« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

GOP Rules Committee Rapidly Moving to Shut Out Grassroots at 2:00 p.m. Today

At 2:00 p.m. today in Tampa, the Republican National Committee, led by Team Romney, is moving to shut down conservative grassroots activists. I’ve been on the phone with several individuals involved in the fight who tell me that the fight is not over, it is only just starting.

Specifically, the media is reporting that the rules fight is over because Team Romney is abandoning Ben Ginsberg’s effort to allow candidates to control delegates. Under an initial proposal, delegates would, in effect, be chosen by the presumed nominee’s campaign and not based on votes in the states and delegate selection processes in the states.

That issue appears resolved, but several people I’ve spoken to this morning make clear that Team Romney and the RNC establishment are using that compromise as a red herring to distract from two major rules change proposals that would decimate Republican grassroots and prevent upstart political campaigns.

Reports that the floor fight threat is over might be designed to calm the grassroots and get them to ignore what is coming at 2 o’clock.

The first rule to be proposed is one that would give the Republican National Committee the power to change rules between conventions with a three-quarters vote of the RNC. One source tells me, “With a Republican President, of course this is doable. Everybody will roll over if a President Romney asks them too. They’ll be able to get Ben Ginsberg’s proposal next year.”

In other words, if Team Romney prevails in this rules change, they don’t have to worry about Ben Ginsberg not getting his way today on the delegate changes. They’ll be able to do it later when the press and grassroots are not watching.

The second rules change would front load winner takes all primaries. Grassroots conservatives point to both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum as reasons to stop this rule. Had there been front loaded winner takes all primaries, neither the Gingrich nor the Santorum campaigns would have been able to get any traction.

“This is going to be a fight on the floor if they don’t back down. They have too much pride to back down and we’re going to humble them,” said one delegate to the convention.

Another tells me, “They’ve gotten social conservatives comfortable with the platform and now that they’re placated [Team Romney] is going to undercut them with this change.”

Speaking to one person familiar with the rules changes who supports them, I’m told a number of people support the changes because they see the current rules as efforts by Michael Steel to “liven up” the process, but all it did was run up the cost and drag it out. “Are we really going to keep the status quo because the guy who brought the convention to hurricane country in hurricane season thought they were a good idea?” the delegate asked.

The Rules Committee will meet at 2:00 p.m. today in Tampa to consider the rules changes. If they make it through the committee, delegates are telling me they promise a huge floor fight and there’s no guarantee Team Romney will get its way given the current make up of the delegates in Tampa.

COMMENTS

  • tngal

    “They’ve gotten social conservatives comfortable with the platform”..??? Wha – What? We are so NOT comfortable. RNC is just itching to show it can have its candidate win without the help of so-cons. Not sure that’s a wise bet. I got no problem backing conservative house and senate candidates while letting Romney twist in the wind. Arrogance, thy name is RNC Establishment. .

  • carmen

    I’d like to take this opportunity to say that I have communicated my displeasure (via a “Levin Surge”) over this issue. I also noted that I am an active Romney volunteer (because we MUST replace Obama) – and I’ll vote for Romney, no question – but I will NOT volunteer for his campaign EVER again, nor will I make a donation to the campaign should this coup take place. Period.

  • HopeHeFails

    Akin is a HUGE problem and he certainly shifted the political wind to the Democrats on their key fake issue.

  • Lucas Black

    The early states have the advantage of going early. God forbid the later states might actually matter. I’m very opposed to front-loading the early states by making them winner-take-all.

  • HopeHeFails

    So, only ultra-rich candidates that can squash their opponents early in Iowa can run? Keep in mind that Romney didn’t win Iowa like the media reported, and had Santorum gotten the proper victory boost from the Iowa win (instead of a token announcement 3 weeks too late) things may look very different today.

  • puritand71

    Only because the RNC and sadly others decided to eat their own keeping the issue in the news cycle longer than necessary. As Levin remarked, Akin is the candidate we need to throw our support behind him. Yet the RNC will not put a dime in the race even if he was tied. This speaks volumes about the RNC.

    The RNC and RINO’s are the issue. I think that they wanted Akin to be a diversion.

  • Darin_H

    “Had there been front loaded winner takes all primaries,” then Mitt Romney wouldn’t be half the campaigner he is today. The drawn out process sharpened him and his campaign. I’d rather do away with the Iowa first then NH then SC then FL order and rotate it (or even have a couple of early primaries on the same day).

  • tnguy

    It’s becoming more and more apparent that conservatives and republicans are slowly parting ways. The RNC and most establishment republicans have utter contempt for conservatives.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Laughable.

  • commonsenseobserver

    He’s the best out of the current field, which is Romney or Obama.

  • BA Cyclone

    If Iowa was winner-take-all, all the Iowa delegates would have gone to Santorum. Not exactly an ultra-rich candidacy.

  • BA Cyclone

    Mitt Romney is the nominee. The primary is over. Sorry to be blunt, but get in line or go vote for Obama.

  • lineholder

    Thanks for the head’s up, Erick. Please keep us informed.

    The leaders of the establishment branch of the Republican party need to take a step back and look at what has been happening during the course of the past three years. It has been a tremendous advantage to the Republican party as a whole to have grassroots efforts, grassroots participation, grassroots influence, grassroots enthusiasm, etc.

    Undermining that would be nothing more than an act of hubris and stupidity.

  • puritand71

    If we desire to have the myopic view that we must choose between going over the cliff at break neck speed or over the cliff at half that speed. Nonetheless, we are still heading over the cliff.

  • commonsenseobserver

    If Team Mitt is wise, they will do anything to avoid a floor fight.
    By the way, they have a new ad up. I can see why they didn’t want to do one with Mitt speaking directly to the camera before…

  • puritand71

    And this is why there will be a floor-fight to save the party!!!!

  • georgiamike

    The more we play from the Dems playbook, more rule breaking should be expected.

    By the way, Erick, the new site looks FANTASTIC and loads extremely fast. Great work to you and whatever genius helped you out! When are they going to announce that you are moving into Boortz’s slot. Please save us from Herman Cain (God bless his heart)!!!!!

  • danvito

    Gee, in the past at least they bought us dinner, first. Now, they don’t even wait until the convention is over to screw Conservatives and non-establishment types.

    The long and short of it is, when all is said and done, Romney IS NOT a conservative, or anything close to it and we’re being used (again).

    When he first locked up the nomination, I said I would not vote for the man. Then Glenn Beck saved me by pointing out “Romney-at least he’s not a commie”. Now, I’ll have to repeat that mantra 24/7 until the election to mark the ballot for this weenie. I may not make it.

    And, before you all go nuts about having to defeat Obama, what’s the difference if it’s going to be status quo D or status quo R? Ryan’s budget is NOTHING near what really needs to happen to save our over-indebted butts. With Romney at the controls, we won’t even get as far as that. I wager. A statist by any name – democrat or republican – is still promoting our failure. It’s only a question of time, not direction.

    By the way, did anyone notice how over the weekend Romney was touting his accomplishments with Romney-Care in Mass.?

  • commonsenseobserver

    We’ve had this debate, and it’s over. It’s Romney-Ryan or nothing.

  • puritand71

    I was not trying to live in the past. I am saying that we ought not be surprised by Team Romney’s tactics since it was there to be seen in the primaries.

    We are reaping what was sown. There is always another route if Romney continues to shoot the conservatives in the foot. Then again, we seem to enjoy the pain over and over and over again.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Not if both sides really care about the party. Seems like both don’t actually care much about the party, which is why Team Mitt is grabbing power and Team Grassroots is going back to TruCon mode. I don’t blame the latter…

  • puritand71

    Well said Danvito

  • commonsenseobserver

    I think we’ve been through Romneycare before… state-level experiment based on the principles of personal responsibility and market competition, before mutating into a Democrat rationing mechanism. As opposed to Obamacare, an open, top-down government takeover of healthcare from Washington, with no consensus at all.
    The Path to Prosperity is at least a good first step in the debate to save America’s fiscal future. Most Conservatives do acknowledge that, and Mitt Romney himself has had the experience of reining in waste and balancing the books, both at the Olympics and as Governor, even in the face of a Democratic supermajority.

  • puritand71

    Right, the ones who seem to care are the grass-roots. It would seem that the RNC is for the power of the purse-strings.

    If the grass-roots did not care, why fight the rule change. They would just walk out. Nope, they desire to try to change from within and continue to get sucker punch over and over and over again.

  • commonsenseobserver

    By the way, can we get rid of all caucuses and nominating conventions after the symbolic Iowa?

  • clintonformccain

    Off hand, I can’t remember too many examples of establishment candidates winning the Iowa caucuses. On the Republican side, Iowa tends to go for the “fundie” who would be a horrible national candidate: Huckabee, Santorum, etc. On the Democrat side, it’s often a lefty-loon moonbat.

  • flsoxfan

    All I have to say is that once the Convention is over and all that money is “freed” up, I want to see the Romney campaign and his SuperPacs go after Obama like they went after Gingrich and Santorum. I don’t know what all this crap is about the theme being “Obama is a nice guy…he is just incompetent.” How is he is a nice guy…debt at 16 trillion headed to 20, unemployment at 8+%…much larger for Blacks and Hispanics, gas prices on the way back to $4.00. Takeover of 18% of economy with Obamacare…etc…What the heck is so nice about that!!!

  • puritand71

    You may not have it both ways here. Romney is causing an uproar in both instances. It is his team and RNC that desire not to play ball with the Conservative wing of the GOP.

    It is the RNC that wanted to replace Akin with a moderate ‘yes sir’ candidate as history continues to show. The duplicity of the RNC is insulting and honestly they should just come out and state it so.

  • puritand71

    But that is just who Mitt is according to Mitt.

  • franklinjr

    Drudge? Hello? anyone notice Drudgereport making no mention of this? Hmmm.

  • surlycurmudgen

    He is the weakest candidate of those who ran.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Drudge cares too much about hurricanes.

  • puritand71

    Drudge is in Romney’s pocket and will do nothing to attract dissent to his chosen one.

  • franklinjr

    Wasn’t it Barbara Bush who said (paraphrased) “I wish this thing were over already. Let’s just decide on the candidate and be done with it.” — as she actively campaigned for Romney. Clearly the RNC/RINO brigade has always had the minset of screwing grassroots conservatives.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    I would agree that any idea by Michael Steele has a funny way of turning out to be a plus for the Obama Reign. Literally, we should investigate if Steele was actually a paid employee of David Axelrod’s. As to the floor fight, I don’t believe Matt Rhoades is going to authorize a fight with delegates over this issue.

  • ebmindc

    Seeking some clarification: why does this harm us (grassroots conservatives)? I don’t understand the connection (but I am a little slow on the uptake). Serious question.

  • commonsenseobserver

    No, Akin was insulting.
    Both sides overreacted, and are overreacting now.

  • slcraig

    ….and it’s the direction and tone of this dialog string that made the Rule change proposal seem prudent to the Party …… look, we HAVE the lesser of two evils as a candidate that CAN beat the greater of two evils NOW…….

    …….NOW is the ONLY battle that counts in the heat of the battle …. and it IS a winner take all struggle……….

    …….quit fragging the people on our side …… it’s Romney-Ryan or bust …….. Party Rules can change at the drop of the hat ………..there’ll be 4 yrs to get what is needed for the next 4 yrs ………..but ONLY if we stay focused on what REALLY matters NOW ..!!!

  • commonsenseobserver

    Are posters here going gaga, like Team Mitt?

  • puritand71

    Not if the rules get passed. Then it would be up to the establisment, RINO’s as to how we get to select the next candidate for the primary. It would seem that Romney wants to do a run-around preventing the conservatives of even thinking of nominating someone against him in 2016.

  • ipeduto

    I only hope and pray that – whatever this talk of delegates means and whatever the outcome of changed rules or no changed rules – that Romney is President of the USA. Don’t want toooo many sideshows – kinda’ like the Ron Paul people.

  • puritand71

    Really, both sides are overreacting. The RNC wants the power to change the rules anytime they want between conventions. Please, it would seem that the only ones overreacting are the party bosses who want to keep control. It would seem that Team Romney does not want to be challenged in 2016 and will make sure it does not happen.

    Thanks to all who voted for him in the primaries….

  • ebmindc

    Btw, not talking about the resolved issue. That was insane.

  • puritand71

    The RNC wants the power to change the rules as they see fit between conventions. This will allow them to dictate how the primaries are to run without any input from state delegates or the state parties.

    I think it is a power grab in hopes of preventing a possible challenge to Romney in 2016. Also, it will allow them to get rule 15/16 in later.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Because the RNC would be able to make rule changes without input from the grassroots.

  • georgiamike

    sad. searching for decent news is exhausting.

  • ebmindc

    What happens currently? As far as rules changes go?

  • surlycurmudgen

    This election the RNC could have locked themselves in a closet and refused to name their nominee until November 7 and walked away with a near landslide, Instead they push the weakest candidate to the front and the best he can do is run even. The RNC and their pick Romney are intensely focused on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

  • jamesm

    Aking, Newteured and Santitized? Let’s keep our eye on completing the mission–defeating the worst president ever-Obama Save the familiy feud for a later date. These rule changes should not be brought up now.

  • commonsenseobserver

    A floor fight would be overreacting, as is a sudden and unneeded return to attacking the nominee and going back to primary mode. Deal with reality. Kerry wasn’t elected President.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Only once every four years, at the convention.

  • commonsenseobserver

    We can’t save rule changes for a later date…

  • lineholder

    You might want to tell that to the people in the establishment branch who are pushing these changes, jamesm. If these changes get locked into place, then any “family discussions” later basically become a moot point.

  • commonsenseobserver

    He’s not a nice guy. He’s just a nice actor.

  • ebmindc

    So, realistically, we can only change the rules every 8 years? Assuming tha we have to live with prior bad ideas for at least one cycle and can only change for a future cycle. More activist input is almost always better in these instances and I imagine some kind of compromise could be reached. Given the failed rule they tried, I join those with suspicions.

  • jamesm

    What’s Prieubus cell#?. He needs square away the Romney camp. Irritating the base at this point is dumb.

  • tngal

    See bet0001970. You’re an independent. I’m more socon. Yet both of us agree we’re miserable this time out. Odd election for sure.

  • writescribe

    jamesm, I’m no webiste expert, but I’m assuming past posts before the redesign took effect do not carry over here.

    Did you take issue with any portion of my post? Or does anyone voicing a different opinion here now count as being a troll?

  • johnyb

    I very much agree with this writer…
    tngal • 6 hours ago

    “They’ve gotten social conservatives comfortable with the
    platform”..??? Wha – What? We are so NOT comfortable. RNC is just
    itching to show it can have its candidate win without the help of
    so-cons. Not sure that’s a wise bet. I got no problem backing
    conservative house and senate candidates while letting Romney twist in
    the wind. Arrogance, thy name is RNC Establishment. .

  • bet0001970

    Holy Cow. The convention is going crazy. But tweets are saying that the rules folks have the signatures for a minority report to rule 12. Not sure at this point what it all means.

  • writescribe

    danvito, apparently jamesm equates principles with trolling. I still enjoyed your post so keep it coming (from one “troll” to another) ;)

  • jamesm

    The day of the convention you write this third party anti-Romney garbage. I don’t buy it. I am not convinced. You’re an Obama surrogate..even if you do not realize it..which I doubt. What you are advocating is taking a vote away from Romney. Who is the beneficiary at this point? Obama.

  • bet0001970

    Sununu is moving for the adoption of the rules…people are going nuts.

  • bet0001970

    OMG. The vote appeared to be even and Boehner passed it anyway. He’s gonna be crucified.

  • jamesm

    @writescribe I read nonsense pro third party writings, from you, on the day of the convention. What principles? Looks like you are standing on emotion instead of a well thought out position.

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    To me a solid compromise – not the heavy handed “we pick the delegates as the nominee” but also a requirement of the delegates to fulfill the obligation they agreed to with the voters of their state.

  • runner12

    Words cannot express my disapointment and anger at this stunt by the RNC. Here we are heading into the convention, excited about defeating Obama and out of nowhere the RNC throws the grassroots under the bus. All of the enthusiasm that was garnered with the Ryan pick is evaporated with one stupid move. Romney is the lesser of two evils in this election by a wide margin, so he still has my vote.

    But once he is sworn in, I am going to do my best to contribute to the purging of these power hungry, big government RNC establishment types from the party.

  • ThePoliticalHat

    This isn’t about the establishment vs. grassroots. It is about Ron Paul trying to further himself by ye olde “divide and conquer.” I am a Tea Partier. I am against the establishment.

    But if it is a question of the establishment and Ron Paul supporters chaosmongering, I recognize that the later is the greater evil.

  • runner12

    This was the compromise made earlier. The RNC took steps today to undermine this compromise, from what I understand. As a result, there is going to be quite a fight on the floor. People are trying to get together enough votes to stop the undermining of the above compromise.

  • conservative_dan

    First, we MUST get Obozo out and replace him with Romney/Ryan. But then, we ought to consider a third, conservative party, split off from the Republicans. I really think it’s time.

  • ThePoliticalHat

    The Ron Paul people would rather have a “Rump Parliament” of a defeated party than allow a flawed candidate to beat a far, far worse Obama in November. It is their demonstrated actions that created this situation. If is really is a “power grab” then such a grab simply exploits a situation that the Ron Paul supporters caused.

  • bet0001970

    It already got passed. The vote was even, but Boehner called it for the “Ayes”. I saw it myself. It was rigged. Completely rigged. He didn’t even wait for the NAY’s to finish “Naying”. He talked right over everyone and called it. This was never going to be debated on the floor. Boehner hates the Tea Party. He was gonna pass this even if everyone in the center opposed it.

  • runner12

    I just read that on the news. Unbelievable. What happens now? This was an aggregious power grab by the RNC.

  • Melody Warbington

    runner, I’m not convinced it’s as bad as some are saying. See my comment below and this article. Just guessing here, but maybe a lot of the drama was coming from the RP supporters. In any event, it appears that somebody stepped up on behalf of grassroots activists – if the articles are correct.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-floor-fight-averted-with-help-of-tenn-national-committeeman-compromise

  • bet0001970

    Seriously. You need to get over your emotional issues with Ron Paul. You look like a kook when you post comments to the effect that one man (an outsider, no lesss) has the ability to dictate major policy decisions made by the RNC. Especially, when the last 4 years have shown the opposite. That it’s been the Tea Party causing the GOP headaches. That it’s been the Tea Party unseating their precious establishment candidates. Ones who will do whatever the party tells them to do.

  • runner12

    Boehner should be fired. Look, I get that they want to prevent Ron Paul type things from happening. But this is going over the edge. They are acting like petty tyrants and causing massive dissention in the party.

  • Melody Warbington

    bet0001970, I have to ask. Are you voting for Romney in November?

    Based on this story at the blaze, the Ron Paul supporters were causing most of the ruckus.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/boehner-booed-at-convention-as-chaos-erupts-on-convention-floor-over-ron-paul-delegates/#

  • bet0001970

    This is the problem…they saw how divisive this was. They knew this was getting out of hand, but they kept fighting the delegates and the states. Which tells me this isn’t about a bunch of Ron Paul supporters. This is about grassroots organizations taking control of the establishment. Besides, the rumblings that I’ve heard from my insider friends have all been about the Tea Party people. They don’t give a damn about RP.
    More importantly, what does it say that they are willing to alienate alot of potential voters and and alot of potential money over this?

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    And, in passing? It constantly amazes us at RedState about just how many ‘libertarians’ out there seem to think that property rights do not apply to websites. Which leads us to conclude that many of these individuals are not actually ‘libertarians’ at all.

  • bet0001970

    Yeah. I was even going to donate to his campaign (I can’t believe I ever considered that). Now, I’m just gonna worry about the Senate race and deal with the state races. I just don’t see a difference between the two anymore.

  • writescribe

    Thanks, daniel22. I’ll leave it at that given the admonition from Mr. Gardner.

  • writescribe

    Duly noted, Mr. Gardner.

  • jamesm

    Sounds like this is the beginning of some partying at the convention. Quibbles, after this compromise, can be swatted at later. Obama’s scalp (figuratively) first. Sounds like the party brought out the peace pipe.

  • Melody Warbington

    runner, I’ve done more reading, and you’ll be glad to know I’ve sent an email to my reps on the rules committee voicing my opposition to the changes. I’ll be sending my comments to my local tea party members and Republican women’s group so they can do the same.

  • Melody Warbington

    Power grab or not (see my comment to runner above), there is still a huge difference between Romney and Obama. I agree with pushing to elect more conservatives to the House and Senate, but if we can do that, Romney won’t veto legislation we send to him. Further, judicial appointments are at stake, and however much Romney wasn’t my first choice, he won’t appoint radical leftists to the bench like Obama has. And if he’s re-elected, Obama will only get worse.

  • jamesm

    party is uniting. Obama is landslidable. Don’t be fooled by the disagreements. People will unite to get rid of Obamafool

  • Melody Warbington

    kowalski, or that new comment to runner may be below. I’m on record as opposing the changes after further reading and am sending word out to make calls, send emails, etc.

  • bet0001970

    With all due respect, this is the United States of America. We have this document called the Constitution. Within it are these things called “Amendments”. The very first one, covers freedom of speech. And up until YOU, everyone on this site appeared to understand and value that Amendment.
    So with that said, as a member of this site, and an ardent supporter of the Constitution, I will not have my words censored and I will not be DICTATED to in regards as to what to say. Have a nice day.

  • bet0001970

    I’ll admit that judicial appointments are a concern, but look at what happened with Roberts. Honestly Melody, I’m very discouraged right now.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Actually, with no respect whatsoever: this is private property, and you have no freedom of speech here at all.

    Ciao.

  • jamesm

    LOL LOL
    555555
    Had to use a gnat swatter on that one,

    Lol

  • garfieldjl

    @redstate-4fbdc7de3e31de33862586c8db456f53:disqus
    I would respond by pointing out that it could be argued the RNC is breaking a long standing trust with the American People, if this story is true and it scarily looks that it is.
    While I may vote for Romney this election to get Obama thrown out of office, if this rumor is true I think that when 2016 rolls around the Republican Party will have lost tea party support completely and there will be a third party, assuming the Republican Party doesn’t go the way of the Whigs.
    I came home today to find this, so I do a little digging and find:
    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/08/28/gop_establishment_tries_to_change_delegate_rules_to_marginalize_conservatives
    Now lineholder, are you going to be a total idiot and accuse El Rushbo of being an Obama troll too?
    We would never have Ronald Reagan if this had been allowed to fly…
    Really I hope this is just a bunch of Ron Paul dingbats whining about the fact they can’t hijack the process.

  • garfieldjl

    I seriously hope it is just Ron Paul supporters whining…

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    You’re not and never will be. Thank God for small things.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    Stupid, thy name is jonny. Neither the house or senate can appoint a SCOTUS justice, and it takes exactly zero votes to make an interim appointment. Obama could string together a group of Marxists on the Court for one session at a time and NEVER offer up a nomination.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    Move to Mexico. Preferably as an illegal.

  • garfieldjl

    I’m of the mindset of voting Obama out of office first, then if this is true, I say we form a new party for 2016… This country can’t survive 4 more years of Obama. After November 2012, if the Republicans are so insistant on becoming Democrat Clones, then we need to form our own party at that point.
    We need to keep our priorities straight on this, we don’t have enough time left this election cycle for a new party to be formed. Ron Paul is quite frankly nuts when it comes to foreign policy.
    Now, I hope that all of this just is Ron Paul idiots whining, but there seems to be a lot of blowback at least from what I’ve heard, and I don’t consider Rush to be an Obama supporter.

  • garfieldjl

    @redstate-59d1604d290eadf333ea3d2b1b9c990d:disqus
    You do realize those polls are heavily skewed because they seriously oversample democrats…

  • garfieldjl

    Moe, considering Rush probably has a larger audience than RS (and is probably more respected than you or any other editor at Red State), and the fact that Mark Levin, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, etc. Have all voiced outrage concerning this, for very legitimate reasons, I might add.
    Example:
    http://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-levin/damn-it-defeat-this-rino-power-grab/10151002712575946
    Are you a member of the establishment Moe, cause if so (and at this point I’m guessing you are) it seems to me you and your buddies actually want Obama to get re-elected? If that isn’t the case how about you tell your establishment buddies to stop trying to alienate the very voters needed to beat Obama.

  • HopeHeFails

    Well, I have nothing but disdain for the GOP leadership, too. Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, and even Issa have been major losers and are painful to watch in front of an audience. We can do far better.

    Akin put his foot in it at the wrong time in history and got caught in the vise. Collateral damage like Howard Dean was.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    “New Party” is a 100% loser. No one has ever come up with a way to provide funding, a 50 state infrastructure or credible candidates to be anything other than a vote taker from least undesirable candidate.

    John Anderson, George Wallace, Ross Perot (who could self-fund a Presidential race) and our good friends in the green party either had no measurable impact or managed to help elect somebody they REALLY didn’t like. Clinton won because of Perot and GWB won because of Nader.

    Third parties are a complete and stupid waste of time and thankfully RS bans third party advocates on sight.

  • garfieldjl

    jamesm
    If the Establishment wasn’t pulling such a boneheaded stunt in the first place, we wouldn’t be having this conversation to begin with.
    We’re supposed to be providing a clear choice between us and the Democrats, not emulating the Democrats…

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    I’m going to point out the blatantly obvious, Erick Erickson is the editor of RedState as such the policy of banning 3rd party advocates on sight is approved by….Erick Erickson.

  • garfieldjl

    @redstate-02d9cccc1328e6ef09f25d18255d411f:disqus Well if you have any better ideas of how to hold the establishment accountable for this idiocy I’m open to suggestions.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    Become a PC.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    Not only is writescribe a troll, so are you daniel.

    You two flap in here advocating a losing tactic – third parties – and expect to be greeted with anything but scorn you’re dumber than you seem.

    You also won’t last long. Third party advocates always wear out quickly. You’re a one-note samba and you’re off-key at that.

  • audax

    Haven’t read all the comments but this is exactly why Conservative-nouns need to take over the party by attending their County meetings and becoming Precinct Delegates/Committeemen! Only PD/PC’s can go to County/District/State and then a National Convention as a voting Delegate! Only PD/PC’s can sit on the RULES Committee’s from County to National Conventions. This is why Cold Warriors “rants” can n-e-v-e-r grow old. Get involved! Take back OUR party!

  • audax

    Opting out of the party is not the way to effect change. This battle between the Conservative wing and the Establishment wing of the GOP has been fought from Taft thru Goldwater thru Reagan and will continue to be fought until Conservative-nouns WIN it! The only way you can WIN it is to be a M-e-m-b-e-r. Sorry you are now flying the white flag of surrender protectfreedom. Take down that white flag are rejoin the battle foreve…if you still believe in it…..

  • audax

    Thank you CW for keeping up the good fight!

  • michaelbowler

    The establishment has chosen to make a stand to fend off the TEA party activists and other interests that are trying to pull the party to the right. This may serve Romney’s interests in the short term…wait until he wants support for reelection. It is clear the milquetoast wing of the party does not like input from conservatives, just votes.

    The game may blow up in their faces, if the TEA party activists who are responsible for the current level of enthusiasm, make no mistake, are forced along with the Libertarian Paulites to seek other avenues, the establishment republicans will be back in the “we fall short of winning anything” position…making it far more likely that third party options will be sought at future elections. This scenario ensures the democrats win it all for years, again.

    Nobody wins if this scenario unfolds. The establishment just doesn’t have what it takes to get there without the grassroots activists, trying to suppress them in this fashion will be to the detriment of the entire party. We told you Romney was the wrong guy, we knew the level of disdain and distrust Romney had for the TEA groups…but he was the one who could win, supposedly, and I hope he does. While I hope he wins, I’ll be looking for the alternative in 2016 because this is just the kind of guy I knew he is.

  • taxpayer28

    this is what the old steriotype of repubicans used to be. the country club dictating to the unwashed masses.
    I will vote for Gray Johnson if this goes through

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    becker handles it below – get involved with this party because 3rd parties don’t work. Let me give you some of the things you need to consider.
    First, you have to build infrastructure. You need websites, local precincts, organizers, and advertising to get yourself out there. In addition, you’ll need to recruit candidates. All in all this will probably cost you 250 million.
    Next, you will need to pick candidates. Don’t overlook this, it derailed Americans Elect which had support from pros who had been about this for several years.
    Next, unless your goal is to elect Democrats to every office – you are going to have to win hearts and minds. Unlike Obama and Romney, you’ll have to play in every media market in the country. There is no such thing as a safe market for you…so you’ll need to be up in Los Angeles, San Fran, Miami, Dallas, Houston, New York City, Jersey, Kingsport, TN…everywhere. This will be a 2.5-3 billion dollar expense, minimum. That is just to run for President; you still need to run for Governor, Congressman, Senator, Mayor…this will cost another billion when all is said and done.
    Who is your rainmaker? Where does the money come from? Koch Brothers, Shelly Adelson, George Soros, forget it, they are too invested where they are at. Literally, the only billionaire unspoken for is Nanny Bloomberg and if he could self fund a third party – he’d already have done it. Which leads to a final point.
    Not every person in the country agrees with you on everything to get enough votes to get elected, you’ll need to decide where you are willing to compromise. In this party, you aren’t the reformer; you’re the establishment.
    No one has done a third party because it’s too expensive to play and once you get around to getting elected, you have to form the same coalitions that folks hated about the Democrats and Republicans. The answer as Becker states below is to take over the local parties, then you have a vote on who is on the RNC. The best plan out there that I have seen is ColdWarrior’s…he has written several times about those efforts on this site. In addition, Daniel Horowitz has written several times about efforts to recruit quality candidates and get them elected. Club for Growth is doing excellent work in this area. That was a long winded response that Becker summed up better below in three words.

  • danvito

    Well, since the RINOs are trying to pull this horse-hockey DURING THE CONVENTION, what better time to comment?

    At least he’s not a commie…
    At least he’s not a commie…

    At least he’s not a commie…

  • danvito

    Jamesm:

    I’m beginning to wonder who the “troll” is here.

    David Barton (Wallbuilders.com) has an excellent principal he follows for judging which candidates deserve his vote: Check their pro-life stance. If they’re strong there, generally, all other conservative principals follow, i.e. 2nd Amendment, fiscal sanity, limited govt., etc.

  • danvito

    writescribe:

    Troll club, anyone?

  • Change Jar Conservative

    It’s ugly that they did this on voice vote.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    Precinct Committeeman. See any diary by ColdWarrior.

  • http://libertynews.com/ mbecker908

    You wouldn’t last 10 seconds as a commentator or a candidate. You’d probably have the distinction of making Akin look good.

  • corsairk09

    Its actually this attitude that is ruining the country. It is the “party first” outlook that is pulling people apart and turning the masses into sheep who follow blindly the “lesser of two evils”. Who wants the lesser of two evils? Don’t we deserve a real leader? Don’t we deserve to have a president who puts the constitution before party? Liberty before party? The American People before party? It is an absolute disgrace that people like you will allow the republican party to choose your candidate for you… because that is exactly what this rule will do.

  • Dave_A

    The Ron Paul folks are NOT our own. They are a cancer needing to be cut out.

    The delegate-selection proposal is SPECIFICALLY to prevent Ron’s movement from hijacking a future convention with ‘stealth’ delegates (Eg, ‘Romney’ delegates that really support Paulisim)….

  • Dave_A

    Not with what the Paul folks are doing at the state-level…

    They are getting better at the ‘hijack-through-apathy’ thing every year, and unless the rules are changed to shut them out, they will eventually be capable of doing real damage with false-delegates.

    The fact is, you should NOT be able to send faith-less delegates to the RNC convention, just like there should NOT be faith-less electors in the electoral college.

    People sent as part of the Romney delegation should be Romney supporters. NOT PAUL SUPPORTERS.

    It should NOT BE POSSIBLE to abjectly lose the primary in a given state and then have your people be a majority of another candidate’s convention delegation.