So, RNC rule 40b says only 3 people are elegible to be Vice President?

[robertwerden]

RNC rule No. 40(b) states:

Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.

So does that mean, only Ron Paul, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney are eligible to be nominated as VP running mate?

Sure looks that way to me.

[sailingaway]

to be nominated from the floor

but in a brokered convention people horse trade votes, and in most cases, the establishment nominee just asks for his choice and 'his' delegates vote for it. So it would be Ron, Santa, Romney OR anyone asked for by those people who is not unacceptable to 'their' delegates.

[Kilrain]

No. It just means that a plurality of delegates from enough states must "endorse" the nomination. No one's bound when it comes to voting for VP. If a plurality of delegates from enough states support Gurley Martin for VP, he can be nominated.

[robertwerden]

Where is the official brokered convention rule book?

[sailingaway]

Where is the official brokered convention rule book?

they just use the real rules, the point is that they negotiate with the delegates or the point person/candidate supported by the delegates then everyone votes accordingly.

[robertwerden]

How would a VP candidate such as Marco Rubio, Rand Paul "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states""prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination"

[Kilrain]

How would a VP candidate such as Marco Rubio, Rand Paul "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states""prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination"

Get enough delegates to openly support you for VP before the nomination process starts and you're in.

[robertwerden]

How do you get enough delegates to openly support you? What is the Roberts Rules of order procedure?

[sailingaway]

How would a VP candidate such as Marco Rubio, Rand Paul "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states""prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination"

Romney's party tool folks would vote for Rubio as would any deluded tea party types who either don't know his background or aren't real tea party, and as for Rand....

Our guys could put him up but if they vote for a Paul VP it might be more likely Ron. But supposing Ron didn't want to, our delegates would have to decide if they would rather Rand or Rubio (no brainer, the question being not whether we'd rather him, but whether we want him compromised.)

[brandon]

How do you get enough delegates to openly support you? What is the Roberts Rules of order procedure?

They just say they support you. It's really not complicated. Mitt Romney says he wants john doe as his VP, and then all of Mitt Romney's delegates nominate John Doe for VP.

[robertwerden]

I'm sorry, I just don't understand. I am looking at the RNC from a following the rules aspect.
If, Ron Paul delegates are being required to WIN delegate slots at State conventions in order to achieve the benchmark of 5 state majorities, then how in the hell can a VP nominee disregard that benchmark when rule 40b clearly sets the same bench mark for both nomination positions?

[Kilrain]

I'm sorry, I just don't understand. I am looking at the RNC from a following the rules aspect.
If, Ron Paul delegates are being required to WIN delegate slots at State conventions in order to achieve the benchmark of 5 state majorities, then how in the hell can a VP nominee disregard that benchmark when rule 40b clearly sets the same bench mark for both nomination positions?

Because no one is bound, pledged or anything when it comes to voting for VP in Tampa. You'll have 2000+ delegates and all are free agents when it comes to the VP slot. If a person can demonstrate enough support, they can be nominated.

[robertwerden]

I post rules, everyone else posts speculation, opinion and conjecture. Please show me the rules on eligibility requirements to be nominated at the RNC for both Presidential and Vice Presidential nominee.

Our problem as a group is we accept that because it happened in the past it is in the rules. Our strength is clearly proven that when the rules are enforced we win.

[Kilrain]

I post rules, everyone else posts speculation, opinion and conjecture. Please show me the rules on eligibility requirements to be nominated at the RNC for both Presidential and Vice Presidential nominee.

Our problem as a group is we accept that because it happened in the past it is in the rules. Our strength is clearly proven that when the rules are enforced we win.

If your interpretation was correct, no one could ever be nominated as VP. Neither Romney, Paul or Santorum have thus far "demonstrated" any support when it comes to the VP slot, whatever support they have is for president.

[robertwerden]

That is ridiculous, winning delegates is the only requirement.

[Kilrain]

That is ridiculous, winning delegates is the only requirement.

And Gurley Martin could have more than 1000 delegates right now, if we're talking about the VP slot. We know he doesn't, but he could. Again, when voting for VP all delegates are free agents. You just need enough of them to support you.

[romancito]

How would a VP candidate such as Marco Rubio, Rand Paul "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states""prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination"

Don't you know that delegations vote within themselves on the floor of the Convention under the leadership of the "chairman" and "committee chairwoman" and "committee chairman? That's how they arrive at a total tally. Delegates go to the Convention to vote within their 'state delegations.'

[brandon]

I post rules, everyone else posts speculation, opinion and conjecture. Please show me the rules on eligibility requirements to be nominated at the RNC for both Presidential and Vice Presidential nominee.

Our problem as a group is we accept that because it happened in the past it is in the rules. Our strength is clearly proven that when the rules are enforced we win.

No one is posting opinion or conjecture. You are failing to understand a simple concept. I think you have some fundamental misunderstanding of the process.

None of the delegates are bound or pledged to a VP candidate. All of them can nominate or vote for anyone they want.

[robertwerden]

Show me the Rule, it is that simple to end this debate. So far no one has posted a rule. Please back up your statements with a rule. That's all I want.

[Carlybee]

Rand has more power to do good as a senator.

[brandon]

WHat rule? The rule that says they can nominate whoever they want after showing support from 5 state delegations? I believe that's the rule you posted.

[brandon]

As far as how the actual process works...I imagine it's something like this.

The chair says it's time to consider VP position. Someone stands up and declares John Doe has the support of the following states, and lists at least 5 states. None of those states object. Then they present their name for nomination.

[robertwerden]

WHat rule? The rule that says they can nominate whoever they want after showing support from 5 state delegations? I believe that's the rule you posted.
Ok so, your saying we can theoretically go into the national convention with zero bound delegates and all of our people bound to Romney and still nominate Ron Paul?

[Kilrain]

Ok so, your saying we can theoretically go into the national convention with zero bound delegates and all of our people bound to Romney and still nominate Ron Paul?

No one is bound when it comes to the VP slot...

If no delegates were bound when it came to the presidential slot, and a majority of delegates supported Paul, then hell yes they could nominate him, vote for him and get him the nomination.

And if a majority of delegates support RP for VP, then they can make him the VP nominee in Tampa. And Romney would have no say at all. But they could also make Gurley Martin the VP nominee.

[romancito]

As far as how the actual process works...I imagine it's something like this.

The chair says it's time to consider VP position. Someone stands up and declares John Doe has the support of the following states, and lists at least 5 states. None of those states object. Then they present their name for nomination.

It could be that way. But every state delegation has a chairperson, and committee chairpersons (2). These people talk to others from other states, usually there are affinities among some regions. They talk and talk until they know. Then they nominate. Is not so difficult since they are all there in the same place and they like each other or not. A leader among leaders always stands up. Is all about leadership roles. Hopefully this time, Rand Paul could be nominated for VP even to make a Romney / Paul ticket. I don't think Paul would accept but I don't know. Ron Paul has a least five states and they could nominate Rand Paul for VP. I don't think Romney will advance a VP name for his ticket ahead of the Convention. Otherwise he could loose all of Ron Paul's devotees.

[robertwerden]

No one is bound when it comes to the VP slot...

If no delegates were bound when it came to the presidential slot, and a majority of delegates supported Paul, then hell yes they could nominate him vote for him and get him the nomination.
So rule 40b where it says "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states" does not mean winning delegates at state convention? The words "demonstrate the support" mean delegates voice their support at the National convention in a roll call vote?
So we did not need to fight for delegate slots all this time, we could have just pretended Mitt Romney won and sneak in pretending we supported Mitt Romney and then sucker punch them at the convention in Tampa? Why did we even go through all the public delegate process then?

[tbone717]

So rule 40b where it says "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states" does not mean winning delegates at state convention? The words "demonstrate the support" mean delegates voice their support at the National convention in a roll call vote?
So we did not need to fight for delegate slots all this time, we could have just pretended Mitt Romney won and sneak in pretending we supported Mitt Romney and then sucker punch them at the convention in Tampa? Why did we even go through all the public delegate process then?

In most states delegates to the RNC are bound on the first vote regarding the Presidential nomination. People in MA for example went to the polls and selected Romney as President, therefore the delegates from MA are bound to Romney for the Presidential vote. The VP nomination is separate. No one voted for the VP at the polls. The VP is nominated at the RNC in the same manner that the President is nominated, however when it comes to the VP nomination all delegates are unbound. So the delegates from MA, for example, can select whomever they wish to place into nomination for VP. If a plurality of delegates from five states all select the same person then that persons is nominated, a floor vote on all the VP nominees is conducted and the VP is selected. If only one person is nominated, which is typical, a voice vote is held in lieu of a roll call.

Make sense?

[Kilrain]

So rule 40b where it says "demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states" does not mean winning delegates at state convention? The words "demonstrate the support" mean delegates voice their support at the National convention in a roll call vote?

More or less. There is an argument that Paul delegates from Nevada can be used to nominate Paul, even though they are obligated to vote for Romney on the first ballot. But when talking about the VP slot that's beside the point. No one has any pledged or bound delegates for the VP slot going into the convention.



So we did not need to fight for delegate slots all this time, we could have just pretended Mitt Romney won and sneak in pretending we supported Mitt Romney and then sucker punch them at the convention in Tampa? Why did we even go through all the public delegate process then?

If you could get around the binding of delegates and if you could get a majority of Paul supporters masquerading as Romney supporters chosen as delegates, that might be something worth looking at, but we're pretty much into la-la-land there. The point of duking it out in local and state conventions is to get Paul people selected as delegates over old guard establishment types.

[Suzu]

If a plurality of delegates from enough states support Gurley Martin for VP, he can be nominated.Gurley is acceptable to me!

[JJ2]

We need Rand to be VP nominee and then lose. It will get his name out there and make him the 2016 "frontrunner," like Sarah Palin was for 2012.

[Aratus]

i'm almost sore tempted to hope for this as an outcome, especially if the electoral college goes 269 verses 269!!!