Skip to comments.Iowa GOP replaces state party chairman
Posted on 06/28/2014 9:04:07 PM PDT by Whenifhow
The Iowa GOP central committee voted Saturday to fire the state party chairman and replace him with a fixture of the establishment. Danny Carroll, removed on a 14-2 no confidence vote, will be replaced by Jeff Kaufmann, formerly the Speaker Pro Tem of the state House.
The bloodless coup was widely expected after forces loyal to Gov. Terry Branstad officially seized control of the partys governing body from close allies of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) at a state convention earlier this month. The former chairman, A.J. Spiker, stepped down this spring and became a senior adviser to RAND PAC. Carroll is a former lobbyist for the evangelical Family Leader and supported Branstads primary challenger in 2010. Chad Olsen, who stepped down as the partys executive director in May 2012 after Pauls forces took control, will get his old job back. Cody Hoefert, from conservative northwest Iowa, replaces the co-chair, who resigned before the meeting.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Oh yes. The GOP can be reformed from within. Just like this!
Just incredible that people still spout that nonsense.
Live blog of the meeting at:
Jeff Kaufmann and Dr. Cody Hoefert are both very sharp. Things will be looking up for the Republican Party of Iowa.
This is actually a good thing. Carroll was installed as chair as a spite move by the old SCC to stick it to the new one. Carroll should have stayed acting chair and not let him be used as a tool for the agenda of other people.
This gets the focus back to organizing, raising money and winning elections, not who can style and profile the best pose as the purest conservative.
I’ll have to check it out because anytime I see an article praising the ‘establishment’ guy it’s never good for us. And the 14-2 vote makes me even more suspicious.
Possible I suppose but I’d be real surprised if this were to bode well.
I think Mississippi brought many of us a long way down reality road. I had thought we needed to try the conservative version of insurgency from inside the party, to see how that might work.
Mississippi sure cleared that up for me.
Now that I look around HERE and there, it’s the voter shills for the Establishment who are the dead weight pulling us down. They are self made hostages to the numbers, enough to take the senate, still willing to vote for Cochran and all the other Cochrans’ out there no matter how liberal they are, or how corrupt.
I am more than ready to be rid of them. Voters who cast a bargain vote for the devil are not my idea of a conservative allignment.
The Iowa thing that ousted the gains made by Libertarians has hit Rand Paul like Mississippi hit us. What will he say now? Will he go Libertarian straight up now?
Thank you so much! Rita
Isn’t the problem in Iowa, all the Paulbots have big egos like Rand and they all they do is promote Paulbot causes? And now that Rand is more liberal than Joni Ernst, Grassley, Steve King and Tom Latham I dont know if his people should be in charge in Iowa.
The tall man is Cody Hoefert.
Who is King with in that photo? What does it mean?
BTW, where was Gomert? :D
Political Parties are full of humans. Humans are not perfect.
If we can't win a majority in our own Party, how do we win on a General Election ballot?
And YES, we do need to clean up the election rules in Mississippi and in other places. However, there is NO WAY that a 3rd Party will “fix” any of the problems Conservatives face on a nation-wide basis.
Maybe in a few States a 3rd Party challenge or a write in challenge would make sense, but NOT nationwide. All you will do is surrender the process to the Liberals. Again, you have NO solutions. You might even be a Democrat. All you know how to do is trash everybody who tries to do much of anything.
Few States have election laws like those in Mississippi. I am upset about what Cochran did too, but that is not a good reason to give the Senate to the Democrats on a silver platter.
Your personality conflict doesn’t change the reality of the situation.
The GOP is loaded top to bottom with liberals.for about 25 years people scream “No matter what!: and here we are. Up to our neck in so much ‘lesser evil’ that a man that lets Mexico invades us, tanks a war and leaves men to die can’t even be impeached.
Shove your GOP excusemaking. We either part company and make an attempt at saving ourselves or we go down with your buddies.
I have the ONLY solution. You just don’t like it. Vote for people with principle. Gee that’s freaking hard to figure out huh? Because doing EVERYTHING BUT that got us here.
I see. Like Norm, I’m looking at tactics and the word “Establishment”, pinned to the victor of the ousting.
Looks like another Mississippi establishment drive-by to me, if the chairman is elected by delegates at convention, and then gets gang ousted by a commitee 17. Just sayin’.
As for Rand, some come-uppance for his blow off of the Mississippi scandal, huh?
It’s OUR head on the silver platter. But I don’t don’t sell for 60 senate votes for any Uni Marxist Party with two tails, one with a “D” and one with an “R” tatoo.
I’m ready to drop the experimenting and go Third.
You guys are killin’ us.
I am guessing you are a Ron Paul-bot or some other type of trouble maker who cares nothing about positive results.
I have been fighting the “establishment” since my early 20s and I am now 55. However, I am a realist. We need to win Party Chairmanships, but still convince the business wing to contribute. We need to win Republican primaries, but still seek the support of the “moderates” who did not get their way.
Your pride and arrogance is no more appealing than the arrogance of the RINO wing that you despise. And it is no more helpful or successful in winning anything that matters.
This has been in motion for months.
“The Republican Party under Ronald Reagan was FAR more liberal than the Republican Party today.”
What drugs are you on and where can I get some? Because I hat to think you just said something that utterly idiotic sober.
You will fail.
I agree that those involved in the Mississippi mess should be punished.
As for Iowa? The Ron Paul crowd was inherited by Rand Paul, and Rand Paul is to be admired on many points.
However Rand is wrong on immigration and Rand is wrong on a few other things.
Those who want Harry Reid to stay in power are the real enemy. The Republicans you do not like are not nearly as dangerous to our country as the Democrats who hate your guts.
My question was about a 17 member committee ousting a duly elected chair by the convention delegates.
I mean, say the ousted guy was your guy. Does that nullification of convention votes work for you?
Bob Dole hated Reagan. I know, he as much as told me so, to my face, several times.
Rita, Danny Carroll was not elected by any convention. He was elected 3 months ago by the old, Ron Paul run, state central committee. The new state central committee took office June 14 at the GOP state convention.
Your burning desire to rewrite history is impressive.
Find one Reagan era Repub that was pro gay marraige.
Fins one that supported abortion
Find one that would have pushed for a fib like Romney
Find one that wanted to ‘share power’.
Find one that wanted to give Dems power at their expense.
One. You can’t. Because the DEMOCRATS back then were more conservative than the GOP today. The GOP then actually tried following their own platform. This crew ignores it almost completely.
You either need a remedial history lesson or a different place to hang out because trying to sell that BS is anything but ‘conservative’. And as to my supposed arrogance”. You just forgot what someone that won’t cave to BS looks like. There is no ‘arrogance involved. I don’t think I’m any smarter or better than most Freepers. That’s you projecting.
Focus, please. I’m looking at tactics and can’t get an answer. I don’t give a flip about Rand Paul’s Iowa inheritance.
The chair was elected by convention delegates. He was ousted by 14 of apparently a 17 member committee. Now, is that democracy or a method of your preferred Republican totalitarian takeover from the delegates vote?
We conservatives here, not Republicans by fiat. This means we are not hostage to Liberals with an “R” on their tail who want the senate at any price.
Yes, Cody Hoefert is a 7 footer. He stands out in a crowd.
Kansas now has the most conservative delegation to Congress in the COUNTRY!
That was easy.
And the “gay marriage” canard? Good Heaven's that was not even remotely an issue under Reagan, and the Courts forced it on us today. Why pull up that canard? (Oh, yeah, you are a trouble maker. You care not one wit about defeating true leftist liberal Democrats, you just want to destroy any effective opposition to the Democrats, you are on a mission to destroy any chance at conservative unity. Admit it. You are an instigator. You are a troll. You are an agent provocateur who would love to see Harry Reid survive, right?)
Ahh, someone armed with the facts who can read. Thank you very much.
Every state is different. We get to vote on the chair and officers at convention and they campaign for those positions.
Thank you very much.
Rita, are those who left office complaining?
Did those who left office have a hand in drafting the rules by which Party offices are filled?
Were the rules followed?
Should Iowa elected officials have more say over the Party than Rand Paul, who does not live in Iowa?
Did the Central Committee Grant POWER to the 17 who made this decision?
You do not even understand Party Politics or Procedure enough to ask the right questions.
Not trying to start a fight but there were a lot of these. Even Barry Goldwater in his last few years in the Senate was pro-abortion. Chuck Percy, John Chafee, Arlen Specter, Jacob Javits, and many others.
So was counting the ENTIRE GOP that backed a pro abort, Pro gay marriage and Anti 2nd amendment candidate for president.
Gosh, that was easier. Now you show me the numbers of Reagan GOP that did likewise.
Yea and where did he end up?
I supported a series or people in the last Primary.
Herman Cain and Newt and then to Santorum, who won Kansas.
Yes it is a flawed system. I did not want Romney to win the Primary but he did.
And I supported Romney in the General Election.
Is there any doubt that Romney would have been better than Obama?
No there is NO DOUBT on that fact.
Obama wants to ruin the country, Obama hates the USA.
Mitt Romney, for all of his faults, does not hate the USA.
Your professorial tone has a place but it’s not a good replacement, even remotely, for an answer to a simple question.
Inform your presumptuous self and reference # 25.
My issue had nothing to do with personalities, complaints, Rand Paul’s say, or his residency, or your IQ on Party purses.
And for every Packwood etc there was a Helms. A Meese, another member or 5 of the admin against liberal ideas. Today they back them openly and push for more.
Sure there’s doubt. His record is what it is. A clone of Barrys. So whose to say he would not have been as bad?
He loves America my foot. Look at his record. Anti 2a for starts. Yea real patriot there.
YES I WAS DIRECTLY ON POINT!
You were asking the WRONG questions and that was my point.
This was not a big surprise to anyone. Ron Paul took over the Iowa Party. Ron Paul did very well in Iowa. To the victor go the spoils.
However, with Ron Paul not on the ballot for 3 years now, the Paul Bots did not show up in enough force to maintain power.
This is how it works.
I suggest you might want to be a bit slower to react in an angry fashion when something perfectly normal happens.
Admit it Norm.
You demanded that I list any Liberal Republicans under Reagan.
You seemed to be completely ignorant of the fact that such people existed.
You lost on that point and now you are trying to change the argument.
You found what? A couple? Big win for you! I am shamed.
Now explain why every single GOP of today pushed hard for a gun grabbing, abortion funding, homosexual pushing ‘severe conservative. EVERY one of them.
Run the numbers on the Amnesty thing while you are at it. You will find a couple that backed it then too. Far less than the number today. So is that a win also?
Does not change reality. Reagans guys were far more conservative than the Insane Clown Posee of today.
There were dozens of them Norm, you demanded that I name ONE and you have been shamed.
Again, you do not have a clue what you are talking about.
The Republican Party is FAR more conservative today, than it was under Reagan.
Norm, REAGAN supported Amnesty, remember?
And of course we know that did not work well.
But again, MANY if not most Republicans in Congress went along with the Ronald Reagan AMNESTY!
Again Norm, you do not know what you are talking about.
(And JOHN MCCAIN served as a Senator under Reagan too, but at least McCain is OK on abortion)
iowamark took care of the question and my issue, if the ousting had nullified the vote of convention delegates. If you are counsel to the Iowa rules and procedures, that’s just cool as hell. I was not.
You have spoken for miles and couldn’t find the point. I suspect that’s why you are not in office today. Heady enough, for sure. Nite—
Dozens! You sure it’s not hundreds? Name these dozens. Show their voting records. Show where they pushed for a gun grabbing, pro abortion, pro homosexual leadership. You keep avoiding that. But that’s the reality. Every GOP today pushed for a hard left ‘Republican’ whose record was the polar opposite of the party platform which they themselves ignored to do it.
Lets see it. Shame me more. Rub my nose in it but good!
Read his Dairies. He called it the biggest mistake of his career. Did you forget that? And BTW, the GOP did not overwhelmingly bless that amnesty. They largely fought it. Which is the OPPOSITE of todays GOP.
And McCain? Really? You are going to trot out McCain as a champion of Pro life causes? The guy is pro whoever pays him enough.
Compare McCains old with the votes and actions recently and try convincing anyone he got more conservative as the years passed.
And then Reagan supported Ford in the General after Ford barely defeated Reagan in the Primary..
Again, the GOP is MORE conservative today, not less.
go pound sand Norm.
You demanded that I “name one”
I have named SEVERAL. YOU LOST!
You suck at debate. It is like “whack a mole” you just pop back up with something else.
You hate the Republican Party and you don’t ever want the Republican Party to win any election ever again.
I get it.
Go work for Hillary, she feels the same way I think.
Nope They were more conservative under Reagan. Check that house number and try convincing someone They were a pack of libs.
“The Reagan Amnesty”
Passed the Senate on September 19, 1985 (6930)
Passed the House on October 9, 1986 (voice vote after incorporating H.R. 3810, passed 230166)
EVERY PUB OPPOSED AT THIS STAGE
Reported by the joint conference committee on October 14, 1986; agreed to by the House on October 15, 1986 (238173) and by the Senate on October 17, 1986 (6324)
There were 166 Republicans in the house
There were 53 Republicans in the Senate
Do the math.