Central Iowa Freedom Forum endorsements

Forum (Articles)

Offer

Partners

Rules

Tips

FAQ

Begin!

Donate

Launched March 25: A forum whose goal is interaction of 100% of the brainpower in the room - instead of the 1% in a room of 100 where only one person talks

     This article was started by Dave Leach R-IA Bible Lover-musician-grandpa (talk) 19:18, 19 March 2025 (UTC) To help finish it:

---

(1) click "edit" in the left sidebar to see the codes used in this article. (2) type four dashes (to create a horizontal line) after the point with which you will interact. Hit "enter" to start a new line. (3) Type four tildes to "sign" your name. (4) Comment, criticize, clarify, amplify, like, rate, argue, write a poem, etc. To vote, change your previous coment, add a section with a heading that appears in the Table of Contents, start a new article, use colors, write in Greek, post a picture, etc. find suggestions and codes at Begin! (5) Use "enter" to double space between paragraphs. When finished, type another four dashes on the next line down, then scroll down and click "show preview", and if that looks good, "save changes".

---

Jeff Kaufman, Chairman, Republican Party of Iowa

“I share your vision of groups more focused on research together than on being entertained.” - 3/18/25 (From memory; if the words aren’t exact they are close)

State Representative Eddie Andrews

How a Forum could supplement statehouse research staff, enabling lawmakers to do their job better – Eddie Andrews

...And Dave started pondering, “wouldn’t it be neat if all these people who are trying to get you elected would start talking [together, in a forum] about different topics and not just stop [meeting, working] on November 5 [election day]. …I think Dave envisions a think tank to start talking about ideas going deep, and some ideas supporting candidates at the legislative level, at the congressional level, so that we [lawmakers] can be better informed. [So that volunteers would] still be active, and support their candidates in that way [also]. …I can tell you that one of the things [that makes it] difficult for people like myself, is we have…a great [research] staff….that helps us. But we don’t have a TEAM of staff….We rely on one or two people but we can only go so far. [On complicated issues they sometimes go] back and forth]. The more we can [bring in more brainpower] the better I can do my job. The better [Congressman] Zach Nunn [can do his job].

Wes Enos, Deputy Chief of Staff for Congressman Zach Nunn

Wes Enos: The “Good Works” that the Congressional Staff does, that a Forum could do

In my official capacity as Deputy Chief of Staff for Congressman Zach Nunn, ...We do a lot of case work. ...People running into issues with maybe their benefit isn’t being paid off properly. Maybe they’re having trouble getting a passport. Or just anything ...We try and go out and find as many people as we can who are looking for help with different things. We try and get other people connected to each other. A [web] of connections and we’re kind of in the center of it. We connect people with needs to people who can meet them. And our ability to do anything depends on our ability to build relationships with people…. somebody over here says I need this. Well, people over here, have the ability to do this. So we connect them together. We basically create a giant web of connections to get a lot of things done for people. Without [them] having to spend a dime or be able to do anything....We literally exist just to facilitate those relationships. It’s the way that government could and should be. [It’s the direction government is moving under Trump] and I’m excited for that.

[My comment: what a great description this is of what a Forum could accomplish for people!]

Another benefit of a forum: to keep Republicans passionate and active – complacency will cost us the next election

....The reason we struggle with mid-term elections is more about the average voter...to get out and knock doors and be a part of county convention [when our candidates win, get complacent and stop working, stop showing up at events] but the other side is demanding, fighting, ready to fight. Our side, “We’re good. We’re happy.” So we struggle to keep our people showing up. We struggle to make our people excited. We struggle to keep that fire that elected President Trump. We think things are fine.

But we can’t do that. Because the other side, they don’t think things are fine. They’re angry, and they are going to show up in big numbers. And if we don’t have groups of people who are deeply passionate and ready to show up and defend what we’re doing right now, they’re going to do a lot of damage. If they get control of the House of Representatives and God forbid they get control of the Senate, that’s going to be the end of Donald Trump’s presidency. They will spend everything they have in terms of political power to derail him. We will start immediately with investigations. We will start impeachment hearings. They will start with everything they can do to stop everything he’s doing right.

That’s what happens if we get complacent.

To keep this, we have to keep that fire burning. Because if we don’t, we go into a tough year. And we’ll lose what we just gained.

So I’m excited to be here. I’m excited that Dave wants county leadership helping keep this fire burning. Everyone showing up tonight despite a tornado warning. What a time to launch this group! Because without that fire burning, we’re all in deep trouble.

Jeff Kaufman, Chairman, Republican Party of Iowa, 10 years ago

10 years ago, January 3, 2015, I wrote to Chairman Kaufman. He responded:

To Dave Leach, May 26, 2015:

I have shared this idea and parts of this email with many people and candidates. Although most think it is a great idea, none were willing to put in the time and effort such a project would require. There are a few foreign policy organizations doing something like this and one “immigration organization” but no neutral entity that could handle the project as a whole. What is needed is a group like the League of Women Voters. I say like the LWV because that group as it manifests itself in most areas is quite liberal and biased toward the Democrats, but a group acting like the LWV should be acting.

As the presidential election heats up, it will be increasingly more difficult to have a “normal dialogue.” I am wondering if this wouldn’t be a good project for a graduate student or students. Again the key will be to find a neutral entity to monitor.

I wished I could be a more help. Between the caucuses, legislative races, raising over 1 miliion, and fighting off attacks on our candudates both from the left and within the party, RPI would not be the vehicle to make this happen, however, I like the idea and we would certainly be willing to endorse and/or sponsor such an activity.

Thanks Dave.

Jeff

Background:

(I also had a conversation with Jeff about this after he spoke at the Westside Conservative Breakfast.)

Back then my vision, besides in-person meetings that appear to have finally begun March 14, 2025, was of an online forum. I first proposed it to Governor Scott Walker when he was running for president in 2015 in Iowa. Walker emailed me a survey that included spaces where we could write comments, in addition to the usual simplistic and biased multiple choice questions. What I wrote to Walker, I forwarded to Kaufman , slightly adapted; it was to that, that Kaufman responded.

The current Wiki initiative got a push in 2015, May 26, after I sent a proposal to Jeff Kaufman, chairman of the Iowa Republican Party. He responded several months later saying he had presented it to several candidates and political groups who would like to see it happen. This was my proposal then. It was actually a copy of a proposal I had sent to Governor Scott Walker who after dropping out of the presidential race had asked people to contribute ideas for “how to get America back on track”:

My proposal to Governor Scott Walker:

Your survey is a step in the right direction to getting America back on track, if as its existence implies, you have assigned people authorized by Governor Walker to read these comments, and evaluate them for clarity, accuracy, and importance, to give the best of them to Governor Walker.

A next step would be to authorize some response from Walker’s team informing the sender of enough of its evaluation for the sender to submit any further research, clarification, or correction as appropriate.

Yet another step would be to prepare a public report listing all responses and dialog in its appendix and featuring what Governor Walker feels are the best. The final step would be to enable readers to interact with the final report by voting for best ideas. I would propose two guidelines for all to consider: no ad hominem attacks on anyone. (Wikipedia has an understandable definition.) And, no diatribes about evils whose existence lacks clear evidence. (An objective way of describing conspiracy theories.)

This would be a forum that would enable the Republican party to resolve a whole lot of division. It would be a way for Republicans to participate in a kind of ongoing Platform Discussion way beyond the very brief opportunity the party extends to a very small fraction of lucky Republicans at present. This would be well described as “a multitude of counsellors”, which Proverbs 15:22.says will guarantee success for, presumably, whatever the “multitude” can agree on. Everyday political experience confirms that to the extent people are able and willing to reach consensus by reasoning with each other in a fair forum, they are unstoppable. Obviously the size of this movement, or consensus-achieving “multitude”, is limited to the extent people with compelling information who must split from mainstream forums to share it. Conversely, as Lincoln quoted Jesus, a house divided cannot stand.

I began the SaveTheWorld wiki on April 8, 2018.

Back then, I wrote on the new site, commenting on the exchange with Jeff:

Without startup money, the best way I can think of to move to these purposes is through the Wiki proposed here. It will need, in addition to people contributing information, volunteers to discuss with each other, on a regular basis:

(1) what rules of order to implement, how to modify/apply them to meet challenges as they arise;

(2) how to physically set up forums. For example, wiki software vs blog software? Or both? Go-to-meeting software for discussion by the forum managers or some other means like conference call? Perhaps a wiki website with auxiliary website space where people can post their auxiliary information and articles free?

(3) Contacting individuals and groups to involve them can't succeed if it is Lone Ranger. There probably need to be contributions for ads, and wisdom where and how to place them. There needs to be expertise managing the website. I foresee three categories of participation, and contacts need to be made to get involvement in each category, and there should be wisdom in selecting who and how to contact, as well as the time needed to do it:

(a) People who love to debate, research, and interact respectfully with others;

(b) candidates and activist groups can use help researching issues old and new, and vetting claims. We can offer to research it as well as we can and give them our report. We will have a unique perspective that should be useful for many political purposes: a cross section of information from the range from expert to novice, but of people who are seriously and carefully trying to establish the truth.

(c) individuals with unique ideas who would like us to vet them and endorse their accuracy if warranted. Where do you see yourself in this matrix? And of course a team is needed to judge whether boatloads of ideas like these are all horseradish.