Keep in mind you can't serve as a precinct chair of a precinct you don't live in. But if your local seat is open then go ahead and run for it (you'll be unopposed). But if it isn't, ask if you can go to the meetings anyway and you will eventually be asked to fill the seat. These are good places to learn early on about the primary efforts you'll want to lend support to. Also look into the regional clubs within your county.
There have been major overhauls that accompanied voter coalition realignments. Whigs morphed into Republicans. Federalists morphed into National Republicans. These were top-down efforts. Not grassroots efforts to pressure one party's elites into being better.
The problem is that many of the worse Rs just don't care that much about losing. Threatening to not vote in the general just doesn't exert any leverage. And I have never seen Rs change their policies or priorities following a low turnout in a general election. E.g. establishment Rs actually got worse after the 1992, 1996 elections involving Perot peeling off populists.
We can stop some of the bad ones from getting the nomination. That's were we still have a voice. Again, I'm only talking about our voice in electoral politics.
Schweikart has a wise friend. He's right.
They sent the FBI to "infiltrate" the Tea Party. Talk about budget deficits is dangerous, and can lead to extremism. Angelo Codevilla relays an anecdote about it here: https://amgreatness.com/2020/11/20/from-ruling-class-to-oligarchy/
This is a disgusting organization.
The logic of voting for the least worst in the general elections still holds whether we like it to or not. Our leverage over the party is in the primaries. Only there. (Not voting and 3rd parties have never worked. We have a rich history from which to safely draw that conclusion.) But, of course, I'm only talking about electoral political efforts.
You are right about energy of the movement. The rally yesterday was significant in showing this. We aren't going anywhere. We can really make ourselves a pain in the ass of the establishment.
We don't need a larger-than-life leader to advocate for MAGA. We need commitment (I know that's hard), basic organization and a little bit of discipline to follow through on simple, feasible plans (I know that's hard).
It would be nice if we had chartered clubs across the country. Until then, focus on local politics.
Third parties never work. Primary challenges are sometimes successful.
We need an organization that focuses on winnable primary challenges. It would be helpful if the Trump family put it together. If they don't then someone else with have to do it.
This a true, and the organization should require consistency from it's members. Since we don't have that yet, I suggest joining some local conservative groups. Don't worry if they are lame establishment outfits. Seek out other Trump supporters and go from there.
One of the most important things to get out of all of this is the resolve to clean house in the republican party.
Ducey is term limited, but a decision to speak out, or not, should be taken as a litmus test for aspiring republicans in AZ.
He has 107 million reasons to sweep this all under the rug.
No - GA, like other states, has signatures on file. The question is whether there will actually be a signature match. Kemp is "urging" the SoS for one. Interesting to see what the SC will say about it.
He's requesting signature matching now.
The big difference here is that this is going to the SC. Barrett wasn't my favorite option, but she's no Sullivan to put it mildly. Also, please keep in mind that there is a whole set of cases the SC will be deciding on. This is not just about "overturning" the election results of various states.
Our right-leaning groups suck at getting information out to voters.
Amendment 3 stops gerrymandering favoring Democrats. Vote YES on it.
Two years ago a lot of outside lefty money was spent to get an amendment passed called "Clean Missouri". It was deceptively worded. It seemed to be mainly about lowering campaign contributions from lobbyists -- that is popular with voters and that is why is passed. But it ALSO mandated a new way to draw the state's legislative district map.
Now because of Clean MO the State Auditor get's to appoint a "non-partisan" demographer to draw the lines. Prior to 2018 a bi-partisan commission appointed by the gov. drew up the map (with input from judges following the inevitable court challenges). Why does the state Auditor appoint the "non-partisan" demographer? Because that is the one state-level position held by a Democrat in MO. Of course, the demographer is going to be left wing and will draw the lines in some ridiculous way to make Democrats more competitive statewide. The same thing has happened in Maryland, California, and Pennsylvania in recent years.
Amendment 3 brings us back to the old way of drawing the map. By the way, our current map was drawn by a Democrat-appointed bi-partisan commission, and approved by democrat judges. It also happens to make sense.
Make sure to remind/prod other likely Trump voters to get cast a ballot. Remind them of down-ballot elections which are often decided by only a few thousand votes.
The ideology was also co-opted by the Koch brothers and the institutions/"scholars" they have financially supported over the years. Old school libertarians such as Murray Rothbard were not in favor of open borders. Anyone associated with the Institute for Humane Studies, or any place like that, do.
But there is the bigger issue: libertarians do not accomplish libertarianism. They don't have enough representatives or judges or bureaucrats on their side to ever get what they want. They don't bargain or compromise (except Rand Paul). And they don't win presidential elections. Support for them is a waste even if you accept their goals.
I will answer your question for them: Either they personally benefit from CoC open border or outsourcing policy, or they are only libertarian as a way of being contrarian. In the latter case they do not actually care about policy outcomes, so any talk about practical politics is irrelevant to them.
Libertarianism was co-opted back in the 1970's by the Koch brothers. They literally purchased a third party movement. They turned it into a pro-gun liberal movement. Before then libertarianism was not in favor of, for example, open borders.
When the election is over try to explain to him how important immigration control is.
Make them promise to call/text every right-leaning person they know well to remind them to vote. They won't do this (even if they promise you they will). But if you tell them to do it, you will convey to them how important this election is. Doing something like this is more effective than just saying, "voting is important".
"Obviously, there’s a lot of affirmative action in the med school racket: the acceptance rate (43%) for Mexican-Americans is virtually the same as for non-Hispanic Whites (44%) even though Mexican Americans average around the 26th percentile of the white distribution in MCATs and college GPA. And 36% of blacks get accepted compared to 44% of whites even though blacks scores and grades are down around the 17th percentile of the white distribution." https://www.unz.com/isteve/medical-school-test-scores-gpas-and_27/
And he knows how to campaign and get a message out effectively. He isn't just another right-leaning character spouting off on twitter. Our side needs more like him.
Actually it would only take about 5 million energetic Trump supporters -- doing exactly what you are doing -- to radically and permanently change the party within about 4 years. Establishment Republicans have money, but nothing else. No agenda that 50%+1 want, no army of volunteers, no real vision. 5 million angry party activists would be dominant. So it would be nice if about 5 million people realized what works in politics and followed through.