As far as the GOP leadership position- we do need leadership that isn’t intent on railroading the grassroots into their big box choices in candidates, but instead is respectful to all voices. I attended numerous BPOU conventions, CD6 & CD3, and state. In no way, shape, or form can the outgoing leadership be described as respectful and open to all voices. Slanders and insults were common, nominations tightly screened and forbidden outright. We need leadership that sees to it that no such tactics ever prevail again, as opposed to leadership that quickly acts to squelch the grassroots.

The issue currently in the ’shaking up’ of the party seems to becoming a battle with the moderates who think we need to be more ‘inclusive’ (again a silly term since that is based on identity politics) and push aside the ‘Social Conservatives’ (whom I call Moral Conservatives since that is a more fitting term)on one side and the aforementioned Social/Moral Conservatives. Problem is, in my mind, they are both wrong.

The idea that this country is ‘center-right’ is not without merit. When given a clear message and choice Conservatism wins a majority of the time. We just need to relearn that Conservatism is Principles Not issues. Positions on Issues stem from Principles held not the other way around. It is possible to have varying stances on same issue all stemming from Conservative Principles. And once we actually remember that then to do something about it. Would that require hard work? Absolutely, things we feel are important to us usually are.

In regards to the election, a lot of it had to do with the candidate. Again it falls back to the ‘Me-too Republicanism’. It says something when the most energy the campaign got was with the selection of Sarah Palin. Someone much more Conservative than the nominee. Some credit goes to Obama of course, but think about it. What was one of his biggest selling points? Cutting taxes for 95% of the population. Forget the fact that was he was stating was nothing more than smoke and mirrors what did people hear? “Tax cut”. Last I looked tax cuts were a trademark of the Republicans? Apparently not anymore.

3rd party. Great in theory, unlikely in practice. Why pick up our ball and go play in another playground when there is one right here that we like. We just need to take the playground back from those who would want it to like the playground on the left side of the street.

In regards to the Presidential election, the reason we lost isn’t because we didn’t get a candidate that was conservative enough. We lost because, rightly or wrongly, people were looking for the quickest way out of an unpopular war, and, mostly, because the economy is in the crapper and “change” sounded good to most people who were in the center. Give a certain amount of credit to Obama too. He is a great politician. Too bad his policies are so far off.

I think your facts are in error, or somehow you are drawing a conclusion contrary to where your own facts would lead. John McCain was the most centrist Republican we have run in many years. He was celebrated as a moderate. Barack Obama was more liberal than 99% of sitting US Senators, yet you know what happened.

Republicans don’t win by moving left, they win by drawing moderates to the right, where people naturally live, and by getting the right out to vote rather than sitting at home. We are a center-right nation; we just get fooled into voting against ourselves too often.

On the other hand, conservatives keep telling us that the whole Party has to be “more conservative” to win elections, and that doesn’t make any sense either. It’s just not that simple.

We have successfully purged many of the centrists from the party with all the “RINO” name-calling and such. We keep it up and we will continue to loose them. Now we have some people on the far-right who are threatening to leave and form a far-right extremist party. I have 2 bits of news for you; 1) It’s been tried before (see Constitution Party, Marianne Stebbens) 2) They get tired of irrelevancy and come back.

My vote is going to go to whoever will bring this family back together, who can convince this party that it’s ok to have a family quarrel, but who can remind us that, in the end, those of us play by the rules and who generally believe in traditional values and limited government are truly members of the Republican family. We need people in leadership that communicate with clarity that, as long as you can put personal aspirations aside, you will always have a seat at the supper table, even if you don’t agree with 110% platform. This is the only way to make the party relevant again, and oh how I want to be relevant again!

Unfortunately, Andy isn’t the only one with this particular fantasy. Now if new leadership gets us a 3x to 10x (or more) improvement in fundraising, a dedicated 24/7 messaging operation, a way through the liberal media filter, and a huge increase in grassroots enthusiasm and performance, I’m all for them, whoever they are. But if all we have for candidates are the real human beings Andy has speculated about here, they’re going to need a HUGE amount of help from a huge number of people, or it isn’t going to happen at all.

But clearly, the next election can be won by simply electing the candidate for chair that Andy endorses. I look forward to electing Andy’s choice for chair and then taking it easy for the next election cycle!

No more phone banks, lit drops, volunteering, or fund raising for me. If I knew that it was all about having the right (haha “right”) State Chair, I would have listened to Andy long ago.

Look, I don’t care who wants to sit in the big chair, and I don’t think it makes that much difference. The person that I want in the job, and will vote for, is the person who wants the job, HAS THE BEST IDEAS, and has the people skills to get the rest of us, including those perpetual grousers like AAA, in line.