The word on the New Hampshire ‘street’ is that a core faction of Rand Paul supporters will boycott the 603 Alliance GPS Caucus on October 17th.
Why?
A narrative has been worked out. Things they tell each other until convinced it is the truth, no matter how impossible or improbable.
The point of the caucus, for starters, is to try something else, something that has not been done before in New Hampshire. Bring hundreds if not thousands of random registered NH Republicans together (including undeclared voters with a history of taking a GOP ballot) to vote in an open caucus. We vote until there is one candidate to unify behind and then campaign for that candidate in the months leading to the First in the Nation New Hampshire primary. The caucus winner might be our second or third choice but we need to try something different to keep the RNC from diluting the base with a large field and nominating another unelectable RINO with little or no support.
There will be media at the caucus. We expect to have a high-profile MC. There will be a live band, and food vendors.
Out of state folks are expected to help out as marshals. They’ll call votes, and do the counting, and monitor time in between. These are people who can’t vote in the caucus because they are not from NH.
So why boycott a historical political event like this, where if your guy or gal wins they could inherit hundreds of grassroots activist supporters working to help win the primary in 2016?
Is it because participants are asked to support whoever wins? And that is the case, why not just say as much?
I bring it up, not just because it is becoming common knowledge but because I got “interviewed” by a Free Stater on Facebook (Yes, they are an actual Free Stater) who seemed intent on justify the narrative that this caucus is a front for Ted Cruz.
Here’s the coup de gras, after several minutes of my answering questions to no avail.
Free Stater (who shall remain anonymous):
“I am afraid that other than you and Skip, everyone else (on the steering committee) is a Cruz supporter, which makes my participation in the event mute. The website lists 4-6 more people on the committee.
Three invited speakers at a 603 event in April (in a long list of gusts) mentioned Ted Cruz by name. Ever since then there’s a rumor going ’round- fix is in. But I often wonder, would they care if those three had mentioned another candidate, or their candidate, and would that mean the same thing?
For the record Chuck and Di Lothorp (mentioned in the conversation by name) are recently declared Cruz Supporters, yes. But they are no longer on the committee. They are mentioned as rounding members because they are but this happens all the time, most often when a campaign offers to pay someone for their time but often because someone decided they want to announce for a candidate so changes are made. It happens.
I got invited to join the committee because someone else stepped back.
The Free Stater was also concerned about members being seen at Cruz events as supporters. Fair enough. But we put on events for candidates so we are often there to support the event but not the candidate. CBL-NH and 603 put on events for candidates to get them in front of voters. We’ve reached out to all the campaigns that align closely enough with the 603 Alliance mission statement to support free markets and the Constitution. They are not obliged to answer, but some have.
Through the 603 sister organization CBL-NH, Fran Wendelboe helped organize Governor Walkers Motorcycle Tour of Central NH. We participated in a GOP dinner at which Walker was the Keynote. We’ve been with or seen around most if not all the candidates who’ve been to the state, and offered to help do events for their campaigns before the October 17th caucus.
The idea behind the offer is to get these candidates in front of voters so they can say they met them, asked questions, or were informed. We can only ask. We can only help those that answer. And for the record, we have asked the Rand Paul campaign on more than one occasion but they have yet to accept.
It’s all above board.
So what was my answer to the Free Stater? Here’s their statement again for context.
Free Stater:
“I am afraid that other than you and Skip, everyone else (on the steering committee) is a Cruz supporter, which makes my participation in the event mute. The website lists 4-6 more people on the committee.
Me:
Let’s assume that’s even correct, and I can’t tell you who they would vote for so that’s a stretch. How do (you) surmise that those 4-6 people will fix a vote of hundreds of random registered voters in an open caucus, covered by the media, marshalled by people who can’t even participate in the vote?
(seen at 7:10pm)
Their response was to end the conversation.
It is worth mentioning, as I did earlier in that ‘interview’ that neither Chuck or Di Lothrop will even be at the caucus. They wont even be in New Hampshire. That did not have any impact on my interviewer. They had the answer before they said ‘Hi!’
(Caucus deniers will now perform exponential magic to create scores of supporters, whose Rube-Goldbergian machinations have guaranteed some pre-determined outcome.)
It is amusing.
It is actually very amusing because we can’t know who is coming. Early sign up just opened last week and we expect plenty of folks will just show up on the day of the caucus; if you are an *eligible registered New Hampshire voter and in the arena by the first vote you are in for the whole thing, whoever happens to be on your list of preferred candidates.
What we do know is that this particular Free Stater and some fawning faction of the Rand Paul or Bust Crowd have decided that 4-6 people (or is that 2-4) people who used to be on the steering committee might vote for Cruz in a crowd of hundreds. Let me help you out. I can guarantee you that there are people who are not on the committee who are going to vote. There are people on the commute who will vote. In both cases I have no idea for whom or who will be first on their list.
But that’s all secondary because the real issue might not even be the caucus itself. It is the message being sent to the world by these Caucus deniers.
This is New Hampshire. HOME TO THE FRIKKIN FREE STATE PROJECT. Libertarian Mecca. They don’t think they can get enough Rand Paul Republicans and undeclared voters to a caucus to get him over the top because a few people mentioned another candidates name or moved on to support them? That’s never stopped them before so what gives?
Who or what broke your machine?
I’d like to think Rand could get much needed traction here. Senator Paul was the inside favorite to win that caucus until Trump surged. Given the random nature of a caucus we considered Rand Paul to be the only candidate with a predictable base capable of that kind of turnout. And in New Hampshire. Not anymore.
Trump is probably the new guy to beat, with Fiorina, and Carson on his heels. But wait, wait, WAIT! Four to Six likely Cruz supporters who have some kind of connection to the 603 Alliance WILL magically convince hundreds of some of the most well informed primary voters in the country (in some cases without even being present) to forget their own opinions.
That is what the narrative suggests no matter how impossible it sounds.
And the 603 Alliance is funded with Nazi Gold or a portion of the Rothschild fortune, or Karl Rove’s pawned pinkie ring, or something.
None of that is true either.
What is true is that this is a caucus. Only one candidate can win. Candidates with fewer votes will be eliminated and people will have to vie for them after every vote. There can be only one and that is how a caucus is won. And yes, it could be Ted Cruz because I know Ron Paul voters who like Cruz more than Rand, and who like Trump more than Rand–and not just because someone paid them by pawning off Karl Rove’s pinkie ring so they would chant to them in their sleep. (No, I don’t think he has a pinkie ring but since when did that ever stop anyone from conspiring to make it so if it advanced a narrative?)
Look, I know a few candidates might be attracting some of Senator Paul’s presumed base. I know a few Ron Paul supporters are not thrilled with some of Senator Paul’s decisions. That’s the point of the caucus. To get people to unify behind a reasonable alternative who might not be your number one; to stop the RNC RINO factory from leaving us with something so rank voters can’t be bothered to show up to vote down ticket and we lose state races and more and more liberty at every level of government.
Still not interested? Can’t commit until that special guy or gal has dropped out for good? Unwilling or incapable? You can still attend the caucus. No one will follow you around after to make sure you support the caucus winner. It is an honor system and only the steering committee will be held to that higher standard. (We don’t have campaign Stasi trolling the ideological barbed-wire perimeter complete with narrative spewing attack dogs.)
You don’t have to do a thing, we’re just asking everyone to give it a try. To step up and push back against the Establishment machine. To try something different.
If you can’t then don’t. But your refusing to participle will be the reason your candidate never had a chance. That’s on you.
