So it didn’t take long for Matt Hall to shower praise on the decision by RPV’s State Central Committee to choose a primary to bind our delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention. [read_more]
Far more erudite folks than I have already covered the events of the meeting itself, so I’ll just address a few things about the meeting, the vote, and its consequences.
First, secret ballots are craven cowardice. We no longer tolerate General Assembly committee votes by secret ballot, and that’s the way every vote taken by representatives should be. Own your vote. Those who voted for a secret ballot on Saturday should be ashamed of themselves… and yes, I would have also voted to oppose a secret ballot on the question of whether to remove Berkley as the chair of the 5th Congressional District committee. His behavior was so obviously egregious, I would have been proud to cast a vote to remove him.
Second, the argument advanced by the pro-primary forces that RPV will gain ‘invaluable’ data is rank nonsense. This same argument has been advanced a number of times in previous cycles, and not once in the past has the party made good on the promise of primary data. Conversely, a 2016 Presidential convention would have brought out the largest level of attendance in Virginia Republican history from activists, no matter which candidate they supported. THIS data would be truly valuable to campaigns from city council on up to statewide races. A detailed list of all our most active members could have been had.
Third, the ‘inclusivity’ arguments ring hollow. The nomination process is not the place for outreach as some try to make it, for one thing. Outreach is a constant process the party should undertake. For another, candidates will have to expend quite a bit of energy just to get on the ballot, more difficult requirements than most other states, as against paying a one-time filing fee. Many states, whatever their method of nomination, operate with filing fees. This is not a significant barrier.
I’d also like to address the ridiculous assertions by Kasha Nielsen at the meeting that a convention would ‘disenfranchise’ CRs. College Republicans elected their leadership, her included, at a statewide convention. The hypocrisy is obvious. CRs can make it to a CRFV convention, but can’t make it out to a statewide nominating convention? Keep in mind that many campaigns cover the cost of CRs and YRs attending political conventions. This would certainly be no different. There would likely be even more opportunities for younger activists to get assistance with attending a mid-March convention, which would NOT fall during final exams.
Lastly, I want to address the issue of Daniel Webb not only supporting a primary, but actually giving the presentation in favor of it in lieu of Chip Muir. Webb promised to be pro-convention as a candidate for YRFV Chair. This is blatant dishonesty on his part. Do campaign promises mean nothing?
We’ll see you at the district conventions next year, primary supporters. Particularly those who switched their votes.