Stephen Frank, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views, 7/21/23 www.capoliticalreview.com
The Next CAGOP Chairman: Heads I Win, Tails You Lose.
Under CAGOP bylaws, an endorsement by the LAGOP is required for Los Angeles County legislative candidates to get the CAGOP endorsement from which flows CAGOP money and volunteers.
Last week, Tim O’Reilly, Chairman of Los Angeles County Republican Party told “Newsom Republican” and State Senate District 23 candidate Suzette Martinez Valladares not to worry. She was the “anointed” candidate in the first of many LAGOP “early” endorsements. Only she could meet the 10 “disqualifiers” Tim had created for “early” endorsement by the LAGOP.
I characterize O’Reilly’s “criteria” as disqualifiers because only former legislators, the rich, the well-connected or Chamber of Commerce types can qualify for endorsement. You can read about what they are here. Their real purpose however, is to keep the LAGOP from even having to consider, let alone endorse and help the only kind of GOP candidate that can or will run in the Democrat dominated precincts of Los Angeles County֫—first-time, underfunded, social or “America-First” conservatives—true believers—which CAGOP donors loath.
Without Party support as many as a dozen partisan legislative seats in Los Angeles County can and do have no Republican candidate file to run. These “empty” seats then become the exclusive province for the LAGOP chairman to fill with CAGOP appointments of his choosing. This is by design. This term, Chairman O’Reilly appointed five (5) delegates all by himself, one (1) state senate and four (4) assembly seats. They include the assembly seat he and his district committee are responsible for and failed to field last cycle and the senate seat they failed to fill the time before..
Applying the “Immaculate Ten” disqualifiers to Senate District 23, only the well-funded “Newsom Republican” Suzette Valladares could “pass the test”. Her less-funded opponent would “fail the exam” and the endorsement would be hers. This was the Generalissimo’s task and purpose. But not his sole mission.
After seeing the early drafts of the Immaculate Ten, a few pro-lifers expressed their worry and concern about the LAGOP endorsing the self-proclaimed “only pro-choice Republican in the State Assembly” before voters sent her packing, Valladares. Playing to both sides, the nimble O’Reilly whispered in their ears “Not to worry, she won’t get the LAGOP endorsement.”
In a strategic move to pass the Immaculate Ten, “PowerPoint” Tim “allowed” the Committee make changes. He kept them to a minimum however by first calling on his “plant” to discourage any change with her many changes of incoherence. It worked and the Immaculate Ten were passed with only minor adjustments making “early” endorsements the province of the favored few in the CAGOP.
When the endorsement process got underway, the “impartial” Chairman gave Senate District 23 candidates the “Immaculate Test”, asking them to answer each of “the Ten”. With a C+ (or 70%) required to pass, the well-funded “Newsom Republican” Suzette Valladares did, achieving a score of 80%—a respectable B-, the privilege of the favored. Her less-funded opponent failed, achieving only a score of 50%, an ugly “F”, the sanction of plebes.
Then a funny thing happened on the way to the bank. The “anointed” lost not one but two votes in her quest to inherit the LAGOP endorsement and vanquish her fellow Republican. She didn’t see it coming.
After the meeting was over, Retired U.S. Army Reservist O’Reilly told anyone who would listen, “this [non-endorsement] was a victory”. For who? Certainly not for “One Term Wonder” Suzette Valladares, the favored or her opponent Lieutenant “DJ” Hamburger, fellow U.S. Army reservist, the vanquished. Both wasted three hours of their life for nothing. Even sadder is that only a few on the LAGOP recognized the scam.
The real and only winner was “Party-man” Tim O’Reilly with his manipulation of both people and process. He delivered on the endorsement disqualifiers wanted by his CAGOP handlers. And He kept the peasants “at bay” with a failed endorsement.
With such a deft hand, he’s the perfect choice to be the Chairman of the CAGOP Platform committee. With his signature “heads I win, tails you lose” approach, he will deliver a platform statement delegates won’t recognize but his handlers will love. And when he does, the next CAGOP chairman could well be named O’Reilly.
SECRET MEETING OF THE CRP RULES COMMITTEE HELD YESTERDAY
The CRP has a Rule, that when committee’s meet, there must be a notice so that delegates can attend and participate. Yesterday the CRP Rules Committee held a “Rules Committee ‘Pre-Meeting”. No notice was given out. The stated purpose was to “get to know one another” and discuss the proposed Rules change on the distribution of delegates to the RNC Presidential Convention.
The California Republican Party by-laws are clear—when a Committee meets, the delegates need to be informed and allowed to participate. But, the CRP is run as a secret society and the rest of us are expected to shake our heads OK like a bobble head doll.
After a lot of discussion, this was the outcome:
- Zero support for the Jessica/Shawn/Harmeet proposal of giving two delegates to congressional district winners and one delegate for being in second place.
- One third support the new amendment by Harmeet Dhillion, 50% in a CD and you get all the delegates. Then if no one got 50% and the second place gets 20%, they get a delegate.
- Finally, there was a proposal for “Winner take all”, statewide. This was suggested by CRP Chair Jessica Patterson and Andy Gimmeekandy. That had, as expected (since she appointed the Rule Committee) 2/3 support. Even though, I am definitely “not close” to either—that does not mean that sometimes there is communication, to see if I would support something.
This is NOT about the 2024 election. They realize that Trump will win the State by a wide margin. Nope, this is about 2028. The goal is to divide conservatives, run one Progressive GOP candidate and get the votes.
As for me, since Trump is going to win the California primary, I have no problem with Winner Take All for 2024—as long as the by-law change sunsets on January 1, 2025—so we have time to hold a real discussion—not with a gun to our heads.
What do you think?
(Periodically the California Political News and Views will publish tidbits of political news, to keep you in the loop of what the pooh bahs know. The phrase “tom/tom’s” comes from my mentor, Lorelei Kinder who never passed a rumor, just called to tell me what she heard on the “TomTom’s”. This column is named in her honor.)
