Why should I support this guy for anything?

As the top of the blog says, opinions are my own and not that of LCRP. I'm not speaking for the party here.

That all said, another Todd Courser email came out that's all about him. There's a quote from one of the greatest movies released. Heat. (Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro). I'll edit it instead of posting clips because of the f'bombs involved.

"Don't waste my (m-bleeping) time" - Pacino to the informant.

That's about my feelings on any "Courser challenge" for Lt Governor. 

I always wonder how Todd Courser supposedly because this super spokesman for conservatives as he claims to be. He ran for state rep and lost. He ran for state senate and lost. Both of those losses were in the primary and with a Republican primary electorate. He lost for State Board of Education in the general. He ran for State Party chair and he lost with a Republican activist electorate. He's 0-4. He's 0-3 among Republican party electorates. To the best of my knowledge although I may be wrong here, he's never had a party leadership position. He is not a spokesman for Republicans, and not a spokesman for the Republican base of conservatives. This isn't about the liberty movement. This is about being a big fish in a small pond. Cliquish games.

Here's some of what he said.

Is a challenge to the LtGov important to the cause and if so why?

There are lots of very good reasons to secure the right to challenge the Lieutenant Governor; there are very very few reasons for not securing this options for the convention. We, as political pioneers, only have so much energy to devote to the cause of liberty; we must be thoughtful and discerning on where we place our energy, money, and finally our time. For me this is always a consideration, as it is for all of you.  In this case, we as a cause, have to decide if we want to see a challenge to the Lieutenant Governor.  If so, will we work to secure or preserve the right to challenge the Lieutenant Governor?  At this point there is no challenge; no candidate has secured the right to challenge.  Regardless of what you have heard, there is not a challenger to the Lieutenant Governor for the upcoming convention.

That's semantics. In Todd's opinion there is no challenge. Wes Nakagiri has been out campaigning for the position. Courser has been running his mouth. He's sore about Wes endorsing Schostak. There's reason for the endorsement. Courser would have been a disaster. He had no plan except talking about how principled he was. Talk is cheap, and talking about principles doesn't win elections, nor does it mean that you actually HAVE principles. Repeating talk about principles and the constitution does nothing. Get constitutional conservatives elected, and I'll start listening to what you have to say. Talk "was yesterday, today you're wasting my (bleeping) time."

Republicans should not be denied the access to run...

 If we are going to be “The Big Tent of Politics,” then we need to be the free market of political ideas and energy.  We can’t keep out people who are wanting to run in elections.  We must be a party that participates in the free market process.  We claim to be the party of the rule of law and process.  In this case, there are rules which state the party leadership will not influence a primary, and yet, that is exactly what they are doing.

 To me, in my small, but statesmen like view, Mr. Nakagiri and myself should be allowed to run.  We are both Republicans, who shouldn’t be kept out of the process because some in leadership do not like the rule of the delegates having a voice in choosing their Lieutenant Governor. Some of those, whom I have approached even in the “more conservative corners, where the state committee members are open to challenging party power,” we find state committee members saying they don’t think it’s right to have a challenger to the Lieutenant Governor or they think there should be only one challenger. Well, at this point, THERE IS NO CHALLEGER.  Mr. Nakagiri has had 8 months to gather the signatures and has not at this point secure the signatures, which may not give the cause even one challenger. At this point, Mr Nakagiri and I are not candidates to challenge the Lieutenant Governor nor will we be allowed in the convention as candidates. 

I don't think you're much of a statesman considering the things you've said. Arguments about the permission slips aside, Todd, you don't even have a Campaign Committee for Lt Governor.  Wes Nakagiri has been running an actual campaign. While you mention head to head between Brian and Wes, at the last straw poll in my county, you finished dead last. You finished behind Calley, Wes, Undecided, and the write-in of governor's choice. You had literally ZERO votes.

My assessment of the Nakagiri situation.

Many will see my words as self serving, but I believe we need to be good stewards of our time and talent.  I explain the facts to encourage you to do your own investigation, but I do not see a serious challenge in him.  My intention with this email is that we, as a cause, take on efforts where we can win and more importantly move the ball forward for the cause of liberty. In this case, the polls and the obvious visible actions don’t lie, We must think about the reality of a challenge such as this and whether it is advisable and prudent.  Who is the best choice to make the challenge? 

Here is the run down, in my opinion, to consider and then decide how to proceed. I definitely believe preserving a challenge of the Lieutenant Governor makes sense and I explain that part in a paragraph down a little lower.  This is what I have seen and know regarding the Nakagiri situation…

 It's a grudge match because Wes didn't support Todd Courser. What Todd doesn't say is that he's polling less than Wes in during everything I've seen.

 1. Mr. Nakagiri is not a candidate for Lieutenant Governor until he has the permission signatures, and at this point he does not have them. (So he is not a candidate.)

2. Mr Nakagiri announced his candidacy late summer last year. (This alerted the GOP to the challenge and set off the firestorm of establishment precinct delegate recruitment.)

3. Mr. Nakagiri has not in any meaningful way moved his poll numbers to show he has gained traction. In no way has his last 8 months translated into a change in the outcome.  Right now he is not in any way a threat to the current Lieutenant Governor.

4. Mr. Nakagiri has yet to win any poll that I have seen in the head to head. ( It’s a tough, really hard, road through the convention, but for him, Mr. Calley clearly is the winner in every head to head.)

5. Mr. Nakagiri has acted like the candidate, and raised money to support his campaign, but he has not in any way secured the right to run.

6. Mr. Nakagiri backed Schostak in the last Chairman’s race and his entire inner circle are or were, in fact, Mr. Schostak supporters.

7. Mr. Nakagiri did not actively participate in fighting for right to work in the last election.

8. Mr. Nakagiri has not explained who he has employed as his convention consultant and who he intends to use to run his convention team. (The Calley team has the best convention consultant in the country, who has won 34 out of 35 conventions.)

9. Mr. Nakagiri won’t say if he has the funds to do mailers, polls, robocalls or put forward a conventnion team to win the day.

In order:

1. Wes has run a campaign. Courser hasn't. Wes may or may not get enough permission signatures. He doesn't have them either.  

2. Todd doesn't like his early announcement. That means he wants a sneak attack and surprise campaign, because he knows he does not have a majority of people on your side. Then when the campaign is going and he loses, it's due to the "evil establishment" supposedly rigging the game. 

3. Wes did not win the two straw polls at the Lincoln Day Dinner. However, Todd Courser got ZERO votes at our Lincoln Day Dinner, and ONE vote at Ingham. 

4. See three. Same thing.

5. That's more than Todd Courser has done. 

6. That's because Courser had no plan and would have been a disaster due to incompetence. 

7. Bullshit. I saw him there in the middle of the battle. I didn't see you. I was right by the AFP tent when it went down.

8. Who gives a damn what consultant he's hired? 

9. Why would he tell Todd Courser - a potential opponent - his plan?

 There is more strategy, and this is really important, without a challenger then there will be; First, little to no voice in that convention for the conservative activist wing of the party. Second, if we have one or two with the right to challenge then the establishment has to deal with that reality. Finally, and most near and dear to my heart, if we have the right to challenge, then it will create a potential of some sort of threat in the convention and this threat could cause the party to be a bit more careful in the steps leading to the convention. If they attempt to drown our conservative activists who are running in these open house seats, it is very easy for the establishment machine to throw $100k into a tipping house seat race and kill one of our 15 candidates who are running to fill these open house seats, then we will have a possible spot to bring some sort of challenge to their power in the convention 3 weeks later. It can be a bit of an insurance policy on fair conduct in the primary.  That can only happen, in any meaningful way, if we have preserved the right to challenge the Lieutenant Governor, and as I have said there is no challenge that has been preserved. I am not sure that Mr. Nakagiri has really any understanding of what a serious challenge looks like and appears to have no one on his team to put on a serious convention effort.

As the famous line from Top Gun says......

"Son, your ego is writing checks your body can't cash!" Again, this from a guy who is 0-4 in his election career. His closest challenge was a sneak attack that cause some folks looking. He had that set up, and he still lost. That's Todd Courser. His campaign for chair is what woke up "the establishment" much more than Wes Nakagiri's challenge.

Open house seats vs Lt Gov is apples and oranges. Courser talks about these 15 house seats and Lt Gov as this either/or thing. That has no basis in reality whatsoever. That is part of the reason you are 0-4. There's no "insurance policy" here. That's bluster and talk. "Uh oh, I better not support candidate x, or Todd Courser will do something." It doesn't work that way. House seats and Senate seats are a higher priority than conventions. Calley is a high priority for Snyder regardless of what happens with primaries. 

In addition, each individual election is its own campaign, with its own bases, and own supporters. It's not "establishment vs tea party" in these campaigns here. That's what Todd Courser wants to portray, It's that talk by Courser that alienates ALL sides who are tired of this schiessen. Back your candidate and work to get that candidate elected. I've voted for "establishment" candidates. I've voted for "tea party" candidates. I've voted for both. I'm not the only one who has voted for both. Campaigns are about matchups between individuals and geography as much as they are about ideology.

Here in Livingston County, we have three state legislature elections. For State Senate, as it stands Joe Hune is unopposed. Hune has a lot of support from both establishment and tea party. In the 42nd District, four people are running so far. Some tea party folks I know are split between two candidates. Some establishment folks I know are split between at least two candidates, maybe 3. In the 47th District, five people are running so far. Some tea party folks I know are split between at least four candidates. Some establishment folks I know are split between three candidates.  Among LCGOP base folks I know, it's split three ways (to varying amounts) with one district and four ways in the other. 

In other words, neither the "establishment" or "tea party" or "base" is a monolithic creation. There's various disagreement within those entities.

While I have not given any endorsement for Lt Governor, I know one person I will not be supporting. Since by his own definition he said he was not a candidate or a challenger, I'll just say that Courser won't get my support for anything he decides to run for - now or in the future. 

Another LT Governor Challenger?

Found this in the Detroit News

Another Republican wants Calley's job

The number of would-be Republican convention challengers for Lt. Gov. Brian Calley could double. Lapeer attorney Todd Courser has been emailing supporters with a survey about whether he should run.

It is an interesting development given that fellow tea party advocate Wes Nakagiri announced months ago he’ll battle to replace Calley as the junior partner in Gov. Rick Snyder’s virtually certain re-election bid. A year ago, Courser came close to wresting party leadership away from Bobby Schostak.

It appears the possible dual threats to Calley have sparked suspicions of GOP infighting over delegate selection for the summer 2014 convention. Courser and tea partiers are leery of efforts — real or imagined — from the party mainliners to weed out potential delegates who wouldn’t support Calley.

“If those who are in leadership in the party are using their official position to recruit pro-Calley and suppress anti-Calley, isn’t that the party leadership getting involved in primaries?” Courser wondered this week in a Facebook post. “Isn’t this the party picking winners and losers in elections that are supposed to open and fair for all Republicans?”

Stay tuned.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140130/POLITICS02/301300057#ixzz2s0p6r8wr

Wes Nakagiri is currently challenging Calley. Todd Courser isn't backing Nakagiri because Nakagiri endorsed Schostak.

I am staying neutral in the Lt Governor race at this time. It is as of now a two way race between Brian Calley and Wes Nakagiri and there is no campaign finance committee for Courser regarding Lt Governor. Those who 'might' run are not candidates. As one of my more famous or infamous quotes within the party goes, "if you're not in, you're out." Therefore, I don't consider this getting involved in this race as Courser isn't as of now running. On the same note, while I won't endorse in the Lt Governor race, some things need to be said about Todd Courser. 

He ran for State Rep in 2008. He lost in the primary.

He ran for State Senate in 2010. He lost in the primary.

He ran for State Board of Education in 2012 - He lost in the general. 

He ran for State Party Chair. He lost.

I don't know if he's won a party leadership position in Lapeer, but I've heard he's never been an officer there. 

Courser is 0-4. I don't know all the ins and outs of each race, but there's a reason one goes 0-4, and he Courser doesn't live in a safe democrat area where 0-4 is excusable simply based on demographics. There's a reason why I voted for Schostak at the convention where we voted for State Party Chair. 0-3 was the biggest reason. If Courser runs for governor and wants our votes at the convention, he needs to explain to us how putting "0-4" on the ballot would help us win.

Talking about principles is just that. Talk. Principles aren't worth anything unless they can be enacted in action. 

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.