I have a serious question for my Republican friends. Before I set up the question, let me give a little background about me and my political views.
I am 34 years old, and I grew up in a staunchly Democratic household. Both of my parents grew up in staunchly Democratic households. I was first old enough to vote in the 1996 election (actually 1995, and I did turn out that year for a school referendum). I voted for Bill Clinton’s re-election, though don’t fault me given the background I just laid out.
In 1998 I first decided to start considering my vote a little more carefully than “who would my parents vote for?” and voted for Jesse Ventura for governor. It turns out that even though I sought to vote independently of my parents, they both voted Ventura too. I was not aligned with the Democrats, but hadn’t come to the point of being comfortable with the Republicans yet either.
In 1999 I was soundly saved by the Lord Jesus Christ. One of the first prayers I prayed after my conversion was for the Lord to show me how He views the world and to bring me into alignment with it. That prayer is still being answered to this day, though one of the first things to change in me was my understanding of politics. Far be it from me to say that Jesus is a Republican, I’ll never go that far, but I could see everything detestable about what Democrats stand for (abortion, the legalized theft that is the social program system, etc.) By the time the next election came around, I was not only firmly Conservative, I was substantially to the Right of most Republicans, where I remain to this day.
Since my conversion, I have voted Republican most of the time in non-Presidential races, and I voted Constitution Party for President in 2000, 2004, and 2008.
Also since my conversion, I have been given the riot act from countless Republicans about my views on Presidential candidates. I’ve been told that I MUST vote Republican for a whole host of reasons. I may not like the candidate, but the Democrat will always be worse. I’ve never been much of a pragmatist in elections, and these conversations drive me as crazy as my vote drives these Republicans crazy, if not more.
I’ve been told numerous times by many Republicans that if I don’t like the candidates that are nominated, I need to get involved in the process early and do what I can to get candidates nominated that I can feel comfortable voting for. Had I heeded such advice from the beginning, I likely would have been caucusing for Alan Keyes in 2000 and 2004.
In 2008, I did what all those Republican friends had been begging me to do, I identified the candidate I liked and I got involved in the caucus process to lend him my support. I had been aware of, and to some degree familiar with Ron Paul for many years, and it was natural that I would support him. I went to precinct caucuses, got elected to my BPOU, where I got elected as a Delegate to my Congressional District and to the State.
Despite the way my fellow Ron Paul supporters were treated in 2008, I repeated the process in 2010 in order to be a part of selecting a candidate for Governor. I didn’t know the candidates well, as I tend not to follow state politics nearly as closely as I follow national politics. However, I had made a lot of connections two years prior in the process and befriended a lot of people who were out in 2008 to support Ron Paul. I knew that their political views were more in line with my own, and believed I could trust their judgment on a Gubernatorial candidate. To a man, they were all behind Tom Emmer, and I threw my support behind Emmer. Despite the fact that he lost, I have no regrets.
2012 rolled around and I got into the mix again. I was unhappy with my experience four years prior, and was tempted to forget the whole thing, but ultimately decided to give my fellow Republicans another shot. I had made many connections in 2008, and met a lot of people. Most of which were friendly toward me and seemed happy to have me in the process. However, when my support for Ron Paul would come up in conversation, defensive walls would immediately go up. There were, and are, strong stereotypes of Ron Paul supporters, many of which are unfair – based on a very small minority of fellow Paul supporters. In addition, I left Rochester and the state GOP convention with a very nasty taste in my mouth. The way Paul supporters, and even Ron Paul himself, were treated it was clear that we were not wanted in the party, that the tent was big but not big enough for us. The fact that Ron Paul came to the convention and wasn’t even allowed past the lobby was incredibly disrespectful, and I didn’t think any Presidential candidate should have been treated that way. Had Mitt Romney, Tom Toncredo, Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter, Rudy Giuliani, or Fred Thompson stayed in the race until that point and showed up at the convention, I would have expected them to be able to speak. The fact that Ron Paul had to go around to the back of the building and speak in the park was disgusting. The fact that Barb Davis White, candidate for US House in my own 5th District was completely thrown under the bus by the MN GOP after speaking along with Ron Paul in the park was disgusting as well.
Nevertheless, I got over my anger and came back two more times to participate in the process.
Now we’re at a pivot point. Last weekend, three Congressional Districts held their conventions and Ron Paul supporters got their people elected to all of the National Delegate and Alternate positions in all three of the CDs. A lot of Non-Ron Paul Republicans are upset. So my question is this: Do you want my participation in the GOP? I was told I should get involved and do what I could to get my guy nominated. I did that. Now that my guy is winning Delegates, which is what gets people nominated, I’m hearing a lot of Republicans saying that I should get out of the party. A lot of Republicans are saying that Ron Paul is “a Libertarian, not a Republican” and that Libertarians aren’t welcome in the GOP. A lot of Republicans don’t feel my contribution to the process is good enough because I’m not spending 20 hours a week knocking on doors, cold-calling potential voters, or passing out campaign literature. (Sorry, I have a growing family of small children – all 5 and younger – and don’t really even have time to be doing what I am doing.)
If you, GOPer, want me to go back to staying out of your way, and voting Constitution Party for President, I will be happy to do so. If you want me to stay involved in the process, and put in the work to make my voice heard in 2014 when we’re looking for a candidate to unseat Mark Dayton, I will be happy to do so. What I am not happy to do is to get involved, but echo your voice. If my role in the GOP is to be a yes-man, check in with you on which candidates to support and what work to do for your precious party, count me out!
Please don’t get out of the party. But please understand the Ron Paul supporters and the party is a big mess of an issue, and there are hard feelings on both sides.
First, you are right that there is a strong stereotype of Paul supporters, and it is based on a small minority. But in any group, it is the most vocal and radical that stand out. The vast majority of Tea Partiers behaved and demonstrated respectfully, but the one or two kooks are the ones that got media attention. If you argue for Paul with facts and logic, I think many in the party will respond in kind (Jack Tomczak is a great example of this). And if you don’t criticize the radicals, you can’t separate yourself from them.
Second, the funny quirk about political parties is that you can do more by working together, but by working together you have less say. If you joined the party to get one particular candidate elected, I think you are destined for disappointment. But if you joined to advance a set of principles, you have a better chance of getting somewhere. Most people walk into a party convention as a Republican who favors a candidate. If you walk in as a Paul supporter who will favor the Republican party, it puts you at odds with others.
Third, the elephant in the room is that will most Republicans agree down the line with Paul’s domestic policy, many of those same Republicans couldn’t disagree more with his foreign policy. There’s just no way to gloss over that.
Last, there is no argument that Ron Paul inspires people to follow him. But that is a serious problem, in my opinion–people are following a man, rather than an idea. What happens to the Paul organization tomorrow if Ron Paul were killed in a plane crash, or suffered a heart attack? Paul supporters scare people in the party when they say “Ron Paul will do this”, or “Dr Paul will cut that”. People in the party are much more likely to say “We need tax reform, and Cain is the one to do it”, or “we need a strong military, and Newt is the best man for the job”. Rather than offering Paul as the answer and then listing the problems, I think you could persuade better by stating the problem and then offering Paul as the answer.
Sorry for the rant, but this is a critical issue that the party needs to solve to have a chance of winning elections.
Thanks for the comments Dave.
You make a lot of good points, which I may not entirely agree with, but don’t find unreasonable either.
One area I think Ron Paul supporters get a bad rap is this idea that we’re one-candidate people. I am sure this comes from the fact that so many in the GOP are willing to sit in the center and be much more moderate than we’re comfortable. Paul sets himself apart, not only with his rhetoric but with his record. We appreciate that he consistently votes the same way he talks.
That doesn’t mean we only support him. I mentioned that I liked Alan Keyes and Tom Emmer to illustrate that I’m open to supporting others that share my values.
Where I get negative reactions from others is that I’m not willing to compromise my values and support a “moderate” just because he’s a better option than his Democratic opponent. I’m not always even convinced that is the case (I’ll get back to that). I hold to a lot of views that are Fiscally Conservative. I hold to a lot of views that, in principle are Socially Conservative, though I tend to take a Libertarian view on how those views are executed in policy. Some of these views differ from Ron Paul, but my views will get further under Ron Paul than they would under someone like Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney.
I say I’m not always convinced that a “moderate” Republican would be better than a Democrat because it is often short-sighted. A lot of the terrible legislation passed in the last three years wouldn’t have gotten anywhere under John McCain, but we also wouldn’t have a Tea Party or a Liberty movement like we have now. Ron Paul’s “Campaign for Liberty” wouldn’t be as strong as it is now, and my voice in the GOP wouldn’t be as strong right now facing a convention intending on endorsing McCain for re-election. Status Quo would be considered much safer, and we wouldn’t have so many people understanding that our Federal government needs some serious overhauling if we are to continue prospering into the future.
I’m not a pure Libertarian, though I am strongly inclined toward Libertarianism (my Libertarian friends tend not to comprehend the concept of Natural Law, which is the foundation of our freedom-inspiring Common Law system). Ron Paul is the only candidate that reflects my Libertarian-inclined values.
As for what happens when he’s gone, I’m not concerned at this point. In fact, I’m fairly encouraged. He has gotten a great movement going, and I am comfortable that others will continue to come forward to continue the “R3volution”. His son Rand is just one example, but there are many that have appeared at the local level. As they move up through state legislatures and into the national realm, the movement will continue to grow.
Another point I often make with my GOP friends when the general election approaches is that my vote isn’t always cast to try to elect the best candidate (or the lesser evil if that’s the case). I live in Minnesota, which last went GOP in 1972 for Nixon. I also do see the polls locally and can see when our state is poised to go Democrat yet again. In such a case, I often think it may be better to send a message to Minnesota Republicans, and Republicans in general, that their candidate isn’t good enough. The Constitution Party holds to values that most Republicans can not only live with, but that they claim to espouse. Voting Constitution party shows that I’m serious about the values I hold, and am not looking to just get a candidate through that can play well with Democrats in Congress. My vote, whether it goes Republican or Constitution, isn’t going to go anywhere in Minnesota anyway, why not at least make a statement? And it does make a statement. If the candidate the GOP nominated was one the Libertarian & Constitution parties can be happy with, those parties will simply endorse the Republican rather than nominating their own candidates, much like the Communist and Socialist parties endorsed Obama rather than running a Communist or Socialist. (Both have said they wouldn’t run candidates if Ron Paul were nominated by the GOP). This view I hold at general election time really doesn’t sit well with many Republicans because they have tunnel vision about Republican candidates.
My biggest problem though, is people who want my involvement when I’m too disgusted with the GOP to vote for them, but don’t want my involvement when I am a part of an organizational movement that has some teeth to it.