What The Hell Is Up With The MNGOP?: Truth And Consequences

There has been much sturm und drang within, and especially outside of, the Minnesota GOP over last spring’s coup de main by the Ron Paul campaign in Minnesota.  Paul activists, organized as tightly as a Marine basic training company, swarmed the precinct caucuses, the BPOU conventions, the CD conventions, and finally the state convention.  They completely took over some districts (including the Metro 4th and 5th CDs) and took the lopsided majority of the state’s delegates to the national convention.

Now, unlike my friend and longtime activist John Gilmore, I’m doing my best to see a silver lining to the takeover, especially in the 4th CD in which we both live.  Gilmore is the lightning rod of the anti-Paul faction in the 4th and the state, of course, and pulls no punches on the subject, and makes it clear he’s not in the business of finding silver linings.

Being a mere foot soldier, all I can do is note that whatever the problems the Paul takeover has brought at the leadership level (and, as I’ve noted, there are most definitely problems), the takeover has had a few benefits, at least at the grassroots level.  There are fewer “warm body on the ballot” candidacies this year in the Fourth CD than any year I can remember.  More of those races hit their number to get the state funding match than in any recent year.

That’s all to the good.

On the other hand?  I’ve documented some of the problems that we’ve had in the 4th CD from the top down rather than the bottom up.

And compared to the 5th CD, we’ve got it good.  Nancy LaRoche – a longtime activist in CD5 – chronicles the disintegration of the leadership in the CD5 GOP under the “watch” of some especially cynical Ron Paul personality cultists.

Nancy’s been trying to find if there’s even a faint sign of life among the elected “leadership”.  Money quote:

None of the executive leadership have responded to the web site bill as of today. Then I wondered, was the 5th District organization as a whole part of their kill plan? There has been no fundraising, no full committee meetings, and no sign of leadership since their election. Mitch Berg wrote about similar issues of idle hands in CD4.

Jason Lewis talked about the misled direction of some Paul supporters who can’t see the forest for the liberty trees. They refuse to elect a better President now to buy the country time for more liberty-minded candidates later. 5th district leaders appear to have no intention of shaping the party, only destroying it. I tend to agree that these Libertarian “tributes” are happily exploiting the Republican party only to advance their sponsor, Ron Paul — then trashing the vehicle they commandeered.

This, of course, was the big concern many in the “establishment” – including this former “establishment” member who in 2010 was one of those pesky Tea Party insurgents – had with the direction of so many of the Ron Paul crowd.  While many – including the vast majority in my own SD65, including its leader, Joe Schultz (who writes an excellent blog, by the way) came to stay and make a difference within the party, there are not a few that quite clearly did not, and have no intention of it.   And plenty of people are not amused.  And in a year when the Fifth CD fields one of its strongest candidates ever – Chris Fields – it would have been spectacular to have had him backed with a functional district.  (Likewise with Tony Hernandez in the Fourth).

On MPR this morning, I heard a bit by Mark Zdechlik comparing the reactions of the “mainstream” Republicans in the party and the Tampa delegation with those of the “Ron Paul”-faction, who were the majority of the delegates.   Zdechlik quoted a Mark Zasadny of Roseville.  I’ll add emphasis:

Minnesota Ron Paul delegate Mark Zasadny of Roseville said if the election were held right now he would vote for former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for president.

Mr. Zasadny: thanks for hammering home every stereotype the “establishment” had of the Paul movement; that you had not the faintest interest in the GOP, but hijacked it to serve as a vehicle for the Ron Paul Personality Cult.

(Yep, I said “Ron Paul Personality Cult”.  Anyone who doesn’t honestly think that a Romney/Ryan presidency won’t be better for the prospects of liberty in this country, especially and even if only economic liberty, but also the rest of the First Amendment, than a second Obama term seriously needs to get a grip.  Incrementalism is not a dirty word, if it’s incremental in the right direction, especially if that’s a springboard to further bigger increments.  Increments are better than excrements).

“It seems like the clear message was like the grassroots movement is not really welcome in the Republican Party. So that’s kind of hard to swallow when they come around and say, you know, ‘OK, are you ready to unite behind the Romney campaign and the RNC,’” Zasadny said. “And it’s like, ‘well you just tried to cut our throats.’ So how are we supposed to respond to that?”

Well, you can respond in any of a number of ways, Mr. Zasadny.

  • You can come back for the next round of caucuses and conventions, and try to consolidate your control of the MNGOP.
  • You can replicate your Liberty movement organization that suceeded so wildly – at least at conquering the party organization – in other states, and take over more states, to gain more control of the party apparatus so that the next time the rules fight comes up, you’ll fight the battle with more than just a thin rump of delegates from Minnesota and Nevada.
  • You can learn the lessons that every spunky class of political newcomers does; that politics is a marathon, not a sprint.  And all of you Ron Paul supporters that got into the game last February at the caucuses?  You’ve just been sprinting.  You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Or you can react to the perceived “throat cutting” (which wasn’t; the party has every right to organize itself to present its winning candidate in as monolithically-positive light as possible, free of the yelping of what is, let’s be honest, a small minority of the delegates) by doing what Mr. Zasadny and the “leadership” of CD5 have done; taking the knife out of their throats and jamming it into their eye sockets, and twisting it 720 degrees.

Mr. Zasadny:  You were sent to Tampa to represent the Republican Party.  Part of being a delegate to a Party convention is supporting The Party.  Whether you agree with it or not.  That’s not to say you can’t be a principled dissenter – I’ve done that myself – but not   while speaking as an elected delegate at the party’s convention.

The MNGOP is, and should be, a big tent.  It should have room for fiscalcons and libertarians, and even the odd “moderate” who doesn’t screw the rest of the party on taxes and regulation.  As a Tea Party libertarian conservative, I’m more than sympathetic to the Libertarian cause; I came back to the MNGOP in 1999 mostly to try to push the libertarian-conservative cause in the GOP.  So not only am I a sympathetic ear – I was pushing the Liberty cause long before most of you were involved in the MNGOP.

But when you betray the party while serving as a party delegate?

The question isn’t “should Mr. Zasadny and those who think like him make themselves absent from future GOP events”.  The question is “how badly have people like Mr. Zasadny and the CD5 “leadership” hurt the cause of the genuine Liberty supporters that have come to the GOP to do some good – and in many cases, have delivered on it?

Because there are a few babies among the bathwater.

19 thoughts on “What The Hell Is Up With The MNGOP?: Truth And Consequences

  1. You aren’t accusing Libertarians of exploiting the public commons to achieve private goals, are you?

  2. Mitch have you been keeping up with the actions of the RNC at the convention? They went out of their way to disenfranchise both Paul supporters and grass roots tea party activists. Their actions to assert control over the national delegates has been openly criticized by many conservative bloggers and pundits including Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Mark Levin, and Sarah Palin.

    This is in addition to the actions directed at Paul supporters, from not seating Paul delegates, to breaking their own rules to prevent Paul from being nominated from the floor.

    Up until these actions I had been a Paul supporter trying to convince other Paul supporters to rally around Romney. No more. I can understand Zasadny frustration, maybe his words were stronger then he intended, but they did not come simply because he is part of the “Ron Paul Personality Cult”, but from feeling personally attacked and disenfranchised by the national party he is representing.

  3. Brad,

    I don’t entirely disagree with the criticisms from Limbaugh et al, but the idea that this was anything especially unusual – especially given the media’s desire to take the Paul crowd up on their desire to undercut Romney – just doesn’t stand up.

    Frustrating? Sure. Unusual? Not that I see.

    I’m not thrilled with the way it turned out – but then, I think the Paul crowd made their intention to undercut Romney clear; I think the vast majority of the party (who weren’t voting for Paul) had a legitimate interest in at least making the Dems and Media’s job harder.

  4. The
    RNC is ALWAYS an infomercial for the Nominee. RP wasn’t the nominee. He wasn’t going to be the nominee, no matter what you did. You hijacked conventions to get the delegates, made your purpose clear to raise hell at the convention because you felt snubbed and proceeded to throw huge temper tantrums in the press and on TV. You made MN look terrible on National TV. What did you expect, Roses??? The RP contingent brought this on all of the grassroots of the Repuiblican Party and you’re making us all pay for your tantrums. And now you’re not going to vote Republican. Emails and facebook all over saying you’re voting for Gary Johnson. You undercut the Party and The Republican candidate and want what?? Thanks?? I think not!!

  5. Brad – I had one person make similar claims of rule breaking by the RNC but when I asked him to point out the actual rules that were supposedly broken, he disappeared. Maybe you can do better?

    As far as “disenfranchisement,” I haven’t seen the text yet of the new rules regarding delegates but considering the chaos in several States were people were filing lawsuits over who was and was not a delegate, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for the RNC to establish a more uniform standard over who gets to be a delegate since it is, you know, their convention. If it means that MN goes to a presidential primary, which I’ve reluctantly come to support after seeing our State ignored repeatedly since the race is pretty much locked up by the time we have our convention, I’m okay with that.

  6. Granted I haven’t been around for long, but it seems like it must have been particularly egregious if conservative pundits were trying to organize an effort to stop the actions of the RNC.

    These rule changes legally passed or not will have serious consequences on future national delegate process, and particularly in MN. It could effectively silence any grassroots movements from having any effect on platform. It will force a change in MN delegate election system, either forcing us to drop the straw poll or risk having the candidates hand pick their delegates.

    With your liberty background I’d hope you’d be on the record how the rule changes the RNC passed are not in the interest of a party that purports to be for grass roots, states rights, and personal freedom.

  7. It would have been a more adroit move by the RNC to acknowledge the passion of Paul supporters and given them their moment. It wouldn’t have diminished Romney at all, the RNC could have paid lip service to the principles of liberty and given everyone a pat on the head and then gone on with the parade and the media wouldn’t have noticed (and the millions of people NOT watching the convention wouldn’t have noticed either). They wouldn’t have endeared themselves to the Paulians, but they weren’t going to accomplish that anyway.In typical fashion, however, they played right into the enemy’s hands (take your pick of who the enemy is). It was disappointing to watch it play out, but it made it all worthwhile when I could savor Kathy DR’s outrage at those who “high-jacked” her conventions, storming in with weapons drawn, tying delegates up and stealing children. And here I thought they merely showed up in greater numbers and followed the rules. Of course, when the rules get in the way you only have to change them.

  8. As far as I’m concerned there is a simple litmus test to be applied here. I do not care what happened at the RNC convention. Mitt Romney was going to be the nominee, and that’s that. Now anybody that wanted another candidate was going to be unhappy but they should have known that going in. It wasn’t like a big surprise. So the test is this: Since Romney was going to be the nominee, and IS the nominee, and the only other person on the ballot with a prayer (that’s still allowed, you know) is B. Obama the Socialist Party candidate, where is your money and effort going to go? Any Paulite not helping is deliberately hurting the conservative cause including, apparently, the CD4 and CD5 hierarchy.

  9. if the election were held right now he would vote for former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for president.

    Another sad thing about our Paulistinians is that they couldn’t be bothered to, you know, vote for Gov. Johnson when he was running in the Republican Party primaries, but now they’re getting ready to cast that all-important protest vote. Because they care. A whole bunch.

  10. “whatever the problems the Paul takeover has brought at the leadership level ”

    It wasn’t a takeover, it was a hijacking. The only goal was to hijack the MN delegation and other caucus state delegations and fly them into the RNC, all for the glory of dear leader. Their suicide mission failed.

  11. The rules changes were unnecessary and unwise. They had no effect upon the current campaign and discourage future grassroots activism. Whether that was the intent or not, fewer people will be getting involved in the caucus/convention process. In a party which claims to stand for representative democracy and needs to build stronger coalitions, that’s a bad thing.

  12. Let’s not overlook the irony: In 2008, the MNGOP said they didn’t want the Ron Paul people and in 2012 the RNC told Ron Paul delegates that they were unwelcome guests and wouldn’t be invited to the convention next year if the RNC had any say in it. However, when Liberty Republicans absorb that advice and walk, they a deserting the party, and it is a foregone conclusion that any Republican election failures will be blamed on “Liberty Republicans.”

  13. One positive that I saw over the weekend up on Da Range. Plenty of Craavack signs and also “We Support Mining” and “Mining Supports Us” signs. Campaign signs don’t equal wins but it is a sign that the Eighth may not be as safe for the DFL as it has been.

  14. I welcome the Paulites, even if I don’t agree with everything they stand for. I have more in common with them than I do with supporters of Reps like Abler.

    Smaller Government should be our uniting goal.

  15. Pingback: Shot in the Dark

  16. Pingback: Idle Hands – Part 2: So Let’s Debate | Shot in the Dark

  17. Pingback: Four Bald Men Fighting Over A Comb | Shot in the Dark

  18. Pingback: Growing Pains | Shot in the Dark

Leave a Reply