Rand Paul Alignment A Slap In Face to Ron Paul Supporters
Does a recent announcement by Rand Paul reflect desperation? Consider our comments intended as contra this article at The Iowa Republican (TIR).
Empty box thinking not same as outside the box thinking
Senator Rand Paul’s RAND PAC has retained the services of local Iowa political consultant Steve Grubbs, President of Victory Enterprises (VE), as a “top strategist” presumably in pursuit of a run at Iowa’s first in the nation presidential caucuses.
Is it really a catch as suggested by the TIR article? After all, it is not as if no one else is thinking about Iowa but Rand Paul , and doubtful as well that others have not lined up a “consultant?”
Could it be that the others have bypassed Grubbs/VE? The track record on federal primary races for Grubbs/VE in Iowa for which they served as consultants this year is horrible . . . Jacobs, Lofgren, Shaw, were all losers. In Jacobs case he was the early on favorite and had more money than sense about running . . . a good portion of the former Grubbs/VE was happy to relieve him of.
As a commenter “Guest” put it today on The Iowa Republican:
Grubbs/ Victory Enterprises track record in general in Iowa is abysmal. Let’s step back in time a little bit shall we?
2002–Steve Sukup for Governor–lost to Doug Gross and just barely beat BVP (Bob VanderPlaats in the primary.
2006–Mike Whalen–crushed by Braley
2008–Peter Teahen–beaten by Miller-Meeks
2010–Brad Zaun–lost to Boswell
2012– John Archer–Lost to Loebsack
2014–Mark Jacobs (got him to blow near 3 million bucks of his own money, and didn’t just lose–but got crushed into 3rd place)
Monte Shaw–(placed 4th in the primary)
Mark Lofgren (lost to Miller-Meeks)
And this is who Rand Paul wants to go with for running his Iowa operations?
One can add 2010 Republican nominee and governor of Iowa Christian Fong to the Grubbs/VE stable of “winners” listed above.
Speaking of national politics . . .
In the 2008 Presidential run-up, Grubbs/VE supported former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, who had an impressive resume,’ and Midwest notoriety. But at Iowa’s 2007 Ames Straw Poll together they managed a distant 6th place finish. Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo almost doubled Thompson’s support in his fourth place finish. Thompson dropped out the day after the Ames event.
In the 2012 run up Grubbs/VE was on board with Herman Cain, producing a resounding fifth place finish in Ames, garnering all of 8.6%. Cain didn’t make it to the Iowa Caucuses before dropping out.
But, for now, forget the aforementioned electoral experiences with Grubbs/VE as a consultant, and consider the philosophical alignments of the following:
Grubbs and or VE supported Bob Dole for President in the primary elections of 1988 and 1996. Considering Dole’s regard for the size of the federal government, and the competition at the time, it just does not seem congruous for Grubbs/VE to now support Rand Paul for the same office (full disclosure we supported Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm, respectively those years).
As regards foreign policy consider that Grubbs / VE supported Israel champion and hawk on the middle East, Steve Forbes (who we also supported) in the presidential primary in 2000, but now supports Rand Paul. Is that not a bit too facile? No doubt others were not interested in paying the Grubbs/VE freight and had other consultants. Or rather, contenders do not by and large pick Grubbs/VE.
More incongruity in the Grubbs/VE – Rand Paul alignment
Believing one can know a campaign by the consultants it keeps, the Grubbs/VE announcement can be seen as a troubling development for Rand Paul’s prospects and arguably an insult to the Ron Paul supporters we presume Rand Paul would like to count on as his base.
Just two weeks ago, rent seeking Renewable Energy Association executive Monte Shaw (endorsed by the Des Moines Register no less) was championed by Grubbs/VE . . . in opposition to Liberty Iowa favorite Brad Zaun and others. Shaw’s campaign may have been the best funded campaign for the Iowa Third District Republican nomination, thanks to Big Ethanol concerns, but with Grubbs/VE consultancy the results were, meh.
And now with such facileness, the Grubbs/VE operation offers itself to Rand Paul and they accept? How desperate is the Rand Paul campaign of late? The choice of Grubbs/VE by Rand Paul diminishes the credibility of both.
The Ron Paul supporters we have been familiar with have been dedicated to matters of Constitutional principle, smaller government and less taxes. Beyond the associations mentioned above, and others, Steve Grubbs was the political guru of Roby Smith in the shameful 2010 Iowa Senate primary campaign on behalf of Republican establishment and other big government interests intent on ridding the state senate caucus of dedicated conservative State Senator David Hartsuch.
The eleventh hour hit piece technique Grubbs/Smith used was to impugn as an effort to stand up for “gun rights for abusers” the efforts of Hartsuch and others to support Second Amendment rights and due process for women (and men) caught up in non-criminal so called protective orders that had nothing to do with a conviction or finding of domestic abuse or “stalking”, or any other adjudicated criminal act, Read more about it here.
As regards smaller government and less taxes you do not get any more to one side on the Republican establishment spectrum than support for Bob “tax collector for the welfare state” Dole. But Grubbs/VE also has a facility for pushing tax increases apart from support for the likes of Bob Dole. Consider this excerpt from A Bluestem Prairie, a Minnesota publication focused on congressional district politics. Grubbs’ Victory Enterprises was involved in a congressional race there (bold typeface our emphasis).
Now, we definitely are not among those who object to out-of-state consultants being hired to work on campaigns in Minnesota.
Instead, we think a look at the track record and style of consultants–wherever they are based–can help observers understand and perhaps even predict the shape of the campaigns and the contest ahead. What is the track record for Victory Enterprises?
We’ve heard in answers to inquiries that the firm enjoys a good reputation in Iowa. (Ed Note they didn’t call us) Using Nexis-Lexis to pull up Campaigns and Elections win-loss records after recent elections, we found that Victory has a fairly decent record with promoting school levies and other local efforts in Iowa (not to be sniffed at, as anyone who has ever worked to get one passed will tell you), but a somewhat less than stellar record in getting its House candidates sent to Washington D.C. (Ed Note: Ask Whalen – not Jennings – and the boys)
Also, there is this article referencing VE’s involvement with a sales tax increase in Peoria and another involvement with increases or extensions of tax levies in Cedar Rapids.
Slap in the face . . .
Still more puzzling is the need or uniqueness thought necessary in retaining Grubbs/VE for Iowa’s presidential caucus system on behalf of Rand Paul. Admittedly we do not know the specifics of the contractual focus for Grubbs/VE but RAND PAC already has former Iowa GOP Chairman and Rand Paul organizer A.J Spiker on board. They already know how to do the caucuses to convention system, and might we add, better than Grubbs/VE has mustered of late.
Compounding the operational insult is the reputation of Grubbs’ closeness to elements of the Republican Establishment who worked to banish Ron Paul supporters from the Republican State Central Committee. Furthermore, in 2012 when Ron Paul supporters were egregiously denied fair unity building representation in delegate strength coming out of Scott County, Iowa’s third largest county and site of Grubbs/VE residence and base of operations, not a peep was raised in objection. Such things are not hallmarks of trust inducing behavior.
So the question remains, why did Rand Paul who already suffers of late from images of walk-backery, flip-flopery and even clay feetery pick a consultancy that has a profile that exacerbates issues of trustworthiness? The mechanics of what Grubbs/VE does is proforma and available from a now legion of experienced Iowa operatives and vendors. Strategy recommendations may sound convincing from Grubbs/VE but the actual success rate comes up short.
Message creation to be believable requires sincerity. That does not come from a resume of working both sides of the Republican street or in antagonistic ways toward other Republicans, another detrimental message that saddling up with Grubbs/VE sends. Grubbs’ treatment of Joni Ernst may not be so easily forgotten this time around by that large contingent of the Republican Party. So one wonders what Grubbs/VE brings to the table.
A problem for Rand Paul is aggravated. How can one convey sincerity in messaging with such an aura surrounding him? The answer is one can’t very well, and that is the “secret” to Grubbs/VE poor record and the disappointment in the pick of Grubbs/VE. If not an affront to the Paul base, images of a consultancy with a track record like Grubbs’ /VE’s whispering in a candidate’s ear does not convey a message of trustworthiness, rather, one of mediocrity at best, or the enemy of success inside the gate. R Mall
This is strange, indeed. Apart from the fact that the 2016 Presidential Contest is getting off to a very early start (because we are so excitedly anticipating Obama’s being out of office) the present list of candidates is very much in flux. None-the-less, most all qualified polling, that is to say systemically honest polling, shows Rand Paul way out in front of second place. In the CPAC poll, the preference was for Rand Paul by some 30% more respondents than the second place preference. Others approximate that percentage as well. So why would RAND PAC and obviously Rand Paul, hisownself, tie himself to a notable and notorious political charlatan?
Personally, I’m a supporter of Rand Paul and have been for a long time, because I sincerely believe that he is the only candidate at this time, and the only obvious candidate for President who can win a national election. Said another way, no other conservative running as a Republican, of whom I’m aware, can win a national election due to their rock-ribbed attachment to the platforms of failed Republican contenders of the past. No need to go into all the reasons why I believe I’m correct. That’s not on topic here.
To say I’m aghast at this is like saying it’s a little cold in Antarctica. It’s simply unbelievable. It is so out of the realm of the courage and smart politics displayed by Rand Paul in the past, that I’m not sure I can accept it on its face. There has to be another reason for this. Perhaps it’s another shrewd tactic to tip his opponents off balance because they think he’s a fool, thereby underestimating his real strength. Perhaps he is being blackmailed by the nefarious consultancy. Maybe he has confidence in the American nature to always root for the underdog? The possibilities for this intellectual constipation are endless.
Now what do I do when the last man standing falls down? It’s too terrible to think about. My mind reels.
No, it can’t be. I shall remain open to the idea that this is all just a bad dream.