Posted on 09/11/2007 3:29:55 PM PDT by LexBaird
In the bluest of blue of California's Democratic congressional districts, long-frustrated Republican voters are suddenly and decidedly relevant.
That's because in 2008 the Republican Party will scrap its traditional statewide winner-take-all California presidential primary. Instead, the GOP will select the vast majority of California presidential delegates based on who wins in each of the state's 53 separate congressional districts, including 34 held by Democrats and 19 by Republicans.
California Republican Party chairman Ron Nehring said the change is an attempt to open up America's most populous state to district-by-district contests he hopes will put candidates in closer touch with voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
The only "celeb", in the Hollywood sense, in the primary will be Fred Thompson. The Arnold/Wilson faction is pushing the Giuliani candidacy. If the people go for the celebrity status, that might actually hurt the centrists at the polls.
But, I don't think the primaries are going to bring out the casual voters the way the recall did. This is going to be a straight up polling of the CAGOP base. Should also reveal some interesting demographical patterns. Guiliani is apparently going to try to target a elusive group: Republicans hiding out in Indian Country. Even if West Hollywood has only 12 party members, the district is worth 3 delegates. The question is: are those 12 conservatives, lost in the overwhelming noise of local moonbattery, or are they centrist mushies or RINOs, similar to their neighbors in all but enthusiasm?
My recap of recent CA GOP actions (feel free to fill in more)
1. Hijacked the California Recall election by inserting Schwarzenegger into a race to avoid a primary election.
2. Changed party rules to allow for an early endorsement of Schwarzenegger for the 2006 primary, approx 18 months before the election, ensuring that any challenger would get no party support.
3. Changed party rules regarding distribution of delegates for Presidential Primary, giving democrat-infested congressional districts equal weight to conservative districts (greatly favoring liberal Republican candidates).
4. [My guess] Initiated the effort to move the Presidential Primary to February 5th, 2008 (vs. June), thereby favoring the big-money well-known candidates.
5. [My guess] Initiated the effort to get a constitutional amendment to change the method for counting electoral votes for the Presidential race.
(I know I didn’t mention the disgusting effort to back Bill Jones in the 2004 Senate race, just to have him not even campaign. That one still sickens me.)
I'm not sold on celebrities Schwartzie, Guilie or the Thompson at this time, myself and have a distinct bias against celebrities in politics!!! I din't even "like Ike!"
I turned out to be right about Ike as he gave us that prick Earl Warren who was worse than Hiram Johnson!!!
I have this basic mistrust of people who are worshipped for any reason. I even had trouble with General Mac Arthur!!!
These self-centered prigs don't "serve the people!" They only serve themselves and I'm not impressed with that!!!
LOL! Actually, it was a riff on something someone else wrote. They used the word "drinken", and I commented that it sounded like something out of the KJ Old Testament. I dunno if it is archaic, or just made up.
Does the name Fong ring a bell? Another verse, same as the first.
How could I have forgotten? Yep, him too!!!
It sounds like these RINOs (and Dem infiltrators) are gonna get their "Purple Party" come hell or high water!
Barney the purple dinosaur can be the new mascot! pffft!
Here's a suggestion Waspman. It won't work in this case but sometimes it does.
Google takes snapshots of the net for posterity. They're random but more frequent than you might suspect. Here's how to retrieve them:
1) Bring up View Page Source with the wrong mouse button, anywhere on the thread, and copy the URL to the clipboard.
2) Open up Google and paste the URL into the search window.
3) When Google returns the current page, select Cached in the lower left of the the last line of the displayed result and bring up the most recent snapshot.
In this case, the thread had only 11 replies when Google took the snapshot, but there could just have easily been 16 and you would have known the answer.
The party would be toast anyway at that point. I'll vote for Bullwinkle and put an "(R)" after his name. Make you feel better?
The fancy Madison Avenue designer label would mean absolutely nothing...
LOL! Great pic!
FYI, I just came across a good article working through all the delegates and mentioning a few of the GOP rules changes. This is just a *small* excerpt:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/12/opinion/main3253634.shtml
According to current estimates, Republicans will choose 2,517 delegates to the September convention. By the time polls close on February 5, 1,327 of 2,517 delegates will have been selected from states that include not only old standbys Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, but also megastates California, New York, Florida, New Jersey, Michigan, and Illinois. Some of these states (for instance, Arizona, Missouri, and Utah) will chose delegates by winner-take-all systems. Others including California (which changed its rules) and Georgia will either select their delegates proportionately or by which candidate wins congressional districts.
In addition, Republican delegate allocation rules grant additional delegates to states that voted for the Republican presidential nominee in the last election, have elected Republican senators, representatives, and governors, or have Republican state legislatures. That system benefits Southern and prairie states at the expense of large “blue” states in the Northeast, Midwest and Far West. New Hampshire, for instance, which went “blue” in 2006, will send eight fewer delegates to the 2008 convention than it sent to the 2004 convention.
(snip)
If the three candidates remain standing after June, the struggle for the nomination would probably move to the party-rules committee. The Republican Party has already threatened to disqualify some or all of the delegates of states that hold primaries before February 5. If it does that to Florida, for instance, that could affect the delegate counts.
If none of the candidates can secure a sufficient edge by altering the party’s rules, then the battle will move to the convention itself, where the candidates will have to convince delegates to change their votes. That can make for very exciting television, but could pose difficulties for a party that wants to use its convention to showcase its nominee. A protracted nomination battle could also sow discord within the party itself and squander funds that the candidates might want to use later.
???
This is apropos of what, exactly? Is this a misdirected post, or do you have some other reason to believe I need chastisement?
We aren't going anywhere. The CAGOP and/or the majority of those voting in California, Republican primary may well go one way or the other, but we aren't following.
In this case, I was speaking as a party member. Should the party in CA decide, as a group, to go decisively in a way I do not wish to go, that association might change. Until that happens, WE ( as FReeping, conservative Californians) have a say in whom WE (as CAGOP members) want our candidate to be. And if WE want to take back the control of the CAGOP from the Arnoldoids, using the new method for choosing delegates, then WE better be damn well aware of how the game is being played.
As I have said here before, the purpose of a political party is to represent the members, not the other way around. This Presidential Primary is when the base gets an undiluted opportunity to state exactly what we want the CAGOP to represent. No mixed party recall free-for-all. No pre-endorsed candidate. No incumbent with ties to CA. Just a straight up ideological choice.
The way the rules are now stacked, a (D) district with 300 (R)s voting will earn as many delegates as a strong (R) district with 3000 voting. Now, the centrists are banking that they can grab the nominally (D) districts, thinking that GOP members there are likely centrist. However, I am thinking that they may well be wrong, and that the support they have gotten in the past in these areas might well be from crossover Dems, and the real Repubs in them might well be more conservative than they think. If so, we have the opportunity, via GOTV connections like FR, to snatch some of these districts out from under them.
If Rudy loses Malibu, it pops the myth that the Arnoids are trying to perpetuate: That the CAGOP is rejecting the conservative wing. If Rudy wins in the San Joaquin, then maybe the Wilsonneggers are right, and it's time for the California Conservatives to quit supporting the CAGOP altogether, since they no longer have any desire to represent us.
Unfortunately, it didn't work quite the way he planned, yet he will still reap the reward of having endeared himself to "the casual voters" and even many who perceive themselves as some kind of "conservative."
Evidently, the usually mistake proof calcowgirl finally flubbed up just a little and didn't use a pencil and still worse... didn't have an erasure!!!
Mayor Linguine (Censored) is too oily to win as a Republican. The only people who win office with a parade of trashy women and ethically challenged friends are Democrats. Rudy supporters should not forget this.
I wonder about the opportunity to snatch up the GOTV effort. If you recall, that operation was handed over to the Schwarzenegger team in 2006. My suspicion (that I posted with supporting rationale at the time) was that they specifically used their micro-targeting database to approach the liberals(R) that would not only support Arnold but would end up defeating McClintock and Prop 90 (Eminent Domain).
Hopefully, that operation will not be put in the same hands in 2008.
Neither Fred nor Rudy have what it takes. I am pessimistic about the GOPs chances in either scenario.
Oh, I am FAR from mistake proof! But thanks for thinkin' so! LOL
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.