Ahead of tonight’s MassGOP Rules Committee Meeting

I found this article to be very interesting as  after work today I have to drive up in the rain from Dartmouth to Boston (well, to Quincy/Adams & then take the T into the city) for a MassGOP Rules Committee meeting at HQ.  I was elected at the last State Committee meeting to serve as 1 of 5 at-large members of the Rules Committee (with 5 others elected, each via a caucus of their own region).

I must say that much of this is news to me.  I can’t say that I’m aware that “there has been widespread talk” although yes, Rules Committee members were asked to submit a list of possible rules changes (we reviewed the 2006 & 2002 convention rules).

Having personally submitted a proverbial ton of suggestions myself – perhaps even the lion’s share – and while I cannot speak for others, none of tonight’s business is aimed at either Christy Mihos or Charlie Baker.

As for me?  I want to take a fresh look at the Convention Rules.  I see no reason to rubber stamp what was done before.  However, I also see no reason to completely reinvent the wheel.  My thinking is simple, take the best of what works, consider fresh ideas that haven’t been done in the past, and – most importantly – enfranchise, empower, incorporate, & include as many Republicans as possible as delegates to the 2010 Convention.  

As far as I’m concerned, it’s all about casting as was wide a net as we can in order to ensure as much GOP participation as humanly possible!

In regards to Mihos/Baker/Dembrowski (any others) or any other contested primary: may the best candidate win in a full, fair, and principled contest.  Then may we march forward, together as Massachusetts Republicans, to victory in November 2010.

Republican gubernatorial hopeful Christy Mihos yesterday unleashed a pre-emptive strike against mounting speculation that the state Republican party would try to bigfoot him from the primary fight.

There has been widespread talk of the GOP changing the way delegates are allocated to decide which candidates make the cut for party primaries.

Under one scenario that has been privately floated, Republican town caucuses could become winner-take-all, a system that would dramatically lessen the chances of a contested primary in next year’s election.

The state GOP’s rules committee, which sets the guidelines for the party election, is expected to convene today for the first in a series of meetings leading up to the state convention in the fall.


About Brock N. Cordeiro

  • BrocktonDave

    Anyone convicted of a felony is forever disqualified from serving on the State Committee, or representing the State Republican Party in any capacity.

    We should make sure that bad pennies don’t resurface.

  • …I think winner-take-all is a TERRIBLE idea.

    I wonder if the proponents realize that COULD eliminate Baker…

    After a lot of debate, we finally made our Presidential convention deleates apportioned, and it created a LOT more interest in running as a delegate.  Why take a step BACKWARDS at the state level?

  • sjfern20

    Because state elections are determined by popular vote and the primary is after the convention. Under the winner take all in the convention a candidate can get 51% of the individual delegates but receive 100% of available delegates. (By winning every town) Thus eliminating the need for a primary. This is very undemocratic and wont build the party to win in NOV.

    At the national level it is different. The primary is first. I believe a winner take all is better because the primary voters first decide who receives the delegates on the first ballot of the national convention.  The presidential election is determined in the same way. 50-Winner take all elections for the electoral votes of each  respective state(with a few exceptions).


  • BrocktonDave

    Those who have court orders forbidding them from leaving the state can’t be elected to delegate to the National Convention…

  • is a really bad idea.  It will just create problems and disagreements at the local level.  People want to cast their vote for the person of their choice.  I hope that rules committee deep sixes this idea post haste.