NH GOP

Updated: I had identified Roland Six as a retired Navy SEAL – I blundered and apologize to Mr. Six for the misidentification and have removed that designation.

============================================

Posted with permission by Roland Six on the current situation in the NH GOP.  Lightly edited by me for presentation:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the matter. I have spent the day reading and re-reading your thoughts below as well as many other posts which have arrived in my inbox.

I understand the analogy you used, and, at some levels the “mission” as it might be considered, can be likened to warfare. However, in reading your words, a little voice in the back of my head whispers that it is the lockstep mentality so prevalent in the opposition political party that is being suggested here.

To speak directly to the “sides” issue, I find it curious that there seems to be an argument that donations to the GOP are being “withheld” because these unnamed donors  are disinclined to release said funds because Jack Kimball is the GOP chair. I’m not the smartest knife in the drawer, but there seems to be a “side” taken in this matter if this scenario is accurate. A little hypocrisy here? Where is the “team” behavior you cite on the part of those currently at odds with the Chairman? Probably not with “Jack and you folks ”, as you eloquently state below. Are you suggesting that you are on a different “side” than “Jack and you folks”; in conflict with the statement that “Once Jack was elected the "sides" issues go away and the team or mission and platform take precedent.”

There is a long-standing and well-documented history of conservatives of every flavor – social, fiscal, or otherwise – being marginalized or ignored by the “Establishment” Republicans in the Party. Because of this, there are some who are of the opinion that there is really no difference between the GOP and the Democrat political infrastructures. Both seem to engage in a…

Read more

In Wisconsin this last election cycle, the Progressive Democrats and unions were booted from power after having had their way for decades.  Voters finally decided that they should not wield that power and those that were voted in immediately set in on to do what they campaigned on.  However, the Progressives & unions decided they didn’t have to accept that result and started recalls, hoping to override the November results. They have been used to wielding power for decades – and took it for granted.  When they lost their majorities, they flipped their lids.

How is this much different with the situation in the NH GOP?  The perception (which makes it reality) of the grassroots is that while the old guard lost but, as Steve put it so well, they have seemingly been fighting the results of January since.  Now, they are looking for their version of the Democrat’s recall.

It is my opinion that they believe they are trying to right a wrong.  They also believe that there is only an upside for them in that the grassroots that helped to put Jack Kimball into the Chair have no where else to go.  In essence, they believe there is absolutely no downside to this attack, on the idea of "they have no where else to go" as well as "Suckers, there is NOTHING they can do in retaliation". They believe there is no consequence to their decision and action.

There needs to be one. If Jack survives the vote, he should immediately turn around and ask for those who voted against him to resign. He also should pivot and bring in more of the Freedom folks to advise and run things. Why? This is only one battle, IMHO, in this seemingly endless enmity between the Establishment and grassroots. it will not stop here.  In fact, this will only cause that to increase.

I had a discussion with a long term NH political operative last night.  He brought up…

Read more

I was just emailed a question, given the rumors swirling around the present NH GOP Chair, Jack Kimball.

"…is JK the right man for the NH GOP?"

The person asking the question also had a quip on this post; that, after the jump

My answer below:

Read more

Thursday, August 18, 2011

I would like to respond to the editorial published in Foster’s Daily Democrat on Aug. 11, entitled "Who does the GOP represent?" The editors examined the results of recent special elections in Strafford and Hillsborough Counties in which both Republican candidates were defeated. The article quotes Democrat Party Chairman Ray Buckley’s partisan diatribe about the GOP and, in general, paints a largely critical and one-sided picture of both the GOP and it’s accomplishments in the spring session of the 2011 New Hampshire Legislature.

So who do we represent? We represent those that agree with the preamble to the Declaration of Independence: We actively support the rule of law, setting it firmly on the bedrock foundations of our state and federal constitutions, as plainly written and intended by our forebears. We believe in the inherent, sovereign right of the electorate to rule the government, not the other way around; and that the government was contracted to protect our lives, our liberties and our property, not micromanage them. We represent laissez faire capitalism and the proven axiom that liberty and reason are the necessary handmaidens of human happiness. We represent those that see America’s promise and ideals as exceptional and inspirational to the whole world. If you would breathe free, we represent you.

Ideals and party mission statements are one thing, but delivering on promises made and implied is quite another. So how did we do? On Election Day 2010, the Republican-led legislature faced a structural deficit of $895,000,000 in a sinking economy with U3 unemployment standing at 5.7%. We had promised to balance the budget with no new taxes or fees, and to do so without resorting to gimmicks or the state credit card or load-shifting to cities and towns. We had large majorities in the legislature, and all five seats in the Executive Council, but faced a popular four-term Democrat governor.

The implication that Bill O’Brien and…

Read more

To the Editor,                                                                                                                               
The premise of an article in the Nashua Telegraph  (“State GOP facing trouble in paradise” 7/25/2011), is that the New Hampshire GOP, despite overwhelming victories in the legislature and the Executive Council, is basically floundering in Concord, nearly out of cash and rife with “. . infighting and back-stabbing.” It also opines that Governor Lynch’s job-approval ratings should have diminished far more, given the “. . . huge political advantage in the House and Senate.” Really? Does the author think that the luster of NH’s premier ribbon cutter is a good metric for measuring results in the legislature and Executive Council? Or that Republicans forgot that they were sent to Concord to get results and restore fiscal sanity, not to merely polish or tarnish reputations?

A close reading of the article shows naked partisanship by the unidentified author. This collection of carefully tailored facts set among unsupported allegations and hearsay assertions; (i.e. no details on the polls, where taken, questions asked, etc.) are clearly chosen to put Republicans in a bad light.

Why else report on a State GOP account balance, from several months ago, when the current balances are much more substantial? Why play with the timelines, if the article is supposed to take the pulse and viability of the NH GOP now? Why hint and wink about “back-stabbing” without presenting any detail or juicy evidence? I invite voters to carefully review this rancid political suppository for themselves (it’s almost all innuendo) and to then consider the rest of the story.
For example:

The basic premises of the article are patently false. Having a charming, popular, and largely statist Governor Lynch is not ‘paradise’ for the GOP. On election day,…

Read more

From Google Ads (of all places):

          Congressman Charlie Bass

          is holding a Town Hall Meeting in

          Salem on Feb. 26/11AM. Learn

          more.

          Bass.House.gov

That would be this Saturday. Go. Watch. Ask. Record.

He’s already gone to the middle, running away from any aspirations of being part of the TEA Party movement (big surprise, eh) that he alluded to during the campaign.  Let’s get real – the Conservatives and the Liberty & Freedom type folks in NH CD-2 barely voted in numbers to give him a victory – vote for a Republican Progressive (self-described) or a Democrat Progressive.  

Why go and watch?   Forwarded by loyal reader, Steven (emphasis mine):

UPDATED: House Fails to Adopt $20B in Additional Cuts (February 18, 2011 by Dan Holler)

Washington, D.C. – The House of Representatives voted 147-281 against an amendment offered by RSC Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), which would have cut an additional $20 billion in spending from H.R.1, the bill to fund the government for the remainder of fiscal year 2011.  Heritage Action for America was an outspoken proponent of the amendment.

“The failed vote on Jordan’s Amendment is a missed opportunity,” Heritage Action CEO Michael A. Needham said.  “This amendment would have put House Republicans in full compliance with their Pledge to America, which promised to rollback non-security discretionary spending to 2008 levels.”

Currently, H.R.1 cuts non-security discretionary spending to approximately $398 billion, $20 billion shy of the 2008 level.

“We congratulate the 147 Members who voted to uphold their Pledge,” Needham continued.  “And while the underlying bill takes an important first step forward, we know they can and must do more if America is to remain an exceptional nation.”

Today’s vote was just the first of many legislative battles over spending, and the future of our country.  Heritage Action for America will encourage Congress to cut spending to put our country on the path towards prosperity and will hold Members accountable to their Pledge and their constituents.

The following 92 Republicans opposed the amendment, along with every Democrat:

All of the Republicans that voted against this are after the jump; for those readers that live in NH, this is all you want to know:

 New Hampshire

• Charlie Bass (NH-02)

Read more