The New 4th CD?

I spent most of Saturday at the Fourth CD GOP convention.

The Ron Paul crowd swept into almost all of the leadership and delegate positions in the Fourth CD on Saturday; only Mike Boguszewski remains from the old executive committee.

The Paul crowd replaced everyone else, myself included, with their slate of candidates – for whom they voted with almost vapor-lock-tight discipline (and no, no sour grapes; I am not “District Secretary” material, and wanted to move over to Vice Chair for Media and Commiunications; I finished closer to the money than anyone who wasn’t on the “slate”, which I took as a mild compliment).

Now, I’ve met a lot of the district’s Ron Paul supporters.  They are, in a lot of ways, the type of people everyone’s been trying to attract to 4th CD GOP politics for years; young, idealistic, motivated.   Unlike 2008, most of delegates that had been forwarded from the House/Senate district conventions showed up for their third straight session of sitting in their delegate chairs until their butts went numb.

And that’s all to the good.

Less good?  Some of their leadership was motivated by fairly palpable anger over the “way they were treated in 2008”, when quite a few GOP activists gamed the system to keep the first wave of Paul supporters out of power.  To their political credit, they spent their four years organizing, and did a good job of it.

Less to their credit?  While anger is a good motivator, “anger at the inner workings of a political party” has, I’m going to guess, a short shelf life.   And at least in the Fourth CD, the anger was manifested by ballot.  The twitter stream during the convention indicated that at other districts, Paul supporters booed Dan Severson and Pete Hegseth, whose main transgression was “not being Kurt Bills”, the Paul crowd’s candidate for Senate, or refusing to stand to support John Kline at the 2nd District convention when he was re-endorsed.

Still, it made for an interesting day.  Rumors on the floor had it that there’d been negotiations going on to keep Jim Carson – who did an excellent job leading what was bound to be a long rebuilding effort, after having led Roger Chamberlain’s upset victory for the Senate two years ago – in place as district chair.  For one reason or another – rumors on the floor varied, but most of them seemed to come back to “we’re still pissed off about 2008” – the negotiations broke down and the Paul crowd voted their straight slate and replaced Carson with former one-term Roseville mayor John Kyslyczyn.

So now, with the exception of Boguszewski, we have an entirely new Fourth CD; in much of the district, the leadership is new from the “BPOU” (MNGOP talk for the lowest level of the organization, which might be a House district, a Senate district or a County) level on up.

So what do we have, other than the hardest-to-spell leadership team in all of Minnesota politics (Kyslyczyn / Boguszweski)?  It’d tempting to say “a big slate of leaders who’ve never won a political race outside the party”, but then outside of Kyslyczyn’s term as mayor and Carson’s management of Chamberlain, the old and new teams are both tied at zero, so we can call that a wash so far.

My big concern, now as then?  While the crowd of Paul supporters at the convention Saturday carefully replaced their “Ron Paul” posters and stickers with “Kurt Bills” goodies, and voted to endorse Tony Hernandez by a 190-5-5 margin (after running a skillful campaign to win support from most of the establishment and Paul crowds), I have yet to hear a lot of support for, or even especially much awareness of, races farther down ticket or, more importantly, for candidates who get endorsed even if they’re not on the Paul slate.

Now, I know that there are a lot of good, committed people among the Paul crowd who are committed to using their positions in the GOP to work for the party, not just a candidate or two.

But I get a different impression from some of their leadership.  Ronald Reagan once said that if someone agrees with you 70% of the time, it doesn’t make them 30% your enemy.

And from some of the Paul crowd’s leadership, I do get the impression that, whether motivated by single-candidate zeal or roiling anger over 2008 or one of the mind-boggling number of byzantine interpersonal pissing matches that seems to motivate so much of CD4 GOP politics no matter who the nominee or the cause celebre or what the defining issue is, the Paul crowd’s leadership, in the district and beyond, sees “70% friends” as “30% enemies”.

About a month ago, I issued a challenge to the Paul supporters in the 4th CD.  Some Paul supporters complimented me on the piece.  Some took umbrage.  At least one of the Paul crowd’s “leadership” took out after me pretty aggressively over the article, denouncing me as Not A Libertarian At All in that Maoist-y way people adopt when they’re higher on political zeal than common sense.

But now he, and all of you in the Paul crowd, are the establishment, and I don’t have to mince words like some sort of party officer anymore.

Ron Paul’s not going to get nominated.  There is not a chance in hell he’s going to even get past the first ballot.  You fought the fight – successfully, here in Minnesota – but in August your national delegates will announce their votes, and the whole effort will wash down history’s drainpipe, and Paul will retire from Congress, and life’ll move on.

But there’s an opportunity to make a statement that’d be even bigger, at least here in Minnesota.

I’ll restate my challenge; exert some of that newfound power and influence down ticket from Paul and Bills; you have a golden opportunity to use your numbers and energy and organization to push Tony Hernandez to an upset victory over Betty McCollum.  There hasn’t been a better  opportunity to do that since the late Dennis Newinski got within six points back in 2000; between redistricting, anger in Stillwater over McCollum’s opposition to the new Stillwater Bridge, Obama’s anti-coattails, and the fact that most of Saint Paul is much worse off now than it was four years ago, this will be as good a chance as we get until 2020.

The chance, in short, is to do the unthinkable; to flip the unflippable Fourth.

Of course, for all your district-flipping numbers, you can’t do it alone.  Obviously, either could the former leadership.

It’ll be a brutally tough job to do even if we do all pull together.

And I know most of your hearts are in the right place.  But, Paul supporters, I’d like you to honestly ask yourself; does your leadership see the rest of the GOP as a bunch of 30% enemies?

Because if they do…I was going to say, “that road leads to Palookaville”. But 4th CD Republican politics has only rarely been anything but Palookaville for as long as anyone can remember.

Now there would be some change we could believe in.

30 thoughts on “The New 4th CD?

  1. We’ll see.

    Can the Paulistinians lead?
    Can the Paulistinians win? Both at CD4 and lower races?
    Can the Paulistinians get your average GOP volunteer to, volunteer? Donate?

    We’ll see.

  2. What FF said. One of the Ron Paul folks became chairman of our BPOU back in ’09 and he was gone within months, leaving the much derided old guard to pick up the pieces.

    I appreciate the zeal and new ideas in the party — I do. But I get the sense that at least some of our new insurgent leaders couldn’t care less about the legitimate concerns of the old guard. There are elections to be won in 2012 and 2014. The new leadership team needs to start building coalitions. That’s the test.

  3. Actually Paul didn’t do all that well in Minnesota as a whole. Sorry to hear about the 4th CD, hopefully they’ve got some adults on board this time.

  4. The Paulista’s have answered the most critical charge against them – which I some up “Are you guys just a cult of personality that will bolt when your guy goes down?”

    In Minnesota, the Paulista’s
    -Showed up to the 2008 state convention where they were shut down in a rather harsh fashion
    -Came back for their guy in 2012
    -Have transferred their fervor from the top guy to a local statewide candidate – so much so that he’s gone from 3rd to front runner.
    -Have used their fervor to organize and win several party posts.

    Even if the last is fueled by anger from 2008, the Paulista’s have proven in Minnesota that they aren’t a one-trick cult of personality. Their movement goes beyond Ron Paul’s Presidential ambitions.

    Now all that’s left to quibble over is whether the Paulista’s will treat the establishment types in-kind (by oppressing the 2008 convention oppressors), or whether they will be magnanimous to those who treated them like a hostile insurgency.

    The health of the party will be better served by the latter – but the old guard has no claim on civility or manners.

  5. Gill: I very much resent your claim that “the old guard has no claim on civility or manners” as you apply it to myself. In 2008, I worked very hard, and successfully, to prevent the stupidity in CD4. Back then, I was only a BPOU-VC, but this was one of the few places where the RP contingent was treated fairly. You got your delegates then because I, myself, made that possible. The RP leadership knows this very well. As Chair in 2012, I placed local RP leadership in key positions on convention committees.
    What did I get for being civil? I was humiliated. Not because I lost, but because I stood up for treating you fairly. Nevertheless, the Bloody Red Queen yelled “Off with their heads!” and you followed her orders. She has got to go.

  6. Gill,

    While I take most of your points – and raise ’em, since I did in fact point out last week that many of the people that got Tom Emmer on the ballot came from the Paul camp – I’m going to go along with Jim on the whole “civility and manners” bit.

    While there was some hostile behavior by some high-profile GOP figures, an awful lot of people in the GOP did in fact welcome the Paul supporters; not to say we didn’t try to set ’em straight on a few things (the Trans-American Highway wasn’t really HD66B business), but many, notably Jim, did in fact go out of their way to make things fair.

    Since I don’t have to mute my criticism of anyone anymore, I’ll say it; I think the whole “way we got treated in 2008” thing was a bloody shirt that some of the Paulistinian leadership waved about to try to keep the troops whipped up, whether it was warranted and historically accurate to the situation or not. I mean, I’ve had Paulistas get in my grill for being “establishment” – and not only did I lead the way in welcoming them to my own BPOU at the time, but I am a former Big-L Libertarian in the first place. Beyond that? The way Jim got double-crossed was disappointing at the very least…

    …and at most, a look into the dynamics of “revolutions. It’s an unfortunate byproduct of “Revolutions” that the “revolutionaries” so often feel the need to rid themselves of those who aren’t “revolutionary enough” for them.

  7. “Roger Chamberlain’s upset victory for the Senate two years ago”

    An upset in that Roger wasn’t the incumbent. But Mitch, let’s not forget that we are are talking about the neighborhoods that a few years ago were represented by Phil Krinkie and Maddy Reiter and today by Linda Runbeck and Roger. At least I have good representation in the MN legislature. 🙂

  8. Jim, I didn’t put out orders regarding you. The CD 4 people made their own decision.

    This isn’t about 2008. This is about 2012. I have been *attempting* to discuss the state convention with Shortridge, but he has refused to appoint a fair convention chair or rules committee chair. So he’s not in a great position to be demanding favors of us.

  9. “The Road to Palookaville” is a scenic trip through the towns of Mendacity, Obscurity and Oblivion. Many in academe liken it to a “Route 66” without neon. The Paulbots are not exactly winning the high ground.

  10. Jim Carson did a great job over the last fours in his role as VC & Chair. Jim has shown respect for the RP supporters and recently rewarded RP supporters with convention leadership positions. Jim Carson certainly deserved to be re-elected based on regaining the SD53 (now 38) seat as well his leadership in CD4.

    The Paulbots have done a great job of organizing a very small minority of MN Republicans (10%?). All this shows is the primary flaw of the caucus system, i.e. a very small minority of political activists control who our candidates are. Whereas, a majority determines the candidates in a primary system.

    Shame on the RP mob for being so rude, inconsiderate and immature before & during the CD4 Convention. The Paulites are losing the institutional knowledge in the BPOUs & CD4 leadership. Additionally, the Paulites have divided our Party to the detriment of our state.

    You deserve what you will get, i.e. no financial support from the majority within our party and the loss of the MN House or the MN Senate or both the MN House & MN Senate on 11/6/2012. The results on 11/6/2012 will be on the backs of the Paulites.

  11. It’s an unfortunate byproduct of “Revolutions” that the “revolutionaries” so often feel the need to rid themselves of those who aren’t “revolutionary enough” for them.

    This.

  12. While there was some hostile behavior by some high-profile GOP figures, an awful lot of people in the GOP did in fact welcome the Paul supporters; not to say we didn’t try to set ‘em straight on a few things (the Trans-American Highway wasn’t really HD66B business), but many, notably Jim, did in fact go out of their way to make things fair.

    I second Mitch’s statement that Jim went out of his way to make things fair. There were a number of resolutions that we didn’t get to because of time and rather than simply allowing them to die for lack of passing, Jim stepped up (twice) to have them sent on to the State convention. As I recall Jim first proposed a resolution to send them on (which was defeated by voice vote). Then when a delegate proposed a resolution to that any we didn’t vote on were deemed to have failed, Jim spoke out against it on the grounds that delegates had worked hard to propose their resolutions and it wasn’t fair that they should fail without a vote merely because we happened to run out of time. That resolution failed and finally before we ran out of time, Jim’s resolution was resubmitted by Pat Anderson and passed by a voice vote.

    I know that resolutions are far from the most important business conducted at conventions like this but I think that the way Jim handled something that was obviously important to the delegates – including a lot of Ron Paul supporters – is a testament to his character. I’m newly returned to the 4CD and I for one appreciated his efforts and regret that I haven’t had a chance to see him in action longer.

  13. -Have transferred their fervor from the top guy to a local statewide candidate – so much so that he’s gone from 3rd to front runner.

    Gill are you saying that Kurt Bills is the odds on favorite to win the endorsement at this point?

  14. Now all that’s left to quibble over is whether the Paulista’s will treat the establishment types in-kind (by oppressing the 2008 convention oppressors), or whether they will be magnanimous to those who treated them like a hostile insurgency.

    If your first impulse after winning control of an organization is to debate whether to punish the people who used to control it rather than moving the organization forward in achieving its mission, then you probably won’t be in charge for very long.

  15. B. Stink – the road to Palookaville was surveyed, paved and striped years ago, and paid for via generations of earmarks, rent-seeking and power plays. Most of the landscape is pretty marshy. I don’t think there ever was much high ground.

  16. Can anybody feel that? It is the winds of… cognitive dissonance.

    The challenge to the CD4 Paulians to stick around and support the Party’s endorsed candidates in the article is followed up with name-calling in the comments thread. “Paulbots” and “Paulistinians” indeed. Even the word “establishment” is reflected quite derogatorily at the incoming leadership (how can newcomers be “establishment,” anyway? Don’t they need time to establish something first, as the old leadership already has?).

    Here we have one of the problems that Paulians/libertarians face while trying to survive in the Republican Party. They are told to stick around and vote “R” but, in all honesty, nobody really wants them around. My BPOU Chair (not a Paul supporter) randomly chewed out a Ron Paul-supporting delegate, a newcomer, at the Convention on Saturday for supposedly not having any plans to stick around simply because she supports Paul. How did he figure she was not going to stay involved, having not known her at all? More importantly: what are chances now that she actually will get involved long-term with the Republican Party after her BPOU Chair chewed her out for being a Ron Paul supporter? Can anybody say “slim”?

    The call for Paulians to stick around in 2012-and-beyond feels just as angry as the Paul Campaign’s Leadership undoubtedly still is regarding the shenanigans of 2008. At its very best, the challenge feels disingenuous; something one utters bitterly as something they are supposed to say when the viewed inferior new guard takes over.

    Despite this rocky history, many (if not the majority) of the Paulians/libertarians do, in fact, plan on sticking around inside the Republican Party (myself included). Make no mistake: although frequently treated unfairly, we want to get the Party back on track towards actually supporting limited, Constitutional government. However, it is difficult not to see some kind of percentage of the Party as the enemy when you are being treated poorly right out of the gate for simply winning squarely at the Party’s own game. Perhaps the old guard needs to earn the trust of the new anti-establishment/libertarian members (the undoubted future of the Party, if there is to be one) more than the other way around? Honestly ask yourself: Will the ousted leadership support the new libertarian-minded Republicans running as endorsed candidates? Will the establishment try and railroad Kurt Bills in St. Cloud? I guess we all have questions.

  17. -Gill are you saying that Kurt Bills is the odds on favorite to win the endorsement at this point?

    More importantly have any of the other candidates pledged to abide by the endorsement and if not whos the likely winner if this goes to a primary? (Besides Klobuchar that is)

  18. This is the big test for Paul supporters. If their intent was to advance Paul’s agenda and maybe get him a speaking slot at the convention, then I think that can be considered a success (at least here in MN).

    But the point has been made already that party leadership has very little to do with getting one person elected, or advancing a specific agenda. Those who were elected now have to help local house and senate candidates get elected, recruit the next generation of candidates, and above all, the Paul supporters will have to work with those in the party who think Ron Paul is a nut.

    I wasn’t part of the party in 2008, but everyone generally agrees that the Paul contingent was treated horribly by party leaders. If other Republicans get the same treatment from today’s Paul contingent, we will be in for a real power struggle.

  19. Somerset,

    First, welcome to my humble blog.

    I’m going to respond to a couple of things from your comment:

    Can anybody feel that? It is the winds of… cognitive dissonance

    Sure. It’s a two-way street.

    The challenge to the CD4 Paulians to stick around and support the Party’s endorsed candidates in the article is followed up with name-calling in the comments thread. “Paulbots” and “Paulistinians”

    I’ll urge everyone to relax. I didn’t make up either term. Politics ain’t beanbag. The DFL will call you much worse – provided they realize you’re not a wedge that’s paving their way to victory, at least.

    Even the word “establishment” is reflected quite derogatorily at the incoming leadership (how can newcomers be “establishment,” anyway?

    There’s a certain amount of hyperbole. But I was called “establishment”, with my grand total of one year on the CD4 Committee. Have it out with your own people.

    Here we have one of the problems that Paulians/libertarians face while trying to survive in the Republican Party. They are told to stick around and vote “R” but, in all honesty, nobody really wants them around

    Untrue. As a former Big-L Libertarian, I certainly did.

    I’ll cop to it; I don’t want resolutions about the Trans-America Highway. I don’t like some of the anti-semitism I see among not a few prominent Paulians (as in, Holocaust Revisionism, in one prominent case), or the strains of personality-cultism that certainly do occur in the movement.

    And I DO, most definitely, have a problem with the scorched earth game *some* of your leadership seem to be playing.

    I do welcome y’all to the party (and since you took all the leadership jobs, it wouldn’t matter if I didn’t).

    . My BPOU Chair (not a Paul supporter) randomly chewed out a Ron Paul-supporting delegate, a newcomer, at the Convention on Saturday for supposedly not having any plans to stick around simply because she supports Paul. How did he figure she was not going to stay involved, having not known her at all? More importantly: what are chances now that she actually will get involved long-term with the Republican Party after her BPOU Chair chewed her out for being a Ron Paul supporter? Can anybody say “slim”?

    Well, sorry to hear that. But that’s been a two-way street, too. For starters, lots of 2008 Paulians DID disappear, even in BPOUs like mine, that DID make an effort to reach out to (but not roll over for) them.

    And a lot of us who came to the party for a variety of our own reasons do, quite justifiably, get upset at being told that our candidate is no different than Barack Obama (yep, hear that one from Paulians all the time).

    The call for Paulians to stick around in 2012-and-beyond feels just as angry as the Paul Campaign’s Leadership undoubtedly still is regarding the shenanigans of 2008. At its very best, the challenge feels disingenuous; something one utters bitterly as something they are supposed to say when the viewed inferior new guard takes over.

    Well, time will tell, won’t it?

    Look – I hope everything works out. I hope that lots of Paul supporters DO pitch in to work for conservative candidates OTHER than Paul and Bills, up and down the ticket. I’ll be doing just that, myself. I’ve worked for candidates who didn’t match my beliefs 100%; as I said above, someone who agrees with me 70% isn’t a 30% enemy.

    Despite this rocky history, many (if not the majority) of the Paulians/libertarians do, in fact, plan on sticking around inside the Republican Party (myself included).

    Well, good! Likewise!

    Make no mistake: although frequently treated unfairly,

    By the way, as I noted, I didn’t support the treatment y’all got in 2008 (although I wasn’t actually a party officer at any level, other than a precinct caucus convener).

    we want to get the Party back on track towards actually supporting limited, Constitutional government.

    Ah, you see, right there’s the problem. A lot of us have been working toward both of those things for a long, long time. A lot of Paul people (and some not-so-Paul people) sneer at Tim Pawlenty, but do you realize the work that the people who were “the establishment” last weekend did as “the insurgents” behind Brian Sullivan to make TPaw as conservative as he turned out to be?

    The Paul crowd acts like they invented “liberty”. You all did not.

    However, it is difficult not to see some kind of percentage of the Party as the enemy when you are being treated poorly right out of the gate for simply winning squarely at the Party’s own game.

    As to the “party’s own game” bit? You’re correct.

    But you do realize being a newbie in politics, especially a loud, brash one, ALWAYS gets you some flak?

    I was a libertarian conservative when I came back to the GOP in 2000. The single-issue pro-lifers who dominated my BPOU didn’t exactly roll out the red carpet, either. The “establishment” in CD6 wasn’t thrilled with Michele Bachmann and her masses of newbies. It’s not like you’re the first disruptive force to be regarded with suspicion by the GOP mainstream, you know.

    Perhaps the old guard needs to earn the trust of the new anti-establishment/libertarian members (the undoubted future of the Party, if there is to be one) more than the other way around?

    Well, we’ll see, won’t we?

    Honestly ask yourself: Will the ousted leadership support the new libertarian-minded Republicans running as endorsed candidates?

    “Honestly?” I’m way past that. I was a “liberty Republican” long before any of today’s Paulians had ever heard of Ron Paul; probably before most of them cared about politics at all. I’ve been fighting that fight for over 20 years.

    Which is why having some snot-nosed little (pardon the expression) Paulbot like one of your leaders call me “not libertarian” because I didn’t express sufficient adoration for “Doctor Paul” rankled. I was fighting this fight LONG before it was cool, insde and outside the party.

    Will the establishment try and railroad Kurt Bills in St. Cloud?

    Or if Bills loses in a fair fight, will the Paul crowd wave the bloody shirt of oppression and go home?

    Thanks for the questions. I’d love to discuss more.

  20. Thank you for raising good questions and speaking so honestly Mitch. I too am a conservative libertarian who could support Rand Paul but not Ron Paul.

    I got involved in the MN GOP after I retired from 3M. I finally had the time to do so. I am very grateful to Jim Carson for what he taught me in White Bear Lake and in CD4. Jim & I were Vice-chairs in CD4 at the same time where we were very successful in retaining HD53B and regaining SD53 in 2010. Jim deserves much of the credit for managing Roger Chamberlain’s election.

    I applaud Jim’s perseverance in trying to change CD4 from the dysfunctional CD of the past via “best practices” in BPOUs that had success in electing GOP Reps & Senators in CD4. Jim deserved to be reelected. I was disappointed but not surprised after seeing what happened in other BPOU conventions in CD4 as well as in other CD conventions.

    The dust will settle and the new CD4 Executive Committee will have to “Storm, Norm & Perform” like any new organization. Unfortunately the new CD4 organization threw the baby out with the bath water.

  21. ” the new anti-establishment/libertarian members (the undoubted future of the Party, if there is to be one) ”

    Well for one you’ll have to actually get a lot more boots on the ground outside of CD4. Paul finished last at our local caucus. He finished 17 points out of the money statewide. For all of Paul’s talk about his behind the scenes caucus tricks he isn’t going to be all that heavily represented at the state convention (I currently plan on attending).

    “Will the establishment try and railroad Kurt Bills in St. Cloud?”

    No but I can’t imagine ordinary delegates pulling for Bills ahead of someone like Hegseth. How will the modest number of Paul delegates react when Bills isn’t nominated?

  22. Kurt Bills was handpicked by Stebbins to run for US Senate as the Ron Paul candidate. He has been endorsed by her Ron Paul MN Organization. Kurt Bills has been endorsed by Dr. Rep. Ron Paul himself.

  23. How will the modest number of Paul delegates react when Bills isn’t nominated?
    If they were smart they’d rally behind Hegseth but won’t because he’s a vet and Severson is too establishment for them, and also a vet aka part of the military industrial complex. If I was Pete I’d start talking more economy and less foreign policy. This is a great trial run for Bills, assuming he doesn’t get the nomination (and even if he does) he would be at the top of the list for 2014 to replace Dayton

  24. Marianne Stebbins will have to live with the results of the CD4 convention debacle as well as the results at State Central as well as the results on 11/06/2012. You made the bed now sleep in it.

  25. Marianne Stebbins will have to live with the results of the CD4 convention debacle as well as the results at State Central as well as the results on 11/06/2012.

    My biggest worry is that she and most of her supporters will say “the party needs to lose to learn its lesson”.

    Parties don’t learn lessons.

  26. so basically they’d rather lose by 25 to Amy with Bills as the candidate than get within 5 or maybe even win with Hegseth (I think Severson has no shot at the nomination personally). That is, as they say in the business, fucking retarded.

  27. My biggest worry is that she and most of her supporters will say the party needs to lose to learn its lesson.

    Parties dont learn lessons.

    I beg to differ, I think that political parties do learn lessons but its not necessarily the lesson that the true believers would like for them to learn. Generally the lesson that a losing political party learns is they need to move in the direction of the winning party in order to capture the votes of the independents and moderates who decide elections. Unless the incumbent party is irreparably tainted by scandal or a national crisis that is perceived by voters as being created by the incumbents, generally the response of Republicans is not to tack further to the right, its to further to the center.

    That sort of dynamic can also worth within a party as well. If Republicans lose badly in Minnesota this fall and there is some high profile event that is tied to their losing, e.g. a failure to endorse a Senate candidate at the State convention or if some of the national delegates pull a stunt in Tampa to try to deny Romney (who is going to be the nominee) the endorsement or force a VP choice or other concession on him, it will likely be blamed on the people who are perceived as having taking over much of the MN GOP apparatus.

  28. Pingback: Ron Paul’s Delegate “Wins” Won’t Amount To Anything

  29. Pingback: Ron Paul’s Delegate “Wins” Won’t Amount To Anything

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.