Can the Passive Aggressive Caucus Be Stopped?

Republicans should be getting ready for a romp this Fall, to knock off Walt Minnick, and bring in a far more conservative state legislature.

And yet….and yet, the picture is far from clear. There is talk of Raul Labrador not raising enough money, and other Conservative candidates are getting short shrift from establishment politicians because they upset Republican establishment leaders.

It seems to me that within the Republican Political establishment, there is a plan underway to passively aggressively make Democratic victories possible for a long-term consolidation of power.

In 2008, the passive aggressive caucus claimed its first victim as Governor Otter and other members of the party establishment failed to provide sufficient help to Bil Sali’s re-election campaign  in a tift over Sali having backed Norm Semanko for Party Chairman. 

The passive aggressive caucus of party establishment folks have continued to complain about the so-called “Loyalty pledge” (i.e. Promising not to support to Democrats and disclosing your position on the platform) rather than respecting the judgment of the convention. These folks have decided rather than sharing credit for defeating the Democrats, they would rather assign blame for defeat to conservatives.

Already, this passive aggressive streak is showing its ugly head in its continued sowing of dissention and the refusal to honor the outcome of the Idaho Falls Convention.

And why should the Gentleman Farmer establishment respect conservatives? To them, conservative activists should be their followers, not leaders, not people who have their own ideas and push them. The activists who showed up at the  Idaho Falls Convention  should be nothing more than the galley slaves that propel their political careers forward. This is why the party’s leaders treat the actions of the party at the convention with contempt rather than respect.

The funny thing is that when establishment candidates are nominated, conservative activists generally will rally around the flag, hold their noses and support a candidate who, while imperfect, is closer to their values than the Democrats. Conservatives behave this way because their concerned with issues.

For the passive aggressive folks, it makes sense to not exert themselves too much to help a true blue conservative candidate in the Fall.  It’s better to have a Democrat to win a state house seat and serve one term rather than to elect a troublesome conservative. This way, the establishment can hold their power, because power and not principle is their concern.

The question has to be,  At what point, do conservatives begin to question whether its wise to go all-in for establishment candidates when the passive aggressive caucus refuses to do its part for conservative candidates. Dennis Mansfield suggested Otter’s completely unnecessary statement on the “loyalty oath” may cost Otter this fall, and many conservatives are quite unhappy with Otter.

The passive aggressive caucus has not been living up to its part of the bargain. The words that were used to lecture conservatives about the need to be gracious and accept when primaries don’t go their way and the party votes differently than they would like seem to no longer apply when conservatives winning and establishment leaders are unwilling to take their lumps.

That’s what the establishment will do. What should conservatives do? Conservatives should put Idaho first and vote the Republican ticket. But, we should keep score and those people who are in the passive aggressive caucus should be defeated in the primaries at the next primary.

It’s also important that we thwart their passive aggressive efforts by fighting for conservative candidates, particularly Raul Labrador. We, the conservatives of Idaho need to step up and support Raul. We can’t give thousands, but we can help contribute in big and small ways to making this campaign, and the other conservative efforts successful. Our long-term goal should be the election of principled leaders and the replacement of every member of the Passive Aggressive Caucus with true conservatives who care about principles, rather than power.