Bob Tiernan wins GOP Chair. Russ Walker Vice Chair

It has just been reported that former lawmaker Bob Tierinan has won election to replace vance day as the head of the Oregon Republican Party. He won against former House Speaker Lynn Snodgrass. Russ Walker was re-elected as Vice Chair against challenger Bob Avery.

  • Harry

    Bob T. is a good pick.

    Now Bob, get to work… there lots of work to do:
    -recruit good candidates for state and local offices
    -raise lots of money
    -increase the R members with a GOTV drive
    -raise lots of money
    -keep attacking the unions
    -raise lots of money

  • Anonymous

    Recruit, candidates, raise money and increase R members by maintaining strong conservative postions and taking strong stances on issues to better contrast with liberal democrats.


  • Anonymous

    Finally a leader, and one with courage! Give ’em Hell Bob, I know you will!

  • devietro

    I was a huge fan of Vance but Bob is a great guy too. I hope we get that IRS lien paid off and we get great candidates for the future.

  • Bob Clark

    Russ Walker seems like a great choice.

  • hapypacy

    Note to Bob and Russ….every chance you get shine the big spotlight on the Democrats in Salem and the fee or tax du jour. We’ve got to let the voters in Oregon see them for the tax and spenders they are and the responsible fiscal managers they are not. Go get’em guys. You got the fire in your belly to do it and we’re ready to help!

  • dean

    Republicans have dropped to serious minority status nationally and within Oregon. They lost the ’08 presidential race by about 10 million votes, which I believe is their largest losing margin in the last 44 years. Since 2004, they have lost 54 House seats and 14 Senate seats if one counts Franken.

    Gordon Smith was the last Republican to win statewide office, and he was only able to do so as a self-described moderate conservative. “Strong conservative positions,” which I presume means cut all government except prisons and the military, cut taxes, bash Latino immigrants, oppose all abortion and embryonic stem cell research, fight against minimum wage hikes, ignore 50 million people that can’t get health insurance, deny global warming, show carelessness about clean water, forests, and habitat, rail against public transportation and bicyclists, trash public schools and bash unions….well these are positions that can still win elections in Texas, Mississippi or Nebraska, but are not going to win elections in Oregon.

    Oregon is not a southern or great plains state, and if the Republican party wants to be competitive here they are not going to make it with fire-breathers like Tiernan at the head. You are making it easy for my party, flawed as it is, to maintain control.

    • devietro

      I have to politely disagree with you. Mediocre republicans are exactly the reason we lost so much lately. In 2006 we chose Saxton “because he was moderate enough to win” same logic applies nationwide to McCain. That logic is flawed and fails us time and time again. Having a hard line conservative will allow us to finally rally behind someone and hopefully we see hardliner candidates come out of Oregon as well.

      • dean

        The polite part is refreshing and I’ll try and return the tone. The very phrase you use, “hard line,” should expose your problem to yourself. Most voters are not “hard line” one way or the other. They want a well run, inexpensive government that does not charge off and do dumb things out of ideology. Classical conservatism recognized this and adhered to caution. “Revoloutionary conservatism” was an historical oxymoron.

        The world changes, and political parties have to evolve or they go out of business. Sticking to ideas that are out of step with a changed world is a recipe for becoming the Whig Party. I think the only age group Republicans won in 08 was over 65.

        If you look hard you can still find small gatherings of the Socialist Workers Party and Single Taxers. For modern day purity, we have the Greens and the libertarians. One of the 2 major parties, by definition can’t be very relevant with 30% or less core support absent a parlimentary system.

        Yes, Saxon lost but he had to shed his formerly moderate positions to win the primary and run as a modern, take-no-prisoners Republican. Smith was caught stradelling a widening canyon and he also lost. Mannix lost in the best year Republicans ever had nationally and he was hardly a moderate. McCain couldn’t bridge the conservatives and independent moderates nationally, and picking Palin to placate the right by all accounts hurt him badly. Any Republican in Oregon is saddled with a heavy baggage of single issue supporters who threaten to bolt at the least sign of moderation. This is what Democrats went through in previous decades. We learned the hard way. I suspect your party is in for a similar lesson that will take at least a decade to play out.

        Unless my team gets over confident and badly bungles, which is entirely possible.

        Anyway…I’d wish you luck but won’t.

        • dean

          I meant to add that “mediocre” and “moderate” are not synonyms. One can be a very high quality moderate, or a very low quality hard liner. Politics is about more than just positions.

      • josh reynolds

        I thought the Chairman’s job is to find candidates to be the leaders of the party. Another words to be the fascilitator. Bob Tiernan is not that. I definately see an alterior motive here, ala Mannix.

        • devietro

          Very interesting, feel free to elaborate. I have been a big fan of Mannix until he did what he did with CD5 this year so if you have evidence that he is doing something shady let us know, but ONLY if its credible no need to smear a man on rumors.

          • josh reyholds

            I must admit it is only rumors but I have been told by some folks in a strong position that Bob is looking for a political comeback. I don’t look at this being a smear at all.

  • Jack

    Congratulations Bob: Now Lets Kick Some Donkey ********

  • eagle eye

    Sounds like the Oregon Republicans want to keep on losing to me. They sure must enjoy it!

  • Bob Tiernan

    Said Dean:

    “Sticking to ideas that are out of step with a changed world is a recipe for becoming the Whig Party.”

    Sounds like you have no idea what caused the Whigs to break up and disappear. The Whigs had a large enough anti-slavery faction (with members wishing to contain, abolish, or reduce slavery) to cause a breakup for failing to become a party with an overall consensus dedicated to dealing with the slavery issue instead of pretending the issue would go away. The Democratic Party remained the major party that was comfortable enough with slavery to take on a “big tent” policy.

    Slavery ended before the Democratic Party had to address the changed world as you call it. The Whig Party refused to continue with a go-along-to-get-along attitude. What do you think the Democratic Party did in 1845-1860 to show that it was “in step” with a changing world?

    Bob Tiernan

    • dean

      You are correct with your history lesson Bob. The Democratic party post 1860 is the more appropriate analog to the Republican party of today. They stuck with their principles to the bitter end and ended up out of the presidency for 24 years. It took a major depression to open the door for them to get back into power.

      Isn’t it ironic that the Republican party has switched places with the old Democrats and is now the southern regional party? You have the same anchor around your necks the Dems once had. Not good.

      My comments are not meant to be mean-spirited. I happen to think the state and nation are better off when we have two strong parties competing at the center of American politics, one a bit to the left, the other a bit to the right. It’s boring but stable and allows for incremental progress.

      • Anonymous

        Dean is a resident of Damascus and a proponent of central planning. I mention this only to point out that in 2008, while moderate Republicans were losing across the State and Nation conservative issues won big in Damascus. The group “Ask Damascus” won all four of their ideoloically conservative initiatives carrying anywhere from 66% to 78% of the vote. Dean was opposed to all 4 measures.

        4 measures trying to enforce central planning referred to voters by the City Council and supported by Dean went down by large margins.

        Conservative principles won 8 out of 8 in Deans home town of Damascus and now he is giving advice to you Bob in hopes of turning you into a moderate loser. I know Bob and the fire that drives him.

        The Republican Party needs those conservative principles.

        Congratulations Bob and go get em!

        Dan Phegley (Ask Damascus)

        • dean

          Dan…or anonymous…how do you see the 4 measures that passed in the last election as being referendums on “central planning?” 3 of the measures were about granting city officials the authority to establish user fees, franchise fees, and system development charges. None of these said a word about “central planning” which is established in state law and can’t be undone by Damascus voters in any case.

          The 4th measure retained the existing citizen right to local initiatives. Again…not about “central planning.” We Damascans could vote 100% to overturn a state law if we wanted to, but what would be the point?

          Assuming you yourself are opposed to “central planning” Dan, what is your positive suggestion? Should we in Damascus bother to develop a comprehensive plan and submit it to Metro for their review, and then to the State for their approval, as required by law? Or do you suggest some alternative, legal or otherwise path for us?

          • Dan Phegley

            We have gotten away from the subject of the original article which is to congratulate Bob on his new position and thank him for taking it.

            I do however feel a need to address some of your statements

            FIRST you say: “Dan…or anonymous…how do you see the 4 measures that passed in the last election as being referendums on “central planning?””

            Only one measure passed. It was by “Ask Damascus”. 4 city measures FAILED.

            Next you claim: “3 of the measures were about granting city officials the authority to establish user fees, franchise fees, and system development charges.”

            They were not about granting city officials anything. City officials already had the power to pass user fees, franchise fees, and system development charges. They were just trying to avoid any local vote before enacting them. Eliminating citizen participation turned out to be unpopular with the citizens.

            Your next statement: “The 4th measure retained the existing citizen right to local initiatives.”

            The measure actually tried to entrench City Council passed restrictions to the initiative by placing them in the city charter. This was wisely rejected by the citizens.

            All of the defeated measures were written by the past Metro general counsel. If you want Metro to plan the entire city, when they get done with their motel, I would call that central planning.


            Thanks, Dan Phegley

          • dean

            Dan…I accept your correction on the 3 fee related ballot measures. They failed to pass.

            You say you are against “central planning,” and claim the ballot measures had something to do with this. I don’t see it. The city attorney worked for Metro over 20 years ago. He may have written the measures, but only at the behest of our locally elected city council. Metro, as far as I can tell, had nothing whatsoever to do with those ballot measures.

            Whether either of us likes it not, we both live in a city, state and region that has overlapping planning authorities. Even the federal government can override local ordinances if for example, we failed to live up to the clean water or endangered species acts.

            I’ll ask you again, as I have in emails in the recent past: What is your recommendation for how Damascus ought to proceed? Should we have our staff planners (and consultants) create a comprehensive plan? Should we submit that plan to Metro for their review? Should we then submit our plan to the State, which has the legal authority to accept or reject it?

            And if your answer is no to any of the above, what should we do, in your opinion?

            And I agree, the Catalyst is not the right forum for this dialogue, so if you want to send me a private email that would be great.

  • bill sizemore

    The big decision to make right now is whether to collect signatures and refer all the governor’s new taxes and fees, especially on cars, to the voters or let the Democrats own all these new taxes.

    If we take the decisions to the voters, most of the new taxes will bite the dust. However, if Republicans in the legislature vote No on the new taxes and we activists simply let them go into effect, Oregonians will see the result of their decision to hand complete control of the process over to a bunch of tax crazy Democrats.

    I am leaning towards letting voters see what they have done to themselves. If we use the referendum process to protect voters from their own decisions, we make it more likely they will make the same decisions again next session.

    It seems the best weapon Republicans have against Democrat majorities is the Democrats themselves. Perhaps we should sit back and let them do what they do best. That should end their majorities soon enough.

    In the meanwhile, Bob Tiernan and others can concentrate on recruiting good conservatives in the districts where conservatives can win. Never fear, the pendulum will swing the other way soon enough. Democrat overreaching this session will endure that,

    • devietro

      I hope your right about the swing in ideologies. Personally I would love to see the activist core work together to make the individuals known who propose these taxes and fee’s. Make them famous specifically in their home districts and see how many of them win reelection even with all the union money.

    • eagle eye

      Strange to admit, I agree with Sizemore here. He says:

      “It seems the best weapon Republicans have against Democrat majorities is the Democrats themselves.”

      Maybe the only weapon. And cleaning up after the Democrats with the initiative process doesn’t help Republicans, it guarantees that they will stay out of office.

  • The New Generation’s Spokespeople

    Congratulations to Bob Tiernan for a good win. Even if he may be looking for a “political comeback”, At least we have someone else who can actually do the job necessary to get Oregon Republicans back to where it needs to be.

    To those who think that Tiernan is a fire-breather, you probably haven’t sat with him recently. He’s actually thoughtful and is willing to be adaptable to some of the new things that the new generation of GOPers are wanting to do (and not people like Rolf Glerum, who just need to get the hell out and retire.)

    Tiernan will be willing to follow the new fighters of the GOP, the ones who actually have the smarts and the skills to fight where many of the complacent ones have not. I have full faith and confidence that he will.

    And people like dean will be pwned, eventually. Because they underestimate people like Tiernan.