Report from the Battlefront
What to expect from California College Republicans in the coming year
By Ryan Clumpner, Chairman, California College Republicans
A week and a half ago, the California College Republicans (CCR) convened to hold the first competitive leadership elections since 2004. Uncontested elections are a sign of organizational unity and CCR has flourished for the past few years. However, like any healthy organization, competition was inevitable and this year the process brought fresh vitality and a renewed interest in the direction of the organization. CCR emerged from the decisive election united and committed to 
an aggressive agenda for the coming year. [Their new Executive Board is pictured.]
College Republicans face some unique challenges in the coming year. California has been seized by statewide elections every fall since 2002. As a result, the organizational strength of College Republicans for over four years has largely been derived from the electoral process.
**There is more – click the link**
April 27th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Well Ryan, if you take uncontested elections as “a sign of organizational unity,” what do you suppose this contested election was a sign of? If the Take Back CCR campaign didn’t make it perfectly clear during convention weekend, let me do so now– it was a sign of discontent, and that discontent didn’t just go away because Activate won.
You claim that CCR “emerged from the decisive election united and committed to an aggressive agenda for the coming year.” I’m trying to figure out just what it is that you and your new executive board are doing to unite the organization, because it’s nice to SAY we’re united, but I haven’t seen any action taken from your camp to make it happen. As I said, the discontent is still there and if I were you, I wouldn’t be writing nice, fluffy articles for the Flash Report about how united the organization is… I’d be doing everything in my power to actually MAKE it that way.
April 27th, 2007 at 12:00 am
“Uncontested elections are a sign of organizational unity”…
Or a police state.
April 27th, 2007 at 12:00 am
The Berkeley College Republicans just elected Ross Lingenfelder as their new President. Ross was another strong supporter of the new CCR leaders- this is the beginning of an era of renewed cooperation between BCR and CCR. With new developments such as this one, the shrill voices claiming and promoting an agenda of disunity ( such as the ill informed above comment) reflect few and are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
April 27th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Of all of BCR’s new leadership, Ross is the SOLE Activate supporter of the group.
I’m not certain what it is you find ill informed about my comment, but I definitely don’t find it becoming of the new CCR Executive Director to call my view (as the chair of one of CCR’s largest clubs) irrelevant. And as the election proved, it is not a view I hold alone. Take Back CCR received roughly 1/3 of the vote– I’d hardly call that few, and considering 4 out of the 5 Take Back CCR candidates are NOT graduating, I’d hardly call it irrelevant, either.
April 28th, 2007 at 12:00 am
“and considering 4 out of the 5 Take Back CCR candidates are NOT graduating, I’d hardly call it irrelevant, either.”
Ouch!
April 29th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Caroline, so when you say, “Ross was another strong supporter of the new CCR leaders,” you’re referring to his statement at 5:54pm on April 23, 2007, “F*** CCR!”? [Edited for inappropriate content]
Here’s a printscreen for your viewing pleasure, in case you missed it.
http://photos-sf2p.pe.facebook.com/v76/73/107/1207313/n1207313_34720101_9860.jpg
Or perhaps you didn’t hear of his t-shirt idea: Front — “Fuck Stanfurd”, Back — “And CCR” He submitted that one to the public at Cal Day, April 21, 2007.
You’re ill-informed when you label our dissenting voice as “promoting an agenda of disunity”. More importantly, you’re ignorant to call that voice increasingly irrelevant. Perhaps you missed Luis Buhler’s remarks at the CCR Convention when he said that Congressional District 11 (formerly the seat of Richard Pombo) will likely be the most targeted California race in 2008. That’s Adam Ellison and Pacific’s backyard. That’s a stone’s throw away from Sacramento State, which casted the majority of its votes for that “increasingly irrelevant” group of people. It’s a quick drive from Berkeley, who’s executive board now holds four individuals who comprised those “shrill voices” of which you speak and the lone “strong supporter” who says, “Fuck CCR!”
The fact that you depict over 1/4 of the voting delegates as irrelevant shows a serious lack of leadership and defines your vision of unity as a policy of exclusion toward those with differing opinions. The more you attempt to silence those with differing opinions, the louder those voices get. When CCR finally stops targeting specific clubs as threats and begins to work with those clubs, then we’ll have an organization of which to be proud.
Your blowhard swagger will only further alienate those people who otherwise would be great assets. For the sake of CCR, put the political bullshit aside and try understanding why there was dissent. It boils down to a whole lot more than resume building, contrary to the assertions a former Activate candidate dared to make. Realize that before the election became contested two of the main planks of the Activate platform were putting video on the CCR website and increasing Moxie distribution. With a contested election the speakers program came out, people started discussing GOTV in a more innovative manner.
Only after you make a sincere effort to understand the points of view raised by those with whom you do not agree do you have any room to begin calling people “ill-informed.” Until then, try leadership on for size. You might find it takes a whole lot more than rhetoric and exclusionary policies. Maybe even a little humility.