Posted on 06/15/2014 2:33:02 PM PDT by PoloSec
In the midst of all the foreign affairs stories it was probably easy to miss a bit of domestic political news coming out of the Hawkeye State yesterday. At the 2014 Iowa GOP state convention, political activists loyal to Governor Terry Branstad essentially ousted all of the “dissidents” loyal to Rand Paul, securing control of the state party for the perceived establishment.
Establishment forces officially wrested control of the Iowa Republican Party from supporters of Rand Paul on Saturday, a development the victors said would help save the state’s first-in-the-nation presidential caucus from being marginalized and possibly spell the demise of the Ames Straw Poll…
The battle for control of the party was primarily an effort by Branstad to reestablish himself as the undisputed leader of Republican affairs in Iowa — perhaps most critically the future of the caucuses.
After the 2012 results, Ron Paul supporters mobilized at district-level conventions to take over the party — despite the fact he finished third on caucus night — and wound up controlling the delegation to the national convention.
Branstad, cruising to an unprecedented sixth term as governor, has spent the better part of the past two years sparring with A.J. Spiker, a co-chair of Ron Paul’s Iowa campaign who defeated the governor’s preferred pick to lead the state party in 2012. As chairman of the party, Spiker was publicly critical of Branstad’s legislative agenda. Establishment-minded donors refused to contribute to the state party as long as Paul people were in charge.
This appears to be the end (at least for now) of a long simmering dispute. The report lists several complaints by Branstad’s alliance creating the need for such a change. The first was a growing fear that the credibility of the Iowa caucus would be damaged if they keep selecting candidates who go on to lose either the primary or the general election. (See Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee.) On that score, I have to say that it doesn’t make much sense. We have competitive primaries for a reason and not every state selects the same person, so nobody picks the winner every time.
They did express some other concerns, however, such as a fear that the candidates who are perceived as being more moderate – such as a Chris Christie or Jeb Bush – might wind up skipping Iowa entirely and focusing instead on New Hampshire. This led one committee member to state, “We need to let people know that when candidates come to Iowa, they have a fair shake,”
The other question, though, is what they meant about the possible end of the straw poll.
It also jeopardizes next year’s straw poll: Branstad said the annual ritual has “outlived its usefulness,” and other critics say it’s become a spectacle that raises a lot of money for the party but has little significance politically. Pro-Paul forces, however, enthusiastically support the event and want to keep it going.
Can they really just cancel the straw poll? Aside from the fact that it gives bloggers something to do while waiting for the actual primary battles, it’s something of a tradition which draws the entire political spectrum. As much as I personally disagree with having Iowa and New Hampshire go first every single cycle, it would be a shame to lose it.
Well, this is kind of a wash for conservatives, as Rand Paul is a flake and the GOPe are not conservatives. Ergo, conservatives had no pony in play.
Paul wants to head up the Republican Party of Mexico.
It’s a Paulista thing. Iowa and NH are ‘Rat states anyway.
“help save the state’s first-in-the-nation presidential caucus from being marginalized”
*****
Iowa should be last for the next 100 years because of the cr@p sandwiches they keep feeding us. Not a red state. Has no business influencing the race.
This disappearance of the GOP-E in the last couple years was a direct result of Mitt Romney (and McCain) having no ground game.Conservatives didn't step up. Paultards did.
The convention did endorse Tea Party-type Sam Clovis for State Treasurer.
Joni Ernst has attracted support from the open borders GOP-E crowd, and from Tea Partiers. One of those groups is going to be sorely disappointed.
Horsecrap. I was there. We ran the Paul Mothership Loons off and installed adults. Everyone there ran the gamut between moderate, tea party, social conservative, and libertarian. Our State Central Committee reflects that.
We are a purple state. Our Guv/LG is GOP, as is our Auditor and Sec Ag. We are home to super conservative congressman Steve King. We are a majority in the house, 2 seats away from one in the senate.
Of all our nominees, Branstad might be the most moderate, and even he’s swung right in his old age. The rest are conservative to libertarian. We have a good lineup.
Even at that, I’m still not for Iowa being First In The Nation anymore. I run state level races and it really screws up our politics a hundred different ways. You can ship FITN down the river to some other state as far as I’m concerned.
It has voted for plenty of “Reds.”
Ridiculous. Who the heck is Jazz Shaw and why is he/she quoting heavily from a Politico article without any attribution?
Believe nothing reported on Hotair or its resident posters such as Jazz or the Other stooges.
Its is Salem broadcasting propaganda outlet and completely run for and by the DC elite .
Michele Malkin sold the site to Salem and let the K street crowd take it over.
Iowasounds like it is a conservative state, but why was Harkin your senator?
Catholic and industrial eastern Iowa.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=19&year=2012
Because the low info voter likes their incumbents. It’s the same reason they like Grassley, Sec Ag Northey, and others on our side.
The other thing is we are a populist state. Unfortunately both conservatives and liberals can play the populist card, and that makes things get very whippy sometimes. Harkin was super liberal, but he know how to play the populist fiddle.
I think former Dem governor Culver peed in the nest though. He was doing real damage to the state, and there seems to be a bit more favor to the GOP ever since. If it weren’t for the party being taken over by Pauldrone Mothership Central, we might have the state senate too in ‘12. We lost 2 races by less than 2%, and a couple more were slightly larger single digit losses, including the one I ran.
Powerful government unions is a large part of that. The tax takers can afford to outspend the private tax payers. In most states average wages for state government workers are greater than those for private workers. The government/private wage ratio varies from state to state and from year to year. But one thing never seems to vary, the state with the highest wage ratio. Every year from 1987 through 2012, the latest data available, it has been Iowa. Although in 12 states, plus surprisingly DC, state (district in DC) government workers were paid less than private workers there in Iowa they were paid 151% in 2012, making five years straight they were paid over 150% of their private 'bosses.' They've made over 140% since 1989. Next highest ratios in 2012 were RI at 139% and OH at 131%. In absolute terms the pay gap is over $20k a head. Which buys a lot of votes. The miracle is that we're not the fiscal basket case many other states have become.
I live in Iowa (long story) and I agree.
After the last election cycle. , I am all for scrapping them. Team Romney stole the election, and to the Ron Paul people’s credit they caught it even though the real winner wasn’t their guy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.