08 State Convention – Logistics
I’m going to break down my MNGOP Convention posts into advice on how things could have been differently. So much stuff happened it would be impossible to do a play by play.Â
This post is about advice to convention leadership and planners from a Delegate’s perspective on things to consider next time.Â
Breaks
First off the schedule and pace of the convention was way too demanding. No breaks for meals is a dirty trick of sorts to railroad through the leadership’s goals. The string of vote after vote and debate after debate made it so you had to choose, do I go move my truck so it doesn’t get towed, or do I stay to listen to Sen. Coleman? Since I figured the Senator’s campaign wouldn’t pay my impound recovery fee, I had to go move my truck.Â
On Friday the National Delegate & Alternate rancoring started late morning and ran right through the late afternoon. A lot of people had meters to plug or to get their vehicle out of the parking ramp the city was shutting down for cleaning. A little bit of compassion from the convention officials, and 30 minutes would have gone a long way. One person I asked said not to even bother.Â
Layout and Materials
I found having credentials and the vendor area down hallways and out of plain sight was a bad idea. I talked to one senior party staffer and got the impression it was not intentional and there was some remoarse. My main problem with it came when we finally started the real business of the convention on Friday morning and there were still no proposed rules distributed on the floor. When I went up to convention officials on the floor, a lot of them had no clue where they were. I had to race all the way to the other side of the convention center to grab a set from credentials.Â
Leadership did not send out a draft of them before the convention and encouraged people to register on Thursday night so we could just arrive and enter the convention hall Friday morning. There were no Rules there Thursday when I registered. I guess we were actually supposed to return to credentials Friday morning to check for new materials.Â
And I do fully understand and agree with the decision to hold the rules, but I believe it would have been a good decision to have the rules sitting at the convention doors on Friday morning. They were handing out a revised agenda at the doors, so it seemed to be a tactic to hide them. After complaints, convention staff did bring some over and walked the isles with them.
The vendor area was in the cafeteria area that you had to go looking for. Since we didn’t have time to break for lunch most people ran to the food kiosk in back of the Hall and ate on the convention floor or in the hallway outside the hall. The only vendor table that was in that area was the RNC convention table. I really think if you are going to charge vendors to come, you have to give them the best visibility you can.Â
In my humble opinion, credentials would have been better suited in the cafeteria area and vendors should have been outside the main convention hall.Â
Procedures
BPOU leaders are expected to follow along with the convention officials and carry out certain tasks. The only reason I actually (sort of know) what I am doing is because I have been to 3 state conventions. I think it would be wise to have a briefing or quick training session with BPOU leaders the day before the convention to go over what we have to do and when we have to do it.Â
Of course I would oppose this to be to instruct people how to vote on the leadership goals, but so that when our own Delegates and Alternates ask a question or have concerns we don’t have to say go ask someone. This is a small thing, but I think in the long run it would help.Â
I also think there needs to be a way for people to be recognized more easily. Sure some people abuse the point of information, (IE Quentin) but there were times where people were not recognized. I’m sure some of it was intentional, but I did talk to a few people who were at the head table and they said it was nearly impossible to see or hear anyone out in the crowd due to the speakers and the stage lights. Those poor pages and staffers with the orange flashlights must have sore arms today.Â
And since the mics were in the front of the isles and turned off until recognized, there was no way to get your points of order in before some votes were taken. I know this is common railroad procedure, but it does not leave the delegation feeling like they were able to be heard. Majority does rule, but the minority should have a chance to be heard up to a point.Â
More mics would be a good idea, and so would pages or staffers who could organize the people there. When I was there to speak to the Constitutional change on the Executive Committee powergrab, I suggested to the person working that mic to organize the people into 2 lines, one for, one against so you could easily figure out who should speak next. (The rules require alternating between for and against the motions)
I also know time and tradition have limiting the number of people for and against to 2 or 3, and that you can allow for a suspension of the rules to continue debate, but in the interest fairness and inclusiveness I really dislike how people can just ‘call the question’ to silence other’s opinions. I know, I know, Robert’s Rules, but some people abuse it. It would be nice to see a minimum number before debate on a motion could be closed. Some Chair’s discretion would be required, but there has to be a better way.Â
As for being recognized by the chair, again they had a hard time seeing people on the floor and having to stumble over people in the rows, then race to the front of the room, and then stand in line to try to raise a point is unrealistic. Most mics had a continual line of people waiting to say or move something and a lot of times people just jumped in front of everyone else. (IE Quentin)
We need to figure out a better and more organized way to do this. Maybe have a bell system or convention staff in the isles with radios connected to a person at the convention podium/chair so they could alert that they have a point of order, information, or clarification. I just think it would be more beneficial to the Delegation to do something to address this problem.Â
Materials
I think it would be a good idea to have the Rules state that anything being distributed needs to be checked by convention officials. There is nothing more annoying than having to stop everything because someone doesn’t like a lit piece. And multiple times when the order was given for BPOU chairs to collect them, we weren’t instructed on exactly what ones to collect so we had to try to figure out exactly what constituted the correct disclaimer or piece the motion maker was displeased about. Â
Maybe just set up a table somewhere and have someone there to check for disclaimers. Not substance, but simply to make sure it is following the rules of who is releasing the info and if they are a legitimate member of the Delegation.Â
Thur, Friday, Saturday
This was a really expensive convention for people to attend. Not only did we have to travel, but we had to take 2 days off work since they decided to start it on Thursday. And for those that were trying to run for National Delegate, unless they were supporting …… well, a lot of people were forced to come down even earlier meaning more work missed and hotel charges.Â
My tab for the weekend was probably close to $400 for lodging, food, gas, and parking (man I hate citied that see tourism and the act of parking a car as a revenue stream). Add to that missing work and it gets a bit painful to be simply a pawn or what leadership wants to happen. If you’re going to railroad everything, at least have the courtesy not to make us pay through the nose to be there and force us to choose between participating fully and eating. I really think this should have been a real weekend convention. Friday night, Saturday and then Sunday. Yeah, I am enjoying having a day to decompress and get stuff done before I go back to work, but…..Â
Ron Paul Banned
By barring Ron Paul from entering the building unless he endorsed John McCain (saw that in a news story from Chairman Carey) you set off for an ugly fight by disenfranchising a segment, albeit slim minority, of the delegation. Had he been allowed to speak, it would have been 15 minutes and under the control of the Chair.
Barring him was a mistake in my opinion. I’m far from one of his supporters and do question his and some of his supporters loyalty to the party, but he got more attention by being barred then from actually speaking at the Convention. It also solidified the position that leadership had railroaded their (McCain) slate through for Delegates and Alternates.Â
MoodÂ
Conventions should be fun and exciting events that people walk away from happy and satisfied and excited to go do electoral work for the party. In my opinion we did not leave this convention as one big happy family. No matter what side you were on, or if you were simply caught between the 2 factions, you shouldn’t be happy or proud of how things went.
I did my best to have my BPOU be able to walk away with the notion that we can still work together to get our own local candidates elected. I had my one little area of the convention to run/deal with, and I hope I did so with a gravitas and maturity so at the least SD51 can be united for a common cause, no matter who you supported for President back on Caucus night.Â
Conventions are the culmination and final time a party can come together to build momentum and unity for the election. From here on out it is election season. We need every single member of the delegation to be enthused to work for the party and satisfied enough to encourage others to work with them. We can’t simply be driven by the name on the ballot, that goes for all sides. We need to find our common shared principles and work together getting all the Republicans possible elected, who share as many of those as possible.
Learning ExperienceÂ
I hope this convention was not one leadership or the battling factions walk away with thinking of it as a victory or a failure. I hope this was a learning experience for both sides. I hope that the interaction and debate can help breach the existing gaps. Not only between the McCain and Paul camps, but also with us strict conservatives who found themselves between them, not fully backing either or what they ere fighting about.
Some of us are still hoping for a change in direction of the party leadership and top elected officials to majority making thinking and Reaganistic vision to grow our party by getting voters to realize they think like us, not changing our message to fit what pollsters think they want us, as Republicans, to support. The kind of coat tails the grassroots wants, where our conservative principles are what people are voting for and the Republican brand is universal up and down the ballot. Â
But I digress. As I put it to some Paul people, I didn’t get to vote for my Fred Thompson Delegates either. At one point I thought back to one of my first conventions and wondered if this thing was being made so unbearable that some people wouldn’t come back. I hope that wasn’t the intention.Â
It is up to leadership to inspire people to want to be apart of the party process, but also to include them. It is one thing to turn out voters, but it entirely different to have people take a weekend, drive to the southern part of the state, pay money, and help run this party. This can’t be a top down organization, it has to be one where even the smallest opinion and voices has a chance to be heard. Unless they don’t even get a chance to say what they wanted to say, they they won’t feel welcome.Â
Grassroots is more than a bumper sticker.
Sure the Ron Paul movement is a slim 15%(+/-) minority, but so was John McCain’s back on Caucus. We have some pretty serious rifts forming in this party and the way the convention was handled sure seemed to widen some of them.Â
As I said, I hope this was a learning experience that everyone can reflect on so next time will be different and leave people walking away excited for the next one.Â
Â
I’ll have more thoughts and advice later for Ron Paul people as well as the establishment/McCain/leadership folks.Â
Here’s my advice to party leadership:
The party has been shrinking and dying. A whole bunch of new blood just arrived, and they’re very energetic. Some BPOU and CD leaders have embraced this new energy and are channeling it effectively into local races. I’d never seen Carleton Crawford (5th CD chair) so excited about prospects in the various races within the 5th, because of all the new energy. He was grinning ear to ear telling me how well things are going with volunteers and filling vacancies.
Don’t Lock them out! Stop attacking and alienating those who would be your friends. It’s counterproductive. The presidential debate will have no impact on anything, so let the people have their say, and then let’s get on with stuff we can all work together on.
I have to disagree on calling the question.
In order to pass 2/3 have to vote.
Just because 10% of the people want to hear themselves speak should not require the 66% who want to get on to other business listen to them.
Also, the chair was way to nice about abuse of point of orders (which as I recall there never was an actually one). The second time Quentin got up to complain about his fear of paper, the chair should have warned him that if he brought up the same subject again, he would be asked to leave.
The purpose of rules are to keep someone from bringing up the same subject over and over until they finally get there way, once a decision is made we move on.
It was nice to see the chair actually do there job at the end and move things along, and good to see someone actually suspend the rules for a good reason and have a real debate (the cigarette plank).
I have no respect for the Ron Paul group.
I had a chance to talk to one of the mothers who teenage daughter was a teller.
She said the things that were written and drawn on the ballots were beyond tasteless.
It is hard to put a number on how large the Ron Paul contigent was. Whether they were 10% as suggested here or 25% as suggested at the State Central Committee meeting is debatable but the major grievances were the following:
1) Only 7 of the 14 people on the Conservative conscience slate for national delegate passed the nominating committee. As I recall no one from the alternate slate passed the nominating committe.
2) They were required to vote for 14 for the national delegate and alternate even though they wanted to vote for fewer. This required them to vote for people they did not support in order to vote for people they did support.
3) Before a complete discussion of the rules could be held the question was called and discussion ended by a vote from the convention.
Many delegates did not like the repeated requests to suspend the rules and the general behavior of the Paul delegates. What upset so many was the impression that the convention was rigged to prevent a fair vote on the national delegates. Given #2 above and the fact that only 17 people were on the alternate ballot meant that 11 of the 14 people on the Conservative Team alternate slate had to win. I will grant that how the rules were passed and the motions to suspend were defeated technically followed Robert’s Rules. But a strong case can be made that the appearance of following rules was a mask. The party leaders, using the nominating and rules committees, having people at the microphone call the question before any debate, combined with the expected tendency of the delegates to follow the party leaders, got the result they wanted.
Yes, the Republican party is a private organization and many delegates may be offended by Quentin’s comparison to Zimbabwe but having a contest where people have to vote for people they don’t want in order to have their ballot counted looks very bad.
Well, I got 42.x percent of the vote as a pretty obvious Ron Paul Republican, so I was thinking we had closer to 35 – 40% of the delegation, which would roughly match up with my numbers expectation. There were around 500 people outside to hear Ron Paul speak (I’m not good with crowd estimates. Were there more?) Not a majority, but not a very slim minority either. If all of our delegates and alternates had shown, we might have gotten to a majority.
Sam,
To say you have no respect for the Ron Paulers as a whole because some wrote bad things on a ballot is irrational.
A McCain supporter went to the mic and said it was Paulers that were holding up the vote yes and no signs in the isles. After he did it a 2nd time I told him it was obviously not us. I asked him how he knew we were behind it. He said he just assumed it. I asked him to stop saying things he did not know to be true. At that point he said we were all jerks and it didn’t matter what he said about us publicly.
So Sam you have some bad behavior on your side as well. I would say publicly speaking lies about a whole group is as great a sin as writing some bad words on a piece of paper. Stop whining and also stop judging a whole group by the actions of a few.
To the rest of you who support Coleman I can only ask Why???? Maybe his up coming vote on Cap and Trade? Previous vote on drilling in Alaska? Federal money for cancer research? (I didn’t find that responsibility in the Constitution).
Here is a suggestion for the future. At Meeker BPOU Rep Urdahl was thinking about voting to override the gov’s veto of the gas tax. We held up his endorsement until he promised to vote with the Governor. Why wasn’t that done with Coleman? With gas at nearly $4 a gallon I think many delegates would have supported a demand for him to vote against cap and trade. I was at the mic to do so, but leadership wasn’t interested in any debate at that time. Just a yes vote for endorsement and they did not even ask if there were any against. It was a pitiful display. Absolutely no pressure is put on these politicians by the delegates. We are nothing but a bunch of lap dogs for them. Maybe endorsement should have to be earned and not just assumed?
Politicking the floor and harassing volunteers are two different things.
Complaining about people walking the floor and pieces of paper is stupid – writing obscene message to give to volunteers is tasteless.
Unfortunately, conventions are the big league of politics and you better be prepared for the inside pitch.
If you wanted to let people know that they were not your people, you should have gone to a microphone and said something – it wasn’t like we didn’t have multiple stupid announcements being made as points of information and/or order.
As for 40%, then how did the call for the question pass, it requires 2/3.
And on all the other votes – it wasn’t even close.
My guess is that the 40% reflect people who are not happy with Pawlenty and Coleman and used you as a safe place to throw away a vote.
While I am not a big fan of the rule – every convention has always had the requirement to vote for the total number, this wasn’t a new rule. The whining about just helped to reinforced the stereotype that most of the Ron Paul folks were mostly new people who were only attending to support Ron and not true long term Republicans
You won’t find me defending Coleman but I can understand others reasoning.
Messing with a Rep who does not have a competitive race vs. trying to damage a RINO who at least votes our way 50% on veto proof items.
Lincoln’s name was mentioned a number of times at the convention in a very positive way. I realize he is the father of our party. Here is a 59 minute cspan interview about him. It breaks the myth that we have been taught all these years.
I think it may challenge what many of you think about him.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=dilorenzo%20cspan&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SUNA&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv#
Sam
I did go to the mic and say they were not our people.
My point is that I did not say I lost respect for McCain supporters, as you did for Paul’s. I did lose respect for that one person, but not for everyone in that group. As far as what is worse, I seem to remember Thou shall not bear false witness? I wouldn’t have even mentioned it here except for your comments.
It seems many of you establishment types have a very low threshold for supporting folks like Coleman? You give up dissent for 50% of the time he upholds vetoes? Can you imagine how much different they would vote if they thought the delegates had any backbone and might withhold the endorsement?
Sam don’t take this personally, but you sound a little spineless.
Another question for everyone to think about. If politicians are OUR SERVANTS, then we must be the MASTERS. Why then when they walk in the room do we treat them like royalty and not question them on their failures.
Liberty,
Whining and complaining is easy – getting something accomplished is hard.
Withholding endorsement of Coleman would not get him to change a vote, but might very well cause fatal harm to his re-election. And again the numbers are close now in the Senate so his occasional support for the Republican party is the best we can hope for now from the candidates we have to choice from.
So why support him – please give me my alternatives? Right now none.
And don’t confuse explaining why it is not a good idea to do damage to our parties candidate vs. thinking he is a great candidate.
Sort of like President, the only candidates with any delegates are Huckabee and Romney – Ron Paul can even place Second in a two man race right now (he continues to get third) So even if I didn’t disagree with his view, I am realistic enough to know who can and can not win.
So I look at my real options – for senate right now Norm or Al, for President McCain or Obama.
Given that choice – I know who I will support.
As for the bearing false witness part – I didn’t say it was right, I said it was to be expected.
Again, it wasn’t like it was one are two items – the mother indicated there were many.
And as for Politicians, I do think we give them too much deference (and I for one don’t think they should be delegates, we have lots of more deserving folks) but when is the last time you stopped Norm or went to his office to discuss policy with him – I have.
But the endorsing convention is not the time or the place to have that discussion – like it or not – it is part of the election cycle.
Sam,
You are probably right on the how the convention process works. My hope is that will change. It did in Meeker County, I think it can happen state wide. These politicians should be fearful of coming back to the delegates after betraying conservative principles.
[...] to do a play by play.? This post is about advice to convention leadership and planners from a Deleghttp://www.residualforces.com/2008/06/01/08-state-convention-logistics/Personal Tech Washington PostThe Washington Post’s Rob Pegoraro discusses his recent reviews and [...]
Sam,
I am thinking of a whole lot of things to say to you right now… but I will only state one. Do you realize that if more people would follow their conscience McCain would not be where he is now? I hear far to many people say things like I used to support ______, but now I support McCain for the good of the party. “For the good of the party”- HA! Other candidates (and just not mine) would be better for the party than him. Enough said.
Cls,
I agree and many people (including myseld) did that – look at the MN vote in the Caucus.
The point is that while Romney, Huckabee, Newt may all be better than McCain – McCain has won the nomination.
So we can either try and damage him, and insure the democrats win or at least try and do no harm.
The majority of the party have spoken – I may not be happy, but either I respect that I don’t always win.
[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptBy barring Ron Paul from entering the building unless he endorsed John McCain (saw that in a news story from Chairman Carey) you set off for an ugly fight by disenfranchising a segment, albeit slim minority, of the delegation. … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptBy barring Ron Paul from entering the building unless he endorsed John McCain (saw that in a news story from Chairman Carey) you set off for an ugly fight by disenfranchising a segment, albeit slim minority, of the delegation. … [...]
[...] to do a play by play.? This post is about advice to convention leadership and planners from a Deleghttp://www.residualforces.com/2008/06/01/08-state-convention-logistics/GAME NEWS: A PC legend jumps to consoles AP via Yahoo! News news from the virtual [...]
As a 61 year old, twice wounded highly decorated Vietnam War combat veteran, ex-economist, theoretical physicist, mathematician, scientist, legal immigrant, newly envigorated political activist by Ron Paul’s message of what the Republicans used to stand for, and having spent spent an expensive weekend in Rochester, I was extremely
disconcerted not at the passion of the new and younger RP enthusiasts but at both the party leadership and the the lemming like brain dead behavior of the rest crying and demanding: “Give us Barabas!Give us Barabas!” Very Very Christian indeed.
As a candidate for national delegate and having paid the party for the privilege inboth time and money, I wasn’t notified either by email or mail the time and place the nominating committe was to hold the interviews. I only found out late Thursday night, though I had arrived 9 AM the same day and checked in before noon.
Premeditated or intential by the leadership? I’ll let you guess. It now seems that it wouldn’t have mattered anyway for I would have forthrightly indicated that I would not under any circumstance vote for Liberal McCain. seems now that such a response would have automatically disqualified me anyhow. How wonderfully Christian. Indeed, If I were to vote for McCain to be a “good” Republican, how do I justify that I’m also voting for Kennedy, Feingold, Gore, and Lieberman?
What we all witnessed in Rochester has been played similarly if not worse in other States as well. Thanks to not only the concerted and deliberate mass media blackout but also to those good Republicans that have not even taken the time to learn about RP’s actual platform but merely judge the candidate by MSM sound bites or by uninformed heresay, I see very little hope for the Party’s credibility as the party of inclusion, its current platform even if adhered to by those elected, or its future. Very sad indeed for the America than once was!