The Direction of the Michigan Republican Parties (State, County, District)

I'm probably going to be saying this line often in the next year or so. "I'm an elections guy first."

Jason Gillman of Right Michigan and I are having a cross blog philosophy discussion that I think cuts in a way to some of the disconnect between factions within the party.One discussion is here, and  a second discussion is here. A third one is here. I think this is a very important discussion to have, and there are some points on both sides here.  Today, Kevin Rex Heine had his own article here which had the results by district. Districts 1, 2, 3, 5, and 13 went for Courser. Districts 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 went for Schostak. Courser cleaned up in districts 2 and 3 and won 5 solidly. The other two districts were narrow. Schostak cleaned up in districts 4, 7, 9, and 14 and won 8 solidly. The other districts were narrow.

I'll say this to the change advocates. As someone who has been around 12 years and is probably considered establishment (as a county chair), I'm not your enemy. I wasn't even a Romney primary supporter. Not everyone who has been around over 5 years is your enemy. However, when you use words like "take over", you going to have a problem - and you're going to have people who ideology wise would probably be your ally going against you.

I don't like coronation politics - and "take over" politics is no different than coronation politics except it's a different "team". (I cringe at the term "coronation politics" being co-opted for a different campaign by someone else in a 3-way campaign I was also involved in, but that's another story - I used it in 2011). I didn't like the Romney coronation. I didn't like it for Hoekstra. I didn't like the attempts for it for Ron Paul at RNC convention after losing the primaries or Gary Glenn by MI4CS. The easiest thing to get my opposition is to try "take over" or coronation politics. I don't care which faction or side you are on. I don't have time for Big Fish in Small Ponds. I don't have time for that bullshit, and I'll even pay the quarter for using that term during Lent.

I'm also not going to sugarcoat things. National isn't making things easy for us at all right now. Between Boehner, Rove, Romney's campaign and project Orca, DC consulting class, and cave after cave on all fiscal matters, we're taking hits here for the poor work of others. The gas tax proposal isn't helping us right now either. I'll just say that I'm 100% in agreement with my senator Joe Hune in his opposition to that. Does Joe get the credit for this? He should. If you're going to stay home from voting to send Snyder or DC a message, Joe gets punished as well. That ain't right. A lot of people stayed home in 2012 (and 2008). Let's also remember that Right to Work would not have been passed if it wasn't for Rick Snyder. Give him credit there. Personal property tax (a major killer) is gone. MBT is gone.

A lot of activists are mad right now for a few reasons. I think the Romney coronation - especially in Michigan was extremely harmful for the party. We're still paying for it. Part or it was that the tactic was a short term success in helping Romney get the nomination. This was a Karl Rove playbook type of operation. Be aggressive in the primary, and be passive in the general.  Romney lost, which made it worse. People are taking pages from that Romney playbook for party coronation attempts and take over politics - as a reaction to what was done for Romney. That's what we are dealing with right now. It's putting us at each other's throats.With national's caving on issues, it's making it even worse. I don't like it either.


In Michigan, we have in reality about 100 Republican Parties. There's State Party/MRP, then there's 82 county parties (Wayne Caucuses) and 14 district parties. They are all different in dynamic. As a County Chair and District Treasurer, I have no control on what national does, what Rove does, or even what our elected officials do. I also have limited control on policy at either county or district level - despite setting agendas in county and controlling the money in district. I can't endorse as Chair. I could push for a bunch of resolutions, but that's a waste of time. They have no real effect. Calling our reps has more effect than a resolution. What I can do is publicize the good things our elected are doing. I also make sure our election operations are ready to go. That's my job. Elections. There's other things as well, but everything directly or indirectly goes back to elections - specifically elections impacting the first two words in our party - Livingston County (or 8th District with the other committee).

I am getting tired of people thinking that being a "True Conservative" or a "Constitutional Conservative" automatically qualifies one for a party leadership position. It doesn't. Been there, done that for 12 years, and even swore an oath to the Constitution. That doesn't qualify me either to be county party chair. What qualifies one for that position is the ability to get those "Constitutional Conservatives" elected. That's the key. Constitutional conservative candidates do not help us when they are not elected.

My own philosophy when it comes to supporting people for county, district, and state committees is to support workers. Who shows up and helps? Who has the skill sets to contribute? Who works well with the team? Who is involved in campaigns? Who understands elections? Who shows up in meetings? Who is active in conservative causes?  In Livingston County, that tends to be mostly conservatives across the board so we don't have the ideology battles very often. Any that do happen are either personality based or tactical based.

For those with ideology problems with current GOP elected officials, there's a method that can be used to rectify it. It's an old one which has been around a long time. Primaries. Just remember that if you're going to run a campaign, you have to do it properly or any primary challenge will go nowhere before it gets off the ground, much like these third party runs that always go nowhere. Speaking of third parties, as far as I'm concerned, third party activists are no different than democrats and will be treated accordingly.

It's time for those in so called "establishment" and those with grievances to discuss matters and for all sides to acknowledge the following.

1. There is a fractured party. Denying it doesn't make it untrue. It's hardly a secret.

2. Part of the fracture is due to the coronation politics and take over pushes - on ALL sides. Romney did a TON of damage here. Rove made it worse. Gary Johnson supporters who want to be Republican precinct delegates as well didn't help matters either. Dictatorial demands lead to those demands getting a middle finger in response.

3. The Republican base is extremely frustrated with Washington DC and the caving by national leadership - over and over and over again. This isn't a one time matter. This is all the time. This is as damaging as Romney and Rove.

4. If Republicans do not stand for lower taxes and fiscal responsibility, then what do we stand for?  This is a frustration, at least in spending, that goes back to the Bush years. Today, the Bush years are looked at as almost fiscal responsibility compared to today. Boehner needs to man up and stand up to Obama. The one bad part about Mike Pence becoming Governor of Indiana is that his presence in the House is sorely missed.

5. We need at least 50% +1 to win. There's a lot of things that need to happen in elections for that to happen. Being a "true conservative" is not enough. Saying that you are a true conservative 100 times is counter productive because you're not focused on things that matter to most people. Competence issues. "Doing the job" issues. You can be a strong conservative on both economic and social issues and get moderate and even some liberal votes. You can't do that if you yap about it all the time. Why? Because those voters think that you're not doing your job by focusing on those issues all the time.  On the same note, don't open yourself to a double flanking by not standing for anything and going leftist and caving. Both of those things are a good way to lose.

6. Elections aren't an art. They don't magically happen. They are a process that requires planning, knowledge, time, money, and energy. All wings of the party have had their successes and failures. If you don't know how to win (which is at times different in each race and each area), you shouldn't be running the show. If a plan is not going correctly, it's time to adjust. Good leaders do that. That goes for all sides.

7. It's time to end this "take over" talk. It does not do anything constructive and right on its face puts people at odds. It creates enemies.

We have a problem. Time to fix it. 2014 is on the horizon. 
 

Feb 22/23 - Michigan Republican Party Convention

There's always a different perspective at these events as a county chair than there is as a regular delegate. As a delegate, I worry about my vote. As chair, I worry about things going right and not screwing up my part along with my vote. There's always room for improvement.

There's no further conventions this year. I think the next one is after August of 2012. Mackinac isn't a convention, but an open conference to those who pay.

District parties and State Committee were elected on Friday and State Party officers elected on Saturday.

I think the process went fairly well in our caucus (officers unopposed in the end), but I'd like to see if we can move our county caucus to different areas so people can hear. In the 8th caucus, we have three counties in one room. It made it tough for hearing. I stayed out of the Oakland and Ingham County caucus decisions. The process in Livingston for district caucus was fair. The results were what they were. When there's eight good people running for six spots, two good people are going to unfortunately lose. I'm looking forward to working with the new committee that was elected. We have a lot of work to do and be ready for the dems.

 There were several contests for the chairs and vice chairs Saturday. A couple were unopposed. Most were easy decisions for me. Some were not. The runoff for outreach VC was tough since I didn't know the other two running (both from West Michigan). I knew the 3rd place finisher whom I supported back from previous campaigns. The youth VC spot was an extremely tough decision for me. I liked both candidates here. I think we will be in good hands there no matter who wins. The other ones were easy decisions for me. That includes my vote for Schostak as Chair. That was an easy decision for me. 

Change for change sake is not necessarily a good thing. I'll repeat that. Change for change sake is not necessarily a good thing. If you are running for chair. CEO. You need to show me you can do the job. You need to show me how you would be better than Schostak. Schostak has a two year record as finance chair and a two year record as Chair. I don't think he did a bad job considering the situation he was dealt with. Do I agree with every decision made? No. What I do like is that Schostak has done what I haven't seen done by most MIGOP chairs in my experience. Adjust when needed.

• Boston screwed up with Romney's campaign. That's not on Schostak. 
• Schostak bought the Romney/Ryan signs after Boston didn't come through. Some said that was a bad thing. I think those who said that do not understand how campaigns work. Ask Joe Hune if signs matter. 
• Karl Rove ran his mouth and for some reason a lot of big donors follow him. That's not on Schostak. 
• That delegate vote in the February primary? Part of that was Schostak. That one was bad and on him. Schostak isn't perfect.
• Straight Ticket voting is BY FAR the number one factor in State Board of Education and University 
•  Trustee/Regent races. That affects financial support to these candidates. Was that on Schostak? I'd say no. Some disagree. 
• The technology deficit is known. Schostak understands that, and not just because Courser said so since he ran for chair. 
• Schostak raised a lot of money. That made the impact of a 9pt loss seem like a 4-5pt loss. This was bad, but it wasn't 1996 bad. We kept the court and state house.
• The big problems I saw were strategic. Historically, state party defers to the candidates at the top of the ticket no matter who is chair. Schostak joined that last time, but I think won't be so apt to do that this time. Why? Boston incompetence. I'm starting to see some of the changes already - before Courser's campaign.

I personally like Todd Courser. I think he would have been great for State Board of Education. State Chair was another story. Platitudes aren't good enough to get my support. Telling me you are a constitutional conservative means nothing. Everyone claims to be that these days. It also doesn't qualify someone for chair.

Having your main team be the people behind the Gary Glenn coronation attempt is a good way to lose any chance at getting my support. I wasn't impressed with Cindy Gamrat's Michigan 4 Conservative Senate push. Now what I didn't mention in that article was that I knew the pick was going to be Gary Glenn before I wrote that. The attempted coronation backfired. Glenn withdrew from campaigning a few weeks before the election to support Durant (who I voted for when Konetchy was out) and Hoekstra won anyway. The guy they tried to get a coronation for did not make it. The local tea parties here had nothing to do with that.

Todd Courser himself is 0-3 in elections and from what I've heard, was never an officer in his county or district party (compared to my 6+ years as a party officer not even counting as chair).  His campaign was telling me that Schostak sucked. 0-3 sucks. That wasn't all his fault, but if you're putting down someone's work based on elections, you better have something to stand on. The coronation attempt for Gary Glenn who dropped out I think sucked more than the 0-3. It was a disaster, and I called it as such way back when. If Courser won, who was he going to hire for election work? Those people? In addition, how was he going to raise the necessary money?

I'm still open to 'non establishment' candidates. I voted for Santorum and don't regret it. I also don't necessarily back people just because they are running against 'the establishment.' Give me something to work with. A track record. A plan. Results.

The media memo is that the tea party opposed Schostak. That's only partially correct. The people who backed Courser that I noticed were the "It's time for change" folks, homeschool advocates (Courser is one of them - that's pro-Courser more than anything else), Campaign for Liberty (Ron Paul and Gary Johnson), Gary Glenn supporters, and SOME tea parties.
Schostak's supporters were a combination of establishment, some right to work advocates, SOME tea parties, and those who worked with him. He got my support with the signs last election. That got me off the fence.

That all said, there is no doubt we have a divided base. Washington incompetence isn't helping matters at all. Our DC Republicans are once again making things a lot tougher for us. A couple of Snyder vetoes of popular bills on gun safety and insurance matters supported by our Livingston County Republicans upset some people. The gas tax proposal is opposed by Joe Hune and many others. While we are quite appreciative of Right to Work, I'm not going to sugarcoat things and say all is well within the party. There's a lot of work to be done. Some people took out their frustrations on Schostak.

I hear this talk about how we need unity. While I agree, the question is how do we do it. I think we need to concentrate on the first part of our names and differentiate ourselves from DC. Washington is killing us. We're not Washington. I'm going to be making a concerted effort to remember the first two words of my party's name. "Livingston County." Just because Washington sucks doesn't mean we have anything to do with it.

Schostak has a lot of work to do. I think he'll get it done. Everyone has to do their part as well, and that includes me.

On to the next election. For us, that's May/August this year.

MI GOP Chair race - Bobby Schostak announces

Bobby Schostak is the current financial director for the Michigan GOP under Ron Weiser. He's now running for chair. He's been endorsed by Rick Snyder. That is interesting since I believe he supported Mike Cox (as I did) in the primary. He's also been endorsed by some good friends of mine who are solid conservatives.

I first want to mention that I have not made a decision yet in whom I am supporting. I have not endorsed Bobby Schostak, nor have I closed the door on him. There is some very good positives and very high negatives with him that need to be addressed, which will determine if I support him. Snyder's support makes no difference to me one way or the other.

As financial director, he was as good as it gets. If he was running for that again, I'd endorse him today. The amount in candidate assistance was at or near record amounts. I've heard some numbers which I won't repeat because it may be confidential information, but it is significant. This helped lead to a 20 seat gain and a takeover in the state house. We needed 13 to takeover. We have 7 seats to spare. Bobby Schostak deserves a lot of credit for that, along with Ron Weiser.

However, my concerns is with his donation history. Schostak is a builder with a large family business. Businesses are often bipartisan in their support. I understand that and that's how the game is often played. I don't like it, but I understand it. Most of the donations made were by all of the brothers and I've heard one of them is a democrat.

These are the candidates who Bobby Schostak donated to. These are under his own name, not his family members or their PAC. I listed both the R's and the D's.

STATE:
Candice Miller (for Sec of State)
Citizens for a Better Michigan (PAC)
John Walsh (R) - Livonia State Rep and good guy
Doug Ross (D) - Primary for governor 98.
McCotter – Several Donations - Then State Senate
Larry DeShazor (R) - State Rep/Senate candidate
Copper Rizzo (R) - State Senate Candidate, worked for Mike Bishop
Gail Haines (R) - State Rep
Jase Bolger (R) - State Rep, new Speaker
Peter Petallia (R) - New State Rep
Common Sense Leadership Fund PAC
Craig DeRoche (R) - Former Speaker
Kim Meltzer (R) - State Rep, State Senate Candidate
Justice Cliff Taylor
Dick DeVos (R) - Gubernatorial Candidate
Dick Posthumus (R) - Lt Governor, Gubernatorial Candidate
Laura Toy (R) - State Rep, State Senate candidate
John Engler (R)
Andy Meisner (D) - Safe Democrat district, State Rep
Burton Leland (D) - Safe Democrat District
Dan Tietma (R) - State Rep Candidate
Paul DeWeese (Was R, now D) - State Rep, State Senate/Congressional candidate
Gabe Leland (D) - Safe Democrat district, Primary
Hugh Crawford (R) - State Rep
Ken Horn (R) - State Rep
Roger Kahn (R) - State Rep/Senate
Steve Tobocman (D) - State Rep, safe democrat district
Wayne Schmidt (R) - State Rep
HRCC - House GOP Committee
Gilda Jacobs PAC (D) - Leadership fund for democrat
JAPAC (Jewish PAC)
Jennifer Granholm (D) (Maxed, 2004) - Pay to play?
Lawrence Deitch (D) for UM – UM Trustee.
Michigan Republican Party – Over $63,000
Mike Cox (R) - AG and Gubernatorial Candidate
New Century Fund - PAC
Number 6 Leadership Fund - PAC
Paul Scott (R) - State Rep, Convention candidate for Secretary of State
John Pastor (R) - State Rep
Realtors PAC
Schostak Family PAC
Senate Republican Caucus
Civic Fund PAC
Team 2006 PAC
Todd LaJoy (R) - State Rep Candidate
11th District GOP Committee -
Wayne Kuipers (R) - State Rep/Senate, Congressional Candidate

If that was it, I could live with that, although the Granholm one bothers me a lot. Most of the democrats are in safe districts. There may be personal ties. I don't know. I'm not going to get bent out of shape over his support of the Lelands or Tobocman in Detroit or Jacobs in Huntington Woods. Someone with bad politics is going to win there regardless. That's how it is.

Federally, I have a big problem with some of his donations.

Mike Bouchard - Candidate against Stabenow
MRP - $10000+
Carl Levin (D) - Why Levin?
Charlie Crist (Then R, now who knows what)(2009, preparty switch)
Joe Lieberman (D) for President - 2004, also gave to his Senate campaign
Debbie Stabenow (D) - Stabenow is up in 2012. Next election. Our state party chair candidate donated to Stabenow.
Tim Walberg (R) - This one is a big positive to me.
Mike Rogers (R) - This was after he was first elected
Susan Collins (R) - Liberal Republican, but it is Maine
Joe Knollenberg (R) - He gave a lot of support to Knollenberg.
Dianne Byrum (D) - This was her race against Mike Rogers in 2000 which was a big fight over who kept the majority. 88 vote difference.
Rocky Raczkowski (R) - Good fight.
Spence Abraham (R) - Then incumbent. Lost to Stabenow.
Jack Reed (D) - Why Jack Reed? Rhode Island far left Senator.
Joe Schwarz (2004) - Then Republican.
John Kerry (D) – 2007 - Why give to this scumbag traitor? John Kerry?
Frank Lautenberg (D) – 2008 - Far left gun grabber.
Mark Udall (D) – 2007 - This one may be the worst from a pragmatic standpoint. There was a battle over the senate in 2008. Mark Udall is a Boulder (Ann Abror of Colorado) liberal. Non incumbent open senate seat in Colorado.
John Conyers (D) – 1999
Ben Cardin (D) – 2005 - Another Open Seat to replace Paul Sarbanes. Michael Steele or Ben Cardin.
Jean Carnahan (D) – 2002 - Appointed incumbent key for the majority. She lost.
Peter Monroe (R) – 2006 - Ran against Bill Nelson
Mitt Romney - 2007
David Fink (D) – 2002 - Ran against Knollenberg
Nancy Pelosi (D) – 2007 - Yes, that Pelosi
Gene DeRossett (R) – 2004 - Ran for open seat primary later won by Joe Schwarz and Tim Walberg (R)
Carolyn Kilpatrick (D) 2001
Al Gore 2000 - Gore for President?
McCain 2008 – 2007
Jeff Sessions (R) – 2007
Bill Bradley 2000 (D) - Ran against Gore
Thad McCotter (R) - Congressman
Candace Miller (R)

For the sake of argument, I'll give the benefit of the doubt on in-state dems outside of Stabenow (who is up in 2012) and chalk it up to builders politics. But Gore? Lieberman in 04? Bill Bradley? Mark Udall and Ben Cardin for key open seats in 06 and 08? Byrum over Rogers? Carnahan in a key swing state. This isn't one, two, or three democrats, but several, and some key ones including presidential campaigns.

Maybe Schostak is party switcher. I hope that is the case and if so, would explain some of the donations.

But I have a major concern. There's some schisms and rifts within the party. They will come out in the 2012 elections. I see some "third way" (Clintonian/DLC) tendencies in the donation history. Leland, Jacobs, Stabenow, Lieberman, Gore, Kerry, Byrum, Udall, Cardin, Crist, and Reed. I see that as well in the Romney support for 2008, and later McCain. I don't think Schostak ever cared much for the Daily Kos or Kucinich wing of the dems.

There's also a schism especially between the Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin wings going back to the end of the 2008 race. For the record, I support neither as my first choice in 2012. There are several candidates I would support before either of them.

However, it's the MIGOP's job to support who the nominee is. Can I count on Schostak to support whoever the nominee is and do the necessary work to give the candidate a solid chance to win Michigan? That includes if it is someone I suspect he would not care for - Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee. Would he support them wholeheartedly against Obama? Would he endorse Obama? Would he stay out? I have no doubt he'd support a Romney or probably a Pawlenty, Daniels, Giuliani, or Barbour. Palin though? Would we see another case of Wayne Gilchrist, Colin Powell, Kathleen Parker, Doug Kmiec, Peggy Noonan, Chuck Hagel, Scott McClellan, Charles Fried, Ken Adelman, Paul O'Neill, and the like. I don't know. I really do not know. In Schostak's defense, he has never given any indication of supporting Obama, either as a senate candidate or in 2008. However, he has donated to Gore, Bradley, and Lieberman in their presidential runs.

I have not made my decision of support in this race. Bobby Schostak has done a great job as finance chair for MIGOP. I do not want that to be lost on the readers. That was a big reason why we picked up 20 seats in the state house and increased our majority in the state senate. Give him credit for that. He earned it. Some of those donations have to be addressed however. It's not a "non-issue."

We all need to evaluate the entire picture and see who runs, what their positives and negatives are, and make sure we do our due diligence in our decision making.

MIGOP Chair update

This just in, according to Right Michigan

Jack Hoogendyk has dropped out of the MI GOP Chairman's race. That leaves former Slovakia Ambassador Ron Weiser as the last man standing barring any late addition. It looks like he's our next chair.

Good luck to Ambassador Weiser.