What did the new RNC rules “fix” this week?

posted at 1:01 pm on January 25, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

We had plenty of warning that this was coming and the debate has been running around on the back burner the whole time, but the RNC has now moved almost unanimously to invoke a portion of the new rules they desired.

The new 2016 rules will make it much harder for states to cut in line in the nomination process and will help Republicans avoid a repeat of a drawn out, bloody primary many believe damaged Mitt Romney’s chances in 2012 of defeating President Obama…

The new rules will help protect early-voting states — Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada — from others who want to rush up to the front, and allow the party to hold an earlier convention, as they look to unite and raise more money for the general election.

The four designated early states will be required to hold their contests in February. States that vote between March 1 and March 14 will be required to award their delegates proportionally, weakening their impact, while states with primaries after that will assign their delegates in a winner-take-all contest, making them much more consequential in the delegate count and adding an incentive to wait.

There were (and still are) a number of different issues under discussion, but apparently the only one that was on the table this week was the issue of primaries. It seems that at no point did anyone seriously bring up the question of why the same four states always have to go first, but I suppose that’s a battle for another day. But the changes they made are still going to have a big impact. They’ll use the power of the whip to ensure that the schedule is compressed and that none of the bigger states jump the line. There are several issues in play here, and Allahpundit was already breaking them down over a month ago.

Evidently the RNC is preparing harsh new rules to penalize a state if it defies the primary schedule and tries to move up its election. Florida typically does that, moving from March to February, which in turn forces Iowa and New Hampshire to move from February to January to retain their pride of place. Supposedly the RNC’s going to take away 90 percent of Florida’s delegates this time if they try that again. They also might dock delegates from any candidate who participates in a debate that’s not formally sanctioned by the RNC. Show of hands: Anyone think Reince Priebus and his team have the stones to declare Florida’s results effectively null and void just before a general election where that state might (again) decide the presidency?

Apparently we have the answer to that question now and it’s a yes. I’m not sure what the results will be, but if the RNC wipes out all but a handful of Florida’s votes (or those of any other large state) there’s going to be a lot of sound and fury at the convention. Is that a net plus when balanced against the fact that some less well funded candidates may wind up being rushed to the door by the shortened season? I can’t help but think there’s some trouble brewing on the horizon.

One other issue which was not voted on yesterday was the question of debates. Taking control of who will moderate them away from the major media organizations has some obvious benefits. But if you limit the number of them you at least partially cut the legs out from under candidates who lack the backing of the big, industrial size donors. They have to rely much more heavily on earned media, and the debates are their very best chance to strut their stuff in front of the entire country. Will the really penalize the delegate count of a candidate who takes part in a “non-approved” debate? Again, Allahpundit had some early observations on that one.

Anyone think they’re going to take away a third of, say, Ted Cruz’s delegates if he decides to participate in a debate sponsored by FreedomWorks? They’re paper tigers.

If they’re willing to shoot down states for jumping the line, they may just feel they can do precisely that to candidates. And in the hypothetical case AP posits above, the RNC may just find themselves with a full blown revolt on their hands. If people are upset enough to stay home in droves on election day in November 2016, the stated intent of these changes will backfire, but we won’t know about that one until the next meeting and vote.

The other rule that was passed involved the proportional vs winner take all rules. Proportional awarding of delegates looks like one of the least controversial items on the agenda because it seems to be the change which would provide a more level playing field. When there have only been a couple of debates and the only access candidates have to potential voters is paid media, the well funded “establishment” candidate (man, I hate that term) has a huge advantage, particularly in large, expensive media markets like Florida. Going with a plan that divides up the pie a bit can allow a less donor-heavy candidate to hang in there longer and get their message out.

So… what did you think of the changes? And when they vote on the rules regarding the debates, which way do you see it going? Personally I think the RNC will be a bit more timid on that one.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Not one penny…

OmahaConservative on January 25, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Not sure what to think of this, yet.

listens2glenn on January 25, 2014 at 1:06 PM

…and the GOP mandarins will be walking around in a daze after the election and muttering ‘enthusiasm gap’ over and over. Put money on it.

ElectricPhase on January 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM

So… what did you think of the changes? And when they vote on the rules regarding the debates, which way do you see it going?

I think if the GOP votes for amnesty, I’m staying home regardless.

BKeyser on January 25, 2014 at 1:09 PM

I like the rule that Speakers obsessed with fake tans are barred from voting for Amnesty.

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 1:11 PM

I will not vote for the lesser of two evils and neither will most conservatives this time around. Given that fact the only possible course of action that will provide a GOP president is to nominate a conservative and turn out the base.

Those are the facts.

Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:12 PM

Jeb Bush, Christie, et al will not get the vote of the conservative base. In other words GOP, if you do not nominate a conservative you will lose. So do the RATIONAL thing and nominate a conservative.

Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:15 PM

The rule requiring Miss Lindsey to have a vasectomy is commendable but pointless.

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 1:20 PM

It seems that at no point did anyone seriously bring up the question of why the same four states always have to go first, but I suppose that’s a battle for another day.

argh! WHY didn’t they talk about this?!! i hate how the same states always go first. it’s obviously unfair to other states, and yet no one ever does anything about it.

I will not vote for the lesser of two evils and neither will most conservatives this time around. Given that fact the only possible course of action that will provide a GOP president is to nominate a conservative and turn out the base.

Those are the facts.

Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:12 PM

i feel the same way. i refuse to vote for someone just because they have an “R” next to their name.

Sachiko on January 25, 2014 at 1:21 PM

also, i refuse to vote for someone because they are supposedly “electable.” that word is a complete joke to me.

Sachiko on January 25, 2014 at 1:22 PM

It’s their frickin party. They can do what they want. And what they want is to be the crony corporate wing of a one party state.

kcewa on January 25, 2014 at 1:24 PM

On their own

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 1:27 PM

The rule requiring Miss Lindsey to have a vasectomy is commendable but pointless.

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 1:20 PM

A hysterectomy is much more likely.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:29 PM

The new rules will help protect early-voting states — Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada — from others who want to rush up to the front, and allow the party to hold an earlier convention, as they look to unite and raise more money for the general election.

I understand this is a tradition, but it’s a handicap for the GOP right off the bat. NH’s open primary and liberal hi jinx exposes the divide between the moderate and conservative wings of the party. Why would the RNC just reconfirm it? Jeb, Christie, and another run by McCain would receive the vote in NH and NV. And, maybe IA.

BedBug on January 25, 2014 at 1:30 PM

I’m getting the sense that these rule changes will benefit the Establishment the most.

joekenha on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

OT, but all is on topic these days.

What qualifies this witch for this job?

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

At the end of the day we end up with an establishment RINO then let’s put up a 3rd Party -Tea Part Candidate. We will then Own the GOP lock stock and barrel.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

I think the proportional awarding of delegates in the early states is a big deal. And a good deal.

Norbitz on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

Postage rates are going up tomorrow so return all those pre-paid reply envelopes you received from the RNC and state GOP on Monday.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:33 PM

I can honestly say I despise the GOP more than the Democrats. The liberals NEVER throw their base under the bus. Their leadership is doctrinaire and ideologically liberal (Pelosi, Reid, Obama) and they are constantly pushing to enact their philosophy. We have nothing. I feel the base is not long for this party.

AmeriCuda on January 25, 2014 at 1:34 PM

If Reince Priebus had any scruples, he would have either resigned or purchased a hari kari knife the day after the 2012 election.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:34 PM

A hysterectomy is much more likely.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:29 PM

Or maybe a hysteria-ectomy?

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 1:34 PM

The rule requiring Miss Lindsey to have a vasectomy is commendable but pointless.

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Possible early thread winner.

Jazz Shaw on January 25, 2014 at 1:36 PM

Not.One.Cent.

ladyingray on January 25, 2014 at 1:36 PM

Meh. I don’t care. If there is no one in the primary I like, I won’t vote in the primary. I’ll vote in the general election to vote against the democrat.

Vince on January 25, 2014 at 1:37 PM

We have nothing. I feel the base is not long for this party.

AmeriCuda on January 25, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Yep!

Vince on January 25, 2014 at 1:39 PM

What qualifies this witch for this job?

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

She probably donated to Obama’s campaign or was a money bundler. I was in the Air Force, but there’s no way I would want my children in today’s military.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Possible early thread winner.
Jazz Shaw on January 25, 2014 at 1:36 PM

The un-seriousness of the comments to HA make this a very boring blog to follow. It’s like 12 year old boys making fun of the guy with a crush on a girl. I used to find this site relevant… Looks like you guys have gone the way of the RNC.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:41 PM

We have nothing. I feel the base is not long for this party.

AmeriCuda on January 25, 2014 at 1:34 PM

The GOP may not get many votes, but it will have a lot of Chamber of Commerce money.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:43 PM

The un-seriousness of the comments to HA make this a very boring blog to follow. It’s like 12 year old boys making fun of the guy with a crush on a girl. I used to find this site relevant… Looks like you guys have gone the way of the RNC.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:41 PM

The X is on the top right side of your browser. See you later!

joekenha on January 25, 2014 at 1:44 PM

Possible early thread winner.
Jazz Shaw on January 25, 2014 at 1:36 PM

The un-seriousness of the comments to HA make this a very boring blog to follow. It’s like 12 year old boys making fun of the guy with a crush on a girl. I used to find this site relevant… Looks like you guys have gone the way of the RNC.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:41 PM

Your comment is off topic. You’re part of the problem.

BedBug on January 25, 2014 at 1:45 PM

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:41 PM

Please don’t take your lonely Saturday out on us.

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 1:47 PM

The X is on the top right side of your browser. See you later!
joekenha on January 25, 2014 at 1:44 PM

You are so predictable and this was too easy.

You make rules like Barak Obama makes rules.
Afraid of diversity of opinion.
You really are a joke, I mean “joek”

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:48 PM

OT….reporting from azgop meeting..
Getting ready for resolutions… don’t know if they have signatures to bring McCain censure up for a resolution vote

cmsinaz on January 25, 2014 at 1:50 PM

The RNC basically has no clue why the GOP lost the 2 election cycles. Let me give them a clue. First, in 2008, there was little chance any Republican was going to beat Barack Obama. He was willing to lie about what he’d do, the meme was there that the country was ready to elect a black President, and the Republican brand, such as it was, had been severely tainted by the endless attack from the Democrats and their media wing (remember the “culture of corruption”?).

In 2010, the Democrats were caught completely by surprise when the tea party mobilized and actually showed up to vote. The Republicans were caught by surprise too, because they were only prepared to defend enough seats to maintain what they had, but they actually got control of the House and moved up in the Senate. Had the Republicans actually realized they were in a race that could have changed things, they would have given the Senate candidates much more support. Instead they let the Democrats label them as tea party wackos and never gave them the support that would put them over the top.

Finally, in 2012, the Democrats woke up and knew the 2010 election was not a fluke. They mobilized all the forces necessary to win. They got election supervisors, the IRS, the DOJ, and the unions all involved to make sure there was no more 2010. Their media wing helped where they could, Candy Crowley during a debate, and the others with many of the fabricated negative stories about Mitt Romney. The republican establishment sat back, knowing they would keep the House, and allowed this to happen.

Now, the RNC is going to listen to the Democrats tell them how they can win, and do everything they can to show how much they believe the Democrats are concerned for their fate. What killed Republicans, in 2012, was the endless debates which got to the point where the media was allowed to get out all their talking points and Republicans, once Newt was knocked out, showed how Democrat lite would run.

If they put out Christie as a candidate, we’ll lose again. Democrat lite does not win elections. Who should be the candidate? Mention a name and the one that makes the Democrats the most apoplectic is the one.

bflat879 on January 25, 2014 at 1:51 PM

I will not vote for the lesser of two evils and neither will most conservatives this time around. Given that fact the only possible course of action that will provide a GOP president is to nominate a conservative and turn out the base.

Those are the facts.

Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:12 PM

Jeb Bush, Christie, et al will not get the vote of the conservative base. In other words GOP, if you do not nominate a conservative you will lose. So do the RATIONAL thing and nominate a conservative.

Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Yes.

Yes.

davidk on January 25, 2014 at 1:52 PM

President Obama to announce executive actions on job training, retirement security in State of the Union address – @AP

davidk on January 25, 2014 at 1:53 PM

We have nothing. I feel the base is not long for this party.

AmeriCuda on January 25, 2014 at 1:34 PM

The GOP may not get many votes, but it will have a lot of Chamber of Commerce money.

bw222 on January 25, 2014 at 1:43 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/24/Lindsey-Graham-I-embrace-being-a-Chamber-of-Commerce-Republican

davidk on January 25, 2014 at 1:57 PM

Yawn… time for a Third Party…

Khun Joe on January 25, 2014 at 1:58 PM

My family moved to Columbia Maryland while I was in college and lived there for 12 years, only moving away this May. I am in shock, HotAit should have a thread for this. Another shooting in a upper middle class community….

libfreeordie on January 25, 2014 at 2:01 PM

I have said for decades that the only fair method of selecting the order of state primaries is to reward success and penalize failure.

Take 1960 the first with 50 states and take the number of electoral college votes each state has and assign an arbitrary primary election date six months before the general election. Now if a state is successful and gains population and representation they may move up one week for each electoral vote they gain. If they lose population and electoral votes they are a failure and must move back one week for each vote lost.

meci on January 25, 2014 at 2:02 PM

As long as BO has a free reign with executive orders he will set the agenda for the next election. Vulnerable Dems will not have to go on the record as being fore or against his liberal agenda.

Obama may be crooked, corrupt and the worst president of our lifetime, but Pinocchio is being manipulated by a political genius.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Considering how and for whom Maryland votes a big increase in violence should not surprise.

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 2:10 PM

I think if the GOP votes for amnesty, I’m staying home regardless.

BKeyser on January 25, 2014 at 1:0

As will I, regardless whether that push comes before the midterms or before the general election.

thatsafactjack on January 25, 2014 at 2:11 PM

Not one penny…

OmahaConservative on January 25, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Why, OC? What’s the deal with this rule change?

Jaibones on January 25, 2014 at 2:11 PM

So, if the RNC decide to go after states concerning elections, all the state has to do is state that the RNC is harassing the state and the citizens of said state during the election and get sued.

Hindsight, it is hard.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Sooo… Cannibal-rat-carrying ghost ship is most likely a not a hoax?

(Makes sense in my mind to link the two stories. LOL)

Fallon on January 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM

Crap. Once more with feeling:

Sooo… Cannibal-rat-carrying ghost ship is most likely not a hoax?

Grrr…

Fallon on January 25, 2014 at 2:20 PM

My family moved to Columbia Maryland while I was in college and lived there for 12 years, only moving away this May. I am in shock, HotAit should have a thread for this. Another shooting in a upper middle class community….

libfreeordie on January 25, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Why don’t they identify the shooter?

He’s dead, dead, dead, yet NO word on him.

He’s very likely NOT a TEApertier. If he were, it w/b all over the news.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:21 PM

At the end of the day we end up with an establishment RINO then let’s put up a 3rd Party -Tea Part Candidate. We will then Own the GOP lock stock and barrel.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

Personally, I’d love for a TEA Party candidate to win the Republican primary and the 2016 election. Can you just hear the discussion with Boehner… you will pass these budget cuts (actual reductions in spending, not lesser increases)… if you don’t, I will start a new party while in office and take the Republican base (70% of the party) with me. And you will be a leader of a dead party, Mr. Whig.

dominigan on January 25, 2014 at 2:21 PM

Fallon on January 25, 2014 at 2:20 PM

I’ll vote you a thread winner for that one, even with the typo.

ElectricPhase on January 25, 2014 at 2:23 PM

Lindsey Graham: I ‘Embrace’ Being a ‘Chamber of Commerce Republican’

You and the chamber, get fluked, traitors.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:23 PM

but Pinocchio is being manipulated by a political genius.

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Soros is no dummy – he exploits the sheepledom from both sides.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:24 PM

A very good rule change that got made was moving the convention to possibly June..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 2:26 PM

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 1:41 PM

Don’t go. Just ignore. Anyone saying that so-so “wins a thread” is just a bunch of hot air, signifying absolutely nothing. It’s about as valuable as being “first”, aka Bishop.

Certainly you are stronger than that. Just do your thing, whatever that is. Ignore all other, and let all other ignore you.

Thank your creator for being YOU.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Lindsey Graham: I ‘Embrace’ Being a ‘Chamber of Commerce Republican’

You and the chamber, get fluked, traitors.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:23 PM

Yes. We know this about Graham and the rest of the GOPe. That’s why they aren’t getting my vote.

When the political class openly chooses the chamber of commerce and the rest of their big business donors over the constituents who elected them, and the citizens of this nation, it’s time to throw the bums out and elect some real public servants.

thatsafactjack on January 25, 2014 at 2:29 PM

it’s time to throw the bums out and elect some real public servants.

thatsafactjack on January 25, 2014 at 2:29 PM

At this point I respect any random dude/dudette from the white/yellow pages, really.

The founding fathers have convulsions in their graves. I really despise the Rs more than the Utopian thuggish Ds. The former enable the latter. The latter are just themselves, on drugs.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:32 PM

Hopefully they’ll reduce the number of preznitial primary debates down from 4000 to two or three?

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 2:33 PM

My family moved to Columbia Maryland while I was in college and lived there for 12 years, only moving away this May. I am in shock, HotAit should have a thread for this. Another shooting in a upper middle class community….

libfreeordie on January 25, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Ban all upper middle class communities.

BedBug on January 25, 2014 at 2:35 PM

A gift for all of you

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:36 PM

A gift for all of you

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:36 PM

If he gets stuck, drag him through :)

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:36 PM

I’m getting the sense that these rule changes will benefit the Establishment the most.

joekenha on January 25, 2014 at 1:32 PM

you had doubts about that?
the GOPe is the RNC … which is why I do not give them money.
I will support candidates … but not the RNC …
they maybe in for a shock …. they piss off people again …
by not nominating an actual conservative
we will probably have president Hillary ….

conservative tarheel on January 25, 2014 at 2:37 PM

Columbia Maryland should move out of Columbia Maryland!!!!

———- Godfather Cuomo

viking01 on January 25, 2014 at 2:41 PM

I will not vote for the lesser of two evils and neither will most conservatives this time around. Given that fact the only possible course of action that will provide a GOP president is to nominate a conservative and turn out the base.
Those are the facts.
Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:12 PM
Jeb Bush, Christie, et al will not get the vote of the conservative base. In other words GOP, if you do not nominate a conservative you will lose. So do the RATIONAL thing and nominate a conservative.
Meat Fighter on January 25, 2014 at 1:15 PM
Yes.
Yes.
davidk on January 25, 2014 at 1:52 PM

I agree. I will not cast another vote for a Bush or other establishment patsy.

h a p f a t on January 25, 2014 at 2:44 PM

thatsafactjack on January 25, 2014 at 2:29 PM

Sorry that you feel frustrated..:(

PS..Good to see you..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:32 PM

Sorry that you are frustrated but electing folks out of a phone book is not a good idea..:(

PS..Good to see you..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Eh … I hope the GOP finds another base …

They have lost me forever.

HondaV65 on January 25, 2014 at 2:50 PM

Hindsight, it is hard.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:17 PM

Uppie! Where you been?

Jaibones on January 25, 2014 at 2:52 PM

Uppie! Where you been?

Jaibones on January 25, 2014 at 2:52 PM

In hiding. I am only around for a bit. How are you doing? Nice to see familiar faces/names around.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 2:48 PM

At this point it w/b better, alas.

Nice to ‘see’ you too. Get a little more annoyed, will ya? :)

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:58 PM

we will probably have president Hillary ….

conservative tarheel on January 25, 2014 at 2:37 PM

“At this point what difference does it make?” — Hillary/Christie

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM

Iowa has voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in 6 of the last 7 elections. (Bush won by .67% in 2004.)

Why do they continue to be rewarded with being first, especially with the caucus system subject to manipulation?

MichaelGabriel on January 25, 2014 at 3:03 PM

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Good to see you posting again..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:07 PM

There is no more room in the GOP for insurgent candidates like Ronald Reagan and Ron Paul. The Republican Party is now the exclusive property of the GOP establishment.

FloatingRock on January 25, 2014 at 3:07 PM

The GOP will set the stage for a milk toast looser in 2016. Strong consertives will have to understand that we cannot take over the GOP by playing their game and voting for the least offensive candidate like we have been doing. We need to change tactics:
1. Keep the House and retake the Senate
2. Make a serious attempt to nominate a consertive on the 2016 GOP ticket
3. If a RINO is the choice then we need to run a Tea Partier as a 3rd Party for president
4. Te Democrat will win the Whitehouse, we will nullify with congress
5. The Consertives/Tea Party will make the rule for the GOP or make them irrelevant because they will have NO BASE!

SayNo2-O on January 25, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Nice to ‘see’ you too. Get a little more annoyed, will ya? :)

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2014 at 2:58 PM

lolz..I hear you..:)

I think we should go for trying to elect more folks to the GOP that are willing to promote the GOP platform and have the ability to “sell” that message..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:15 PM

FloatingRock on January 25, 2014 at 3:07 PM

I disagree..Reagan was not an insurgent..As for Ron Paul I have no comment..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:18 PM

My family moved to Columbia Maryland while I was in college and lived there for 12 years, only moving away this May. I am in shock, HotAit should have a thread for this. Another shooting in a upper middle class community….

libfreeordie on January 25, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Maybe after the facts have been released so we have something to comment on other than the fact that it was an uppper middle class neighborhood.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:19 PM

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:55 PM

How have you been?
thomasaur

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Hindsight, it is hard.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:17 PM

One can’t view their ‘hind’ when they have their head up it.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:22 PM

How have you been?
thomasaur

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:20 PM

Good Thom. :) nice to see you around.

Been super busy.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Been super busy.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Hope all is well with you and yours. I have been busy myself, moved back to the Grand Canyon.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:32 PM

I disagree..Reagan was not an insurgent..

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Yes he was. He was an insurgent when he supported Goldwater against the Eastern establishment in ’64 and when he ran in the primaries against Ford.

kcewa on January 25, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Hope all is well with you and yours. I have been busy myself, moved back to the Grand Canyon.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:32 PM

Be safe on you move.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 3:33 PM

They need to add a rule that states with open primaries are only award half the delegates of those with closed primaries.

agmartin on January 25, 2014 at 3:36 PM

I have a better idea: How about any state that polls in favor of a northeastern moderate or anyone from the Bush family just automatically loses all of their delegates.

TBSchemer on January 25, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Be safe on you move.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Thanks, I am already here.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 25, 2014 at 3:41 PM

And while we’re at it, let’s eliminate the delegates from states that poll for southwestern, warhawk, immigration warriors. That’s also a movie we’ve seen before.

TBSchemer on January 25, 2014 at 3:43 PM

kcewa on January 25, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Okay I was wrong..he did support Goldwater..I will grant you that point..but I don’t consider him an insurgent..he was very mainstream..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM

I’ll take the contrarian view and argue that this helps popular conservative candidates like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, especially Paul because of the networks his father built in the early states. With the winner-take-all rule for the latter states, candidates that have the ability to raise money can keep the race close and pull it out in the end.

midgeorgian on January 25, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Okay I was wrong..he did support Goldwater..I will grant you that point..but I don’t consider him an insurgent..he was very mainstream..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Maybe when you compare some of his positions to the more extreme conservatives today (like me), but he wasn’t considered mainstream in the Republican party of the 70′s. Gerald Ford, Rockefeller and G.H.W. Bush were the mainstream.

kcewa on January 25, 2014 at 3:51 PM

With the winner-take-all rule for the latter states, candidates that have the ability to raise money can keep the race close and pull it out in the end.

midgeorgian on January 25, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Good point..But we also have to face a fact..You have to have big fundraising arm to win a primary..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:51 PM

People still don’t see the problem or the entire forest.

The Left is pushing for total control, and the Right (the GOPe especially) doesn’t understand the nature of the fight or that they are really in a winner take all fight.

Frankly, this country is WAY WAY WAY to big both geopgraphically and population-wise for only one federal government, and it is more divided now than at any time in our lifetimes.

That’s my dog-whistle for Texas to……get on it.

KirknBurker on January 25, 2014 at 3:53 PM

kcewa on January 25, 2014 at 3:51 PM

He got elected Governor of California twice..imho he was pretty mainstream..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:55 PM

The “first four” more or less came about on their own, but there are good reasons to keep them.

New Hampshire has hosted the “first in the nation primary” since before most states had primaries. It’s traditional, and there is no way they are going to allow anyone to jump that history, RNC, DNC, or anyone else. But it works out pretty well to keep them along with Iowa, South Carolina, and Nevada.

The reason is they are four smaller states with affordable media markets and a history of “retail politics.” This allows unknown candidates a chance to get known and make a name for themselves. Without them, the best-funded candidate going into the first primary is going to almost always win. If Florida, New York, or California were first, the days of the upstart challenger are just over.

Also, they provide a cross-section of the country. Four different regions, different electorates. Iowa and South Carolina are states with strong social conservative bases while New Hampshire and Nevada tend toward more fiscal and libertarian ideas. SC adds a large black minority population while Nevada brings Hispanics into the mix.

~

For those who don’t like “the establishment candidates” winning the nomination, keeping the four small states first is your best hope. Otherwise, it is going to just boil down to money every time.

Adjoran on January 25, 2014 at 3:57 PM

I mean, let’s face it: the last remotely decent candidate the Republicans nominated for president was Ronald Reagan. Since the 1988, the Republicans have NOT ONCE nominated a candidate who holds true to the libertarian economic principles Reagan stood for. And that’s why all they have to show for it is two Bushes who have dug the party into its biggest ditch since Herbert Hoover.

When the GOP nominates a more libertarian candidate, like Rand Paul, they will regain their strength.

TBSchemer on January 25, 2014 at 4:08 PM

In hiding. I am only around for a bit. How are you doing? Nice to see familiar faces/names around.

upinak on January 25, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Copy that. All good here. Bishop and Schadenfreude have largely taken over the blogging, to great effect. Hilarity and conservatism about, but far too much jousting with the trolls. It’s wearying.

Good to see your “face”. Cheers.

Jaibones on January 25, 2014 at 4:08 PM

The only thing they have fixed is the “fix” itself.The new rules are designed to make it easier for their chosen establishment candidate to win the nomination.The GOP is delusional,or so intent on committing suicide they don’t care about what their actions reap.They truly believe they can insult the base,compromise away conservative principles,stack the deck against “insurgents and petty much vote to do things that inflame conervatives,and still think we will support them in November.I guess they figure they have gotten away with it for so long,and that we will always vote for the “lesser of two evils”.I don’t know about y’all,but I’m not voting for evil of any magnitude ever again!

redware on January 25, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Frankly, this country is WAY WAY WAY to big both geopgraphically and population-wise for only one federal government, and it is more divided now than at any time in our lifetimes.

KirknBurker on January 25, 2014 at 3:53 PM

That’s why I am for a decentralized federal government. For example, it makes no sense for the Bureau of Land Management to be located in D.C., when most of the land it controls is out west. I’m for spreading government agencies (and money & employment) throughout the U.S. Money and power is too concentrated in the D.C. area.

MichaelGabriel on January 25, 2014 at 4:13 PM

He got elected Governor of California twice..imho he was pretty mainstream..:)

Dire Straits on January 25, 2014 at 3:55 PM

If you don’t think Reagan was an insurgent candidate that the GOP establishment at the time did everything they could to stop, but were overpowered by the grass roots, then you simply don’t know your history. Now the GOP establishment has rigged the game even more than it already was so that had these rules been in place at the time Reagan would have failed.

FloatingRock on January 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2