Maricopa County, Arizona GOP Straw Poll Results

On Saturday, January 13th at the Maricopa County Republican meeting, a straw poll was conducted on the 2008 Presidential candidates and the reasons why the Republican faithful thought we lost the election last November. Here are those results:

458 Ballots cast

First Choice for Presidential Candidate:
1 Hunter 96
2 Romney 82
3 Gingrich 53
4 McCain 50
5 Rice 27
6 Tancredo 24
7 Giuliani 22
8 Brownback 14
9 Huckabee 10
10 Hagel 2
11 Barbour 1
12 Pataki 0
Unacceptable Presidential Candidates:
1 McCain 282
2 Hagel 272
3 Pataki 260
4 Giuliani 213
5 Barbour 113
6 Brownback 108
6 Huckabee 108
7 Rice 91
8 Tancredo 85
9 Gingrich 81
10 Hunter 71
11 Romney 65
Acceptable Presidential Candidates:
1 Rice 269
2 Gingrich 265
3 Romney 239
4 Tancredo 219
5 Barbour 182
6 Brownback 178
7 Huckabee 167
7 Hunter 167
8 Giuliani 157
9 McCain 89
10 Pataki 70
11 Hagel 28
Republicans lost last November because:
Primary Reason Iraq 136
Secondary Reason Spending 115
Tertiary Reason Too Lenient on Immigration 94

Comments

  1. Smart Voter says

    An interesting fact emerges regarding the “straw poll” presidential preference ballots handed out at the Maricopa County Republican meeting:

    The ballots appeared to be distributed selectively to those who were known McCain fans. When the balloting was announced, numerous people were left looking for or asking where to get their ballots. They were told they should have received one (or more–depending upon the number of proxies a committeeman was carrying) when they registered.

    Even with the gamesmanship, it was interesting to see that John McCain came out at the bottom of the heap of ACCEPTABLE presidential candidate and was the top vote getter in the UNACCEPTABLE category.

    Even with his advocates dealing from the bottom of the deck, McCain loses!

  2. 1. The first comment doesn’t make sense. Known McCain supporters were the only people given ballots. Obviously not.

    2. Republican leadership in the County has to be called into question if Hunter is considered the frontrunner here and Tancredo is among the most “acceptable” candidates for president.

    3. I’ve yet to find any of the Democrats running who I would support over any of the Republicans on the “unacceptable” list. Who comes up with these questions and who takes the bait and determines who “unacceptable” Republicans are?

  3. Smart Voter says

    This occurred where “moderates” were credentialing precinct committeemen as they arrived. Upon signing in, some folks were given the straw poll and others were not. This was not apparent until the announcement was made that the voting was about to start. People began asking where the ballots were and were advised they were given to precinct committeemen as they registered.

    There were a total of 1058 present or by proxy. There were only 458 ballots turned in. This is an assemblage of interested parties who not only vote, but are activists. How do you account for the numbers, Walter?

  4. Mike Triggs says

    Just another example of how these Republican delegates would raher lose than go with a winner.

    Excuse me – Duncan Hunter! Why not Dr. Dobson or someone with a direct line to the Almighty? I’m thinking Pat Robertson!

  5. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Duncan Hunter’s showing is the direct result of him actually having supporters at the event, videos of his commercials showing, etc. Think of him as the only candidate there actually campaigning. Obviously he’s not going to be the Republican nominee… As far as whether this was a “scientific” poll, it wasn’t and no one is claiming that it was. It was a straw poll and you can click on the link in the original post to learn what that is if you don’t know…

    You can count on surprises in most straw polls. After all, Pataki getting zero votes making sense, but having so many people declaring Haley Barbour unacceptable makes no sense. Barbour was a very successful national chairman and is now a respected Governor of Mississippi. But it is still surprising that so many people would not only know who he is, but that they would have any reason to believe he is unacceptable.

    Mike trying to equate Hunter with Dobson or Robertson is kind of funny. Hunter has no connections or ties to the religious right or christian conservatives. He’s best known for military and national defense issues, trade issues, and border security. My guess is that most Republicans know as little as Mike does about Hunter, which would explain both Mike’s posting and Hunter’s non-existent poll numbers.

    Obviously the real story is that our home state Senator still has a lot of work to do with the base of the party. Regardless of who got ballots and who didn’t, he should have performed a LOT better…

  6. Not being there, I can only offer the following possible reasons: Perhaps people felt uneasy about voting proxy for a subject they hadn’t spoken with people about; Perhaps other people felt uncomfortable (especially in the acceptable/unacceptable question) in voting period.

    I continue to question the substance of the allegation that people were being cherry-picked — if so, they did a miserable job/and presumably McCain’s numbers would be even worse than shown here if the ballots had been more forthcoming.

    I know alot of people hate McCain, but the idea that any of these guys is “unacceptable” to Republican party leaders in our county really turns my stomach.

    I’m hopeful these folks know considerably more about local politics than they do nationally, because this is embarrassing.

  7. 1. This straw poll is as much a message as it is a preference of candidates.

    2. The chance that a candidate was deemed “unacceptable” sure seems to have a direct correlation with how much that candidate disagrees with the party platform.

  8. I would have to say that the straw poll was poorly managed.

    Unfortunately, the creator of the poll, Rob Haney, appears to have stacked the deck completely against his greatest arch-enemy, John McCain. This poll can have absolutely no real or true meaning due to the way it was created and run. I think the overall idea is sound as long as it is run by someone without an axe to grind.

    I did not vote in the poll. I would have voted in support of Tom Tancredo, with the choices that were presented.

    Unfortunately, all possible candidates were not presented. Ron Paul was noticeably absent. It seems that Ron Paul, who espouses every view that Haney has (to my knowledge), would have had a much greater showing if he were an option. He was probably not included since he had only announced his run for president 1 day before the meeting. Had Ron Paul been an option, I would have participated in the poll and supported him.

  9. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Jim Gilmore has announced an exploratory committee recently as well, and he wasn’t included. Condi Rice has stated explicitly that she is not a candidate, as have some others, yet they were included… So no, its not scientific, but it is still informative.

    Ron Paul’s stuff was handed out by a bunch of Libertarians who also distributed their 9-11 conspiracy literature before leaving the meeting altogether. They left the meeting hall before the event even started. I’m sure Ron Paul would have polled better than Pataki, but being asked to vote for Ron Paul by the same people who want us to believe that George Bush was piloting the planes into the World Trade Center by remote control so that he could get oil from Iraq probably didn’t too much for Paul’s cause…

  10. Smart Voter says

    Walter admits he was not present at the Maricopa County GOP meeting. This indicates he is not a precinct committeeman and likely has scant knowledge of how such events function.

    PC’s who are unable to attend the meeting give their proxies to those they consider trustworthy and, most importantly, share their views.

    This meeting was not Rob Haney’s private conclave. It was attended by nearly 600 Maricopa County ELECTED precinct committeemen, carrying 468 proxies. Let’s put an end to this foolishness that one guy controls all of the Republicans in one of the nation’s largest counties.

  11. The vote required you to give your name as they did not use a credentialing process to provide the ballots. MANY did not vote because of what appeared to be overt actions to identify individuals and their preferences.

    When the number of respondents is considered this is not a very clear indication of true preferences.

  12. I’m a new resident Brother Smart and aspire to be in your ranks next time around. I was a PC in my former locale and very familiar with the processes of the party and the importance the PCs SHOULD have in electing all Republicans on the ballot.

    I cannot believe that anyone carrying a proxy had 100% agreement on all issues or candidates they support (or if we really are going down this road, candidates that are “unacceptable”.)

  13. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Ann says:

    “When the number of respondents is considered this is not a very clear indication of true preferences.”

    A strange statement. No one is claiming that it is a scientific poll, but it remains a poll of nearly 500 opinions of elected Republican PCs in Arizona’s largest county. The result of the poll is an EXACT indication of where those people stand on the question of preferences/presidential contenders. Ann would have us believe it is “not very clear” when in fact it is the exact opposite.

    These people represent the grassroots of the party, as attested to by their level of involvement. For the home state Senator to barely get 10% support is a sign that there is trouble there. To ignore it would be folly.

  14. 1.)Smart Voter is in error, I was the LD-6 C&T chair, and we handed out straw polls to everyone until we ran out of forms. Whoever “Smart Voter” is, I take acception to: I am a McCain supporter and i ought to know. We don’t do that.
    2.) With Walter I must disagree only to the point that he “supports Democrats over Republicans running”.
    3.)Well, half of the people did not vote, or there weren’t enough straw poll ballots. Our table had run out of them long before the last checked in.
    4.) Mike Triggs is right on target with his observation, I say.
    5.)Sonoran Truth Squad you are almost right Duncan has strong support here in AZ and his name was kicked around as a potential speaker for the West Side Lincoln Day Event, so it is “fresh” in many minds. Whom he, Duncan, associates himself with is more important in the perception of the minds of the 2008 voters than his occupational mainstay. To put it more bluntly, to the 21th century women voter it is more crucial who might control power over her reproductive faculties. She or some glorified Sunday School Teacher.
    6.)Walter, I disagree with you more than I agree, but you are right, no one was cherry picked. However, since the ballot clearly said “Vote for one only” and had 12 choices for President it is indeed remarkable that McCain wound up with 50.
    7.)Joe Baby, I admit I can’t follow your reasoning here. Honestly, I am unable to point to any disagreement that Sen. McCain may have with the party’s plattform.
    8.) I do not know the architect of the poll. I have no problem with Rob Haney, I do have a problem with Rob having a problem with McCain. Those internal squabbles have the effect of polarizing our party and resulting in consequencial injury. Fortunately we, the Republican Party, can’t lose the House and the Senate in 2008. We already did. So what is left to lose is Pennsylvania Avenue and a
    few seats here and there.
    OTOH we could very well regain our losses and retake the hill. It is all part of our own RESOLVE. This correspondent will do all he can to facilitate the latter.
    Life is a trampoline, one must hit bottom before one can bounce back.
    Horst Kraus,
    Candidate for AZ GOP Treasurer

  15. Carlton Camp says

    This straw vote(meaningless) was very poorly done. I believe that it was planned and orchestrated by a group who really wanted to embarrass someone. The way the ballots were distributed, the selection of the candidates,and the questions that were asked indicates a real conspiracy. They not only embarrassed candidates but also themselves, if not, at least it should have. This kind of stuff is some of the reason the GOP lost the seats that it did in the last election.

  16. Too lenient on immigration was one of the reasons for the GOP losing? That makes a lot of sense when hardline anti-illegal immigration candidates lost big time this past cycle. Hayworth? Gone. Graf? Not even close.

  17. Hurry on board. The Mitt train is leaving!

    Ok. Sorry shameless plug here

  18. This is all very interesting to watch. Hopefully the straw poll is accurate and the Arizona Repulicans won’t feel obligated to back McCain. He is completely out of touch on immigration issues, perhaps he and his cronies make too much off their backbreaking underpaid uninsured labor.
    As a rankandfile, I hope the party can at least muster a real Gov candidate in 4 years. Me thinks we’re hurting worse than you know.

  19. The most amazing thing about this story is how no one reported that Chuck Hagel and his wife were in attendance.

    There could be no explanation otherwise why he received those two votes.

  20. Smart Voter says

    The State party had a table set up in the lobby for Congressman Duncan Hunter. This was not an endorsement of Hunter, rather the intent was to sell tickets for the upcoming Trunk ‘n Tusk dinner. This will be the final dinner in the 2006 series, since an earlier dinner was unavoidably canceled. Hunter is the scheduled speaker for the February 24, 2007 event.

    Interesting that pro-choice Horst Kraus, who states his concerns about protecting women’s “reproductive facilities,” is on the list supporting Lisa James. She identifies herself as being pro-life. You can’t have it both ways, Mr. Kraus.

  21. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Funny stuff Framer!

    And for Smart Voter, I’m not sure that Horst is trying to have it both ways. He says its an issue of importance to women, not him. He may be pro-choice, but it might not be an important issue to him. Lots of WISH list pro-choicers are supporting Lisa James. You can reach your own conclusions over which pro-life candidate should be supported by people for whom protecting life is important (Hint: He’s been endorsed by them in past campaigns).

  22. Nightcrawler says

    Not everyone chooses a candidate over one issue. I realize it makes living in the world very easy. Good/Evil Coke/Pepsi, Ford/Chevy, Dennys/Cocos Country/Western, Skoal/Copenhagen and of course Conservative/RINO.

    Once the mind is stretched by an idea it never returns to its original proportions. Cowboy up Smart Voter. Live a little, think for yourself.

  23. Now listen up Mr. Smart Voter, Sir.
    I assure you that I am as much against abortions as anyone else that is against this practice. But I am also a conservative and therefore I am for responsible behavior and self-determination, and I am for getting the Government off our backs and out of our daily lifes and out of our wallets and out of our kitchen.
    I have often stated, and I repeat it for your benefit, I would be willing to take a vow of poverty and relinquish my not so unsubstantial fortune if I could wave a magic wand that would eliminate premature pregnancy terminations by anybody, anywhere.
    There can be no argument that abortions are for the most part the consequence of unwanted pregnancies.
    You know, there are ways for men also to take particular measures to avoid such inconvenient accidents.
    In my own marriage, I took that step when my wife and I decided that our family was large enough.
    Just as much as I feel I qualify to call myself a Conservative, I call myself a Pragmatist. I know what is and what is not doable. If you are so kind as to read my earier post again, you might come to realize that I did not make a personal pro-choice statement, but instead offered an opinion on the American Women Voter of the 21st century’s concerns.
    I am in the “People Business” you know, and between me and my wife we have been and still are in contact with thousands of individuals, men and women, day in and day out. We know what we are talking about.
    And by the way for what it is worth, the infamous list of “Republicans for Janet” confirms our observations. So does the Wish List. Just look at the gender.
    The proof [as always] is in the pudding.
    Since I mentioned my wife, she and I met in 1943 in 7th grade and decided to get married to one-another when the time was right and we did and still are. So much for social conservative family values in the Kraus household. Please make a note of this.
    Now for the rest of the story.
    Yes, we do support Lisa James for Arizona GOP Chair. This is not a vote against Randy Pullen, we supported him big time in his bid for Phoenix Mayor and we will support him again for the right office when the time comes. But as it stands today, Randy serves currently as our National Committee Man and we are not comfortable, giving the gravity of the state of the party, for him to have to spread himself so thin as to fill both positions.
    We met Lisa James as we volunteered to work for the 2004 presidential re-election campaign, and we were impresed by her contagious enthusiasm, her omnipresent limitless energy, her wits, her smile and her unwavering resolve to get a job done well.
    We met her again as we volunteered to be Kyl captains in 2006, and she hadn’t changed an ounce of what we knew her from the 2004 campaign experience.
    We, that is my wife, myself, our daughters and now the first of our Grand Daughters that have been elected Republican PC’s care deeply for our party to win aall that may be won in 2008.
    Now you heard the rest of the story. You may pass it on.
    Sincerely
    Horst Kraus Secretary LD-6 and Candidate for AZ GOP Treasurer

  24. Re: Sen. McCain and the party platform, it wouldn’t surprise me that he would see no separation between his actions and the standards of his party.

    But his advocacy of gun control measures, amnesty, campaign finance restrictions and embryonic research gives many folks enough reason to doubt.

    He’s long reveled in the maverick label…and as such shouldn’t be surprised when the party loyalists place their faith in others.

    It’s not enough (and if I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard this) that McCain is conservative “on many issues.” There are other candidates who seem more loyal to the platform and less willing to triangulate constituencies within the party.

  25. Re: “But I am also a conservative and therefore I am for responsible behavior and self-determination, and I am for getting the Government off our backs and out of our daily lifes and out of our wallets and out of our kitchen.”

    This, in my opinion, is where the libertarian approach results in tyranny. The above neatly obscures the supposed freedom-interest of a woman who wants to execute her unborn child.

    1. How is abortion “responsible behavior”?
    2. The unborn are prevented from any self-determination.
    3. Our Supreme Court has created a “liberty” that claims to unburden one by destroying another.
    4. Our wallets are already pilfered for this to take place.

    The problem with pragmatism is that it becomes a religion of its own, with power driving the boat and truth tossed overboard. Better off to leave pragmatism for a budget bill, and decide matters of life via other values.

  26. Oro Valley Dad says

    Let’s just assume for arguments sake that the straw poll was rigged. Doesn’t it tell us something that in McCain’s hometown, where he is the senior senator, he could not muster up enough grassroots supporters to rig a poll for him? The news here is not that the survey might have been stacked, the story is that McCain was not able to do the rigging on his home turf after decades of representing the area in the U.S. House and Senate. Poor showing either way.

    Mike Triggs – please remember that our biggest winner in the party was a pro-life, pro-gun solid conservative named Ronald Reagan who invoked the name of God all the time.

    Tim – Yes Graf and Hayworth lost but look at what their opponents said during the campaign. Both Mitchell and Giffords pledged to get tough on the border and anti illegal immigration ballot measured passed overwhelmingly.

    Horst Kraus – Will you also be supporting the repeal of the National Firearms Act of 1934? If figure if a woman can have her unborn child ripped out of her womb because of the penumbra of the constitution then I should at least get back my rights that were written down in plain English. Also Randy has stated that he would give up his national committeeman position if the was state party chair so he would not be spread too thin.

  27. The stretch it takes to go from point A to point W is pretty far… and it is exactly what I see happening in so many of these posts. The same 2 or 3 people doing all they can to move statements and ideas around to make sure to discredit opposing thought with all efforts going to support the ideas and opinions they want others to believe….regardless of the truth , validity, or end result.

    It is very clear that STS, OVD, and perhaps Joe Baby are in support of Randy Pullen. I have made my support for Lisa James known; Mr. Kraus has now done the same. Where the others fall is up to speculation; but the reality is this…. if the Republican Party wants to become the new Democrats meaning the minority party; keep shooting at each other and always look to discount the guy that might get the next big job that you really want… we will continue to lose seats in Congress and will quickly lose the majority in Arizona. Elect someone for party chair that does not represent the strengths needed for THAT position but is in lock step with YOUR ideology; let’s see how much money is raised and how many ELECTABLE candidates are promoted? Grassroots will become deadwood.

    I can see the response post now; someone will cut my line about becoming the new Democrats and insert their line about voting for RINO’s or give names or something. Let’s be clear here, again I will say…. This is not about if Randy Pullen is a good Republican in right standing with the right people with the right belief system or if Lisa James better fits that description. This is about who can and will better serve our state party in a job that has gone undone or poorly done for too long!

    Someone asked me once why I was a Republican when my compassionate nature would lend them to think I would be a Democrat. (The person was a Catholic Dem) I told them I thought we would all be judged by God as to how we treated the weakest, the most vulnerable…and in my mine that is the unborn. That I could never be a part of any group that, as a matter of practice, used the right to terminate a birth as a standard and that I didn’t see how any other compassionate person could do so. There are many other reasons but that one addressed a position this person could understand. But, I would never deny someone the right to believe as they do. Vote for them, no…respect them, yes. I believe the same judge I spoke of taught us to “walk in love.”

  28. Maybe it’s simply a disagreement between the values/platform folks and the pragmatism/management folks. I understand that the latter doesn’t trust the former, seeing them as firebrands who will guarantee defeat in pursuing perfection.

    Yet, in my opinion, that latter group fails to heed the legitimate complaint that many in our “big tent” have chosen personal enrichment and power over principle. There is a serious loss of trust, yet the party hoo-hahs ignore this and instead rely on scheme and three-card monty accomplish their objectives.

    The ELECTABILITY question is important, but is secondary when the top dogs fail to support their own candidates in the general election.

    And of course, if all a political party is about winning elections, we would support the minimum wage, pouring cash on social problems, and amnesty.

  29. Yes, I agree with you! This is why I truly see Lisa as the person to UNITE and conquer such a divide. We do not need to further the division making it impossible to maintain a solid majority much less improve on it.

    I also agree with you on the support of candidates. I find that abhorrent but more than one Arizona Senator had endorsements for Janet from among his supporters. This brought great consternation to some of us who were working hard to elect a Republican Governor AND Senator….but it is America.

    Winning should not be about pandering and it doesn’t have to be. For too long the Dems tried that and failed in all but the mindless who looked to them for their monthly paycheck for life. Which brings me back to the point of who can and will develop the strongest grassroots effort, bring in the necessary financial support, and grow our own electable candidates? The answer is clearly Lisa James.

  30. Smart Voter says

    Ann, Lisa James is “clearly the answer” IF you believe the Republican party wins by the game playing initially involved in getting her positioned as a state committeeman, enabling her to run for state chair.

    She not only lost in her own district, but came in TENTH alternate. Then, she was taken across the valley to be elected in yet another district. James finally resigned when the protests became too loud. How nice that Keith DeGreen gave up his seat for her, completely sidestepping the nine other alternates on the list ahead of Lisa James. This is a questionable and oily start to her desired position of state party leader.

    Regardless of protestations to the contrary, she is the establishment choice to pave the way for John McCain. The last thing our congressional delegation wants is for their Great Hope, Open Borders McCain, to suffer the same fate Sen. Al Gore did when he lost his home state of Tennessee. People outside of Tennessee were shocked. Those who reside there and know him best, were not. The same holds true with McCain. He is beloved by the liberal media. Democrats find him palatable, which could be the reason Republicans don’t!

    As to Lisa James, she is an integral part of piecing together the McCain puzzle. When she and her handlers say that is not the case, I’ll stick with William Shakespeare’s great line in Act III of Hamlet: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks .”

  31. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Ann, like many others, sees the Party winning for Bush in 2004 and Kyl winning in 2006 and gives all of the credit to James… So case closed I guess, Lisa James is therefore the uber politico…

    Of course, on closer reflection the fact that Bush’s campaign (nationally) ran a great race and the Democrats didn’t fight for Arizona might have played a larger role than one lady out of many working down on 24th Street.

    And Kyl raising $10M+ and running a nearly perfect race against a personality-challenged candidate who never got traction might have also been a bigger factor than a state party who raised a mere fraction of that. Yet again, Ann and her allies would have us believe that again it was Lisa and that fraction of the money that made Kyl our Senator again.

    Worse still, while giving her all of the credit for the party’s successes, they completely absolve her of the party’s failures. Well they can’t have it both ways. If you want her to take credit for keeping George Bush in the White House and Jon Kyl in the Senate, then she also gets the blame for the worst defeat of a GOP candidate in a governor’s race in our history, the loss of more than half a dozen legislative seats, the loss of two Congressional seats including one that had a 17-point GOP registration advantage, and a fundraising operation that was outraised 3.5 to 1 by the Democrats. So much for your arguments of competency and fundraising ability, eh?

    I agree that the race is about competency and who can lead the Party to victory. Ann is wrong when she claims it is about ideology because both candidates are, as far as anyone can tell, pro-life conservatives, and on this site, that’s what we’re most concerned about. So with them equal on that point, who can fix what is wrong with the party and lead us to victory IS the issue.

    In Ann’s opinion, James gets the credit for Bush and Kyl. So she deserves the blame for the other failures that are the result of a state party that only knows (and only cares) about winning the race at the top of the ticket. Why? Because the State Chairman is always installed BY the top of the ticket and that is where their loyalties lay.

    Randy Pullen will lead this party from the grassroots or from the bottom up. That means that every race, from city council to state legislature to Congress to President, will be important to the state party and will receive support. That is how you win and build a strong party.

    Lisa James will just be more of the same, serving the few at the top and disregarding the rest of us. In truth, the state party does NOT deserve the credit for Bush or Kyl and neither does James. They happened to be a small part of someone else’s great work and now they want credit for it (without credit for the failings all around them). More of the same leadership will lead to more of the same results.

    That is why Randy Pullen is getting the support he is getting!

  32. A quick look at the above post will clearly indicate just “who protest too much”.

  33. Lisa James may be perfect for the job…if she wins, she is entitled to our support. But if she loses, she will have been a victim (perhaps unfairly) of circumstances created in previous years yet still unaddressed by the party powers.

    People are fed up with the “Trojan Horse” routine, whereby our elected officials (including at the party level) act one way and behave differently upon entering office. Yet our local “usual suspects” putter on, promising big and delivering little, so concerned with getting along and being “big tent” they are oblivious to those lighting fires inside it.

    The combination of “Republicans for Janet” and the recent D11 submarine maneuver provide recent proof of what people have long suspected — that many in the party are committed to neither the principles nor the candidates, but to their own designs.

    That party insiders vote for and support our opponents yet still work for our elected officials is beyond a disgrace — it’s a stunning reality. Any talk of “uniting” our state party without addressing this first and foremost is a sham.

    As noted, might be unfair that Lisa James is forced to prove her innocence, but the party faithful has seen the song-and-dance too many times to rely on good faith. The faith is gone and our opponents are inside the house shooting as us. My advice to Lisa James would be to put down the phone and pick up a rifle.

  34. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    33 posts… Cool!

  35. Great work, Sonoran Alliance. You’ve earned your way into my daily links!

  36. az_conservative_alltheway says

    It is my understanding that Lisa James was hired by the Arizona Republican Party and her function was to get Jon Kyl elected. She did that!

    As with all the other losses, look at those responsible. Stop blaming people for things they didn’t control!

  37. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    you may be right az, since officially Lisa was one of the people hired to run the GOTV operation that we were told would be to benefit all GOP candidates. We are now told that she was a one-woman show who deserves all the credit and that, according to posts like yours, the sole purpose was to re-elect Kyl. If you’re wrong, then you’re wrong. If you’re right, then you’re confirming what so many of us have been afraid of, that our Party only cares about the race at the top of the ticket (see post #31 above).

    Either way, enough is enough and continuing to do what we’ve been doing will only continue to cost us seats. Consider that in the last three cycles we’ve lost the Governor’s race (twice including once by record margins), the AG’s office twice, numerous seats in the State Legislature, and two Congressional seats. And this in a red state? I think you’ll see why we’re not thrilled with the same crowd picking yet another figurehead for the party.

  38. az_conservative_alltheway says

    To clarify my point, The Arizona Republican Party hired other people for other races. Who were those folks?

  39. interesting says

    I wonder what the Romney/? 2008 ticket will look like. Romney/McCain (NO) Romney/Tancredo ? (Probably not). Romney/Hunter? Who knows. Romney/Rice?

  40. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    People were not hired for single races. That would have been an independent expenditure and would have been treated much differently by law. They were hired for the GOTV operation as a whole. So you’re not going to find the answer to your “who were they?” question because that’s not how they were hired…

  41. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    From Lisa’s own website:

    “Recently, Lisa served as the director of coalitions for Senator Jon Kyl’s 2006 successful re-election effort before joining the Arizona Republican Party as the executive director of Victory 2006 where she led the Get Out The Vote efforts and managed expenditures on behalf of the State’s Republican candidates.”

    There you have it, she led the GOTV efforts that lost every meaningful contest except Kyl’s… 2 U.S. House seats, the Governor’s race (not her fault we lost, but by a record margin? Yup, she gets some of that…), 7 legislatives seats, etc…

    Can you imagine putting that on your resume?

  42. Nightcrawler says

    Kraus you are a good man and I may even vote for you, but you have got to stop exposing yourself on these blogs. No pun intended. That was simply too much information. You need to cover up and use a blog handle so as not to take everything personally.

  43. Just found this site googling Duncan Hunter. Of the people who appear to be running, he’s my first choice for President. Hopefully, since he is certainly a longshot, he will at least be able to bring the serious border problem to the forefront of the debate for Republican candidates and the American voters.

  44. My favorites for 2008 are Mitt Romney, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo! Can I throw in my favorite Sherriff, Joe Arpaio, from Maricopa County there in AZ. for Secretary of Homeland Security! First and foremost, we need to secure our borders to preserve our culture! I live in Michigan and CAN’T BELIEVE HOW MUCH HERE IS WRITTEN IN SPANISH!!!!!!!!! America has citizens that originated from over 100 countries, why isn’t everything written in all of those countries languages? Think of all of this before you vote in 2008. John McCain is not the one!

  45. az_conservative_alltheway says

    Is it any wonder?

    I was curious and decided to check out Mr. Pullen’s contributions a little more.

    Turns out, in 1998 he ONLY gave to DEMOCRATS. If you go to followthemoney.org, you will find that Randy Pullen, one of our candidates for Arizona Republican Party Chairman, gave a $500 contribution to Paul Johnson who ran against Jane Hull for Governor as well as the Mitchell donation.

    This is AWFUL!!!

    What’s worse is he didn’t give a PENNY to a REPUBLICAN. How can we conservative Republicans stand for that?

    I do understand the frustration of PC’s, as elected officials of the Republican Party, giving their name to democrats as being unacceptable. But the “by-law changers” have any credibility at all, their latest by-law change in Maricopa County to put teeth in sanctions against PC’s who give their name to Democrats, ought to apply to their choice as Party Chair as well.

    Randy gave money to Harry Mitchell just a few days before the general election. Those that were around then knew we needed to defeat Harry because he had aspirations to run for Congress.

    Shoot now to 2006 and our fears were confirmed when Harry Mitchell defeated J.D. Hayworth.

    I am really tired of people incorrectly judging Lisa James. Lisa James has never given money to a Democrat here in Arizona. Or anywhere else, that I have found so far!

    And when raw data like this comes to light, “OMG, it’s a smear campaign”. How silly!!

    Some of us just use the internet to dig for the facts and are enlightened by what we find and aren’t afraid to admit when we might have been wrong about a person.

    The information below is from http://www.followthemoney.org.

    Recipient Office Status Party State Amount Date
    JOHNSON, PAUL EDWARD GOVERNOR Lost – General Election DEMOCRAT AZ $500 10/05/1998
    MITCHELL, HARRY E SENATE Won DEMOCRAT AZ $100 10/29/1998

    PULLEN, RANDALL L

    Total Given to Date: $600 (2 records)

    Address: PHOENIX, AZ 85018

    Employer: PULLEN AND CO.

    Occupation: CPA

    Breakdown by Political Affiliation
    Party Counts Total % of Overall
    Democrat 2 $600 100.00%
    Republican 0 $0 0.00%
    Third Party 0 $0 0.00%
    Ballot Measures 0 $0 0.00%

  46. Lisa was involved in all of the campaigns that the state party devoted resources to, so that would include Kyl, Munsil, Montgomery, Renzi, Hayworth and briefly Graf. Was she the “karl Rove” of the operation, no. Does she have contacts throughout the state, yes. She should also have a pretty good idea of what went wrong; people who did/didn’t do a good job; potential candidates who can run in CD4 and at the state level; possible incentives to limit the potential bloodbath primaries that could evolve in cd5 and cd8.

    She and Randy should both lay out their visions on those key areas and we should all stop beating up fellow Republicans (even if you don’t like them on a personal or philosophical level) who are willing to work for and have demonstrated the ability to produce for Republicans.

  47. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Walter – What you say about Lisa’s contacts and ideas of what went wrong apply to Randy as well. And they have both, on their websites and when speaking to groups, laid out their “visions and plans”… And frankly, both plans sound pretty darn good.

    The difference and concern for a lot of us is that we’ve had many years of top-down leadership where a Chairman is dictated to us. That Chairman then sets aside whatever grand campaign rhetoric was used, and goes about serving his real masters, and that is the powers that be that annointed him rather than the grassroots that elected him. He serves a few people (Republican people I grant you) rather than the best interests of the Republican Party. It is the same as when we choose lobbyists as chairmen who then put their clients before candidates and party.

    Lisa didn’t want the job and she wasn’t even their first choice for the job (or second, or even third). She was talked into running and we don’t expect her to bring the energy and enthusiasm to it that Randy will bring. He was motivated to run by what was being done wrong and by a desire to fix it. Lisa was asked to run by the very people who are responsible for what is wrong and by those with no desire to fix it. The end of that tug-of-war, should Lisa even choose to fight it, is all too predictable. She was picked by the few, would serve the interests of those few, and would monopolize the resources of the party to benefit those few. That is why we do great with the one race at the top of the ticket while we get “thumped” the rest of the way down. The top of the ticket chose our Chairman and that is who the Chairman and the Party served.

    All of the rest of this noise is a bunch of ugly mugslinging that this same group of folks tried against Pullen when he ran for National Committeeman against Mike Hellon. Back then they didn’t like that he was pro-life and pro-border security and anti-amnesty. The same people get new usernames and pretend to get surprised and upset all over again at the same old stuff. They want us to believe that Randy is too extreme but they also want us to think that he can’t be trusted on the life issue and that he’s really a closet liberal on that issue. It all gets very tiring except that if we allow these folks to just bang away with lies, then good people who don’t know the truth may stumble across these sites and come away misled. So as much of an aggravation as it is, we keep an eye on these posts and threads and make sure that every falsehood is corrected.

    I’m sure there will be more debates on substantive policy issues. Lisa and Randy appear together at many locations. These blogs really don’t lend themselves to that. They’ve really become a way for campaigns to smear each other at no cost and hiding behind fake names. Some of us use them to protect ourselves, others choose “conservative” identities to misled readers.

    I like yours… Walter… I still don’t know who you are, but I believe that you are Walter. Refreshing in its own way! Thanks for the comment…

  48. Some unknown person wrote “This straw vote(meaningless) was very poorly done. I believe that it was planned and orchestrated by a group who really wanted to embarrass someone. ”

    That sounds like spin to me. Arizona still has an appreciation for candidates like Duncan Hunter. The poll reflected that. Remember Steve Forbes in 1996? He won in Arizona because he more closely reflected our values, more so than Dole or any other big government candidate. BTW, remember how Bob Dole believed we should put more bodies on the ground in Bosnia? Does that sound familiar to you?

  49. Rice?Come on,people.The SECURITY ADVISOR who wasn’t fired 9/11.And McCain?Has he firends in high places too,or what.What kind of people have Americans become?And where do I find some who aren’t into 9/11 cover-ups and all.Ask the people who helped in the aftermath…no…wait..even doctors aren’t allowed to help them.

  50. The Mitt Romney Deception

    by Brian Camenker, MassResistance
    November 20, 2006

    Despite recent statements across the country by Governor Mitt Romney claiming he’s pro-life, pro-family and a committed conservative, a broad investigation of his actual statements, actions, and public positions over the years indicates that he has spent his entire career speaking and governing as a liberal – and that his new found conversion to conservatism very likely coincides with his candidacy for the presidency.

    The information in this report is gleaned from public records, press accounts, internet web sites and research (as well as personal observation) by my organization, MassResistance, a grass-roots pro-family group that has observed Governor Romney for over a decade. We have analyzed his legislation, met with his staff, lobbied for and against his agenda (depending what it is) and otherwise compiled considerable research on his administration.

    We believe this report is necessary due to a calculated effort by the Romney campaign to revise his history and portray the Governor as far more conservative than the record indicates. Already, the Governor’s staff is making appointments with the nation’s leading conservative leaders to convince them that he should be the standard bearer for the conservative movement in the upcoming presidential elections.

    We have also been alarmed by misleading and glowing accounts about Romney which have appeared in the conservative media over the past year. The fact that these articles were based upon sloppy research and material supplied by the Romney camp gave us great incentive to set the record straight. Few national political writers have bothered to speak with any MassResistance member, or for that matter anyone critical of Romney’s record.

    One of the few conservative publications to expose Romney’s liberalism is the conservative weekly Human Events which (in a 2005 article) listed Romney at number eight on its list of “Top Ten Republicans in Name Only (RINOs).” Indeed, this report will demonstrate that Romney was probably the most pro-abortion and pro-gay rights Republican official in the nation for the last decade. The idea that he has suddenly become a conservative after a decade of liberal actions and statements would be merely amusing were it not for the fact that he’s running for the presidency and that many conservatives are falling for this act.

    Top 10 RINOs (Republicans in Name Only)
    Human Events 12/27/05 – (Mitt Romney is ranked #8)

    On the other hand, it’s particularly interesting to note that Bay Windows, Boston’s major homosexual newspaper, has reviewed Romney favorably. That same newspaper regularly prints extremely vicious and even obscene attacks on all conservative politicians, the “Christian Right” and even parents who challenge the liberal political agenda.

Leave a Reply