PDA

View Full Version : "How We Became the Party of Ron Paul" - Iowa GOP insiders no longer in denial




Agorism
05-08-2012, 03:25 AM
"How We Became the Party of Ron Paul" - Iowa GOP insiders no longer in denial

http://theiowarepublican.com/2012/how-we-became-the-party-of-paul



From the outside, one must think that the Republican Party in Iowa is a minority party that has never recovered from the losses of 2006 and 2008. It’s not close to being true, but that is how it feels these days. Despite having elected a governor, gaining control of the Iowa House of Representatives, and leading the Democrats in voter registrations after trailing them by 110,000 after the 2008 elections, the Republican Party is going through a regime change.

The new regime that was elected to govern the Republican Party of Iowa earlier this month at the district conventions is laser focused on their own goals. In fact, Mitt Romney will be lucky to garner six votes this fall out of the 16 state central committee members that were elected at district conventions. Laugh all you want, but I’m not joking.

By now, those of you who are paying attention realize that the supporters of Ron Paul and other like-minded individuals have taken over the Republican Party of Iowa. While they use their purity test as a reason why they can’t support Romney, they have no problem selecting delegates to the national convention whose beliefs violate various planks in the platform.

Of the 13 at-large delegates that were selected on Saturday, one was an active Democrat in 2010, another supports gay marriage, and yet another repeatedly attacked a Republican leader in the house last year because that leader supported a bill that would limit abortions in Iowa. Maybe the 2012 state platform that will be ratified at the state convention in June will provide an exemption for anyone who doesn’t agree with the document so long as they pledge their allegiance to Ron Paul.

TheIowaRepublican.com has provided step-by-step coverage of how Ron Paul’s revolution has taken over the Republican Party of Iowa. While traditional news outlets are now catching on, this is a story we have followed for quite a while. In fact, our coverage began two-years ago when four people associated with the Campaign for Liberty were elected to the state central committee in April of 2010. The name of that article, “The RPI Revolution?,” ended up being very prophetic.

The Paul supporters are reveling in the moment, while other long-time GOP activists are worried about what the future holds for the Republican Party under the new leadership. TheIowaRepublican.com has spent a lot of time covering the events that have led up to this point, but we have not spent much time discussing how it happened. This article is intended to shed a little light on that subject.

As has been stated before, the Ron Paul supporters have taken control the Republican Party of Iowa and the county and district conventions through legitimate means. While some feel that they have exploited the rules to their advantage, they have broken no rules in Iowa. However, there are concerns in other states where Paul supporters have taken over. For instance, in Nevada, Paul supporters secured most of the delegate spots and seem poised to vote for their candidate at the national convention even though Nevada’s delegates are bound to support Romney.

How did the Ron Paul supporters take control of the GOP apparatus in a state like Iowa? Here are some of the main reasons.

The Paul Supporters are Organized

We all know that Ron Paul has not run a traditional campaign for president. He did in states like Iowa and New Hampshire, where he campaigned and ran TV ads, but since then, Congressman Paul has only made a few appearances in caucus states, and that’s about it. Instead, the Paul campaign has focused on district and state conventions in states like Iowa.

While other campaigns were focusing on upcoming states on the primary calendar, the Paul campaign repeatedly called its supporters in an effort to turn them out to county and district conventions. With no other campaign organizing delegates, and with Santorum getting out of the race and Gingrich becoming an afterthought, the Paul campaign basically had no competition.

Romney has Zero Presence in Iowa

Despite campaigning hard in Iowa during the final stretch before the caucuses, the lack of grassroots support for Romney is shocking in this state considering that he finished just 34 votes shy of winning here. Romney’s Iowa campaign can be compared to a carnival. It’s impressive when it’s all set up around the town square, but when it’s over there is no sign that it ever existed.

Romney had little to no presence at county or district conventions last month. No signs, no table to sign up to volunteers, nothing. Also missing from the conventions were actual Romney supporters. Sure there were a few of them, but for the most part, many of the people who caucused for Romney showed no interest in being a convention delegate.

One of the main reasons why the Paul supporters have been able to ride roughshod over the county and district conventions process is because of the absence of the Romney campaign. For months the Romney campaign made the case that they had the nomination all synched up. They do in the traditional sense, but while they dried up their main opponents’ money, they were also signaling to their supporters that it wasn’t necessary to participate in the rest of the caucus to convention process. This was bad move that is now going to cause them a major headache.

Some Social Conservative Leaders Have Sold Out

For years, social conservatives have dominated the delegate process in Iowa in thanks in large part to the work of National Committeeman Steve Scheffler and his Iowa Faith and Freedom organization. Scheffler’s efforts were largely successful. Scheffler insists that since becoming National Committeeman, he no longer pushes for the election of a specific slate of candidates. Instead, the Paul campaign and other groups, such as Iowa Right to Life, have instituted the practice. However, Scheffler’s fingerprints can still be seen everywhere you look helping Paul devotees become delegates.

As we have seen with the at-large slate, not all Ron Paul supporters favor traditional marriage or are on the same page with Scheffler’s Iowa Faith and Freedom organization. Furthermore, it seems odd for the National Committeeman to be aiding the Paul campaign in their quest to secure a majority of the national convention delegates from Iowa. If Iowa awards its delegates to Ron Paul in Tampa, Iowa’s National Committeeman will have helped tarnish the state’s First-in-the-Nation caucuses even worse than the certification fiasco did.

TheIowaRepublican.com will have more on Scheffler later this week.

Nobody should be surprised that the Paul supporters have taken over the Republican Party of Iowa. For the last two years, they have been gaining seats on the Iowa GOP State Central Committee, including electing one of their members as the party’s chairman. What has caught some people off guard, however, is how blatant they have been with the at-large national convention delegate slate. Most people expected Paul to get a majority of the slots, but nobody imagined that they would have awarded delegate positions to some of the people who got them.

I guess there is no longer any need for them to appear reasonable. There is little doubt that the Iowa GOP has become the Party of Paul.

RickyJ
05-08-2012, 03:35 AM
While they use their purity test as a reason why they can’t support Romney, they have no problem selecting delegates to the national convention whose beliefs violate various planks in the platform.

Alright, the few examples he gives are more than likely plants. Romney probably paid them to say they were for Ron Paul just to make Ron Paul people look bad when they elected these fools as delegates for Ron Paul.

If you take a good look at all Romney delegates I would imagine you would find some similar problems with them.

bluesc
05-08-2012, 03:38 AM
Damn the people who run that website are butthurt over us taking over their party. Non-stop attacks, and they regularly attack the current Iowa GOP chairman. Hypocrites much?

LibertyEagle
05-08-2012, 03:52 AM
Maybe the next article should be about how they previously allowed a pack of Trotskyites (neocons) to take over the party. I'd like for The Iowa Republican to explain that.

nobody's_hero
05-08-2012, 05:05 AM
Alright, the few examples he gives are more than likely plants. Romney probably paid them to say they were for Ron Paul just to make Ron Paul people look bad when they elected these fools as delegates for Ron Paul.

If you take a good look at all Romney delegates I would imagine you would find some similar problems with them.

Those delegates are probably legitimate Paul supporters. The GOP is just pissed off that the party is growing. (seriously, how else can the reaction be explained?)

They have no problem with the Reagan revolution when democrats poured into the party to carry the Republicans to the White House. Now they're singing a different tune.

Besides, most of the GOP doesn't even know what its planks of the platform are, including the author of this article.

MozoVote
05-08-2012, 05:18 AM
Petulant as it is, the article does a good job of laying the blame at the Iowa GOP and Romney's feet for being uninterested in the process. An astroturf campaign can win the MSM, but it's organization and volunteerism that wins the county conventions.

Bern
05-08-2012, 05:34 AM
... While they use their purity test as a reason why they can’t support Romney ...

lol. The GOP is the one who wanted to use "purity tests" to close the tent. It couldn't possibly be that Paul supporters are actually paying attention to issues, advisors and who the money men are? Mitt has no integrity, is assembling a team of neocon foreign policy advisors from the widely reviled Bush administration and is funded by the same Goldman Sachs and Wall Street cabal that is ruining the country.


Some Social Conservative Leaders Have Sold Out

lol. The GOP heirarchy sold out a long time ago. That's why there is a r3voLution.

parocks
05-08-2012, 06:37 AM
lol. The GOP is the one who wanted to use "purity tests" to close the tent. It couldn't possibly be that Paul supporters are actually paying attention to issues, advisors and who the money men are? Mitt has no integrity, is assembling a team of neocon foreign policy advisors from the widely reviled Bush administration and is funded by the same Goldman Sachs and Wall Street cabal that is ruining the country.



lol. The GOP heirarchy sold out a long time ago. That's why there is a r3voLution.

Here's this, which I didn't look closely at before, too - to elaborate on the "neocon"

"But in XXXX, the lives of Mitt Romney and Benjamin Netanyahu intersected, briefly but indelibly, in the 16th-floor offices of the Boston Consulting Group, where both had been recruited as corporate advisers."

Mitt Romney has been a friend of Benjamin Netanyahu for 36 years. That XXXX is 1976. In 1976 Ron Paul was a Delegate for Ronald Reagan. In 1976 Romney became a buddy of Netanyahu.

Since everything he has said has been wiped clean by the etch a sketch, what do we really know about Romney? Bankers love him. He's been a close personal friend of Netanyahu for 36 years. Dov Zakheim is a top foreign policy advisor.

Is the Romney policy basically "as close to Obama on domestic policy, but slightly less, and definitely Netanyahu will tell us who we will fight and when, and there will be no bad time for a banker bailout. A slightly different style. A little less for the socialists, a little more globalists, bankers, Israel. No change at all, merely shifting the emphasis.

Bern
05-08-2012, 06:55 AM
parocks, it's much simpler than that.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?374262-Obama-to-cast-Romney-as-Bush-III

John of Des Moines
05-08-2012, 07:01 AM
Craig Robinson was the Political Director for the Iowa Rep Party back in 2007. He attended the June 30, 2007 Tax Forum that had excluded Paul. While the Tax Forum had 650 people in attendance Paul had 1100 plus. Craig was in the back near the entrance doors amazed at the Paul people. He commented to me that the crowd energy was what the Republican Party needed.

trey4sports
05-08-2012, 07:13 AM
bwahaha

sailingaway
05-08-2012, 07:20 AM
In denial? Celebrating, I should think. This author still has the lingering notion that it is a bad thing.

sailingaway
05-08-2012, 07:20 AM
Maybe the next article should be about how they previously allowed a pack of Trotskyites (neocons) to take over the party. I'd like for The Iowa Republican to explain that.

this^^

Arklatex
05-08-2012, 07:27 AM
I'm tellin' ya!

Tinnuhana
05-08-2012, 07:43 AM
Didn't Mitt's foreign policy guy just quit?

walt
05-08-2012, 07:44 AM
Wait, does this mean Ron Paul won't run 3rd party? ;)

No1butPaul
05-08-2012, 07:47 AM
Man, I LOVE this line from the article:

Romney’s Iowa campaign can be compared to a carnival. It’s impressive when it’s all set up around the town square, but when it’s over there is no sign that it ever existed

J_White
05-08-2012, 07:49 AM
One state at a time, we are taking back the GOP !
neocons are going the way of dinos !

Bastiat's The Law
05-08-2012, 09:21 AM
Craig seems butthurt.

talkingpointes
05-08-2012, 09:31 AM
I like the piece. It reads like an obituary of the old guard.

sailingaway
05-08-2012, 09:32 AM
I like the piece. It reads like an obituary of the old guard.

WE are the old guard. They are just the recent mis-managers.

tsai3904
05-08-2012, 09:35 AM
One state at a time, we are taking back the GOP !

Yes. There's no reason why we can't duplicate the success in Iowa in other states. The key is to get involved in your local GOP and become a voting member. Only voting members can elect County GOP Chairmen, State GOP Chairman, State Committee Members, National Committeeman/woman, etc.

angelatc
05-08-2012, 09:40 AM
No doubt Barry Goldwater wrote similar pieces about the social conservatives and their hijacking of the platform, too.

Definitely butthurt.

I really hate the way it's branded "the Ron Paul movement." Paul has always been determined to make it about the philosophy and not the man, but we aren't quite there yet.

I hope the writer wrong about the Ron Paul people leaving after the election though, but I've seen it happen before. Part of the problem is that so many of the libertarians have attached themselves to the man instead of the movement, and when he's not running, they go back to their lives. Since this is his last run, they might never come back. Politics is boring grunt work 70% of the time. Getting people to stick around for that is hard, especially the young libertarians that leave in a snit anytime they get insulted about any ol' thing.

Inkblots
05-08-2012, 09:53 AM
Maybe the next article should be about how they previously allowed a pack of Trotskyites (neocons) to take over the party. I'd like for The Iowa Republican to explain that.

Nailed it! I still think we should stop giving them the courtesy of calling them "neo-conservatives" and call them what they are: foreign policy progressives.

FSP-Rebel
05-08-2012, 10:01 AM
I hope the writer wrong about the Ron Paul people leaving after the election though, but I've seen it happen before. Part of the problem is that so many of the libertarians have attached themselves to the man instead of the movement, and when he's not running, they go back to their lives. Since this is his last run, they might never come back. Politics is boring grunt work 70% of the time. Getting people to stick around for that is hard, especially the young libertarians that leave in a snit anytime they get insulted about any ol' thing.
I think with all the successes that have been pouring out recently, many of our people that aren't exactly politickers have seen how refreshing it is to get our way. Not saying the usual % of supporters won't go dormant after a while but our diehard core and associates are likely enough to exert enough influence to maintain our areas of control while expanding elsewhere.

The flip side is much of the demoralization comes from the party insiders that have been purged. They had their way by controlling the way the sheep voted but the sheep can't be unglued from their tv sets and ball games long enough to keep their masters in charge (in this case local and state parties). IA and a few states are definitely ahead of the rest of us in terms of ownership but the rest of us just need to follow the example set forth. 90% of winning is just showing up and that should be the rallying call in all cases where there's upcoming state conventions.

jbauer
05-08-2012, 01:01 PM
The young leaving might have been true in the past. Now they can't find jobs, they can't pay college debt, they can't afford health insurance and they can't move out of mom and dads house. I think the young have quite a bit of reasons to hangout and fix this thing.

FYI, I'm between the old and young.


No doubt Barry Goldwater wrote similar pieces about the social conservatives and their hijacking of the platform, too.

Definitely butthurt.

I really hate the way it's branded "the Ron Paul movement." Paul has always been determined to make it about the philosophy and not the man, but we aren't quite there yet.

I hope the writer wrong about the Ron Paul people leaving after the election though, but I've seen it happen before. Part of the problem is that so many of the libertarians have attached themselves to the man instead of the movement, and when he's not running, they go back to their lives. Since this is his last run, they might never come back. Politics is boring grunt work 70% of the time. Getting people to stick around for that is hard, especially the young libertarians that leave in a snit anytime they get insulted about any ol' thing.

Hyperion
05-08-2012, 01:07 PM
Nailed it! I still think we should stop giving them the courtesy of calling them "neo-conservatives" and call them what they are: foreign policy progressives.

I love this so much.

I don't understand the conflict between social conservatives. I'm quite socially conservative with some libertarian tendencies but support Ron Paul and see nothing inconsistent about it.

jmdrake
05-08-2012, 01:57 PM
Maybe the next article should be about how they previously allowed a pack of Trotskyites (neocons) to take over the party. I'd like for The Iowa Republican to explain that.

These same people would be perfectly fine with someone who voted to increase the debt ceiling and for funding for Planned Parenthood. (Rick Santorum). Just saying you want to bomb Muslims enough times and all else is forgiven.