Sandra
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,123
Remember, Viguerie bought this site.
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/06/06/breaking-news-upheaval-in-chuck-baldwin-campaign/
BREAKING NEWS Upheaval in Chuck Baldwin campaign?
We have received unconfirmed word of an upheaval of some kind in the Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party) campaign.
An unhappy campaign volunteer (code name “scandinavian”) says: “People who signed up to volunteer were sent messages to a conference call last night where the new campaign manager Anita Andrews spoke. Chuck came on board and let everyone know he was fully supporting Anita and great things are happening.”
This person continues: “We were horrified to hear her say that this campaign will not be associating with Ron Paul, nor continuing the revolution, but that Chuck will be his own candidate, and they will be having a different campaign…. It appears that this person Anita has taken over the Chuck Baldwin campaign and is hostile to spreading Ron Paul’s message.”
There’s no word yet from the Baldwin campaign about a new campaign manager or campaign tack, so at this point this is just an allegation spread by someone who’s unhappy with the new campaign manager.
First, I am particularly suspicious about the transition from “Chuck came on board and let everyone know he was fully supporting Anita” to “It appears that this person Anita has taken over the Chuck Baldwin campaign.” Unless the candidate is just a front man for some shadowy conspiracy (which Baldwin does NOT seem to be!), the campaign manager doesn’t take over the campaign, just the running of the campaign. A campaign manager serves at the pleasure of the nominee and candidate.
Second, the change in direction attributed to Anita Andrews appears to me to be probably a distortion at the least. I know none of the people named in this story, I wasn’t in on the conference call, and I am not supporting any candidate at this time, so I have no horse in this race. But years of experience in politics and all the squabbles and factionalism that comes with a political campaign leads me to conjecture that this may be what happened:
1. One group of Ron Paul volunteers who have switched to supporting Chuck Baldwin emphasizes that this is a continuation of the Paul campaign and the Paul revolution.
2. The candidate says, no, this is the Chuck Baldwin campaign, not the Ron Paul campaign, and finds himself a campaign manager who knows how to make that distinction.
3. The unhappy faction takes to the email circuit, seeing this as a slap in the face to their real hero, Ron Paul.
I see no reason why Chuck Baldwin and his new campaign manager would be spreading anti-Paul messages, since he was a strong backer of Paul as long as that campaign was viable, and it’s my understanding that she was part of the Paul organization (I’ve seen her described as “grassroots trainer” and “National Campaign Organizer”). It’s perfectly reasonable for the candidate to want to be his own man, not a front man for someone who is essentially a former candidate in a different party.
I will say, conspiracy buffs can have a field day with Anita Andrews. Just a few minutes of scratching around led me to postings where her name has quotes around it, as in “Anita Andrews,” suggesting that this is just a front name for someone who doesn’t want her/his/its real name to be exposed. And allegations that she’s part of a secretive organization called the Clifton Coalition. And sure enough, their website says, “This is a closed business group” [supporting Ron Paul] and “membership is by invitation only.” Perfect!
This is almost as much fun as Dr. Wright or McCain’s temper! Anyone know anything about this?
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/06/06/breaking-news-upheaval-in-chuck-baldwin-campaign/
BREAKING NEWS Upheaval in Chuck Baldwin campaign?
We have received unconfirmed word of an upheaval of some kind in the Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party) campaign.
An unhappy campaign volunteer (code name “scandinavian”) says: “People who signed up to volunteer were sent messages to a conference call last night where the new campaign manager Anita Andrews spoke. Chuck came on board and let everyone know he was fully supporting Anita and great things are happening.”
This person continues: “We were horrified to hear her say that this campaign will not be associating with Ron Paul, nor continuing the revolution, but that Chuck will be his own candidate, and they will be having a different campaign…. It appears that this person Anita has taken over the Chuck Baldwin campaign and is hostile to spreading Ron Paul’s message.”
There’s no word yet from the Baldwin campaign about a new campaign manager or campaign tack, so at this point this is just an allegation spread by someone who’s unhappy with the new campaign manager.
First, I am particularly suspicious about the transition from “Chuck came on board and let everyone know he was fully supporting Anita” to “It appears that this person Anita has taken over the Chuck Baldwin campaign.” Unless the candidate is just a front man for some shadowy conspiracy (which Baldwin does NOT seem to be!), the campaign manager doesn’t take over the campaign, just the running of the campaign. A campaign manager serves at the pleasure of the nominee and candidate.
Second, the change in direction attributed to Anita Andrews appears to me to be probably a distortion at the least. I know none of the people named in this story, I wasn’t in on the conference call, and I am not supporting any candidate at this time, so I have no horse in this race. But years of experience in politics and all the squabbles and factionalism that comes with a political campaign leads me to conjecture that this may be what happened:
1. One group of Ron Paul volunteers who have switched to supporting Chuck Baldwin emphasizes that this is a continuation of the Paul campaign and the Paul revolution.
2. The candidate says, no, this is the Chuck Baldwin campaign, not the Ron Paul campaign, and finds himself a campaign manager who knows how to make that distinction.
3. The unhappy faction takes to the email circuit, seeing this as a slap in the face to their real hero, Ron Paul.
I see no reason why Chuck Baldwin and his new campaign manager would be spreading anti-Paul messages, since he was a strong backer of Paul as long as that campaign was viable, and it’s my understanding that she was part of the Paul organization (I’ve seen her described as “grassroots trainer” and “National Campaign Organizer”). It’s perfectly reasonable for the candidate to want to be his own man, not a front man for someone who is essentially a former candidate in a different party.
I will say, conspiracy buffs can have a field day with Anita Andrews. Just a few minutes of scratching around led me to postings where her name has quotes around it, as in “Anita Andrews,” suggesting that this is just a front name for someone who doesn’t want her/his/its real name to be exposed. And allegations that she’s part of a secretive organization called the Clifton Coalition. And sure enough, their website says, “This is a closed business group” [supporting Ron Paul] and “membership is by invitation only.” Perfect!
This is almost as much fun as Dr. Wright or McCain’s temper! Anyone know anything about this?
