Connect with us


Could current Republican lawmakers leave the party before 2018 elections?



Could current Republican lawmakers leave the party before 2018 elections

For full disclosure, I’m a co-founder of the Federalist Party. It behooves me to want certain Republicans, those who want to limit government, defend freedoms, and protect life, to leave the Democratlite party (better known as the GOP).

The last week has been a whirlwind for the GOP and the nation. In the gap between two major hurricane disasters, the Republican Congress has worked on or plans to address issues that one would normally associate with the Democrats. They’re going with the Democrats’ plan to raise the debt ceiling. They are now tasked to legalize DACA, bail out Obamacare, and push forth “tax reform” that seems increasingly likely to resemble a Bill Clinton plan than something fiscal conservatives would draft.

Their leader in the White House is making it crystal clear he loves working with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi while despising the agenda (which he helped create) being botched by Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan. If they’re unable to put forth the so-called tax reform as well as Trump’s trillion dollar infrastructure plan (which is conspicuously similar to Schumer’s plan) while trying to fund the border wall, it’s possible for the GOP Congress and the White House to no longer be on speaking terms by Thanksgiving.

Stakes are high heading into a midterm election cycle that is laced with uncertainty. That’s been part of the buzz this week, but even with the debt ceiling being in the news, few have discussed the actual debt itself. With GOP control of both chambers and the White House, it’s inexcusable that the debt continues to skyrocket. How can Constitutionalists in DC watch as their party squanders an opportunity to address the fiscal cliff we’re heading towards? That’s the $20 trillion question.

Could we see Republicans abandoning ship ahead of the election to run as Independents or Federalists? Are some who aren’t going into an election year considering changing allegiance soon rather than waiting? If things continue to look gloomy for both Republicans and Democrats in coming months, the answer to both questions is “maybe.” It’s a long-shot; we weren’t planning on running in many national elections until 2020, but the growing angst has accelerated things.

I wish I could go into detail about the conversations I’ve had this week. Some were surprising. The rest were downright shocking. We’re in a very strange situation where both major parties are failing to inspire any form of support outside of the fervent base. The best thing going for the Republican Party is the Democratic Party. The best thing going for the Democratic Party is the Republican Party. There’s a distinct lack of positive momentum on either side. At this point, all they can rely on is trying to make the other side look worse.

That’s the problem with binary choice. It’s a system that mathematically offers the lowest chance of yielding candidates the people truly want. It’s why we’ve become a political society of attack ads rather than issue-based platform building. Instead of laying out concrete plans for policy, campaigns have devolved to pure mudslinging. They no longer give reasons why you should vote FOR someone. They simply focus on making us vote AGAINST their opponent.

Our intention has always been to focus locally in the 2018 elections and expand to national races in 2020. That plan hasn’t changed, but the calculus is much more favorable now than it ever has been. I’ll be reaching out to those who appear to be Federalists before the end of the year to see what’s possible. If the interest is there (and based upon my calls this week, it is), it’s possible we could see current GOP lawmakers jump ship.

Who can blame them? The Establishment is no longer a representation of what conservatives call RINOs (Republican In Name Only). They’re now what the Republican Party embodies philosophically. It’s the small-government-minded, Constitution-loving Republicans who are no longer considered true representatives of their party’s ideology or plan.

Constitutional conservatives are now Republicans in name only. They see the party as the best vehicle during campaign season because there haven’t been any viable alternatives. We’re trying to change that. Judging by the response we’ve received so far, we’re on our way to reaching the necessary tipping point.

Our biggest challenges are the ongoing failures of third parties. They’ve suffered from amateur strategies and poor choices that end up wasting time, money, and votes. They’ve paved a road towards a dead end. Combine that notion with the self-perpetuating false dichotomy created by the masters of the two-party system and it’s easy to see why so many Americans want a third party but have a hard time believing they’re even possible.

We can suspend disbelief if one or both of two things happen. Our strategy of starting with local, city, county, and state elections is the long road heading towards DC, but it’s solid. The longshot – an exodus by current lawmakers – is entering more of our internal conversations. This time last month, it wasn’t really an option. We’ve apparently been causing some people to take notice which has prompted this week’s enlightening conversations. Now, the exodus gambit is getting stronger consideration. Thankfully, they’re not mutually exclusive. We’ll continue with the first plan while keeping our eyes and ears open for the second.

America needs to be released from the inherent dysfunction of the Democratic-Republicans who’ve had a stranglehold on government since the 19th century. President Trump has stirred the trough shared by both major parties. The time is near when Constitutionalists on Capitol Hill can no longer willfully partake in eating the slop. When the time comes, we’ll be ready.

Christian, husband, father. EIC, NOQ Report. Co-Founder, the Federalist Party. Just a normal guy who will no longer sit around while the country heads in the wrong direction.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

The Naked Truth Of Guiding Principles.




The ‘SI Swimsuit edition’ is a perfect ‘illustration’ [pardon the pun] of why one needs bedrock principles.

For a moment, imagine the editorial meeting on the upcoming Sports Illustrated “Swim Suit” issue. Someone comes up with the brilliant idea of going after the premise of women as pure sex objects by making women pure sex objects – but with grease paint. After a brief, awkward silence a sycophant in true echo chamber style agrees with the concept with everyone else chimes in with approbation over the sheer genius of the idea.

This is what happens when there is no sane voice in the room that points out the sheer absurdity of the such a suggestion and steers the meeting back to more reasonable topics. It is (almost literally) the modern version of the emperor’s new clothes, a new cautionary tale of what happens under extreme groupthink. The ‘me too’ movement is now imploding in on itself because it has no real direction or guiding principles.

Two Different Revolutions, Two Different Outcomes.

Now, compare the results of the American and French revolutions with the impact of one having underlying principles to keep things on an even keel. The magnificent words of the Declaration of Independence penned by Thomas Jefferson set the framework for the new nation keeping subsequent events from spinning out of control. Such was not the case with the tragic results of the French revolution for want of bedrock moral code to keep mobile vulgus at bay.

It should be clearly evident that recent events have reaffirmed that one must have a set of guiding principles or be at risk of suffering the same consequences that have afflicted all too many of the past.

Everything from the current budget deal that is being opposed by the House Freedom Caucus as reported on The Right Scoop  to the gift to the Socialist-Left Media of the possibly of having an Illinois Nazi run as a Republican in the state’s Third Congressional [and ‘very Democratic’] District as reported by the New York Times.  Its location that includes part of Chicago should mean the man doesn’t have a chance. But that won’t stop the national Media from endlessly smearing the GOP with the story.

Guiding Principles are key to a political party’s continued success.

Following a clearly articulated set of Conservative values would hold such circumstances at bay. The basic principles set forth in our nation’s founding documents of individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise. Or as presented by The Federalist party.

Holding on to such principles will keep us from digging ourselves into the budgetary hole we presently find ourselves. It will also short-circuit the media’s obsession with connecting us with a group of Socialists. There is a reason why they are labeled a platform or guiding principles, they are the foundational constructs of what we stand for, and what we oppose.

Continue Reading


Wisconsin GOP offers choice of either a RINO or a racist for Congress



It’s been a little over a quarter of a century since Ronald Reagan rode off into the California sunset; ever since that day the GOP has worked to destroy conservatives and conservative principles and, as a result, the party itself

This terminal condition gave rise to a group of Republicans we’ve come to know as RINOs (Republican In Name Only) because it used to be that the words “Republican” and “conservative” were synonymous. Sadly, that is no longer the case.

Besides the election of Donald Trump, there is perhaps no better example of just how far the GOP has fallen from its conservative values than the rise of Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan into positions of leadership. This devolution has become prima facie evidence of why now is the time for conservatives fed up with Republicans who have become nothing more than inarticulate Democrats to form a new party.

For those who would challenge my conclusions, I invite you to consider the upcoming GOP primary race between Paul Ryan and Paul Nehlen in Wisconsin.

When Paul Ryan became Speaker of the House, I knew that based on his track record of spinelessness that he wouldn’t be anymore conservative than his predecessor, John Boehner. Needless to say, I wouldn’t shed any tears if the early inductee into my Gutless On Principles Hall of Shame were to be kicked out of his cushy job in Congress this November, but should Paul Nehlen be the guy to replace him? Not a snowball’s chance in Hell.

With the support of Breitbart, along with Steve Bannon’s redefinition of conservatism, Nehlen challenged Ryan in 2016–a campaign he lost by 70 percentage points despite receiving additional support from Donald Trump and an army of alt-right nationalists who had found a home with Bannon and Trump.

In his 2018 campaign, Nehlen has taken his alt-right nationalist beliefs to David Duke levels by openly attacking Jews. In an appearance on Duke’s radio show, Nehlen stated how the “relentless attacks” against his “America First” position were due to his belief that “Jews control the media.”

As it currently stands, the GOP in Wisconsin is offering a choice between a RINO and a racist for Congress. Using the now widely accepted “lesser of two evils” approach to voting, that means that one of these men will represent the irreparable party in November.

By the way, Wisconsin isn’t an isolated case. Such losing binary choices are being foisted on conservatives all over America. I can only hope that an army of dedicated patriots will rise up and say, ENOUGH!

The solution to America’s problems won’t come from the two-party duopoly owned and operated by the Republicans and the Democrats. It’s up to us to draw a line in the sand, stand our ground, and defend our conservative values.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading


California eyeing State-run bank for marijuana



The State of the Union address is over and as expected, the Left side of the aisle is saying everything good in this country right now is because of Obama and Trump is taking credit for his accomplishments.

Conversely, the Right is saying everything good happening in the country is because of Trump. It’s the typical partisan spin put out by both parties. Each goes to their own corner to defend their cause even if they might be wrong.

We have become so accustomed to the divisiveness that any bi-partisan agreement is labeled a sellout and any politician is worthy of a primary challenge if they are marked a sellout because they are not ideologically pure.

It’s the typical Red shirts versus Blue shirts game.

So when you’re the Republican candidate for California State Controller, and the California State Treasurer and Attorney General come out with an idea for a state-run bank for marijuana, I should immediately dismiss it because they are Democrats and I’m a Republican.

Well, not that I don’t have my concerns with a state-run bank, run by a state that can’t properly manage its own finances and the answer to every question is to raise more taxes.

Don’t get me wrong I’m no fan of the quasi-governmental private-public bank that controls monetary policies in the United States called, The Federal Reserve. This does not mean as a Federalist that this idea isn’t worth studying.


According to the Sacramento Bee:

Because of the federal prohibition on marijuana, banks generally will not provide accounts to cannabis companies, forcing them to pay taxes and other expenses in cash. The resulting safety problems and accounting complications have been brought to the fore by the Jan. 1 start of legal recreational pot sales in California.

US Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been on a crusade to stamp out state-legalized marijuana. Thus tensions between the states and the federal government over marijuana are at an all-time high; no pun intended.

Why it’s worth considering

I’m no fan of marijuana, but as a Federalist, the criminalization and regulation of marijuana on the federal level is not an enumerated power given to the federal government. This is a state’s power issue.

If you are okay with what Jeff Sessions is doing, then I’m assuming you were fine when the Obama Administration was working to force banks to dump gun stores.

Remember, you can’t have it both ways. You either want to limit centralized government, or you just want your team to control everything and do what you want.

If you liked the power Obama had then you should be fine with Trump wielding the same powers or vice versa.

If you don’t like the person wearing the other jersey having that much power because of their ability to abuse that power then it is time to reconsider how we do government from the federal government all the way to local government.

Are there concerns with a state-run bank

Yes, there are concerns, and in the same Sacramento Bee article they mentioned a few:

“The obstacles to creating a public financial institution are formidable, including the difficulty of getting deposit insurance, unknown start-up costs, investment likely to measure in the billions of dollars, and the probability of losses for several years or more that taxpayers would have to cover,” the report states.

“For a state that is already plagued with so many economic problems, despite its recent budget surplus, the idea of the state running its own bank should worry every person in California,” said Yaël Ossowski, the Deputy Director for the Consumer Choice Center in Washington, D.C.

There is also another proposal to work within the framework of existing state-chartered banks.

State Sen. Robert Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, also is pursuing the idea of a state bank for cannabis businesses. Last week, he introduced a bill that would allow state-chartered banks, credit unions and other financial institutions to open checking and savings accounts and for marijuana businesses.

Principles over Party

So even though California politicians didn’t lift a finger to protect California gun shops from the Obama administration, we should be willing to consider any idea that limits the scope of the federal government’s reach.

You never know, this might just help protect our 2nd Amendment Rights during the next Democratic administration.

Even if the intentions of the State Treasure and State Attorney General are not to your liking, its okay. The point is, if you want to limit the power and scope of the federal government then we should take this opportunity to see how we can best do it.

This does not mean the resulting proposal will be good. I do have real concerns, but before we shut the door to even doing a study on this and discussing it, let’s see what the possibilities are and what we can learn.

Konstantinos Roditis is a candidate for California State Controller. You can learn more about his campaign at, and you can follow him on Twitter & Facebook.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily






Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.