CPAC, the RNC, and a review and warning about the coming elections:

(National Harbor, MD) -- Kentucky Senator Rand Paul won the CPAC Presidential Straw Poll for the second year in a row. The support he received from 31% of voters was almost three times the support of his nearest rival, Texas Senator Ted Cruz. The more surprising news, however, is the steep drop in the number of CPAC attendees participating in the straw poll. The number of ballots cast has dropped more than 34% since 2011, when the GOP had just swept the 2010 mid-term elections.

A total of 2,459 ballots were cast in the 2014 CPAC straw poll. This vote is down 16% since just last year. CPAC last year wasn't in an election year and took place just months after the GOP was routed in the 2012 Presidential elections. This year's CPAC took place as conservatives and the GOP have rising hopes for a very successful midterm election. The GOP majority in the House is safe and the party has an increasing chance of taking control of the Senate. Any growing enthusiasm for the upcoming election certainly isn't reflected in greater participation in the CPAC poll. 

Editor’s notes:  Sogoes the story from Breitbart.  Good points,  by the way,  but here is another point not given consideration:  the conference was very well attended, overall,  with more than 11,000 concerned conservatives from the political Right and the youthful Libertarian movements. Conservative interest is very high,  if we look to CPAC attendance as some sort of gauge. 

No “big deal” about the straw vote, per se;  not a single winner of that poll has ever gone on to win the Party’s nomination,  much less the national contest.  

At this point in time,  the political game is all about positioning and giving the folks something to think about.  And they were all there,  from Christie and Mitch McConnell to Ted Cruz,  Rand Paul and Sarah Palin.  

Missing and most notably so,  was John Boehner.   I am not sure I could have done a better job as Speaker,  but I am positive that neither could Boehner!  

On the subtle side of one of the most consequentially negative decisions made by the GOP,  in modern times,  the single decision on Boehner’s part that may have lost the election for Mitt Romney,  was Boehner’s move to ignore the teaparty beginning immediately after that constituency gave him the House of Representatives in November of 2010.  That decision carried through and including the 2012 elections.  As a result of giving the stiff-arm to the power base within the GOP,  Palin was not invited to participate at the RNC or during the Romney campaign  . . . . . . .  and she fully supported the man.  Romney lost that election by 6 million;  it is estimated that 3 to 4 million Palin Conservatives stayed home.  Couple that with Christie’s last minute kiss-up to B Obama,  just days before the election,  and you have the disaster that took place.  

Understand that Romney got 2 million more votes than McCain in 2008;  Obama lost 1.5 million votes in total,  yet,  Romney lost that election.  The difference?  Turnout.  Forget about all the nonsense as to "why."  The fact of the matter was simple:  Romney lost because the RNC did not fire up its base,  and its base included millions of teaparty types.  

At any rate,  we have a long way to go before the GOP arrives at its candidate.  Never mind the in-fighting.  The GOP has been doing that,  since WW I  -  a hundreds of hardball politics  -  and the party still has relevance,  still wins elections.