Where did my post go and why was it deleted, may I ask? And by "whom"?

I, natural citizen, would like a formal explanation, please.

 

[jct74]

Where did my post go and why was it deleted, may I ask? And by "whom"?

I, natural citizen, would like a formal explanation, please.

i deleted it because it was a defeatist derailing rant that doesn't belong in Grassroots Central or this thread. if you really think "freedom is dead" and are going to give up then fine, but there is no good in spreading that negativity in Grassroots Central where most people prefer to continue the fight that we have made great progress on.

 

[twomp]

i deleted it because it was a defeatist derailing rant that doesn't belong in Grassroots Central or this thread. if you really think "freedom is dead" and are going to give up then fine, but there is no good in spreading that negativity in Grassroots Central where most people prefer to continue the fight that we have made great progress on.

This post will probably get deleted by big brother too but fk it! We have learned not to listen to the media and the naysayers we've run across in our daily lives but somehow we need you to protect us from the "negativity" here. If his post was that bad, I'm sure most of the posters here at RPF would have given him a piece of their minds. And here I thought only the MSM silences people who disagrees with them.

 

[Okie RP fan]

And for those who want to give the GOP the finger completely, do you all not understand that we need to work within our own party to establish more third party friendly laws? Work within the GOP, strive towards third party relevancy, and then you can leave and join the Independent or Libertarian party.

We need to break the stranglehold the two parties have in this country. And we can effectively do that at local and state levels, first.

 

[Carlybee]

And every week there's a thread on here questioning our involvement within the republican party, in an attempt to derail all our efforts. Of course these posters offer nothing viable as an alternative.

No one is trying to derail anyone. If it's such an awesome idea then no one should be able to derail it, right? And we have offered an alternative which is a new liberty party. We will see what happens after the convention. I personally have no desire to do anything until after that. It remains to be seen what will happen but the natives are restless. Doesn't mean some of us won't still financially support certain liberty candidates within the GOP. Just means some of us have no desire to be part of the GOP. Not being defeatist...just responding to your accusations.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

It's not an "attempt to derail your efforts". It's an attempt to warn all of you that your efforts will be co-opted, your group will be infiltrated, and the movement will be hijacked. Watch for neocon candidates in liberty clothing. These people in the GOP don't play nice.

Oh my, let me tremble in fear. The people we support wouldn't rise to the ranks they do if they were as you say, neocons. You think Kurt Bills won because he was a neocon in liberty clothing?

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

No one is trying to derail anyone. If it's such an awesome idea then no one should be able to derail it, right? And we have offered an alternative which is a new liberty party. We will see what happens after the convention. I personally have no desire to do anything until after that. It remains to be seen what will happen but the natives are restless. Doesn't mean some of us won't still financially support certain liberty candidates within the GOP. Just means some of us have no desire to be part of the GOP. Not being defeatist...just responding to your accusations.

Alright destrationists. Eternal cynics.

 

[Monotaur]

Yes, please, stay engaged! That way we can have a larger impact on local and regional candidates. It takes candidates at all levels!

 

[Peace&Freedom]

No one is trying to derail anyone. If it's such an awesome idea then no one should be able to derail it, right? And we have offered an alternative which is a new liberty party. We will see what happens after the convention. I personally have no desire to do anything until after that. It remains to be seen what will happen but the natives are restless. Doesn't mean some of us won't still financially support certain liberty candidates within the GOP. Just means some of us have no desire to be part of the GOP. Not being defeatist...just responding to your accusations.

Amen. And a viable alternative has been presented, repeatedly, one that revolves around two simple points: 1) the anti-liberty faction of the Republican party isn't going away, as they are backed by the defense complex, big business, the banksters, and the NWO/CFR/eastern establishment. They will continue to fight and seek to co-opt the movement tooth and nail. 2) It is easier to win open seats in primaries, than it is to win against incumbents in primaries and elections. Concentrating on the 5% of races with open seat situations, in either safe Republican or safe Democratic districts, is a higher percentage way to focus our movement's limited resources and win seats often, from a co-opt-free position outside of any major OR minor party.

These concepts invest more faith in the grassroots itself to seize on opportunities where they appear in both major parties, without necessarily aligning itself with the LP or CP, or making itself dependent on one major party. It also presumes there are no major differences between the Democratic or Republican leadership when it comes to core liberty issues, so it makes no difference which party's open safe seat we try to get a liberty candidate elected to. This factor in fact opens up twice as many opportunities for likely victories than if the movement concentrated only on GOP races.

It's a bit sad how many have not comprehended this "second half" to the rEVOLution. We keep talking how many people are attracted to Paul from across the spectrum, but nobody keeps track of the Democratic supporters who could be our pool of Paul candidates in that party. It would be a MUCH superior strategy for us to act as an independent force, utilizing third party resources (such as already vetted LP or CP liberty candidates) to act as "switch hitters" to run in either major party as the right opportunity opens up.

 

[Natural Citizen]

i deleted it because it was a defeatist derailing rant that doesn't belong in Grassroots Central or this thread. if you really think "freedom is dead" and are going to give up then fine, but there is no good in spreading that negativity in Grassroots Central where most people prefer to continue the fight that we have made great progress on.

Well. Thanks. I do appreciate you responding to me as well as the relative notions to the post that one could certainly find to be agreable. Is good form and stimulates further discussion on such important scribbles. Certainly you didn't have to oblige as per the forum rules. To have simply not and left the logic open to conclude that I was just some ahole with an attitude with no path to reason would have been, oh, I don't know,...can't even think of the right word.

And yes, I agree, One could surmise the same from what I had posted as you may have. In scope though, one could also apply some or all of the logic toward redirecting the path more relevant to change in a more practical manner.

As for the substance of the post, I regret only that I may have painted those folks who take part in the reorder of the GOP as fascist money changers looking for power. Certainly that wasn't my intention and my apologies I certainly forward to them if they feel as if my scribble made them sound like they were just playing like they are on the bus and just trying to blend in. History is the only judge of that, I guess and I do believe that there are some honest folks working hard out there to do what they think is the right thing. It doesn't make them right though as far as what the right thing really is. Is it a straight line moving forward to change or is it just a big old circle with everyone racing around it?

I'll try to rescribble the latter of my post in a more politically conformative...ish language should the motivation come again to contribute to the particular discussion though. Probably will make a note to not respond to obtuse posts that appear more antagonistic in value than healthy any more either for that matter.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Oh my, let me tremble in fear. The people we support wouldn't rise to the ranks they do if they were as you say, neocons. You think Kurt Bills won because he was a neocon in liberty clothing?

Did I say that Kurt Bills is a neocon? Did I mention anyone by name? Nope, that's just you putting words in my mouth.

But that doesn't mean that some non-specified so-called liberty candidate won't prove to be a disappointment once they get to the House or Senate. Whether now, or in the future.

But, hey...if you like having to fight with people in your own party (who are supposed to be on your side but will sabotage your every effort) feel free. I'm not derailing anything, just expressing my opinion about it.

 

[Carlybee]

Alright destrationists. Eternal cynics.

Contrarians...seekers....

"Question everything you've been told...reject what insults your soul". Walt Whitman

 

[Natural Citizen]

Contrarians...seekers....

"Question everything you've been told...reject what insults your soul". Walt Whitman

Yep. Walt was a wise old fella. He obviously appreciated the natural elements of a civilized society. The real constant, that is. No change required.

 

[Carlybee]

Amen. And a viable alternative has been presented, repeatedly, one that revolves around two simple points: 1) the anti-liberty faction of the Republican party isn't going away, as they are backed by the defense complex, big business, the banksters, and the NWO/CFR/eastern establishment. They will continue to fight and seek to co-opt the movement tooth and nail. 2) It is easier to win open seats in primaries, than it is to win against incumbents in primaries and elections. Concentrating on the 5% of races with open seat situations, in either safe Republican or safe Democratic districts, is a higher percentage way to focus our movement's limited resources and win seats often, from a co-opt-free position outside of any major OR minor party.

These concepts invest more faith in the grassroots itself to seize on opportunities where they appear in both major parties, without necessarily aligning itself with the LP or CP, or making itself dependent on one major party. It also presumes there are no major differences between the Democratic or Republican leadership when it comes to core liberty issues, so it makes no difference which party's open safe seat we try to get a liberty candidate elected to. This factor in fact opens up twice as many opportunities for likely victories than if the movement concentrated only on GOP races.

It's a bit sad how many have not comprehended this "second half" to the rEVOLution. We keep talking how many people are attracted to Paul from across the spectrum, but nobody keeps track of the Democratic supporters who could be our pool of Paul candidates in that party. It would be a MUCH superior strategy for us to act as an independent force, utilizing third party resources (such as already vetted LP or CP liberty candidates) to act as "switch hitters" to run in either major party as the right opportunity opens up.

I'm not sure about the switch hitter thing simply because it's hard to win elections unless you have been at least somewhat involved in a party. It does bother me that there are liberty people from several different spectrums that may be disenfranchised simply based on whether or not they are willing to pony up to the Republican Party. Which brings us back to the topic. Some states are going to be virtually impossible for liberty candidates to make inroads in the GOP unless they are very stealth...meaning they are going to have to lie.
Texas is a good example. Even though there has been progress, the neocon establishment is embedded here and is backed by big establishment money. It's the state that brought us Karl Rove, The Bushes, Phil Gramm and Tom DeLay. Most people I know who are long time Republicans are ditto-heads and think Ron Paul people are kooks. They are pro-war, pro-Israel (and that includes many evangelicals and other church groups...and there are a lot of them here.) I'm not saying it's impossible but the minute they let it be known that they disagree with the basic GOP platform, those establishment types are going to go through hell and high water to make sure they are as marginalized as possible. I would say the same thing about most large red states with a few exceptions. And even IN all those states where RP got a lot of delegates, look at what those same establishment types did. Every single one of them except maybe Iowa. Remember Nevada? Remember Oklahoma? Remember Arizona? And who can forget Louisiana? It is an uphill battle..which may or may not play out well in some states like Iowa and Minnesota, etc.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

It's a tough road either way, but remember, Paul managed to hang on to his House seat IN Texas, despite the establishment. The grassroots or 3rd party activists could range from those who are fully independent to those who are (by preference) enrolled in one of the major parties for the purposes of jumping into an open seat situation. The point is to be ready to pounce and hit the ground running from a separate base of resources, than being joined at the hip to statist party A or B.

The reason Paul could function as a free man in Congress, and on his own resources as a presidential candidate in the primaries, is he avoided GOP PAC money by developing his own national mailing list, email list, CFL PAC, and developed his own meetup and grassroots network of Republican and Libertarian liberty activists. Building on that same independent, cooperative model can produce the same results at the local level to support liberty candidates, both in the election, and once in office.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

The reason Paul could function as a free man in Congress, and on his own resources as a presidential candidate in the primaries, is he avoided GOP PAC money by developing his own national mailing list, email list, CFL PAC, and developed his own meetup and grassroots network of Republican and Libertarian liberty activists. Building on that same independent, cooperative model can produce the same results at the local level to support liberty candidates, both in the election, and once in office.

That's kind of what we're doing here in Bentivolio's race for Congress and the establishment is bucking us real hard. The only reason they've been able to pull their stunts on us is because we haven't restored liberty and decency to the state committee yet. That most likely will happen at the next state convention after the new year. I also agree that maintaining pressure on our respective liberty candidates/politicians will keep them closer to home rather than straying once in power. The more good folk we send to DC, the more they can mingle amongst each other rather than potentially getting co-opted. Still, having the majority of delegates to ensure a straight-edged state committee will instill the fear in potential traitors going forward. The more people we have involved the less likely our guys and gals will be co-opted.