Rule Change Compromise :/

[VAMole]

Cameron Joseph of The Hill reporting on Twitter that the compromise version essentially extends the binding of delegates to the "placing in nomination" process - e.g., Nevada delegates would have to nominate Romney as the majority of them are bound to him. States still allowed to choose their own delegates without campaign veto.

It's a logical extension - I know many here were surprised when we realized that Nevada's delegates, though bound to Mittens, could still help place Dr. Paul in nomination - but I am still quite displeased. :(

https://twitter.com/cam_joseph/status/240241249225940992
https://twitter.com/cam_joseph/status/240245743397515264

[Aratus]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ THIS ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[ClydeCoulter]

They're doing everything they can to prevent Ron from being nominated...........a$$holes

[Lucille]

https://twitter.com/cam_joseph/status/240256984010604544



Ron Paul camp not blasting rule change compromise — tells @peteschroeder "very positive that the Romney campaign is listening to feedback"

[sailingaway]

Cameron Joseph of The Hill reporting on Twitter that the compromise version essentially extends the binding of delegates to the "placing in nomination" process - e.g., Nevada delegates would have to nominate Romney as the majority of them are bound to him. States still allowed to choose their own delegates without campaign veto.

It's a logical extension - I know many here were surprised when we realized that Nevada's delegates, though bound to Mittens, could still help place Dr. Paul in nomination - but I am still quite displeased. :(

https://twitter.com/cam_joseph/status/240241249225940992
https://twitter.com/cam_joseph/status/240245743397515264

It isn't logical, it is a totally different thing.

When does it go into effect?

And what about states that choose not to bind delegates?

[rockandrollsouls]

Hoping the TX delegates don't compromise.

[Aratus]

be nice. lets not do our usual 15 to 50 pages on the poor kid.
borat. bruno. borat. bruno. borat. bruno. borat. bruno. borat.
we cannot assume that this was his decision. be very nice...

[rockandrollsouls]

What we need to do is continue taking over at the state level and change the laws that bind at the state level.


It isn't logical, it is a totally different thing.

When does it go into effect?

And what about states that choose not to bind delegates?

[BSU kid]

I have everyone telling me to join the Campus GOP.

After how they have treated Ron ...I don't think I will go near that place. Let the games by the establishment continue.

[VAMole]

Here's the new rule as proposed:
For any manner of binding or allocating delegates under these Rules, if a delegate
(i) casts a vote for a presidential candidate at the National Convention inconsistent with the delegate’s obligation under state law or state party rule,
(ii) nominates or demonstrates support under Rule 40 for a presidential candidate other than the one to whom the delegate is bound or allocated under state law or state party rule, or
(iii) fails in some other way to carry out the delegate’s affirmative duty under state law or state party rule to cast a vote at the National Convention for a particular presidential candidate,
the delegate shall be deemed to have concurrently resigned as a delegate and the delegate’s improper vote or nomination shall be null and void. Thereafter the Secretary of the Convention shall record the delegate’s vote or nomination in accordance with the delegate’s obligation under state law or state party rule. This subsection does not apply to delegates who are bound to a candidate who has withdrawn his or her candidacy, suspended or terminated his or her campaign, or publicly released his or her delegates.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2012/08/republicans-reach-rules-change-deal-to-avert-floor-fight/

[ClydeCoulter]

So, this still means that there is no need for delegates when delegates are bound (unbound would still be okay).
So, a candidate can lie, cheat, steal or change their platform after winning a primary and the delegates have to still support them. What?

[MozoVote]

Bleah. It just bifurcates and triplicates into various interpretations of state and party rules. A morass for Romney's attorneys to stick forks into.

[VAMole]

It isn't logical, it is a totally different thing.

When does it go into effect?

And what about states that choose not to bind delegates?

A) I disagree. Although I don't like it, it makes sense that a bound delegate is bound throughout the process, including the Rule 40 nomination. Imagine if we had delegate majorities bound to us in 5 states but one state's delegates decided they weren't going to support us in the Rule 40 process to deny us being placed in nomination. We'd be crying bloody murder.
B) I don't know, but I suspect it becomes effective if/when it's adopted by the Convention.
C) Unbound delegates would remain free to support whomever they wish to support in all stages.

For better and further particulars, we'll have to hear from lightweis or another delegate.

[sailingaway]

A) I disagree. Although I don't like it, it makes sense that a bound delegate is bound throughout the process, including the Rule 40 nomination. Imagine if we had delegate majorities bound to us in 5 states but one state's delegates decided they weren't going to support us in the Rule 40 process to deny us being placed in nomination. We'd be crying bloody murder.
B) I don't know, but I suspect it becomes effective if/when it's adopted by the Convention.
C) Unbound delegates would remain free to support whomever they wish to support in all stages.

For better and further particulars, we'll have to hear from lightweis or another delegate.

I didn't think about it in terms of NOT having enough to NOMINATE. But the Santorum guys who were elected in CO promised to vote for Ron and are changing their minds, likely.

As long as states can still choose to have unbound delegates if they want to.

but I do object because ALL of that should be up to the states. If the STATES want them bound on nomination they can do that at the state level. It is the shift of power away from the states that is objectionable.

I would raise it (or better get someone not one of us to raise it) as a states rights issue.

[Lightweis]

I haven't heard anything from the Paul campaign. I have heard that the Maine delegation has given up.

[wgadget]

Is it me or does the NEW RULE imply that the OLD RULES don't bind candidates?

[wgadget]

STATES' RIGHTS, dammit.

[parocks]

I haven't heard anything from the Paul campaign. I have heard that the Maine delegation has given up.

I'm in Maine, on 3 Maine Ron Paul Facebook groups and it's really hard to tell what's going on. The controversy seems to be whether the entire delegation boycotts the convention, or if some of the Ron Paul delegates do attend the convention.

[Aratus]

for good or ill? its a legendary double edged sword
if each individual state is like a medieval fiefdom...

[parocks]

Is it me or does the NEW RULE imply that the OLD RULES don't bind candidates?

the NEW RULE implies that the OLD RULES don't prevent bound delegates from nominating someone other than the candidate they're bound to vote for.

The vote and the nomination are different.

[ShaneEnochs]

I know that they want this unity bs, but why not just let RP's name be put forth? Isn't Mittens convinced he can beat him soundly?

[CPUd]

This is likely what they were shooting for all along.

Doesn't say anything about VP.

[jolynna]

I didn't think about it in terms of NOT having enough to NOMINATE. But the Santorum guys who were elected in CO promised to vote for Ron and are changing their minds, likely.

As long as states can still choose to have unbound delegates if they want to.

but I do object because ALL of that should be up to the states. If the STATES want them bound on nomination they can do that at the state level. It is the shift of power away from the states that is objectionable.

I would raise it (or better get someone not one of us to raise it) as a states rights issue.

Exactly...it is like the RNC issued an EXECUTIVE ORDER--just like Obama does. Just like Romney did when he issued an executive order as governor of MA to make Romneycare a mandate.

We should be used to executive orders by now. Looks like that is the new American way.

In my opinion.

[jolynna]

for good or ill? its a legendary double edged sword
if each individual state is like a medieval fiefdom...

10th Amendment!!!!!

All the way.

[CPUd]

All right- a way to attack this:

Why did the RNC not recognize binding in the first place? Would it violate any laws/regulations?

[Tiso0770]

This is intimidation, the RNC does not trump state laws.

[WhistlinDave]

All right- a way to attack this:

Why did the RNC not recognize binding in the first place? Would it violate any laws/regulations?

Yes, it violates the Voting Rights Act, the same one Gilbert was trying to use. (And I hope everyone knows he failed not because the law doesn't apply here, but because he didn't do the complaint properly. The law does apply.)

[devil21]

Still wondering how they can apply a state law to conduct that occurs in another state. A "bound" Nevada delegate's conduct only applies to that delegate's conduct while in Nevada, not Florida. Nevada state law is completely irrelevant in Florida. There's no way to force that delegate to do anything and certainly no means to enforce that state law once the delegate returns to Nevada. Florida law is the only law that matters in Florida.

[CPUd]

Yes, it violates the Voting Rights Act, the same one Gilbert was trying to use. (And I hope everyone knows he failed not because the law doesn't apply here, but because he didn't do the complaint properly. The law does apply.)



Still wondering how they can apply a state law to conduct that occurs in another state. A "bound" Nevada delegate's conduct only applies to that delegate's conduct while in Nevada, not Florida. Nevada state law is completely irrelevant in Florida. There's no way to force that delegate to do anything and certainly no means to enforce that state law once the delegate returns to Nevada. Florida law is the only law that matters in Florida.

And if they agree to this compromise, they waive those and probably a laundry list of other rights.

This is how they argue against it. They don't have enough time to research it and see what other rights they may be giving up with this compromise, thus, it would not be prudent (The GHWB Defense) to agree to the terms.

[tangent4ronpaul]

PLEASE DELEGATES! - NO COMPROMISE!

http://wassupmalawi.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/never-give-up.jpg

-t

[CaptainAmerica]

muther flippin mitt flippin romney thinks he can destroy the electoral college process just so he can flippin nominate himself ...that flippin PRE MADONNA

[Tiso0770]

Saw this on FB.....


Delegates! Read and share this!
from the legal team: "Keep in mind that any new rules put in place by the Rules Committee this week are not valid for this convention. The Convention Rules we
re put in place in 2010 and except for small rules changes that can be added to clarify a precedingly approved rule, any new rules will be in force at the next convention once approved by the convention delegation by vote. What the RNC is attempting to do is to intimidate the delegates into thinking that these new rules must be abided by simply because they are being railroaded through the convention by an organized crime syndicate. Our delegates will do the right thing on the floor. We have learned so much from our dear friends from the 2008 convention, and the experiences of
this 2012 primary/caucus season. We're behind you 2012 National Ron Paul Delegates 100 percent!"

[nobody's_hero]

Compromise—when you have everything and they have nothing—usually ends with you losing something. So I'm sure whatever comes of the rule change, it will be more difficult in the future to accomplish what we have tried, than it was in the past.

[sailingaway]

And if they agree to this compromise, they waive those and probably a laundry list of other rights.

This is how they argue against it. They don't have enough time to research it and see what other rights they may be giving up with this compromise, thus, it would not be prudent (The GHWB Defense) to agree to the terms.

If it is doable I think they should stand on the principle of state rights of self determination. Aren't we Republicans, after all?

[WesSeid]

I have everyone telling me to join the Campus GOP.

After how they have treated Ron ...I don't think I will go near that place. Let the games by the establishment continue.

I'd probably join and stealthily (or not so stealthily) constantly remind them why neocons are lame and so we should avoid being lame.


I'm in Maine, on 3 Maine Ron Paul Facebook groups and it's really hard to tell what's going on. The controversy seems to be whether the entire delegation boycotts the convention, or if some of the Ron Paul delegates do attend the convention.

I don't know what the point of boycotting is. No one will care. If they're there they can at least make noise about this farce of a nomination and help out against rule changes like this.

[parocks]

I'd probably join and stealthily (or not so stealthily) constantly remind them why neocons are lame and so we should avoid being lame.



I don't know what the point of boycotting is. No one will care. If they're there they can at least make noise about this farce of a nomination and help out against rule changes like this.

Here's the latest. From Facebook

Bernie Johnson Maine National Delegate and Republican National Committeewoman-elect Ashley Ryan has been the tip of the spear in the fight against this power grab by Romney's allies within the party. Other states have brought strength to the discourse (most noticeably Texas due the sheer size of its delegation). The outrage over these rule changes have seen other factions not always friendly toward the liberty wing of the party, join in the fight to defeat these proposals and push forth the Minority Report. We see the fight to restore Maine's duly elected delegates and the defeat of these rule changes as one intertwined pursuit of justice that is going to be waged on the convention floor. We have been busy building coalitions and developing a cohesive strategy knowing that it is going to take more than just our (now minority) 10 person delegation to be successful during the scripted Romney coronation that they are calling a convention. I want to thank all the States like Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, Oklahoma, Michigan, Alaska, Missouri Minnesota, Vermont (and any others I've missed) for your courage and resolve in defense of the duly-elected Maine Delegation and the push to pass the Minority Report. We stand together and we came to fight!


I'm not hung up on boycott or no boycott. It appears they have a plan and they're working. This plan may not be a boycott. I don't think anyone really knows what the best way to proceed is. But it sounds like what Bernie is saying is a good way to go. Does it violate the "must all go or not go" policy? I can't really tell. I wouldn't personally insist that they start with the "must all or none". What I'm reading from Bernie seems good.

[Badger Paul]

"What we need to do is continue taking over at the state level and change the laws that bind at the state level."

Exactly. That was the sticking point more than anything. They could care less what happens to Paul's delegates. States like Texas and Iowa still wanted to control their own delegate process and instead of having it run by the RNC and the RNC wisely backed down.

[tangent4ronpaul]

If it is doable I think they should stand on the principle of state rights of self determination. Aren't we Republicans, after all?

I don't know about you but I'm a Libertarian!

Registered Republican for political expedience.

-n

[MozoVote]

I have not seen anything here from the N.C. peeps (which includes Glen Bradley) - but at the state level conventions, North Carolina grassroots turned back and attempt twice by the state central committee to grab more power, so we are familiar with this problem.

Considering that half the alternates are Paul people, (and tradition has been to include the alternates as part of the delegation for the most part) I bet the NC delgation has had some robust discussions about these rules.

Most of the delegation is made up of party loyalists, but that doesn't mean they *like* Romney or that he was their *first* choice. I suspect this is true in many states. Romney's rule change may be inadvertantly hinting to people: "You might not be allowed at the next convention..."

[MozoVote]

Writer in the Atlanta Constitution refers to this rule change as an "Atom Bomb"

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/08/24/rnc-committee-adopts-%E2%80%98atom-bomb%E2%80%99-rule-for-2016-calendar/

[bbwarfield]

I have everyone telling me to join the Campus GOP.

After how they have treated Ron ...I don't think I will go near that place. Let the games by the establishment continue.

I would definitely join... The message of Ron Paul is equally palatable to the Republicans and Democrat idealists at the college levels.... the thing is the Dems tend to snatch them all up.... join the GOP and grow in colleges.... todays college students are tomorrows party. how many of us can't go back cause we learned too much under paul? they would be the same

[parocks]

http://www.facebook.com/groups/Maine4RonPaul/permalink/485401668144328/
Maine and Texas are leading the charge, please understand this.

[parocks]

Have we gone to the Gingrich and Santorum delegates? Do the Gingrich and Santorum delegates want to see Gingrich and Santorum also voted on for nomination? Can't we trade with those? If we need 1 or 2 or 3 votes in one state, and Gingrich needs 1 or 2 or 3 in another state, can we say to the Gingrich people, we'll give you the votes you need for votes we need in a different state? Or Santorum if he needs delegates to get to 5.

[parocks]

Can delegates just vote to unbind themselves?

Sarah Palin is around. Are we saying "Sarah Palin / Ron Paul" to see what people think of that? I would guess that particular ticket with these particular delegates would be more popular than Romney / Ryan.

[wgadget]

I have everyone telling me to join the Campus GOP.

After how they have treated Ron ...I don't think I will go near that place. Let the games by the establishment continue.

Please see my new post about talk radio. You MUST join--and take TWO LIKE-MINDED FRIENDS with you!

[wgadget]

Tut tut. Negotiating for delegates behind the King's back during Coronation week....

I love it. :)

[green73]

https://twitter.com/cam_joseph/status/240256984010604544

Unbelievable

[phill4paul]

Patriots:
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security...He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

Patriots: We've reached a compromise with the Crown. No longer shall we be transported beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences.

Compromise?

[green73]

I know that they want this unity bs, but why not just let RP's name be put forth? Isn't Mittens convinced he can beat him soundly?

All dissent must be crushed for the sake of unity.

[Lightweis]

Virginia will unanimously reject the compromise and will push for the minority report..

[No1butPaul]

Virginia will unanimously reject the compromise and will push for the minority report..

I saw on C-Span last night, Virginia has seats in the front -- all swing states do, EXCEPT, Nevada they put in the noise bleeds.

[Lightweis]

Virginia will be seating in the front row

[parocks]

Unbelievable

Ron Paul certainly already has talked to the delegates who are going to lead. Those delegates are going to do what they're going to do. Ron Paul will say nice things in public. We're gonna rip them apart, or try to, as individual delegations, individual delegates, and not by Ron Paul.

[parocks]

Have people talked to Santorums people and Gingrichs people about what they might do if Santorum and Gingrich don't want their names in nomination?

Would they vote to put Sarah Palin's name into nomination.

Remember, RNC Rules used to matter. But watching Romney, it appears that they don't any more. If the rules don't apply any more, why can't the delegates just do
whatever they want.

In Maine, state law was followed and we got 21 Ron Paul delegates. But Romney bypassed state law, replaced it with his own version.

In other states, state law has delegates bound. But can't the delegates say "you screwed Maine, you violated state law, therefore, I can violate state law, too,
and I'm voting for Ron Paul, or Sarah Palin, or Palin/Paul. We're going to vote right now to unbind ourselves. Everybody in favor.

[parocks]

I can't imagine there are that many Santorum delegates that would prefer Santorum to Palin. And certainly they'd prefer Palin to Romney. They might not like Ron Paul.

Our people should be pushing the Santorum people to Sarah Palin, because it appears that she might want it.

[pacu44]

Hoping the TX delegates don't compromise.

TX with BIG talk has been pretty bad with towing the Romney line...

[sailingaway]

I have everyone telling me to join the Campus GOP.

After how they have treated Ron ...I don't think I will go near that place. Let the games by the establishment continue.

You join the campus YAL, is what I would think.

[sailingaway]

Can delegates just vote to unbind themselves?

Sarah Palin is around. Are we saying "Sarah Palin / Ron Paul" to see what people think of that? I would guess that particular ticket with these particular delegates would be more popular than Romney / Ryan.

I would put it the other way. You are the only one on these boards pushing that.