As to the “antics” you mean the blatent disregard for convention rules, the MN GOP constitution and the will of the delegates?

Sue’s Campaign was my first state-wide race, and I’m not afraid to admit to my inexperience. That said, the floor-fight strategy I developed was sound, and in retrospect (hindsight being 20/20) there is nothing I could have (legally) done differently to affect the outcome. The gavel simply shut us out (with a little help from “Hatchet Man”).

You seem to be OK with below-board tactics within the Republican party and you seem to be OK with disenfranchising the delegates. I find that very disturbing.

I mentioned before that we had the explicit (written) support of 20% of the delegates going into the convention. The Pawlenty camp had estimated that we actually had 40% of the convention. Disregard for law, democracy and proceedure to win is a Democrat trait. I expected better from the leaders of the GOP. Is it any wonder the base is staying home?

You’re right I don’t like it, and I’m working on changing it.

The vote was by secret ballot, so how other voted is only an assumption.

My vote was that Sue was unqualified to seek endorsement. This was based on three issues.

1. Her endorsement from the Libertarian Party
2. Her failure to directly answer quetions asked by the committee members, including questions I raised.
3. Her lack of picking a Lt. Gov. running mate, which shouwed a utter lack of planning by the camapign.

I also voted Shudlick and Uldrich as unqualified,
Pawlenty interveiwed by phone.

If Sue had played the game straight and showed that she had a credible campaign, I would have no problem signing a minority report. I done it before, and can do it again.
These are State wide offices, not the local garden club.
Is there a lot of “insider politics” at play, of course. You may rail about it, but this is the system. Don’t like it, then you have to change it, but it doesn’t happen overnight.

As to the antics on the convention floor, as her campaign manager, that was your responsiblity, and results showed your skill level.
Statewide Campaigns do not fight fair, they fight to win at all costs.

What I did see, was a complete lack of organization and understanding of the internal workings of the Republican Party by Sue Jeffers and her campaign.

Don’t like the answers, then don’t ask the question.

You’re right. I wasn’t in attendance, but Sue was, and as Sue’s campaign manager, it was my business to know what was going on both inside and outside of the nominating committee’s meetings. Do you think we were in the dark? Did you know that Sue had the explicit support of 20% of the convention delegates before hand? We made certain of that, since Carey was talking about requiring a petition, but in the end, the nominating committee dropped that as a qualifier, didn’t it? There was only one way a candidate for governor would make it past the nominating committee: if the candidate’s name was Tim Pawlenty. And he didn’t even show up for your inquiries, did he?

J. Ewing: Even if the more conservative candidate isn’t picked, the presence of such a candidate moves the others right-ward. Without that competition, we are far more likely to install candidates who look out for their own political interests before a conservative agenda. Lack of vibrant competition will weaken the party. You’re right, Pawlenty isn’t Hatch. I shudder to think what things would be looking like without Pawlenty’s veto power. I pray he uses it often. We have a RINO problem, though. There are too many Ramstads (and Sviggums) and not enough Bachmans. To right this, we need options. No more insider “king-making.” Fair, open, spirited competition. Competition in the marketplace makes our nation’s economy stronger. Competition in the arena of ideas will make the party stronger, and benefit us all.

I was a member of the State Nominations Committee, and no one twisted my arm or made my decision for me.

As usual, ask me a question and I’ll give you a straight answer, but always be prepared for a answer you may not like.

As for Carey and Repya, I’m more than happy to listen to both of them as to why they are the best person for the job.

Yes, I was Sue’s campiagn manager. A decision I am proud of. I know that I did the right thing. The nominating committee had it’s marching orders. The decision had to be “unanimous” to prevent the results of the nominating committee being challenged by a minority report. Arms were twisted, and some members were convinced to abstain from voting rather than vote for or against Jeffers.

The executive committee further saw to it that the convention rules were changed to prevent nominations from the floor, robbing the delegates of their voice, and taking away the traditional method of nominating candidates that all levels of the state party have always employed.

Debate on the rule change was squelched by hiding the rule change in with a larger block of rules, and running out the clock on debate for the issue by bringing up irrelevat portions of that rules block first. The entire orchestrated event was aided by a certain state central committee member took the mic several times at the convention to steer the debate and change the subject whenever anything arose that could have opened a door to Jeffers’ nomination. I took to calling him the “hatchet man.”

Sue Jeffers isn’t a member of another party. That’s what the executive committee would have you believe. She’s the vice president of the Twin Cities Republican Association, the state’s largest republican group! Carey said Jeffers was denied delegates lists because “she filed as a Libertarian” which is just flat out wrong. She filed as a Republican, which is why there was a primary challenge to Pawlenty!

Carey was to blame, and I hold him as partly responsible for our staggering losses last election. Is Repya any better? I don’t know that yet, but I’m paying attention!

Shudlick was allowed to speak, but he was asked to cut his time short, since they weren’t planning on having anyone but Kennedy take the stage. And, this was only after Shudlick had been barred from speaking at several BPOU and Congressional District meetings and conventions. His campaign was deliberately handicapped by denying him access to delegates lists until the last possible moment. Without access to the conventions or the delegates, it’s prety hard to run a campaign. The same was true with Jeffers. Sue Jeffers worked on Tim Pawlenty’s first campaign for governor, yet her credentials were “suspect?” Jeffers was denied access to any delegates (except the 2nd CD), even when she was the ONLY declared candidate for GOP endorsement. Coleman is a Democrat, and Alan Fine was pro-choice, favored amnesty for illegal aliens and big government solutions, but they had the support of the party. Uldrich, meanwhile was elected by his BPOU to the 5th CD convention and the state convention. He was also just elected to the state central committee. He’s good enough for his BPOU, who know him, but not the nominating committee, apparently (and to be frank, I wouldn’t have voted for him, but he should have been allowed to compete). Their job is supposed to be just screening out people who are not legally qualified, not decide for the delegates who will receive endorsement!

In the nominating committee, Jeffers was quizzed on the major items in the party platform. She agreed with 99% of the issues raised. Were Kennedy, Fine and Pawlenty quizzed about their stance on platform issues? Pawlenty didn’t even appear before the nominating committee!

Andy’s right. Carey took an active role in hindering some candidates for endorsement in favor of others. That’s simply unacceptable. We wound up with no competition for endorsements, so in essence, the decision about who would be the endorsed GOP candidates was decided before-hand by the executive committee, and the delegates got a show, but had no actual say in the process. Unacceptable! Unacceptable! Unacceptable!

We have to do better than this, or we’ll soon be irrelevant as a political party and as political movement.

I’ve always been told that the GOP is a bottom-up organization. That is no longer true, but we must ensure that it is again, or we’ll end up with more liberal candidates, and lose even if we win!

Both you Andy and Dan (I assume this is the same Dan who managed the Sue Jeffers for Governor campaign) love to blame Ron Carey for Sue Jeffers not speaking at the State Convention. That decision was up to the Nominating Committee. This same committee allowed Harold “The Shud” Shudlick to speak, but barred Uldrich from speaking. Uldrich and Jeffers were barred from speaking since their conservative credentials were suspect. Ron Carey did not serve on that committee.

Secondly, it seems that only Jeffers supporters are vocally backing Repya. This concerns me if we have a member of another party and her supporters trying to back their own candidate.

But really, when a man like Repya gives his word that he will remain neutral, personally, I take him at it.

And as Dan pointed out, Carey has interfered with an endorsement before. Like it or not, like Jeffers or not, like Pawlenty or not, Carey made darn sure NO ONE appeared against Pawlenty at the conventions last Spring and Summer. That is undeniable. I’ve heard the excuse for it, if he stands by it, then he shouldn’t have a problem admitting he did it.

I encourage everyone take a few deep breathes and listen to Repya, and his plans on making the party better and stronger over the next few weeks and compare that to what Carey is going to propose for the future. This debate can be incredibly constructive for the party, no matter who wins as long as it remains constructive about the plans for the party.

Let’s all, myself included, take a big step back, relax, and watch these 2 candidates provide their visions for the future of the party in the coming weeks. Let’s take a break from the divisiveness and have a debate about how best to fix this party all the way down to the grassroots level. That’s what we should really be looking at right now.