We hope not.
In a story in today’s The Iowa Republican (TIR) the specter is raised that Ron Paul supporters, who it is suggested dominate the body tasked to nominate a candidate for an Iowa House district, will “do unto others as has been done unto them” here in Scott County. Well actually yours truly makes the association but an analogy regarding the situations is inescapable.
The story about the Polk County affair is available here. We responded in those pages with the following plea.
Based on TIR’s description there is a potential scenario in Polk County where current Republican leadership there (the new “powers that be”) might use their raw power to subvert or completely skew what folks in the precincts arguably voted for. No doubt if they do so we can anticipate that they will justify their actions in their own minds as “for the good of the Party;” or “the need to keep apostates out” or the cut to the quick response “we’re in . . . you’re out . . . the rules allow it . . . so tough bananas.” In politics, the gag inducing, “how dare you question my (our) integrity or competence” is also a possibility of being invoked .
Those attitudes hardly enhance a unified effort which would enhance our chances for a thorough victory in the fall, moving the country away from the precipice it faces now.
IF Polk County Central Committee people who support Ron Paul use their raw power to install a favored candidate without regard to the precinct events than they have nothing to complain about as regards their charges about how they were treated by elements of the Party establishment in the run up to the conventions after the caucuses.
Now in Scott County Ron Paul people were given a raw deal through the use of raw power by a narrow group of individuals in a position to do so. Hypocrisy abounded from the leadership of that narrow group throughout the convention ordeal. One would be obtuse not to acknowledge the analogous situations. The “jewel” of the Party, Scott County, helped breed sustain and justify the hard-ball winner take all demeanor of Ron Paul supporters elsewhere in the district and state conventions. Those machinations are chronicled at veritaspac.com under the category, Raw Deal Scott County Leadership and Caucus Integrity available herein.
Every presidential campaign other than Ron Paul should be embarrassed at how disorganized they were at the caucuses demonstrating so little appreciation or competence with the system. The Ron Paul people ate your (our) lunch in a lot of precincts and it was easy to do. That hardly speaks well of the vaunted organizational ability of the establishment and does call into question the actual effectiveness of the past pursuit of Republican principles.
Ron Paul people have some very good ideas and some very bad ones. But they are not monolithic, they are a mixed bag, and most just want the Republican Party to move aggressively toward smaller government. They have reason to distrust the establishment’s energies if not intent. I appeal to the majority of that element to not be as stupid as some elements of the establishment but also understand the vagaries of politics and the roadblocks that are out there that are not their creation. And ask yourself the question . . . would you want allies to form a third party instead of working together to push the country away from the precipice?
The rallying cry of hopefully merely rival elements, hopefully still allies, should not be “screw them cuz sure as hell “they” have/are/will screw us.” But so it goes with this internecine warfare . . . a lack of real humility, wisdom and leadership by people who bleat for “unity” and cooperation after they’ve screwed the other side. Operative elements within each “side” need to set an example and call to task those who would rather exercise raw power than winning wisdom and collegiality.
In a circumstance like the current Polk County nomination process, in the future I would lean toward a rule requiring a run off. That would allow the arrival at a truer majority or even consensus candidate rather than just declaring the plurality candidate the winner. In the immediate circumstance the PCCC should probably simply go with the plurality candidate unless a process is available to determine it quickly in some other way.
For the Iowa caucuses and the subsequent delegate process I support a study to determine the advisability of a simple and automatic proportional process. Oh wait, didn’t we have a commission that might have produced something like that instead of a bunch of folderol stating what should be the obvious about when and how a presidential caucus winner is announced? Roger Mall
