Posted on 01/24/2014 12:06:11 PM PST by Hostage
The Tea Party should hold their own convention one month prior to the GOP.
At first glance this seems symbolic only. But upon further reflection, some united statement coming out of a "Tea Party Convention" about who conservatives should vote for could have a chance to affect the eventual nominee. If we could at least get all conservatives voting for he same guy, it might reduce the dilution of votes that always get the establishment and media "their guy".
Thanks to Tenacious 1 for the above:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3115298/posts?page=10#10
_____________________________________________________
It can be done and I believe more easily than most would at first think.
For example, the Tea Party Convention could be a hybrid virtual convention where state TP delegations attend state convention centers with all conventions tied together in live video. No need to make one city the epicenter.
In addition to nominating a TP conservative a TP convention could adopt a platform.
Here’s why I think it’s a feasible and potent proposal:
The loose assemblage of Tea Party organizations has in the past and can again represent nearly 70 million Americans comprising conservatives, independents, libertarians, the blue collar Perot Bloc (more than 6 million) and Reagan democrats (more than 7 million). There will also be a significant bloc of voters that go with their perception of who will be a winner.
These numbers are possible and even probable given the grievances that most Americans have with both political parties today.
Republicans such as Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and other recent TP champions can attend both conventions. But their presence at the TP Convention one month before that of the GOP will empower them to be movers and shakers in the latter.
My own view above:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3115298/posts?page=22#22
_____________________________________________________
I’ve been floating the same idea for about a month now.
Tea party gets behind one in the beginning. Much easier to beat the GOPe that way.
maybe even send a GOPe ringer in too.
Thanks to cableguymn for the above:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3115298/posts?page=26#26
Let me credit *Lakeshark for reminding of all the investigations on conservatives, never remotely punished and double down by Schumer at the Soros funded think tank, for more of the same, by the IRS, to come.
We had discussed the need for a safe destination for grassroots money. Lakeshark wondered about The Heritage Foundation. They do seem to have more cover from the Justice Dept than grassroots operations ever do. I wonder why that is?
The difference for investigation seems to hinge on
“educational” goals as opposed to “political action” goals.
Ping mention.
I “sent” before I pinged you. So sorry about that. Rita
It's the bitcoin of US politics.
Any organization headed by former Senator Jim Demint is Ok with me and I think most every Tea Party conservative.
But I just think this is warfare and it may be best to ‘design’ the funding repositories so that if one is attacked others keep on going.
Senator Demint I am sure would know exactly how to design the financial arm(s).
The strength of the Tea Party as a movement is in the natural protection from its many different and autonomous groups which are amorphous in structure. The Left becomes confused not knowing how to apply Alinsky tactics to the movement; they don’t have winning tactics to marginalize it.
The financing of its convention process should mirror this natural protection. Financing for example could be distributed to a number of repositories that are all pledged to support the winning Tea Party nominee.
Sitting back and watching everything going on and the way the democrats and rinos attack all things T.E.A., I have decided that we need to focus on Scott Walker for pres. Because, he has already shown that he can withstand the attacks and if there is any dirt to be had on him the unions would have found it long ago. I truly love Ted Cruz and he is the smartest man in politics right now, but he would be crucified. He already has captured the wrath of the left. Therefore we can’t get him past the rinos. He is a male Sarah Palin. Rand, etc. don’t have the political sense to get elected. I think that Walker has earned the respect of even the rinos. So he could pull the party together. This is the first time I have thought about him as a viable candidate and it’s because of the news about the state of the state of WS. He’s a tough cookie. Look at all he survived.
Christie also stood up to the unions and yet he is a full blown RINO.
Walker like Christie has shown RINO tendencies but with more finesse.
The reason we can't go with a moderate any longer is because they are headed in the same direction as the democrats, their path just takes a little longer to get there.
Walker thinks in compromising ways and we can't afford that now. It's gone way past the point of compromise as in times past. It is now critical to American freedoms to strengthen and promote traditional roots of Americans.
For example, Walker proposes to take federal money from Obamacare and channel it to the poor and low income in his state who will select their plans while bypassing a state health exchange.
Sounds good but it is no solution. Obamacare will still define what and what is not a satisfactory health plan. So there won't be a plan for anyone to select except what the federal government approves and the plans that will be available will be too expensive and this will force the system to single payer which is the ultimate plan.
So Walker, like Ryan comes up with half-baked solutions that lead to the same results that democrats push for.
The proof of what I say here will be when you see the NY Times, and the state run media promote Walker as a candidate for the GOP. When these liberal media groups get behind a GOP candidate like they did for Ryan, then you know they are choosing a moderate to go up against their democrat.
Walker on NSA surveillance of ALL Americans charts the 'middle' road:
MADISON, Wis. (AP) - Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is trying to chart a middle road in the debate over government surveillance in the name of national security.
Walker was asked Monday how he felt about the recent spat between two other Republicans, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.
Paul is from the libertarian wing of the party and has been outspoken about his concerns over government surveillance without warrants, which he calls a threat to freedom.
But Christie called on Paul to make his point to the widows and orphans of those killed in the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
Walker says he sees merit in both arguments, and believes in preserving national security while also protecting individual freedoms.
Walker, Christie and Paul are all potential 2016 presidential candidates.
But prevention of 9-11 did not require an effective nullification of the 4th amendment, it required stricter surveillance of foreigners, not American citizens and permanent residents. Walker ignores this fact and decides to walk the 'compromise' tight rope. This is a sure indication of a RINO. He should just come right out and say the 4th Amendment like the 2nd Amendment is sacred and not up for debate, and that protections can be better provided by stricter border enforcement and surveillance of foreigners on American soil who are not protected by the Constitution.
Walk is untested and shows no fire in his belly that American sorely needs right now.
Reagan was no moderate and he won my landslides both times he ran for President. Reagan was demonized by the leftist press and their minions.
Cruz is like Reagan and better.
Cruz will of course be maligned by the leftist media, they hate him because he threatens their power base.
But America is still mostly conservative. It is a documented fact that Romney lost because he did not carry the blue collar conservative Perot voters who sat at home. Walker will not carry them either unless the dems put up Hillary and I don't think they will.
Cruz will carry the GOP and its base, and he will carry the Perot Bloc which is 6 million + strong. He can also carry the conservative Reagan democrats who are 5 million + strong.
If you succumb to the dem maligning of Cruz, then you are playing into their hands. They will brainwash as many people as possible against Cruz just as they did Reagan but it will not work because the country is still conservative.
When conservatives are nominated, they win.
When moderates are nominated, they lose.
GW Bush ran as a conservative and operated as a moderate. Conservatives gave him a GOP House and Senate for his second term and he squandered it. Never again.
McCain was a moderate who 'talked' conservative when it was convenient for him.
Romney was a RINO and a liar.
Never again.
Walker is not what we need.
In a perfect world I would agree with you, but reality is what it is. The “established” political entity’s tentacles are entrenched into every corner of the system. We are never going to kill it in one fell swoop. That was my point. Of all the moderates out there running, Walker is the only fiscal conservative who has been tested. At this point in time we desperately need someone to tackle the economy. We are going to have to settle for a “step” by “step” method, just as the progressives have done. I don’t see another electable person other than Walker. Is he my first choice? No. If I had my way Sarah would already be president and we wouldn’t be in this mess. Ted Cruz, if her runs, will be giving the Palin treatment and the results will be the same. Of course I could be wrong, but I a pretty good grasp on the big picture.
Please don’t bring down the “perfect world” “perfect is enemy of good” yada yada on me because this is typical brainless Beltway jibberish.
Walker has been tested fiscally but not in any other way. He is a moderate just as Christie.
Sorry but he’s a no-go.
Cruz will be the nominee.
I think you're onto something here. A couple of points:
One reason the TPM is successful is that is diverse and unorganized/uncentralized, which prevents the GOPe as well as the libs from pulling the alinsky trick of personal destruction.
Secondly, the TPM needs to stay on message of smaller gov, constitutional limits to gov and fiscal sanity. Being a subset of CPAC will help prevent the dillution of their message.
Finally, a convention costs a lot of money, money that could be better spent on elections.
What if it was required that your vote was accompanied by a $20 donation to whoever is the eventual winner? It would be no different than a "campaign bundler" except you don't know exactly who your donation is ultimately going to at the time you make it.
70 million people X $20 = not exactly chump change
This would prevent non-tea party folks from participating.
I like it!
Are you speaking of the tea party caucus?
I haven’t read all the posts on this thread, but is there any reason you would not want to coordinate with the Tea Party Patriots and Express people?
Yes and not necessarily a convention. We need to take over the Republican party.
Good Lord, they are tlking about Mitt Romney again.
I believe the Republican Party has been infiltrated by the Democrats, as they have courts, schools, etc, to ensure that these idiots keep doing the same thing, running liberal Republicans and trying to out do the Socialist party.
No reason not to coordinate with Tea Party groups. In fact it is required.
They could invite Karl Rove to be a speaker and give him the hook after his introduction.
I’m in!
Good idea — and encourage multiple GOP-e candidates to run.
How about make it a regional thing? New England, the southeast, NY/NJ/PA area, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.