This page has been updated, accounting for all the GOP delegation candidates supporting Ron Paul, according to this link.
Jim McHale, running to be a delegate in the 16th district, got his start as a Paul supporter. Upon witnessing more intimately the bursting inanity of Pennsylvania’s primary system is he decided the right thing to do was to simply reflect the will of his district. He informs me, though, that in order to be designated a “Pennsylvania Patriot for Ron Paul” one has to agree to vote for Dr. Paul at the GOP convention regardless of the will of the district one represents.
I mention this because when I spoke to some of those people they claimed they would try and represent their constituents rather than the interests of Ron Paul. So either they were lying to me, or they are being less than truthful with the Paul campaign.
So unless you hear otherwise from me, the people indicated as Paul supporters on that grid intend to vote for Ron Paul, which is absolutely their prerogative. It is, of course, also incumbent to them to be honest with the voters about their intentions, and I am beginning to have my doubts about their veracity.
Your mileage may vary.
I saw the first sign for a presidential campaign in my corner of PA today. Someone has put up a Ron Paul sign.
For lots of reasons, I probably would have been on that bandwagon 15 years ago. My first presidential vote was for Andre Marrou, who was actually Ron Paul’s veep choice in ’88 when he ran for president on the Libertarian ticket.
I have since diverged from my Libertarian brothers and sisters. Getting married and becoming part of a community have steered me away from radical individualism, and I also happen to think the threat that radical Islam represents to Western ideals is something that must at least partly be dealt with actively. A passive, isolationist response may very well end up being a demographic white flag.
That all said, I wish no ill will to my former comrades in freedom, and hope over time they will come to recognize that in lots of ways Mayor Giuliani– as a fiscally responsible, and socially Federalist candidate– is the most Libertarian-friendly aspirant to the presidency we are likely to see for some time.
At he is for those in the Libertarian party who take property seriously. I imagine the more libertine sort of Libertarian bristles at the prospect of the Giuliani presidency…
I was looking at a NH poll today showing Mayor Giuliani lagging behind Romney– which was a bummer as Hizzoner had tightened things up there during the last round of polls– and saw that the bulk of independent voters in NH still aren’t sure which primary they’ll vote in.
They get to make that choice as NH has an open primary: You don’t have to be registered as a member of the same party in who’s primary you’d like to cast a ballot. I think this bodes will for Giuliani. The GOP race will be more comeptitive, and hence should draw more independent voters. I bet Giuliani is very strong with that crowd. I have not seen commentary regarding this.
As a matter of theory I don’t know how I feel about this. On the one hand, we are a de facto two party system, if not a de jure one. I used to be a registered libertarian, and one of the main reasons I now am a registered member of the GOP– and now a ward leader– was I became sick of having no voice in the primaries. It was a real bummer to be unable to cast a ballot against Arlen Specter…
On the other hand, though, political parties are private organizations. Now, I think it might be difficult for the Dems to restrict their primary to only illegal immigrants, and for the GOP to restrict theirs to men named Cleetus. Still, as private organizations I instinctively support their rights to handle their affairs however they want.
I do wonder, though, if Giuliani’s fight for the GOP nod would pretty much be fait accompli if all states had open primaries. It would certainly be the case here in the Commonwealth of PA.
It’s a problem as old as the GOP, actually. The primaries are the place where minority factions carry the most water. But does this end up giving us the best possible candidates for a general election? Ronald Reagans aren’t very commonplace…
Posted in Arlen Specter, Federalism, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Libertarian, PA Support, Polling, Primaries, Romney, Rudy, Rudy Giuliani
Apparently the state GOP is considering a straw poll here in PA to officially determine which way the wind is blowing in the presidential primary. [HT Grassroots PA, although it is a Drobnyk piece in The Morning Call]
I imagine this has something to do with the fact that every GOP presidential candidate that beat the Pennsylvania bushes for ducats last week found the response underwhelming. Except, of course, Rudy Giuliani. I also imagine they want to encourage candidates to pay attention to the state despite the fact our primary currently will be a political vestigial tail taking place in April.
Interestingly, the reason the primary may not move up from April is because the state GOP is against it, as that will make it more difficult for them unseat new democrat incumbents in state elections. See this older post from Tony Phyrillas on exactly why that is. I suppose the state GOP wants the best of both worlds: Attention from presidential candidates while simultaneously protecting their best interests locally. I still need to learn more about this before forming a completely coherent opinion.
Charlie Roberts, GOP committeeman and activist from Bethlehem Township, said he felt a straw poll would give “the average guy a chance” to have his voice heard in the primary process if the state GOP is successful in persuading all of us it is a bad idea to move up our presidential primary. If by “average guy” he means the state GOP leadership, I guess he’s right. If he means “nobody bloggers who pay far more attention to politics than most people but have no political connections and no money with which to make political donations” then I believe he may be mistaken.
I am open to learning in more detail why moving up our primary is a bad idea as it relates to promoting the conservative agenda on a local basis. But even if I were convinced I would still be disappointed as I have never in my life cast a vote that matters in a presidential primary. As a politically engaged conservative this stings. I have never, ever been all that thrilled with GOP presidential nominations post-Reagan, and I am too young to have ever voted for him anyway.