Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

Proposition 2 Failed Among Republican Voters

In Kootenai County only 34% of Republican voters supported Proposition 2 in the last general election.

Proposition 2 Failed Among Republican Voters

Proposition 2 Failed Among Republican Voters

by Brent Regan

Proposition 2 supporters are demanding that the legislature follow the “will of the people” and allocate funding for the initiative. This raises the question of which people’s will should they follow; the ones who elected them or the ones who didn’t?

In Kootenai County only 34% of Republican voters supported Proposition 2 in the last general election. The state wide average number rises to only 45% of Republican support. Why is this important?

In a perfect world our representatives would represent all the people in their districts. In reality they would be foolish to ignore the mandate from the very people who put them in office. In practice this is exactly what we see. Democrats voting to support democrat issues and Republicans voting to support republican issues. No surprise there.

How do we know that only 34% of Republican voters supported Prop 2? The key is understanding how Idaho’s second largest political party, independents, split for Proposition 2. To do that we look at the governor’s race. It is safe to assume that 95% of Democrats voted for Jordan and 95% of Republicans voted for Little. In order to reach the known vote total, 37% of unaffiliated voters would have voted for Little and 63% would have voted for Jordan.

It is safe to assume that the independents who voted for Jordan also voted for Prop 2. It is also safe to assume that 95% of Democrats voted to pass Prop 2. All we need is a little math to discover what percentage of Republicans voted to pass Prop 2.

In Kootenai County, where Prop 2 passed by less than 1%, Republican support was less than 34%. State wide Prop 2 passed by a wider margin but it failed to get a plurality of support with only 45% of Republicans on average.

Anyone planning to run in the next primary election would be wise to keep these facts in mind. In the words of Barack Obama, “Elections have consequences.”

 

Brent Regan is the Chairman of the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee and the Chairman of the Idaho Freedom Foundation

The views, opinions, or positions expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions of Redoubt News. Social Media, including Facebook, has greatly diminished distribution of our stories to our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting Main Stream Media sources. This is called ‘Shadow-banning’. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you. Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: Paypal.me/RedoubtNews

7 Comments on Proposition 2 Failed Among Republican Voters

  1. Elected Republicans disappoint me by continuing to support abortion by funding Planned Parenthood, allowing and even implementing additional gun control legislation, and neglecting to reduce government spending year after year. I have also been concerned about the ever growing support for Republican legislators despite the fact that they rarely deliver on their promises despite their controlling majorities in all three branches of Federal and Idaho state government. Now, I am even more concerned to see that it is likely that over 1/3 of the so-called “Republican” electorate supported Prop 2. What is happening to the Republican party?

    • “What is happening to the Republic…?”

      I don’t think that one in a million people are able to explain what a republic means. Perhaps you can give it a try. What does it mean to be someone who supports a republic?

      When I ran for Congress I was not invited to an NRA meeting as a candidate, but I was a member of the NRA at that time. The members of the NRA were assembled to allow their candidate to speak. The NRA candidate was an assault weapon banning Republican.

      I volunteered to speak as a paying NRA member. My response to the NRA Republican criminal (infringing on the right to bear arms) was to state that no piece of paper can authorize someone to take from me the means by which I defend myself.

      No one responded to my comment, and to me, it was as if my attempt to discuss the vital topic fell on deaf ears.

      “What is happening to the Republican party?”

      Since when? There was a party formed in opposition to the “Federalist Party” soon after the Alien and Sedition Acts. That party was called the Democratic-Republican Party, and if you want to know their concerns then you can read the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions which I will quote just for this occasion.

      Virginia

      “That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.”

      Kentucky

      “That the several states who formed that instrument, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction; and that a nullification, by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done under colour of that instrument, is the rightful remedy: That this commonwealth does upon the most deliberate reconsideration declare, that the said alien and sedition laws, are in their opinion, palpable violations of the said constitution; and however cheerfully it may be disposed to surrender its opinion to a majority of its sister states in matters of ordinary or doubtful policy; yet, in momentous regulations like the present, which so vitally wound the best rights of the citizen, it would consider a silent acquiesecence as highly criminal: That although this commonwealth as a party to the federal compact; will bow to the laws of the Union, yet it does at the same time declare, that it will not now, nor ever hereafter, cease to oppose in a constitutional manner, every attempt from what quarter soever offered, to violate that compact:”

      Are you speaking about the “Republican Party” formed by abolitionists?

      “The gavel fell to open the party’s first nominating convention, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on June 17, 1856, announcing the birth of the Republican Party as a unified political force.”

      If that is the republican party you speak about, then those people would be the same people who were falsely called Anti-Federalists, like Patrick Henry, George Mason, Richard Henry Lee, Roberty Yates, Luther Martin, Melancton Smith, and many others.

      “He was pleased that, thus early in debate, the honorable gentleman had himself shown that the intent of the Constitution was not a confederacy, but a reduction of all the states into a consolidated government. He hoped the gentleman would be complaisant enough to exchange names with those who disliked the Constitution, as it appeared from his own concessions, that they were federalists, and those who advocated it were anti-federalists.”
      FRIDAY, June 20, 1788
      Melancton Smith

      “Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union.
      June 17, 1788
      George Mason

      • James Madison gave describing a Republic a shot in Federalist #39, “The Conformity of the Plan to Republican Principles”…it does require discernment.

        “What, then, are the distinctive characters of the republican form? Were an answer to this question to be sought, not by recurring to principles, but in the application of the term by political writers, to the constitution of different States, no satisfactory one would ever be found.”

        Madison then goes on to note Holland and Venice get labeled “Republics” though they are not. Which brings us to the members of the United Nations..how many of them have the word “Republic” in their name….this is a short list:

        Antiquated “U.S.S.R. – Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” *
        Central African Republic
        People’s Republic of China *
        Czech Republic
        Republic of Cuba *
        Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
        Democratic Republic of the Congo
        Dominican Republic
        Gambia (Republic of The)
        Iran (Islamic Republic of) *
        Lao People’s Democratic Republic
        Republic of Korea
        Republic of Moldova

        Anyone can call themselves anything it appears…but Madison explained in #39:

        “If we resort for a criterion to the different principles on which different forms of government are established, we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior.”

  2. R is for Republican, not Redoubt.

    We’ll be sure to remind our neighbors in 2019…

    The American Redoubt is an extremist religious separatist group. Terrorists. Not politicians. Not journalists. Terrorists.

    Have fun paying the lawyers bill for the Prop 2 lawsuit. The least you could do with your lobbyist $ from the Koch Brothers is ensure the cost of your completely unfounded and unintelligent lawsuit isn’t picked up by tax payers.

    #brentreaganEXTREMIST #VoteOutRedoubt #soreloser

    • How about you post your real name and quit hiding behind democrat rhetoric and lies? The Redoubt is a location, and if you live here then YOU ARE A REDOUBTER.

      #TrollsAreAfraidOfTheRedoubt #RedoubtAlwaysWins

    • Hey TJ,

      Your tyranny rhetoric is showing.

      You Democrats instantly name-call everything that doesn’t agree with your narrow authoritarian point of view. You incorrectly and falsely accuse people constantly of being a homophobe, misogynist, racist, fascist, etc. on and on. You just falsely accused all redoubters of being terrorists. Completely unjustifiable accusation.

      Citation please.

      I’d like to see a list, alphabetical, of every single name in the redoubt followed by a list of their terrorist crimes (acts of violence perpetrated with political purpose). Unless you can provide a list that details EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the redoubt, along with a list that attributes at least one act of politically motivated violence to EACH AND EVERY person, then you are a bold faced liar engaged in nothing more than a smear campaign against truly innocent people who simply have a different opinion than you and dare to express it. Your credibility is impeached.

      You are labeling redoubters, including children, a very specific criminal and legal label that means people with guns can come and take them away from their homes and families under threat of lethal force to small cells for the rest of their lives without due process or just outright kill them. What the heck is wrong with you? That is exactly the behavior you people claim to be against. Yet it is ONLY you people engaged in this.

      Redoubters want to live and be left alone to live their life as they choose. Nothing more, and it negatively impacts no one. We don’t care how you choose to live your life, just don’t impose your will and demands upon ours as we don’t impose our will and demands on yours. YOU people are the only fascists here, demanding more and more laws and restrictions on our way of life, while we simply don’t want more laws restricting anything. Two very different approaches.

      You want, no, demand, total governmental authority and power and complete subservience to it by all people, with no political opposition tolerated. Tyrants. Fascists. I don’t need to name names, like soviet Russia, Nazi germany, communist China, Mussolini’s Italy, and the various despots and dictators who led their governments by the same principles of absolutism that democrats demand, like Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Castro, Robert Mugabe, Kim jong-Il, Hirohito, ho Chi Min, and on and on throughout history. When govt power is absolute and no opposition is tolerated, bad things happen. We are smart enough to realize this and demand nothing more than the already functional govt we have not continue to be expanded needlessly. That doesn’t make us anti-government or terrorists or anything else. The overwhelming majority of us believe in our system of government.

      We want restriction on governmental power, fewer laws, and the right to be left alone and to make decisions for ourselves when it harms no one else. These are simple tenets that any rational person should be able to agree to. We are the exact OPPOSITE of tyrants or fascists or terrorists.

      Your credibility is entirely impeached.

      By your logic, I can likewise classify all Democrats as terrorists, because it’s democrats who are running around dressed in all black using lethal melee weapons and chemical weapons to batter and attempt to permanently disfigure or blind innocent people engaged in no illegal action or wrongdoing whatsoever and who are simply trying to express their right to speech or engage in a legally protected activity.

      Also, you have Democrats with a history of actively engaging in acts of politically motivated ecological terror (ELF anyone?) and likewise, look at the 70’s, Democrats were responsible for numerous acts of violence and bombings for a political means. THAT, my lying democrat friend, is the definition of terrorism. Use of violence and threats of violence to achieve a political means. You and your party have the history of engaging in criminal acts of terror. Meanwhile, redoubters have been around just a handful of years and do not have a history of any such thing or behavior!

      You are the pot, calling a can of white paint black. Because there is no similarity at all between redoubters and democrats, as it is members of your party (not redoubters) engaged in and with a long standing history of, acts of terrorism and violence, routinely, from the 70’s through to just this last week where democrats attacked an elderly man with a crowbar to the back of the head and savaged beat him and hospitalized him for the act of wearing a hat and it was Democrats who just this week mob attacked, robbed and nearly killed (gave him a brain bleed and hospitalized him) a gay Asian journalist who was simply engaged in constitutionally protected activity of recording events and was wearing nothing political at all.

      A half century of terrorism by democrats on one side of the scale, and a bunch of people with no political violence history whatsoever, who banded together via peaceful means, enduring hardships such as leaving their homes and jobs and families behind, solely to support and defend our existing system of government and to peacefully try to build a stronger voting block to effectively utilize the existing government to defend people’s rights to be free.

      It’s very plain and obvious to everyone where the scale tips and who the terrorists are. And it’s not us. No matter how much you stomp and how loudly you shout. You can’t change facts. The central tenet of our organization is peaceful use and preservation of our existing government. While the central tenet of your organization is the abolition of our existing government, including usurping our bill of rights, upending the electoral college, trying to rig the Supreme Court by adding members, inflate your congressional power by gaining congressional seats based on illegal immigration populations, etc. Every action advocated for by your party is affront to the existing government and existing laws. Your party routinely engaged in criminal conduct, and you try to change every aspect of our government, and utilize force in the streets to silence, threaten, and physically harm the opposition who does nothing more than speak facts peacefully.

      YOU represent the terrorists, actively trying to overthrow both our government and our people’s way of life. And you falsely point at the people bravely standing up in the face of said violence and are simply trying to use their voices to express opposition even as your party savagely beats and kills us for doing so. And if you are going to say ALL redoubters are terrorists (based on nothing and no evidence), then likewise, all democrats are terrorists bearing responsibility for the acts of these.

      You are shameful, and we will not stand for your BS and lies.

Comments are closed.