For the Harvard College Democrats (HCD), last winter's trips to New Hampshire to campaign for President Clinton were a dream come true.

While they journeyed north to the Granite State as a solidified group, the HCD witnessed their arch-rivals, the campus Republicans, take to the stump as two separate organizations embittered by months of infighting.

The fact that the Harvard Republican Club (HRC) and Harvard-Radcliffee Republican Alliance (HRRA) did not unite during the primary season is just one symbol of the rift created last year when the Harvard-Radcliffee Republican Club split into the HRC and HRRA.

And as a result of this rift, many are beginning to question the impact and strength of Republicanism at and strength of Republicanism at Harvard.

"It makes a laughing stock out of Republicans on campus to have all this infighting," says Charles A. Truesdell III '99, first-year member-at-large of the HRC.

A Tumultuous Election

The seeds of the split among campus Republicans began in the fall of 1994, when many say the Harvard-Radcliffe Republican Club began to become significantly more conservative.

At that time, the club voted to drop the word Radcliffe from its name, a measure that some former club members contend led female members of the club to feel that they did not stand on equal ground with the male members of the organization.

"In general, a lot of the female members that were with the HRC that are now with the HRRA felt uncomfortable because of the sexist atmosphere," says Scott L. Tribble '98, vice president of the HRRA.

Tribble attributes the uncomfortable atmosphere in part to the fact that many writers who expressed racist and sexist sentiments in Peninsula, a conservative campus publication, also belonged to the club.

"A lot of sentiments in Peninsula were very racist and sexist," Tribble says. "And a lot of that was expressed in the attitudes and policies of the HRC."

The final straw that led to the breakup of the HRC occurred as a result of the HRC executive board elections held in February 1995.

Members of the HRRA allege that members who did not pay club dues voted in the election and that these non-paying voters tipped the results to the club's more conservative faction.

"Our original intention was not to found another club, but it soon became apparent that we could not compete with their underhanded election methods," Amanda P. Williams '96, HRRA's first president, told The Crimson last year.

But James M. Dickerson '98, the victor of that fateful election and the HRC's current president, tells a story that starkly contrasts with the HRRA's accusations of election tampering and bigotry.

He contends that the denunciations leveled against the HRC by the HRRA stem from the HRRA's incorrect belief that the HRC and Peninsula at the time were interchangeable organizations rather than two separate clubs.

Instead, Dickerson turns the tables, blasting the HRRA and its current president, William D. Zerhouni '98, and claims that the new Republican club was formed as a result of personal differences rather than ideological ones.

"Those were ridiculous accusations used to undermine the club; they were totally unfounded," Dickerson says. "People might think that Zerhouni's a sexist, but that's no reason for a group to leave an entire organization."

But other HRC members offer more shocking explanations for why the break occurred.

"I don't think [HRRA members] had noble intentions," says Brian E. Malone '96, a member and former vice president of the HRC. "I think they were upset that they lost the HRC elections and they needed something to put on their resumes."

Malone says it is extremely suspicious that the HRRA put approximately half of its 20 members on the executive board when the organization was started.

Two Outlooks

Although there is some doubt as to whether ideological differences led to the HRRA's formation, the two clubs have staked out rather different philosophical positions on numerous issues.

In its short existence, the HRRA has prided itself on creating a more inclusive club that projects a positive outlook for Republicans.

In addition, club members have not hesitated to boast that the Alliance's membership exceeds that of the HRC.

"We formed the [HRRA] to show that Republicans are tolerant, that Republicans are inclusive, that Republicans have a positive agenda and that Republicans are optimistic about this country," says Zerhouni.

This year, the stances the two clubs have taken on a number of issues illustrate their differences.

The HRC and HRRA backed different sides in the clash between members of Philip Brooks House Association (BA) and the Harvard administration, which led BA to push for increased autonomy from the University.

While the HRRA supported PBHA's move toward autonomy, the HRC found fault with PBHA's position.

The HRC declared that the opposition of the PBHA toward Assistant Dean of the College for Public Service Judith H. Kidd, the new director of PBH, was unjustified and that PBHA's separation from Harvard "was not in the best interest of the donors."

An even greater ideological rift between the two Republican groups appeared over the winter as the race for the Republican presidential nominee heated up.

HRC is committed to following the national party's platform, which means that club members would therefore support any Republican who emerged as the victor of the nationwide primaries.

Members of HRRA say they would not necessarily endorse the party's nominee, citing candidates such as political commentator Patrick J. Buchanan as possibly too "extreme."

"I think Pat Buchanan threatens to lead the Republican party in the entirely wrong direction," Zerhouni says. "His message of division, hatred and pessimism has no place in respectable politics."

Despite the fact that the two groups travelled separately to New Hampshire, Zerhouni concedes the groups may eventually unite temporarily to support Sen. Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.).

Scathing Accusations

In addition to open disagreement with each other over political stances, the two groups have also traded barbs over more mundane items.

Just as the HRRA attacked the 1995 HRC elections, HRC members questioned the way in which this year's HRRA elections were conducted.

In a series of e-mail messages, the HRC alleged that "serious procedural errors" marred the election.

"Mr. Zerhouni has begun a campaign of exclusion against members of the HRRA who disagree with him on issues of management," one message stated.

At the time, Zerhouni discounted the e-mail message and concluded it was the only way the HRC could hope to save its declining membership.

The two organizations can not even agree on how many members they have.

The HRRA currently claims to have approximately 40 paying members and 60 associate members, while the HRC says it has more than 60 dues-paying members.

"[The HRRA] can't even produce a membership list, so they haven't produced proof of their numbers," says Dickerson.

HRRA says not only that the count for the club's membership is accurate but also that the numbers give an indication of its popularity on campus.

"Given the membership we have, there's a definite student body desire to have this organization," says Colin Kennedy '97, treasurer of the HRRA.

No Dialogue

As a result of these petty squabbles, the two groups have made little effort to communicate with each other. Before any ephemeral cease fire can take place, both the HRRA and the HRC must first overcome this hurdle.

Indeed, one of the contacts that was made between a HRC member and someone from the HRRA inevitably resulted in a scandal.

Last month, Malone accused Truesdell, the first-year member-at-large in the HRC, of "unethical dealings" after an informal meeting had taken place between Truesdell and Zerhouni.

Malone said that Truesdell and Zerhouni were surreptiously planning to form a single Republican club which would replace the current organizations. Malone accused Truesdell of overstepping his duty as an HRC representative.

At this point, Zerhouni stepped into the melee by writing a scathing letter to The Crimson regarding the controversy.

In the letter, Zerhouni called Malone "sneaky, underhanded and cowardly."

One "sneaky, underhanded and cowardly."

Zerhouni also claimed that Truesdell's "sexuality played no small part in Brian Malone's decision to attempt to expel him."

Truesdell, who is openly bisexual, denies that his sexuality had anything to do with Malone's attempt to get him expelled or that his sexual preference has ever been an issue at the HRC.

"Zerhouni's just using this to further his own cause," says Truesdell. "If [HRC] is truly this bigoted organization, I'm sure I wouldn't be on the executive board."

Truesdell has been cleared of all the charges brought against him by Malone.

Nevertheless, this affair raises questions over whether steps will ever be taken to establish one Republican organization and whether two heads are really better than one.

"Members of the HRRA are always welcome to join the HRC," Malone says. "I hope there's never any sort of agreement where the HRC has to admit any wrongdoing."

Disharmony

Neither group has expressed any interest in compromising their positions to form one Republican organization.

"The existence of a second club gives an outlet for people who would otherwise feel alienated from the HRC," says Kennedy.

One individual that has been smiling throughout the deluge of bad publicity facing the two clubs is Seth D. Hanlon '98, president of the HCD.

"I think all [HRC and HRRA] do is bicker," Hanlon says. "It helps us in the sense that it makes us look like adults."

Members of the HRC agree that the infighting is detrimental to the Republican cause.

"I think Seth [Hanlon] is totally enjoying this," says Truesdell.

Perhaps the split among Republicans at Harvard may symbolize the national Republican split between the far right and the conservative moderates.

Just as Republican infighting shows no signs of easing at the national level, so too do the tensions between Harvard's two groups of Republicans show no sign of dissipating in the near future.