I propose a merger of the Liberty or Death and the Coolidge Society caucuses. I also support the idea of a merger of the Perot Group and the Non-Interventionists.
On the former note, I think it would make more sense to rebrand the Coolidge Society into more of a socon/"True Conservative" group now that there is a solidly libertarian one--maybe with RFayette or Potus in charge or something. (Just names I'm throwing out, please no one think I'm volunteering anyone for anything
)
On the latter note, two points:
-I like the idea of smaller caucuses that encapsulate a certain set of issues, i.e. being more focused, complimenting larger, broadly-focused caucuses like Liberty or Death! that serve a certain tentpole ideology of the party (the "right triangle" of moderatism, libertarianism, and conservatism) across the board. It makes sense to have one for reform-type stuff whether it's a conservative, a moderate, or a libertarian supporting those issues, and another for opposition to war, which can also come from many different points on the spectrum of domestic issues.
-Why would we combine the Perot Group and Non-Interventionists? That seems to defeat the idea of focus on a certain thing. And if the idea of narrow-focused caucuses is something only I like (which is a possibility I guess
) then why would we keep them around at all? If anything it would make sense to merge Non-Interventionists into Liberty or Death!, and merge the Perot Group into the Main Street Partnership (which makes sense given that I think LT might technically be in charge of the Perot Group since he was Vice-Chair of it--so they're basically pseudo-merged already
), so we only have the broadly-focused caucuses.
Just my two cents--sorry if I got too rambly
