RPVNetwork

Grassroots Network of the Republican Party of Virginia

With the RPV State Central Cmte. removing Chairman Frederick today, names have begun to surface as to who should be the next chairman.

Former Loudon Co. GOP Chairman Randy Minchew

Fairfax Co. GOP Chairman Anthony Bedell

Warrenton Mayor George Fitch

Former RPV Chairman Ed Gillespie

Former RPV Comm. Dir. Shaun Kenney

Northern Virginia businessman Earle Williams (although he supported Mark Warner in 2001)

Sandy Liddy Bourne

Pat Mullins

Charlie Judd

Jay Hughes

So, any of these or do you have your own suggestion?

Views: 116

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Republican moderate pretending to be a conservative....lol. Very true on that. We seem to get a lot of those. The problem there is whatever he said came across as disengenuous. I was such an admirer of John McCain before he ran for President the first time. He used to be such a straight talker.

Just because we have allowed the left villify conservatives doesn't mean it's wrong to be one. Like I said we need to keep arguing the conservative line, even if it loses elections, because it is the right thing to do. I have faith that more people believe in conservative values than even know it. We just need to stay on message. Yes we need to prioritize and stay away from issues that are not currently important and that could prevent us winning elections but we should not abandon those issues or take them off of the platform.

So we are where we are right now and we need to make sure that the Republicans win back this state. Then we can worry about keeping our candidate in line and encourage him to lead us forward. Like I said before I don't really know any of these people.
See, Mark...I don't like being judged as "squishy" by folks who don't even take the time to find out what I believe.
I'm as conservative as they come...but I'm also pragmatic and I look at what needs attention in an outright priority of those beliefs. It's all too easy to caste assignments of someone's conservative or squishy nature.
What I do want is a principled, fund-raiser extrordonaire who does not take it personally when he is questioned about his and the party's finances being inter-mingled.
Mr. Frederick has had problems with being questioned since he was in College in Ga. as I hear it. This is all about him right now...the McDonnell Governor's race can go straight to hell. I find that offensive, and I'm betting a better part of the Republicans who support McDonnell will, too.

Mark Collins said:
Republican moderate pretending to be a conservative....lol. Very true on that. We seem to get a lot of those. The problem there is whatever he said came across as disengenuous. I was such an admirer of John McCain before he ran for President the first time. He used to be such a straight talker.

Just because we have allowed the left villify conservatives doesn't mean it's wrong to be one. Like I said we need to keep arguing the conservative line, even if it loses elections, because it is the right thing to do. I have faith that more people believe in conservative values than even know it. We just need to stay on message. Yes we need to prioritize and stay away from issues that are not currently important and that could prevent us winning elections but we should not abandon those issues or take them off of the platform.

So we are where we are right now and we need to make sure that the Republicans win back this state. Then we can worry about keeping our candidate in line and encourage him to lead us forward. Like I said before I don't really know any of these people.
Obviously Jeff Frederick should be elected again and the people that voted him out have got to go. You should not be worried about in-fighting, you should be worried about the establishment that does follow the will of the people.
Brian W. Schoeneman said:

If Frederick tries to run again, he will lose. He doesn't have a hundred grand and four or five months to campaign and recruit delegates throughout the Commonwealth.

If Frederick tries to run again, he will lose win. He doesn't have need a hundred grand and four or five months to campaign and recruit delegates throughout the Commonwealth. What he has is thousands of fans that are pissed that some committee could undo their votes. You haven't heard the last of this.
Good for you Mr. Drain. We have been shut out of comments on another thred because we have created a Circular Firing Squad against Brian Shoenman coming on this site and pretending to be a Moderate Republican. If the owners of this site think that it is OK to go against the Virgnia Right to Work position, which is what McDonnell and Bolling are fighting for, then just maybe some are inviting those that don't belong under that Big Tent. Tom, I saw a post by you, at the beginning of this site, that said there are some that just need to be thrown overboard. What exactly would it take you to be convinced that some votes just aren't worth it? Would supporting the Card Check legislation convince you that some votes are not worthy?

Ed Drain said:
Brian W. Schoeneman said:

If Frederick tries to run again, he will lose. He doesn't have a hundred grand and four or five months to campaign and recruit delegates throughout the Commonwealth.

If Frederick tries to run again, he will lose win. He doesn't have need a hundred grand and four or five months to campaign and recruit delegates throughout the Commonwealth. What he has is thousands of fans that are pissed that some committee could undo their votes. You haven't heard the last of this.
Clothing and food drives, clean-up campaigns, mentoring - what ideas do you have for projects in your area? It's part of our mission, so think about how you want to contribute and let us know.
Brian, when you say it was not an ideological fight, you are partially right. The people that ousted Jeff didn't care about his ideology so much as they wanted a lap dog that would agree with everything they said, and would fall on his sword whenever they wanted.

Competence? This was never about competence. This was a mean, slanderous campaign of vicious innuendo designed to remove someone who wasn't a rubber-stamp yes-man. And when that obviously did not work, we had the artificial drama of some people suggesting that it was somehow good for the party for him to lay down and die, just because they asked him to.

Regarding the convention this year... well I am going and should Jeff run again, I will be voting for him. I will be sure to tell everyone I know about the dishonorable, scandalous way the SCC removed Frederick. *They* tried to do it in secret, *they* tried to squelch any discussion, and they pulled a tricky manipulation of a proxy to ensure they'd win.

And you are worried about in-fighting? I think if you understood how this ouster was planned and executed, you would see in-fighting as a positive result of people sticking to principles. You would see it as evidence that our Party is worth saving. It is a shame that you don't.


Brian W. Schoeneman said:
Ed, the convention assembled this year is not the convention that was assembled last year. If Frederick chooses to run this time, he will lose. And he will have demonstrated that his efforts to become party chairman were not taken with the best interests of the party in mind. Frederick had his opportunity to prove to those of us who did not support him that he was the right man for the job. He didn't do that. In order to protect the party and ensure we can focus on November, the SCC had to do what it did. If Frederick prolongs this fight, all he does is take attention away from McDonnell, Bolling and our AG candidates at a time when we are well poised to take all three. I hope that whomever is elected Chairman is just as conservative as Frederick is - that is the only thing that I believe will prove to some that this wasn't an ideological fight. It was about competence, not ideology.

Sandy, you're obsessed. Please stop with the unnecessary attacks on me. Nowhere have I said that I support card check, and your continued efforts to censor me demonstrate you are willing to toss aside fundamental principles like the freedom of speech that no Republican should ever support curtailing. You would better serve your cause if you'd get out from behind the keyboard and actually work to elect Republicans across Virginia and across our country, rather than baselessly attack those of us who do.

Sandy Cope said:
Good for you Mr. Drain. We have been shut out of comments on another thred because we have created a Circular Firing Squad against Brian Shoenman coming on this site and pretending to be a Moderate Republican. If the owners of this site think that it is OK to go against the Virgnia Right to Work position, which is what McDonnell and Bolling are fighting for, then just maybe some are inviting those that don't belong under that Big Tent. Tom, I saw a post by you, at the beginning of this site, that said there are some that just need to be thrown overboard. What exactly would it take you to be convinced that some votes just aren't worth it? Would supporting the Card Check legislation convince you that some votes are not worthy?
Ed Drain said:
Brian W. Schoeneman said:

If Frederick tries to run again, he will lose. He doesn't have a hundred grand and four or five months to campaign and recruit delegates throughout the Commonwealth.

If Frederick tries to run again, he will lose win. He doesn't have need a hundred grand and four or five months to campaign and recruit delegates throughout the Commonwealth. What he has is thousands of fans that are pissed that some committee could undo their votes. You haven't heard the last of this.
Nothing slanderous? They accused him of witholding cash from donations, implying that he somehow profited, when they knew that was false. They accused him of acting improperly during votes, which they also knew was false. So that is what I mean by slanderous.

Now you say that everyone on SCC is elected. Care to review and try that again? You are obviously testing me as to my knowledge of how the system works. Not everyone on the SCC is elected by convention. There are bonus seats that come about due to vacancies or if a particular district is carried. Those bonus seats are *selected* not elected.

I'm not saying Jeff walked on water, but 1) it was not the Grassroots that wanted Jeff out and 2) it was not the Grassroots that tried to hide information and then later tried to limit disscussion and 3) none of the things Jeff did rise to the level of ousting him.

Now I worry for the consequences for Bob McDonnell. He was on the wrong side of this and the Congressional delegation got in line to try to protect him. I understand why they would do that, even if I disagree.

The complaint that Chairman Frederick used his own company, well, so what? Had he not used his company, and the capability for online donations had not been made available, RPV might not have collected those donations at all. Then you'd be saying he was ineffective. It was a stop-gap measure done by his company becasue his company was *ready and able*.




Brian W. Schoeneman said:
Ed, please. There was nothing slanderous about the constant mistakes and errors Frederick made while he was chairman. No conspiracy was formed to ensure he'd put his foot in his mouth over and over again in front of the national media. No conspiracy was formed to tell him it was okay to use his own company as a vendor for RPV to process campaign contributions and then claim an in-kind donation to beef up his fundraising numbers (which were anemic in comparison to previous years). It wasn't slander to point out that he went on a junket to Israel in the heart of the election campaign last year. And no one held a gun to his head and asked him to Twitter about negotiations in the State Senate. The "people who ousted Jeff" included a super majority of the State Central Committee, all of whom were elected, just like he was, by conventions. They also included Bob McDonnell, the entire Congressional delegation, all of the State Senate save one, 3/4s of the House leadership, and dozens of unit chairs across the country - including those who had supported Frederick and even the one who handled his transition. That's over a hundred elected officials and party activists, covering the entire range of ideological positions within the party. Were they all wrong? Were they all part of this conspiracy?

I don't see this as sticking to one's principles because it isn't a principle of the Republican party to manage poorly. Just the opposite. Our party is worth saving, but we need someone competent to do it. Frederick isn't that man. He had has chance, and he blew it. It's time to move on and not refight battles that have already been lost.

You're going to the convention to vote for Frederick, I'll be voting against him. Hopefully we'll find a new chairman that both of us can agree on and we can focus on what really matters, which is November.
Oh yeah, one more thing -- regarding sticking to principles -- How about the principle that one is innocent until proven guilty? Not only did they bypass that, but in effect, they said he is guilty AFTER he was proven innocent!


Ed Drain said:
Nothing slanderous? They accused him of witholding cash from donations, implying that he somehow profited, when they knew that was false. They accused him of acting improperly during votes, which they also knew was false. So that is what I mean by slanderous. Now you say that everyone on SCC is elected. Care to review and try that again? You are obviously testing me as to my knowledge of how the system works. Not everyone on the SCC is elected by convention. There are bonus seats that come about due to vacancies or if a particular district is carried. Those bonus seats are *selected* not elected.

I'm not saying Jeff walked on water, but 1) it was not the Grassroots that wanted Jeff out and 2) it was not the Grassroots that tried to hide information and then later tried to limit disscussion and 3) none of the things Jeff did rise to the level of ousting him.

Now I worry for the consequences for Bob McDonnell. He was on the wrong side of this and the Congressional delegation got in line to try to protect him. I understand why they would do that, even if I disagree.

The complaint that Chairman Frederick used his own company, well, so what? Had he not used his company, and the capability for online donations had not been made available, RPV might not have collected those donations at all. Then you'd be saying he was ineffective. It was a stop-gap measure done by his company becasue his company was *ready and able*.




Brian W. Schoeneman said:
Ed, please. There was nothing slanderous about the constant mistakes and errors Frederick made while he was chairman. No conspiracy was formed to ensure he'd put his foot in his mouth over and over again in front of the national media. No conspiracy was formed to tell him it was okay to use his own company as a vendor for RPV to process campaign contributions and then claim an in-kind donation to beef up his fundraising numbers (which were anemic in comparison to previous years). It wasn't slander to point out that he went on a junket to Israel in the heart of the election campaign last year. And no one held a gun to his head and asked him to Twitter about negotiations in the State Senate. The "people who ousted Jeff" included a super majority of the State Central Committee, all of whom were elected, just like he was, by conventions. They also included Bob McDonnell, the entire Congressional delegation, all of the State Senate save one, 3/4s of the House leadership, and dozens of unit chairs across the country - including those who had supported Frederick and even the one who handled his transition. That's over a hundred elected officials and party activists, covering the entire range of ideological positions within the party. Were they all wrong? Were they all part of this conspiracy?
I don't see this as sticking to one's principles because it isn't a principle of the Republican party to manage poorly. Just the opposite. Our party is worth saving, but we need someone competent to do it. Frederick isn't that man. He had has chance, and he blew it. It's time to move on and not refight battles that have already been lost.

You're going to the convention to vote for Frederick, I'll be voting against him. Hopefully we'll find a new chairman that both of us can agree on and we can focus on what really matters, which is November.
I guess we will get some good choices, don't you all?
Hey Brian- I guess you were absolutely right about everything. God Lord what a dolt I am. I really do think we should have Unions everywhere. God Lord how nuts was I too doubt you.
Holy man, now that I have no argument with anyone, I guess my latests posts are allowed. It's a good day at RPV. Let's all just get along guys and agree that we support whatever republicans are nomoinated, because, they are far better than any democrats. Don't you agree?

Reply to Discussion

RSS

****************************

 

U.S. DEBT CLOCK

****************************

 


 

 

(sales help fund this site)

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2021   Created by Tom Whitmore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service