54 People Like Cox
We received an email in the tipjar from the Cox campaign touting their strong Iowa organization and asking to be moved up the line. Here are some pertinent excerpts.We have 3 District Coordinators covering West, Central, and Eastern Iowa. We have over 54 volunteer coordinators covering all 99 Iowa counties. I have been working my tail off to achieve a solid ground game in these key states. John has traveled to all 99 counties in Iowa already and makes extensive trips. The next one is in November after the election. Our message is what is getting through and causing our early success.
They didn't brag about the front page spread in the LA Times, which was the most bewildering news of the week to us in the Cooler. In that article, his law partner calls him a long shot! Nice commitment bud.
They have the inimitable Steve Huff on board, as first reported here at the Caucus Cooler. Huff you might remember lost a GOP Primary for State Senate to Ron Longmuir (who? exactly)... They've got Keith Hunter for Western Iowa (how much are they paying you Keith?) and Patrick Anderson for Central Iowa. As best as we can tell, Patrick is in college.
Cox's national coordinator, the fellow who emailed us, Nathan Martin, lost a Primary in OH-04. (Are we starting to see a trend here).
You can go to their website and see their 54 coordinators. All good people, we're sure. Their hearts are in the right place, but they just don't get it. The point of this process is choosing a leader of the free world and there's a vetting process. The American people are not going to elect a lawyer they've never heard of. The Gang of 50 unanimously agree on this. John Cox will not be President.
He will likely cause some of these other guys trouble over the next 18 months, and for that reason we'll report his actions. In the meantime, in order to make Mr. Cox feel better, we are moving him up the line.
Now he's 998-1.
posted by Caucus Cooler at 10/11/2006
40 Comments:
Don't be so hard on Cox
hilarious.
Paging Morrie Taylor...
Sounds like Cox doesn't have a bunch of has-beens, he has a bunch of never-were's.
Morrie Taylor was kind of "stiff"
They claimed 50 coordinators months ago. When I called to ask who they were, they wouldn't give me any names. Ha! I'm heading over to check them out right now.
Sounds like we've got a blogger here with an overactive sense of importance.
I hope you're happy when Iowa Republicans elect the liberal/moderate wishy-washy candidate the media force feeds you, rather than a social and fiscal conservative like John Cox we probably would be better off having as our standard-bearer
He will likely cause some of these other guys trouble over the next 18 months.
Yeah, he'll cause a LOT of trouble. Keep watching. Watch when he asks why Romney is a flip-flopper and is hardly honest on his latest abortion stance, and when he asks why McCain is a media darling with no credibility on conservative issues, and when he asks why Huckabee is a chronic tax-raiser who thinks those who criticize illegal immigraiton are "racists." The liberals in the race - Guiliani and Pataki - have utterly no chance of winning. None. So I'm sure the blog will cover them in great detail, all the while belittling someone who is actually on the ground and fighting for conservative priciples like John Cox.
But go ahead and promote the Magnetic, but unelectable Mormon or the Phoney Media-beloved McCain. When 20 million social and fiscal conservatives watch the Summer, 2008 GOP convention, they will all look to Iowa and say "Why didn't show us a Reagan Republican?"
In the meantime, in order to make Mr. Cox feel better, we are moving him up the line.
Mitt Romney 7-2 (unelectable - cultist, pro-choice, until last month)
John McCain 5-1 (unelectable - not a conservative on the Senate floor, but is in Iowa and SC)
George Pataki 7-1 (unelectable - liberal)
Rudy Giuliani 8-1 (unelectable - America's liberal Mayor)
Mike Huckabee 25-2 (unelectable - tax-raiser, illegal-coddler)
Bill Frist 22-1 (unelectable - free-spending lunatic with your tax money)
George Allen 25-1 (unelectable - makaka, closeted and ashamed Jewish man, will lose race in 06)
Newt Gingrich 32-1 (unelectable - intellectual, visionary, humiliated by Clinton)
Sam Brownback 33-1 (unelectable - religious zealot, will not sell outside of Mississippi)
Chuck Hagel 500-1 (unelectable - who? oh yeah, the liberal)
Great odds-making guys. And America is trusting Iowa... why??
Let me get this straight, you don't even put Cox on the line with the other candidates? WTF is wrong with you?
Cox will never be president and you know it. His little dog and pony show sure is cute. He's not doing anybody any good. And the only "sense of overimportance" comes from some schmuck who thinks he has a right to be president while the others you listed have been fighting for our cause for years.
Cox as president? Blows my mind.
He's not doing anybody any good.? What does THAT mean?
He's calling the party back to Reagan principles, while exposing these careerist politicians who bask in the warm glow of media acceptance inside the beltway.
These folks are going to look over their shoulder and see John Cox moving up and not know what hit them, thanks to snarky blogs like this and the elite media who are trying to freeze out the only Reagan Conservative in the race.
As we all well know, Iowa has been trusted by Americans to head the presidential election process. With this induced trust by our country, I believe as conservative republicans in Iowa, we need to make a tough choice, and acquire our traditionalist thinking again. As many of us have read or heard, we are in a culture war of American values. Crazy far left liberals are trying to take over our religious history, and form a secular progressive movement. We need to establish a battleground, by electing a Republican, not a candidate that will say almost anything to get elected. We need a candidate that is going to stand up for what he believes in and not let the secular progressive media deteriorate his thinking.
We are living in a country that has been attacked by groups such as the ACLU, to limit our religious freedom. We all know that among many principles this country was founded on religious freedom. We have activist judges giving asinine rulings on religious displays, and unbelievably easy sentences for child rapist. Do we want our country to fall into the path of a liberal society, that mimics France and the Dutch? We need a candidate that is going to stand up to this attack on our values. In looking at a list and doing research on all of the candidates, John Cox is really the only one that will completely stand up and be a leader is this culture war. I lack confidence in many of our Republican hopefuls, and believe we need to remember our values, the values that Reagan loved and believed in. We are Iowans and we set the tone for the country! Let’s set the tone and declare we want America to stick to it’s traditional approach that has given refuge to so many people throughout the world! Republicans don’t need to elect a middle of the road candidate for the upcoming election, we sure know the Democrats won’t! We need John Cox, and it doesn’t matter how many times he has lost a political race in the past, I am disappointed someone would even bring that up. What matters is what he stands for and John Cox stands for what America was founded upon, a traditionalist approach of moral values and policies that would make our Founding Fathers smile.
Well said, Murph.
Part of knowing your place in this business is understanding who should carry the mantle. Reagan had it, Cox does not.
I could just see John Cox in 1979 before the Iowa caucuses:
"We need John Cox, not a former Democrat and divorcee named Ronald Reagn, to carry forth conservative principles."
You guys are such idiots.
But you can break it by trashing John Cox?
Kinda hypocritical of you.
Reagan never voted with Teddy Kennedy, never went on a spending spree, and never accused the military of torturing prisoners just like the terrorist do. But if he had, that would have been a great attack, and a valid one.
"blogger with an overactive sense of importance.."
Sounds like a commenter that is bitter that the standard bearer for Iowa Caucus conventional wisdom doesn't give your guy any love.
The fact is Americans don't elect Presidents they've never heard of, don't elect guys without elective experience, don't elect lawyers with no record who want to crown themselves as conservative.
The fact is that conventional wisdom says your guy doesn't have a prayer and that's what the line reflects. Go somewhere else if you are looking for a fluffer.
What Patrick said.
Every time I hear John speak, I'm impressed.
People need to stop playing high-minded pundit and start listening to the real grassroots in Iowa and across the nation.
They want a real conservative and don't care if he hasn't had decades in Congress pushing pork back to their districts as "experience."
The blogger calls himself the "standard bearer for Iowa caucus conventional wisdom" but bristles at the accusation that he's got an overactive sense of importance.
How ironic.
BTW, the elites and self-appointed pundits aren't going to choose the next president. The caucus-goers are, and the primary voters in other states are. The only good news is that if Iowa screws up and follows, lemming-like, the dismissive chatter of wanna-be pundits and supports an unelectable insider, the rest of the states can fix it before the convention.
But I bet Iowans are smarter than that.
As for the 11th commandment of not attacking a fellow Republican, we aren't attacking fellow Republicans. We are attacking, for the most part, Northeast Democrats masquerading as Republicans because the last 12 years it has been cool to be one. Look past the style, there is little substance. John Cox is discussing issues, real issues, not trading nicetys trying to climb up the political ladder. As to the claims of no political experience, take a look at Eisenhower, Hoover, Lincoln (used to losing), and Washington. To claim that someone needs vast political experience to be the chief executive is vastly misused. Also, Mr. Cox is not a practicing lawyer, he has built a 100 million dollar real estate and investment firm from scratch. He has also been involved in politics since 1988. Hardly someone who woke up yesterday and decided to run for president. As for your other arguments, to point out my staff's past "failings" in an attempt to avoid talking about the issues is the definition of idiocy. Not to even mention our successes. While you have played pundit brat, I returned from Iraq last November and decided to ACTUALLY try and MAKE a difference instead of useless lines on blogspot. I continue that fight today. So, if you want to put any other candidate toe to toe on the issues. BRING IT ON! You don't have a prayer.
Cox bloggers: Welcome to the Cooler. For what its worth the line is not full of random numbers that fit our mood. It's based on conversations with a lot of people who are involved at all levels of GOP Politics: from grassroots to strategists to fundraisers to journalists.
We also consider history. And before you lecture us on your candidate you should look at how candidates similar to yours have fared in the past.
And Patrick as the line states "The line IS NOW mathematically accurate but is NOT intended for gambling purposes."
We hope you will continue to join in the Cooler conversation.
Cox can parade around the state all he wants, Patrick. Hell, he can abandon NH and SC and spend every day from here until January, and he'll still lose. Why? Because he has NO EXPERIENCE!!!
Why do you think governors win elections? Because they have experience. What does Cox have? Nothing. Oh wait, he can do my taxes for me. In fact, I might give him a call in April. He probably won't have much else going on.
John Cox better spend every waking moment between now and January talking to someone in Iowa. Because as soon as the governors are done governing their states, he's gonna be in a world of shit.
Cox is kind of like a replacement player playing baseball during the strike. They provided entertainment, but as soon as the big leaguers came back, they were gone. Come January, when the big leaguers have more time to campaign, we'll find John Cox talking to college accounting clubs, not central committees.
What affect this guy has on the campaign is moot. We know who we are and what we believe. This guy is a nobody and should be religated as a noiseless mouth piece. He shoots his mouth with useless cliches. I don't have justify myself or this campaign to him or anyone else. What we do as team and what we build as a team will become evident on election day and this pinhead can't do a thing about it!
this is still hilarious...
Political fan, that's some "brilliant" analysis there. No, really. I also can't wait for the governors to stop "governing" and show up in Iowa, NH, and SC with their dog and pony shows, trying to explain why they lied about being pro-choice to get elected (Romney) or why they fought for and then pardoned someone who raped and murdered a girl in Arkansas, only to have him go on to Missouri and murder another woman (Huckabee - Dukakis was an amateur compared to this guy.)
Oh yeah, and both raised a boatload of taxes along the way, all the while claiming to be "fiscal conservatives."
Let's talk substance about these "records" and not just throw the word around as if it should disqualify anyone who lacks the experience of raping the public's wallet and bludgeoning the truth to a pulp just to get elected.
We'll see who's standing when the celebrity shine wears off these jokers, and we'll see who's unelectable and has 998-1 odds where it counts - with the PEOPLE.
Steve - if you're going to claim mitt raised a boatload of taxes along the way, you'll have to provide some proof. Everywhere I see the state tax rates went down in Mass while state revenue went up.
Nobody wants a congressman who can't do anything but take money from lobbyists and bring the bacon home -- some of you are right -- I would want Cox over a congressman; but not over a gov'ner.
Is steve a parody? If so that is hysterically funny. If not its sad.
So far we've been called "snarky," "pessimistic," "pundit/brat," and "self-important"...
Boy that's a tough day.
Ben, is it tough being the editor for a paper in a town of 700? I'm sure it is, if you figure you're probably the clerk for all the office supplies you sell. The only reason I make this comment is because you included it in your post, like it gives you credibility.
You'll have to move to Iowa for a chance to vote for Cox, my friend. Then you can meet Patrick aka Steve aka anonymous and you guys can go hang out.
Yeah...I'm jumping on board with Steve Rathje too.
C'mon...you need experience in politics before you run for office.
"you need experience in politics before you run for office."
That comment is kind of silly. I guess you forgot about Arnold S. in California - or Ronald Reagan for that mattter. And it ignores about 90% of anyone who ever entered politics, and did so without ANY prior experience. And 19 million people thought Ross Perot was a better choice, without a day of experience in politics.
But John Cox actually has experience (not that some of the vicious, elitist partisans here care about facts.) He was president of the Cook County Republicans. There are not a whole lot of Republicans in Cook County, but there are about ten times more than will vote in the Iowa Caucus.
He served on Jack Kemp's national steering committee in 1988. He also stood up for principle to run a couple of times in a heavily BLUE state (where even the Republicans cow-tow to the Daley machine.) Lincoln couldn't even get elected in Illinois. Nothing's changed.
He's been constantly standing up for Republican conservative values. Have your favorite liberal governors been doing that? Has your favorite free-spending Republican senators? Thought not.
Ben Thompson:
I admit I'm a not a right-winger . . . but I'd like to match you -- quote for quote:
Henry Clay said compromise was the cement that held the Union together:
All legislation . . . is founded upon the principle of mutual concession. . . . Let him who elevates himself above humanity, above its weaknesses, its infirmities, its wants, its necessities, say, if he pleases, “I will never compromise”; but let no one who is not above the frailties of our common nature disdain compromise. (Profiles in Courage, John F. Kennedy, p. 5)
Kennedy goes on to say:
It is compromise that prevents each set of reformers from crushing the group on the extreme opposite end of the political spectrum. The fanatics and extremists and even those conscientiously devoted to hard and fast principles are always disappointed in the failure of their government to rush to implement all of their principles and to denounce those of their opponents. But the legislator has some responsibility to conciliate those opposing forces within his state and party and to represent them in the larger clash of interests on the national level; and he alone knows that there are few if any issues where all the truth and all the right and all the angels are on one side. (Profiles, p 6)
It's all well and good to compromise when governing, but quite another when you either lie about your beliefs for political expediency or fail to stand up for them even in the face of overwhelming opposition.
All of teh Cox supporters look like "Children of the Corn". They all look like whackos. They even got that crazy Linda Harrington traveling around pimping Cox.
Pimping Cox. I made a funny.
Cox ran for office, what, two or three times, and lost. Now, don't throw out how many times Lincoln ran and lost, Cox is a nobody. Why waste all of our time.
A nobody.. that describes you political posers.
Wow, Keith Hunter. At least there's one experienced guy on the Cox campaign.
Good to see all these Cox bloggers focused on '06. Way to help the cause.
Second, why does Cox say Iraq should produce more oil? Increasing our reliance on unstable oil resources owned by terrorists is brilliant. Yeah, that's going to win it for him.
Finally, you idiots couldn't even get his ad right. It cuts off his final sentence.
Nice work. An '08 ad on valuable '06 time. That's not conservative, and it outright hurts our cause.
Keith Hunter experienced? OMFG
Who the hell is Patrick Anderson and Steve Huff? At least I've met Keith Hunter before, how'd that Allsion scandal hurt you? Couldn't find any better Keith?
My oh my the Nussle people are being very snarky. Trouble in paradise?
Anon said: Good to see all these Cox bloggers focused on '06. Way to help the cause.
John Cox has been in Iowa frequently this election season, bearing checks for local candidates as well as lending a hand with fundraising. Guess you didn't hear about it because the crew here blacked out that news, and only had time to bash and ridicule John (taking away time from 06 candidates too, by the way.)
Just so you're clear, he doesn't want to increase our dependence on foreign oil, and has said NO SUCH THING. He wants the Iraqis to sell their oil and be prosperous on their own dime. He didn't even say he wants them to sell it TO US, necesarily. Even if they sold it to Japan, it would reduce the cost of oil on the open market for us all by increasing supply. Or do you know how markets work?
He also is on record as wanting to reduce our dependence on foreign oil sources, and drill more here (as well as use Iowa's abundance and create ethanol.) But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned slanderin'.
Steve? or is this Patrick? Where do I sign on? HAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAAHAHA
Post a Comment
<< Home