Republican Convention 2012

FreedomWorks' Matt Kibbe: "I think the Establishment's freaking out"

|

On Tuesday, during the normally boring rules-and-roll-call portion of the festivities, the Republican National Convention erupted in some contentious and confusing disputes between the GOP establishment and delegates associated with both Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and the Tea Party. Today I asked Matt Kibbe, president and CEO of the Tea Party-assisting political group FreedomWorks, to explain what it all meant.

"I think the Republican establishment is struggling with how to manage this very decentralized world we live in, and you saw signs of their acknowledgement on the stage like last night," Kibbe said. "It wasn't remotely about Mitt Romney, it was about giving various voices and agendas and constituencies a voice at the convention.

"The opposite of that is coming in late Friday afternoon and dropping a dramatic rules change on the table, and thinking that it won't get Tweeted out immediately and that people wouldn't notice. And I think that's a fascinating clash–they're trying to figure out how to deal with the Ron Paul guys, they're trying to figure out how to deal with the Tea Partiers, all of whom have become part of the process. They're delegates now, they're playing by the rules, and really I think fundamentally transforming the party, and I think the Establishment's freaking out a little about that. […] Literally in every delegation I've spoken to, formally or informally and just walking around, there are Tea Party delegates all over the place; they've really embedded themselves into the process."

What was the dispute about?

"So there's two rules–15, which is now 16, and we succeeded in pushing back on the power grab that was proposed on Friday afternoon, and it is complicated: the candidate can no longer simply disavow anyone he suspects doesn't toe the party line. There's a more complicated process than that; the delegate can show up, and once the delegate reveals himself to not be doing what he said he would do, then there's consequences. And that matters a lot.

"The safety valve for the Establishment is Rule 12, and Rule 12 says that the Republican chairman can change rules any time he wants, and that means that they could try to pull one of these fast ones again. You know, they could convene next week and try to sneak something past.

"The problem is there's this thing called the Internet, and Twitter, and the ability to discover these things in real time, and this is what worries me about the Republican Establishment: If they didn't know this was coming, they still don't understand the nature of this decentralized world we live in."

Are the Tea Partiers storming off, or grinning and bearing it?

"They were a little hacked off, but they're more resolved, they're not walking away from the process, they're going to keep showing up. And I think that's the lesson: We actually follow the rules, we play by the rules, and when Establishment Republicans don't like the rules, they change 'em."

Is the limited-government tendency on the grow within the GOP, or getting clubbed back into its place?

"Well, we have a seat at the table, but it's still a minority position, and clearly the Establishment would love to go back to the way they were. But I think they're starting to grudgingly acknowledge that something's changed and they have to adapt. Politicians adapt, right? They always respond to incentives, that's what we understand from Public Choice theory."

And is there anything at all to indicate that Republican leadership is taking the idea off cutting government seriously?

"I'm more positive about the [Paul] Ryan nomination. I happen to think that Ryan is a real market guy–I know all of his flaws, I know all of his bad votes, but by choosing Ryan the Party has conceded that it actually has to defend these ideas, including entitlement reform. All of the straw men that Obama is throwing at them, they now have to respond, and I think that's an important shift in the campaign that Romney was running, because he was running a campaign about nothing except that Obama is bad."

Nick Gillespie interviewed Matt Kibbe earlier this summer:

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

24 responses to “FreedomWorks' Matt Kibbe: "I think the Establishment's freaking out"

  1. Drinkin’ Edmund Fitzgerald Porter, not watching the convention.

    1. I put a bottle of that in my mix and match once. It tastes like coffee beer or that liquid smoke stuff they use to flavor bacon.

      1. You should try the [i]Sultana[/i] Porter, then…

        1. I’m partial to Old Leghumper. Tried a Dragon’s Milk last night out celebrating my birthday. Keg ran out in the midddle of the pour. They gave me the halk pint for free. Not sure if it was because it was the last of the keg but the bourbon taste was pretty strong. It was like drinking bourbon and cream almost. Wasn’t all that into it really and I do love bourbon. I’ve had Elevator Dark Horse a few times over the last week or so. Really liked that. Really dark, really good.

      2. that liquid smoke stuff they use to flavor bacon.

        WTF!?!??!

        Bacon does not need flavor!!!

        IT IS FLAVOR!!!!!

  2. Rule 12, the chairman can change the rules any time he wants…

    They know the ship has been boarded, and they are taking steps to fight off the invaders.

    1. I may be deluded, but I think it is entirely possible that libertarians can/will take over the Republican party. I’d go so far as to say 50/50 chance.

      1. Avast! Take no prisoners! By morning she’ll be ours, Mateys!

        1. How many porters have you had Cap’n?

          1. More than enough, I’d think.

            We’ll see. It seems pretty clear there is no hope for a truly relevant 3rd party. And by “relevant” I mean actually expected to win major elections. It’s the Dems and Reps for the foreseeable future. That means a pitched fight for the Republican party, as the democrats seem to have less attachment to their principles than team red. Not much less, but less.

            If the media were honest (phlegmy chortle followed by choking), there would be more folks who see the two parties as basically the same damn monster. Instead the media goes all “but he wears a sweater vest” and “she wears white after labor day, they are totally opposite!” all the while George W. and Obummer fist pump each other while shouting “wonder twins powers activate!”.

          2. One…Two…Three! Three! Er, Four!

            1. You are a wise owl.

              1. Link doesn’t work, but I assume the Tootsie Pop owl, which is whoo-whoo I was referring to.

                1. Huh. SFed it, but yes.

      2. At least a TEA Party/Paulista Libertarian coalition, which sure beats the living fuck out of a Crony Capitalist/Christianist coalition, like the RNC apparently wants…

    2. Three Rules for the So-cons, under the sky daddy.
      Seven for the banksters, in their halls of gold.
      Nine for Medicare dead-enders, doomed to die (eventually).
      One for the Dark Prince Rebus on his dark throne
      In the Land of Potomac, where the Politicians lie.

  3. But….but…..according to some Paultards, Freedomworks is a tentacle of the KOCHTOPUS!!

    1. What is a Paultard?

  4. We reserve the right to change any part of this agreement, at any time, for any reason.

    Now sign, mother fucker.

  5. there needs to be a rule about unfortunate facial hair…people with ridiculous sideburns should be escorted off the floor

    1. Are you kidding? I was about to comment that his sideburns are the only thing that make me interested in what he has to say.

  6. Considering the republican establishment, we may be better off if Obama is elected. Why? Because after the fall at least the military would probably not listen to Obama ordering them to fire on us. With Fuhrer Romney stirring up the requisite nationalism… who knows?

    I mean, if one doesn’t suspend the fact that greater powers than our own democratic efforts choose who our leaders will be, this is considerable.

    Just thinking…

  7. just because they say that “politics is Hollywood for ugly people” doesn’t mean that people should take the statement so seriously

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.