The Republic you save may be your own.
Posted on 05/17/2012 9:59:20 AM PDT by Gennie
Mitt Romney and the Republican National Committee (RNC) will erect their own Nevada state operation to supercede Nevada's dysfunctional state Republican apparatus, according to a report from the Las Vegas Sun's Jon Ralston.
The Nevada Republican Party has long been a mess, and Ron Paul backers who have a questionable commitment to electing Romney recently took control of most of the party structure. Last week, the Clark County Republican Party, which covers two thirds of the state's population, called for RNC chairman Reince Priebus to resign.
In response, Romney and the RNC will build out their own ground game in the state to run the get-out-the-vote and voter-contact operations the state party usually handles.
"Essentially, we're setting up a shadow state party," a GOP insider told Ralston.
RNC spokesman Kirsten Kukowski told The Hill that the RNC hasn't "made a decision and continue to work with the Nevada GOP," while Nevada Republican Chairman Michael McDonald told Ralston he planned to work with Priebus to "build a top-notch ground game to beat Barack Obama and elect Mitt Romney to the White House."
Nevada's messy Republican Party has been the biggest structural concern for the RNC and Romney. It will be interesting to see if they make any similar moves in Iowa, where Paul supporters also control the state party but have been less antagonistic toward the RNC.
IMHO, we’ve been given a wonderful gift. A chance to see the future.
Actual real people who are registered as Republicans in complete insurrection from the party hacks. A pack of hounds running around with no leader.
The RNC has to admit defeat, essentially, and come in and start a new party ??????
By doing this they have tacitly admitted that they could not restore their local party to get in line with their guy.
Methinks people are festerin’. Mad. I know I am.
The RNC forgets that it’s real simple: I’m a real American, been here forever, ain’t leavin’. I’m Christian, that’s not changin’. I know that morals is where everything starts - morals are one’s foundation.
I can’t trust them any more to protect what is right.
They make deals. They bargain away essential freedoms; they bargain away morals; they sell the truth for a few pieces of silver.
Dastardly words and deeds.
I just can’t vote for that, any more than I can vote for overt enemies of the Republic, otherwise known as Democrats, who also sell our nation and our liberty for a few pieces of silver.
This is rather disturbing. At the same time, I’ve previously read that the Nevada GOP is a shambles and prior election results appear to bear this out.
I just don't get your comment. The ad nauseum drumbeat on FR is that the Republican establishment needs to be challenged and dispatched. So the Tea Party rises up and shakes things up from the ground up, but then when someone like Romney works to shake things up from the top down, he gets a bunch of BS.
Either there is a crapload of trolls around here or else there is a crapload of people who will never be happy.
The drum beat is getting very tiresome and is the reason why a lot of people have just given up on FR and gone elsewhere. Maybe it's the goal of the constant complainers to get rid of people who see possibilities and potential so FR can become one giant juvenile pity party.
I’m thinking probably not. While the vast majority of Nevada’s income comes from gaming, technically “tourism gaming”, there is no love for the gamblers, only their money.
(A friend noted that in such gambling areas, you will never see a “genuine smile”, a very interesting cultural observation to say the least, though way too complex to try to explain. Very deep meanings.)
However, the mood on the street is probably close to hostility, since so many of the tourists come to Nevada not to give something to the state, or even just neutrally have fun, but to take from others, in what is effectively a less than honorable way. It is a predator-prey place.
So what is the mood to “carpetbaggers?” Though many people came to Nevada and set down roots there, they actually contribute, so are soon no longer outsiders. Most of the post-WWII western cities are like that.
But “carpetbaggers”, like the original carpetbaggers, have no love for the place or its people, and just want to use them for their own advantage and profit before leaving. The modern term “transients” is perhaps a better one.
In Nevada, they are always on the lookout for casino cheats, con artists, thieves and robbers looking to prey on the gamblers, gamblers who spend more than they have, as well as the usual assortments of criminal scum.
So enter Romney and the RNC. Like it or not, the Paulites have manipulated the system in Nevada to their advantage, and the Romney people and the RNC don’t like that, because they want those delegates anyway, even if they don’t want to get them the right way.
This sounds like something all too common in Nevada, and not something they like. So it will be interesting to watch and see what happens.
The Tea Party is working to fix the problem, Romney will institutionalize the problem. Romney is part of the establishment and he's lloking to fulfill his father's dream of silencing the Goldwater and Reagan conservatives.
You mean fix things like Romney's people and his allies in the Virginia Republican Party did to freeze out any viable competition?
I'm committed to opposing liberalism in all its forms whether in our party or outside of it? Are you?
Of couse, I mean he's looking. Too fast with the send button.
I’m sure as heck not going to whine about what Romney may or may not do. He’s not a stupid man and he knows he will need Tea Party support to get anything done. I vehemently disagree with your take on his goals.
I will save my negativism for what I know will happen to this country should Obama win a second term. And if people like you sit aside and let it happen, I will be among the first to call you out on your hypocrisy if you complain about anything Obama does in his second term.
It is just as likely that Romney will use Tea Party opposition to strength his support in the center-left coalition. The best way to prove that he isn't a "radical right-winger" and maintain support among independents is to publicly pick a fight with the Tea Party. Since his political stances throughout his career have been center-left, he has a natural constituency there. Romney might need some support from the Tea Party types to get elected but he doesn't need them to govern.
I vehemently disagree with your take on his goals.
Just look at his record. Actions speak much louder than words. If you vote for him, fine. Do want you think is best but do it with eyes open.
And if people like you sit aside and let it happen, I will be among the first to call you out on your hypocrisy if you complain about anything Obama does in his second term.
Whatever. I'll be doing my part by putting Tea Party people in place. Don't get too worried about my vote - I'm in a solid red state where Romney would have a hard time losing (which is good for him because he won't get my vote).
If Romney wins and turns out to be the dud that his record suggests, then I assume you'd be okay with me calling you out for voting for him. Turnabout is fair play, right? I'm curious about something. You're upset because we criticize Romney the candidate. Will you be upset if we criticize Romney the President too because that will be supporting the 2016 Democrat candidate? Will you be opposed to a Tea Party candidate running in 2016 because a divided Republican Party would only assure Romney's defeat and the election of the Democrat nominee (who we will be assured by Romney supporters will be a lot worse than Romney and therefore we can't gamble with voting our conscience)?
A “electable” Tea Party candidate would be my first choice. There wasn’t one running this year.
Second choice is ABO (anybody but Obama). The stakes are too high.
Romney will deserve any and all the criticism he gets if he betrays conservative principles, but I’m willing to give him a chance and not pre-judge.
The Tea Party movement will be doomed if it attempts to become a top down political party, so your point about a candidate in 2016 is moot. It is most effective working within the existing two major parties as a grass roots movement of like-minded people. In its short history, it has had a MAJOR impact in local, state, and national elections in its current form.
The Tea Party movement will be doomed if it attempts to become a top down political party, so your point about a candidate in 2016 is moot.
I don't think so - I was talking about a primary challenger to Romney in 2016, not a third-party general election run. Any such challenger will be criticized by the Romney administration or the GOP-e as just helping the Democrat in the general election by undermining the GOP incumbent. Kennedy's 1980 challenge to Carter and Buchanan's challenge of Bush in 1992 will cited as "proof."
If Romney wins in 2012, (which is not a given especially since there are a lot of purists who would rather have no pie at all rather than not having 100% of it), then why not a Tea Party challenger in 2016 IF Romney is not carrying through on conservative principles. It would keep the heat on him to stay to the right.
I have heard people of the ilk of Larry Kudlow, whom I like and respect a lot, say that Romney has the potential to be another Ronald Reagan. Kudlow’s been on the political and economic scene forever and has known Romney a long time. His opinion should bear some weight.
Dubya made an enormous contribution toward the conservative cause by appointing two OUTSTANDING SCOTUS justices. If elected, Romney will have the opportunity to chart the direction of the SCOTUS for decades to come. That’s something that’s little mentioned or considered and it’s extremely important.
I vote crapload of people who will never be happy.
This appears to be about winning the state despite a weak state party organization.
Sounds like the state party has been made even worse by the take over Ron Paul people. A lot of state parties are being taken over by Paulites. They damn well better not be incompetent losers who fail to get Republicans elected.
Grand design to have Rand oppose Romney in 2016?
“This appears to be about winning the state despite a weak state party organization.”
I agree.
“Grand design to have Rand oppose Romney in 2016?”
I think it’s to have Rand as VP in 2012.
how would he (or his supporters) act any differently?
Because mitt romney IS a democrat
why would you expect he or his supporters to act any differently.
Well, if Rand Paul runs for president in 2016, he will lose in the primaries and won’t be able to run for reelection in KY, which hopefully will put an end to the Paulistinian attempts at highjacking the Republican Party. I know that Rand hasn’t espoused any of his father’s kookier views, but I figure it’s only a matter of time before he comes out in favor of shutting down all U.S. military bases abroad and legalizing heroin and letting Iran get the nuclear bomb and ending our support of our ally Israel and legalizing same-sex marriage.
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.