It probably comes as no surprise to anyone that I oppose state-run, taxpayer-funded Open Primaries, where we lack Party registration.[read_more] I have been actively involved in electing members to the Republican State Central Committee who support conventions in lieu of primaries because of the advantages to our Party and to the grassroots.
Many people have sincerely asked why the method of nomination matters in a presidential election. I thought I would take some time to outline a few of the key reasons why it is critically important that we have a convention to choose our presidential nominee, rather than a state-run primary like we have done the last three presidential cycles.
- No Run-Off means Conservatives split the vote. Under Virginia law (Code 24.2-545), a Presidential Primary, like all Virginia Primaries, has no run-off provision. That means in a crowded field, someone can win with a very small plurality. This is particularly important when we could be facing a ballot with 8-16 candidates! (That is, if they can all meet Virginia’s primary ballot access requirements, which are still the most onerous in the nation). At this point, likely choices already include Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, and Carly Fiorina, with many others expected to announce soon. It is very conceivable that one presidential candidate could win Virginia with just a small plurality, say 25% — frustrating the other 75% who voted for a different candidate – and most likely the moderate wins over a conservative in this scenario. For example, imagine a possible outcome: Jeb Bush 25%, Scott Walker 20%, Ted Cruz 20%, Rand Paul 20%, Marco Rubio 10%, Mike Huckabee 5%. Under VA law, the winning candidate would take all 16 of Virginia’s at-large state Delegates, and 3 Delegates in each Congressional District by which he also carried a plurality. In other words, 25% could take virtually all — if not all — Virginia’s 49 Delegates. This is a VERY real possibility. Imagine how upset Virginians and conservatives would be if that happened. Only a Convention allows us run-off capability to ensure a consensus candidate emerges with a majority support of Republicans.
- No Party Registration – Democrats Vote! As always in Virginia, Primaries are open to Democrats and other non-Republicans participating. (Sure, the State Central Committee can vote to require the State Board of Elections to require a “loyalty” oath, but we always get negative press that we never require it). Votes by Democrats and other non-Republicans “cancel-out” the votes of our Republican rank-and-file – the ones who should really be determining our nominee. If we held a Presidential Primary next year, we would have to hope that the Democrats have a very competitive Primary in order to “suck up” all the Democrats and persuade them not to vote in our Primary. At this point, it still looks like Hillary Clinton takes it in a cakewalk. We all remember “Operation Chaos” in 2008. Perhaps the Democrats do that to us in a Presidential Primary this year if Hillary continues to dominate the Democrat field. Do we really want NOVA Democrats tinkering with Republican politics?
- We have to hold Conventions ANYWAY in 2016. In 2016, we are required to hold District and State Conventions to elect our Party Leadership and our Delegates to the Republican National Convention. It makes little sense to hold TWO processes: one to elect Delegates and then an entirely separate one paid for by the taxpayers to bind them/instruct them how to vote at the RNC.
- A Presidential Primary is no silver bullet for a General Election win. The Virginia Presidential Primary winner in 2008 was John McCain. The Virginia Presidential Primary winner in 2012 was Mitt Romney. These candidates did not excite our base and we lost Virginia in both General Elections for President. Even though 2008 and 2012 were critical elections to stop Obama, the Presidential Primaries in those years did nothing to help stop him in Virginia. In fact, it can be argued that the Primary process nationwide in those years split the conservative vote and allowed the more moderate, weaker candidates to win with only pluralities. Why not try something different?
- A Presidential Primary generates no $$ or activists lists for the Party. Our Party makes NO money in a Primary (although the taxpayer gets billed to host our shindig) and we are unable to build an activist list off a Presidential Primary. Anyone who has worked in the grassroots for the last twenty years and done any amount of door knocking knows we never have enough help on the ground for all the homes we need to knock in a statewide election! You can’t just import thousands of teenagers from out-of-state and think it will have the same impact as neighbors reaching out to neighbors. We need to do a better job identifying and activating Republicans in Virginia. A Convention will help us identify, motivate, and integrate new grassroot Republicans into our Party who can help us turn VA red again. We also have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to raise needed revenues to fund the Party’s grassroots operations in 2016 and 2017 by holding a Presidential Convention – especially since we are seen as a “competitive” state.
There are, of course, many other reasons why a Convention is preferred over a Primary for the 2016 presidential race, but these are just a few of the strongest. Given these factors, it’s a no brainer. We need to make sure that we can build a stronger and bigger grassroots team to win in 2016–and that can only happen with a Convention, just like it did in all the years before 2000 when the Presidential Primary was first tried. We need to raise lots of money to thwart Hillary/McAuliffe cash–and that can happen only with a Convention. And we need to make sure that someone like Jeb Bush doesn’t win Virginia with only 15-20% of the vote–and that potential madness can only be stopped with a Convention.
Make your desire heard by contacting the Republican Party of Virginia and telling them you support a Republican Convention in 2016. They will be voting on this very issue shortly.
42 comments
From the latest VFRW newsletter john Whitbeck, RPV Chairman, is asking whether the candidate for President in 2016 be determined by: convention or primary. Click the link. http://survey.constantcontact.com/poll/a07eb0t3dp7i9rtu4an/start.html?s=$SUBSCRIBER.OBFUSCATEDSEQNO.URLENCODED$.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10153325760387302&id=692457301&post_id=692457301_10153325760387302#
As soon as I read just the TITLE “2016 Nomination is a No-brainer” of the article on BD I knew what their article was going to say from beginning to end, and as I read it and they made it clear they were responding to points made here I knew what the points made here would be before I ever read this article.
Does that make me some kind of mind reader ?
Hardly.
When it comes down to it, the reason the establishment doesn’t want a convention, and the reason the TEA party does, is because the establishment and the TEA party both know which method of nominating a candidate is going to get them the candidate that they want.
It really is as simple as that.
The arguments for/against primary or convention are just window dressing.
Not true at all. What makes a conservative candidate more or less likely to win the nomination, whatever the method, is a strong campaign. That’s how Dave Brat unseated Cantor in a primary.
Conventions make it far more likely that an underfunded and underprepared candidate can win the nomination, backed by a few thousand voters, leaving them completely befuddled on how to appeal to millions.
not only that, the “millions” may never have heard of this candidate so this candidate has to play “catch up” for the Nov election. At least with a primary, the candidates have to make an effort to reach out to voters by trad’l methods such as old media & newer social media methods. This raises their name ID for the general election.
I think you responded to the post you wanted to respond to, not the post I actually wrote. I said “nominated”, not “elected”.
Primary or convention makes no difference when you have a Baker’s dozen
of lousy candidates. To think that Virginia is going to be a key
battleground state is beyond absurd. Liberals own the cities, and all
the RoVa counties in the world won’t make up the difference without a
cross the aisle populist that gives an honest damn about the Little Guy.
Having been to several of these VA Republican conventions going back since 1994, I can say that I am no fan of them. 2013 was the final straw. Sure, Jackson gave a good speech and the crowd was mesmerized – mesmerized like the rats going over the cliff as the Pied Piper played. I hate to disagree with you, Jamie, but primaries are more likely to draw in the less involved voter.
Mark, I’m not following….you say “primaries are more likely to draw in the less involved voter” as if that’s a desirable feature?
yes. we need each & every voter as our gubernatorial election should have shown all of us.
So we need Democrats voting in Republican primaries? How does that help us win the Governorship?
i don’t think the crossover is as much as you might think. While a primary doesn’t have the turnout that a general has, it seems logical that more than 10,000-20,000 Virginians (amount at a convention) would vote in a presidential primary. We want these people motivated to go to the polls.
Jackson didn’t win because he gave a speech, he won because he organized the most supporters to come to Richmond. He lead on every ballot.
are there 10,000 dedicated, loyal, rabid Republicans who will go to a convention? certainly. But what about the other several million Republican voters in Virginia? could they go to the convention if they first joined a unit, signed a pledge, paid the filing fees (if applicable) & marched themselves to Richmond, Roanoke or wherever? sure they could. would they? that’s the question.
what about the guy behind the counter at the convenience store? what about your lawn guy? or your babysitter? your loan officer? your doctor? these are average people who might vote Republican—we so want them to get involved—but they just don’t have the drive to go to a convention. it is these people who we disenfranchise when we do not allow them to vote in a Republican primary.
How involved in the party is that guy at 7-11? Does he have a clue who to vote for? What if he’s a Democrat? What if most of the people who vote in our primary are uniformed and/or Democrats? Those who are involved in the Party, those who have some skin in the game should choose the nominee, not the guy working the nightshift at 7-11.
the guy working at the 7-11 is working. & if he is a US citizen & a registered voter, then we want him involved. is he as informed as those of us who read this blog & other “inside baseball” publications? probably not.
ask Mark Obenshain if he would want this voter, uniformed or not, skin in the game or not, as one of his AG voters.
If you want to leave the average republican or those with republican proclivities out of the process, you cannot be disappointed when they don’t support your choice.
Why are Republicans in Virginia obsessed with allowing Democrats to vote in their primaries? This is insanity.
Because the only republicans involved in a Virginia Republican primary are the candidates?
Because Virginia primaries are nothing but spring training for the regular election?
Because Virginia primaries are paid by the taxpayers, which saves incumbent slush fund cash for other uses, and starves the RPV fake party to keep malcontents in check?
Because sometimes the only candidates in a primary stink so bad they have to do something to keep the voter participation illusion alive?
Those represent many of the excuses I’ve read on Virginia blogs over the decades. I’m sure you can come up with your own. 😉
It seems to me the bulk of the conversation regarding the nominating proccess always seems to come down to the state convention vs the state primary with passionate advocates on both sides laying out the pluses and minuses. Are these truely the only viable options for Virginia? What about the local mass meeting or local party canvas? These options would seem to me to give the requisite degree of state or central party input while distributing the organization and participation to local Republican districts presumably satisfying the grassroots concerns over management and control. Am I misunderstanding in my mind that a state primary is not processually or structurally the same as a local party canvas nor is a mass meeting identical to a state canvas. Are these options even being considered? In 2014, the 10th VA district used a party canvas to select their congressional candidate with local GOP staffers running ten polling places that were open for five hours. I believe we had close to 14,000 voters cast ballots which was a decent turnout for an off year election cycle. Wouldn’t this type of approach mitigate against the class of reactions and comments presented by Mr. Willis and I’m sure more then a few others? Logistics are logistics and will they will be with you irregardless of direction selected?
Lawrence, people in each jurisdiction elect delegates to district and state conventions at their mass meetings. (Some larger units use county conventions for this purpose, and at least one I believe uses a canvass). The mass meeting is open to any registered voter who is a Republican…no need to join anything, pay any dues or filing fees or anything else. Local mass meetings send their representatives to the district and state conventions to represent the people of that locality.
In terms of using these local processes to cast votes on how to bind Virginia’s delegates (i.e., the “Virginia Caucuses” idea), it’s a very attractive option, but it comes with some pretty big logistical challenges. When Iowa does their caucuses they have several hundred locations for a much smaller state. Here, we have 120-something GOP units in a much larger state. Would be hard to pull it off smoothly.
I realize I wasn’t very clear in my comment as I was thinking in regard to conducting the Virginia presidential primary effort. I leave it to those with far more knowledge and experienced then myself to realistic estimate the scale of logistical effort required to pull off a state wide canvas. Too bad because the 2012 experience was not a positive one for many.
Steve – Since delegates are elected at the unit and district levels, they are representing other voters at the convention, correct?
Since that is the case, would you support roll call voting, so the folks who elected the delegate can know how the delegate votes? It would be similar to us knowing how Congress votes.
are the delegates bound? is that a unit decision to bind them?
I don’t know if they are bound or not, but if there was open voting, you could easily see if people are keeping their word, or if they are not…
The greatest part about all of this is that if we hold a convention in 2016, it will be the end of the convention/primary debate. Why? Because it will be such an unmitigated disaster that the people on SCC that vote for them will be purged out in a wave of anger. Hey, how long did the voting in 2013 take? I wonder how long it will take in 2016 with more candidates on the ballot. Should be fun.
Let me go point-for-point here with you.
1.
I will ignore the blatant process rigging you are condoning to undermine the democratic process our country was founded on and go after the most obvious counter point to this; no run-off also means the “establishment” splits its vote.
2.
Hey, nothing stopping a Dem from going to a convention either. One quick signature on a “loyalty pledge” and next thing you know, Low Kell is a delegate. Who knows, maybe he has had a change of heart. But hey, do you know what really quells the vote of our Rank-and-file members? Making them drive 2-3 hours, rent a hotel room, spend money on meals, waste their weekend, find baby sitters for their kids, and miss out on the other activities we should be doing on the weekend. I would really like to see my kid play Little League, but thanks to you I will be wasting my money on something I could have done for free (because I am a tax payer and I get to vote, it’s my right and all). I am glad that the “conservative” wing of this Party has become so anti-family. Seems appropriate.
3.
It does actually make sense, because one would have over 20,000 people attending, the other would have closer to 1,500. But hey, I am sure you can find a venue for 20k people. Oh wait, you can’t. But that won’t be a problem, because you and Mr. Moulton will be busy excluding people from the process, because that is your vision of expanding the Party.
4.
Neither are conventions. Hey remember 2013 and 2014 when we lost those elections? I wonder what Governor Cuccinelli has to say about this. Oh wait.
5.
If you think conventions raise this Party money, you point out to the one time we did that in the last 5 years and I will concede, because guess what, it’s never happened. For a group of people so obsessed with the history of our country, you sure do ignore the most recent history of it NEVER raising a dime. In fact, the Party loses money on these every single time. For more information please visit http://www.vpap.org and look up the money made/lost in the conventions. You will find that you are in the Red, and I do not mean Republican. If you’re worried about costing the tax payers money, don’t. The Dems will be holding a primary, so the polling locations will already be open. Also, from a campaign perspective, it is way better start with a list of over a million people, who you know are predisposed to liking you, than to start with a list of 30,000 people you, whom we probably
already knew who they were.
I will end with this, choosing a convention because you
think you are going to get a conservative candidate is ludicrous. Let me give
you a quick history lesson, since you seem to be so shortsighted:
2009 Convention – McDonnell (Establishment)
2012 Primary – Allen (Establishment)
2013 Convention – Cuccinelli (Tea)
2014 Convention – Gillespie (Establishment)
2014 Primary – Brat (Tea)
Primaries/Conventions have NO bearing on the outcome, it is a preconceived notion you have made up in your mind. So do my family and me a favor and let us vote by our house.
Strong words and strong convictions. And with a tasty backdrop of anonymous posting cowardice. When you registered with Disqus, it was equally easy to actually use your name. Very compelling.
“you point out to the one time we did that in the last 5 years and I will concede, because guess what, it’s never happened.” Wrong-o, sport. The conventions in 2013 and 2014 were both the biggest fundraisers for the party each year. I won’t hold my breath for the concession, though.
I don’t know about everybody else, but I find the fact that the establishment players are finally willing to self-identify as the establishment is a victory in itself. It wasn’t that long ago that they wouldn’t even own that.
I have made my desire known to the RPV, a desire to NOT hold a nominating convention. By doing so we disenfranchise the vast majority of dependable Republican voters, and many of them have stated flat out that if this happens they will never again vote for a Virginia Republican. I have been to state conventions and I have seen the games that are played, and I’d rather take my chances with Democrats voting in our primary than to leave this important decision to a handful of party hacks that care about nothing but internal political gamesmanship. Go ahead with this plan if you want to, but do so knowing that a lot of people are ready to dump the GOP as it is, and this is a great way to push more of them over the edge.
Correct me if Im wrong, but didn’t the RNC change the rules about delegates back to winner take all? If we have a convention, odds are the race will be over before the first district conventions are held. So while you make good points is it worth forgoing VA having a say in the nomination just to have a convention?
Also, I think its been proved over and over again that we aren’t mature enough as a party to hold honest conventions. If we have problems, which we most certainly will, any appeals definitely won’t be settled until well after the race is settled.
Max, there is nothing that says district and state conventions have to be held in May or June like they normally are. Having conventions in March is just as possible, and would make us just as relevant, particularly in a year like 2016 when there is such a crowded field and no one is going to have a big lead until much later.
I’m out of town and on my phone so I can’t easily crunch the numbers myself, but when you consider the timeframes in the party plan for meeting notice for unit and district conventions doesn’t having them in March end up being pretty much impossible? And if its not impossible then you will be having around 130 unit mass meetings in 60ish day period which will make it a giant cluster@$#! for everyone involved.
But convince me its logistically possible and that all the committees can handle it and i’d be open to supporting it. I don’t think that’s possible though.
So in Presidential years the calls for unit mass meetings must be issued 15 days in advance and the district conventions 30 days in advance. So lets assume we start on January 1.
Lets also assume all ~130 unit committees have their meetings on the same day.
That means ~January 16th we have all the unit committee meetings. The calls for the district conventions get issued the same day.
That leaves a ~February 16th date for all 11 district conventions. The state call is issued the same day.
That gives a ~March 15th date for the State convention. More likely it would be March 19th because that’s a Saturday.
Are you really going to tell me that kind of timeline is a good idea?
And that’s assuming all the unit and district committees work as fast as legally possible and everything is agreed to and pre-planned 6ish months ahead of time, which is not going to happen.
District committees can’t make their decision about when to hold their convention until all the unit committees make their decisions and the state convention can’t be decided upon until the district committees make their decision, at least under the scenario that we want to have everything happen in a time frame where its safe to assume there will still be a competitive race.
Bottom line is that if we want Virginia to have the best chance at making a big impact on the presidential nomination AND have a convention, we have to make a massive gamble that will almost certainly turn into a cluster!@#$ of massive proportions.
Max, sorry, but I think you’ve got a serious misimpression of how this works. You write that “District committees can’t make their decision about when to hold their convention until all the unit committees make their decisions and the state convention can’t be decided upon until the district committees make their decision.” None of this is even the slightest bit true.
I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. In a scenario where you are trying to have a state convention in March, the district conventions and state conventions can’t have a date decided on until its clear all the unit conventions can get all their calls and mass meetings done in that first 16 day period.
Lets get real here, your contention that we could have a state convention in March is indefensible so you make a stupid attack on my argument. You’re better than that.
A “stupid attack”? I was being respectful. Your facts are wrong. State and district convention calls go out in January. Mass meetings in February. Conventions in March. What is so hard to understand about that? You’re making up some convoluted scenario that doesn’t exist in real life where “the district conventions and state conventions can’t have a date decided on until it is clear all the [unit conventions? I assume you just mean units] can get all their calls and mass meetings done.” That’s just not true. The district and state convention dates come first, then the units set their mass meeting dates before those dates. Not very hard.
You are talking legal restrictions. I’m talking logistics. That you don’t understand the difference is exactly why this isn’t going to be possible.
If the district and state convention calls go out when you say, that means every unit committee has to hold their mass meetings with somewhere in the range of the minimal notice required by the party plan which is 15 days to 30-45 days to get them all in February. You are assuming all 130 or however many unit committees there are can handle locking down a location and coordinating all of the logistics in that time period.
That also puts all the campaigns in the unenviable position of dealing with ~130 mass meetings in a 29 day period or roughly 4 per day if they choose weekdays or 30 per day if they do weekends.
So yes, according to the rules you can set the district conventions and the state conventions in March and have the mass meetings in February. But if for logistical reasons the unit committees can’t do things on that short notice, for example the RPVB had theirs in March of last year, then you are screwing up the rest of the convention schedule.
Are you willing to take those risks and put the unit committees in the position where they have to work in such a compressed time scale?
Again, it’s a question of what’s logistically possible, not what’s possible in writing according to the party plan.
On top of all that, you are going to be counting on the campaigns wanting to put resources in VA in the time period of Iowa, NH, South Carolina, and NV. You really think the Presidential campaigns are going to be wanting to focus on dealing with 130 mass meetings in that time period? Again, LOGISTICS. Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.
Amateurs double down when they don’t know what they’re talking about.
And that’s exactly what you are doing by failing to offer an alternate timeline or dispute my saying that if we tried to hold the State convention in March we would have roughly 30 mass meetings per weekend every weekend in Feb. or roughly 4 per day if they did weekdays too.
Having a State Convention in March will be incredibly and most likely prohibitively difficult. Having a convention in May or June instead of a primary in March will significantly reduce Virginia’s influence in the nomination process.
Do you really disagree with those statements?
Hi Jamie- very compelling argument you make. Can you come on The John Fredericks Radio Show on Weds and elaborate – many of our callers have expressed a contrary view. Email us when you have a moment: John@jfradioshow.com 7:35, 8:35 or 9:05 work. Thanks!