Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: GOP officials accuse Romney of ‘power grab’

  1. #1

    GOP officials accuse Romney of ‘power grab’

    TAMPA, Fla. — Top Republicans are fighting each other over what one party leader called “one of the biggest power grabs” in GOP history.

    Senior GOP officials are accusing the Romney campaign’s chief lawyer Ben Ginsberg of pushing through a rules change for delegate selection that would give Mitt Romney enormous power over the primary process should he win the White House and seek re-election in 2016.

    “It shifts the power to select delegates from the state party to the [party’s presidential] candidate,” Republican National Committee Vice Chairman Jim Bopp told the Washington Times on Sunday. “And it would make the Republican Party a top-down, not bottom-up party.”

    Conservatives as well as some moderates said Mr. Ginsberg persuaded RNC Rules Committee members to let Mr. Romney - if he becomes president - decide which delegates will be seated at the 2016 GOP presidential nominating convention. It also calls for letting future presidential hopefuls decide who gets to take the delegate slots they win in each state.

    Even though changes won’t take effect until 2016, senior officials fear it will dampen the enthusiasm of rank and hamper this year’s bid to unseat President Obama.
    Mr. Bopp, who called it “the biggest power grab in the history of the Republican Party,” said the issue emerged because of this year’s fight over Ron Paul delegates. He said that has been worked out and minor changes can address similar issues in the future.

    “Those of us in states where the Republican Party is thriving have a problem with people from states where the Republican Party is on life support telling us how to run our business,” a ranking Texas delegate said in obvious reference to Boston (where so many of Mr. Romney’s closet advisers hang their hats, as well as to Massachusetts and the Northeast in general). “They would be better served by taking lessons.”

    Romney advisers have argued in private that Mr. Ginsberg instigated the rules change on his own and that it’s irrelevent right now.

    Mr. Ginsburg could not be reached for comment. He has served as the behind-the-scenes enforcer of the desires of the GOP establishment for decades.
    “This is an abuse of power that we hope will be changed when the full Republican National Convention adopts our minority report that will restore the old rules that let states decide on delegates,” said Carolyn McClarty, chairman of the Oklahoma delegation to the national convention.

    Opponents of the move said he “blindsided” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus.

    Mr. Priebus, considered the most conservative national chairman in recent memory, has been put in a difficult situation. If he sides with the grass-roots propoents on the national committee, he buts heads with his party’s presumptive presidential nominee - an advent unheard of in history of both parties.

    “We can’t let them undo, with one bad change in the rules, the two years of good work Reince has done in opening up this party to the grass roots,” Mrs. McClarty said.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...of-power-grab/



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    i hope there will be more non-romney delegates who will sympathize with the RP cause and come to the RP side.

  4. #3
    It appears They're already making an attempt to thwart that possibility.

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...es-dead-yet%29
    Last edited by wgadget; 08-26-2012 at 04:59 PM.

  5. #4
    Did Romney shoot himself in the foot? Could this unravel his nomination?

    I pray like no other prayer I have said before!!!

  6. #5
    What they should do about this is vote down the credentials report, install Ron's delegates, let them nominate him from the floor so at least there IS a ballot, not just acclaim, vote for him, who can, abstain those who can, and see if that adds up to enough for an open convention.

    Who knows who would ultimately win, but you have to open up the process, first.

    Just sayin'.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahApocalypse View Post
    Did Romney shoot himself in the foot? Could this unravel his nomination?

    I pray like no other prayer I have said before!!!
    Praying with you!!
    Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.
    ~ George Washington

  8. #7
    oh let this be a black swan moment.
    The bigger government gets, the smaller I wish it was.
    My new motto: More Love, Less Laws

  9. #8
    I'm wondering what the 'minor changes' to address Paul like situations in the future are that they refer to?

    By the way, it is on the front page.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    This needs to be reversed soon or 2016 will have to be 3rd party.
    No one here wanted to be the Billionaire.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahApocalypse View Post
    Did Romney shoot himself in the foot? Could this unravel his nomination?

    I pray like no other prayer I have said before!!!
    Yes indeed!

  13. #11
    Does anyone understand this statement: "It shifts the power to select delegates from the state party to the [party’s presidential] candidate,”

    I don't get it. Delegates select the "party's presidential candidate." Not the reverse. I don't understand this article. Are they saying that Romney and the RNC will just keep picking Romney delegates for 2016? Regardless of possible primary elections? Like, for example, if Rand Paul challenges President Romney in 2016, and Rand wins the plurality of the popular vote in all 50 states, it won't matter? Romney will simply pick all the delegates to represent him? I'm sure I am not following...

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by anaconda View Post
    Does anyone understand this statement: "It shifts the power to select delegates from the state party to the [party’s presidential] candidate,”

    I don't get it. Delegates select the "party's presidential candidate." Not the reverse. I don't understand this article. Are they saying that Romney and the RNC will just keep picking Romney delegates for 2016? Regardless of possible primary elections? Like, for example, if Rand Paul challenges President Romney in 2016, and Rand wins the plurality of the popular vote in all 50 states, it won't matter? Romney will simply pick all the delegates to represent him? I'm sure I am not following...
    It would mean there would no point in having State Conventions, other than for Platform, as everything would be decided by the primary vote.

  15. #13
    What I'm seeing from that is a textbook problem-reaction-solution maneuver.
    They want the delegates to defeat the 2 really bad rules, the only one they wanted passed was the 8-state minimum. Note that it is rarely even mentioned now.

  16. #14
    And what about this:

    "It also calls for letting future presidential hopefuls decide who gets to take the delegate slots they win in each state."


    Isn't this statement completely contradictory to the general theme of the article?

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by libertyjam View Post
    It would mean there would no point in having State Conventions, other than for Platform, as everything would be decided by the primary vote.
    I'm still utterly confused. Isn't assigning delegates based on the popular vote different from "President Romney" deciding what delegates to seat?

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by anaconda View Post
    I'm still utterly confused. Isn't assigning delegates based on the popular vote different from "President Romney" deciding what delegates to seat?
    No, not at all.

    I don't know how to explain it any clearer, someone else?



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by anaconda View Post
    I'm still utterly confused. Isn't assigning delegates based on the popular vote different from "President Romney" deciding what delegates to seat?
    They could use the model like the one in California, where it is winner-take-all by district, or PA, where there is a direct election of delegates. In both cases, the delegates are chosen by the campaigns beforehand. They will go with the model which benefits their chosen one the most.

    This is why I don't think these rules were intended to stand. Any state having their primary after Super Tuesday will be raising hell for the next 4 years and they know it. First off, they won't have anything meaningful to do at their conventions (loss of $$), also, the candidates won't campaign in the states (loss of $$).
    Last edited by CPUd; 08-26-2012 at 05:29 PM.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by anaconda View Post
    Does anyone understand this statement: "It shifts the power to select delegates from the state party to the [party’s presidential] candidate,”

    I don't get it. Delegates select the "party's presidential candidate." Not the reverse. I don't understand this article. Are they saying that Romney and the RNC will just keep picking Romney delegates for 2016? Regardless of possible primary elections? Like, for example, if Rand Paul challenges President Romney in 2016, and Rand wins the plurality of the popular vote in all 50 states, it won't matter? Romney will simply pick all the delegates to represent him? I'm sure I am not following...
    No, no - its that way: If you got 40% in New Hampshire (as Ron Paul Campaign, for example) you can choose the 40% percent of the Maine degeation. The Maine GOP would have no vote on it. Thats the question right now. A "veto" right is also discussed. This all has no effect on the 2012 candidate, as Mitt has the numbers in this circle.

  22. #19

    GOP officials accuse Romney of ‘power grab’

    Yep. Shaking things up.

    Senior GOP officials are accusing the Romney campaign’s chief attorney, Ben Ginsberg, of pushing through a rules change for delegate selection that would give Mitt Romney enormous power over the primary process should he win the White House and seek re-election in 2016.

    “It shifts the power to select delegates from the state party to the [party’s presidential] candidate,” Republican National Committee Vice Chairman Jim Bopp told The Washington Times on Sunday. “And it would make the Republican Party a top-down, not bottom-up, party.”



    Read more: GOP officials accuse Romney of ‘power grab’ - Washington Times



Similar Threads

  1. The RNC Power Grab
    By sailingaway in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-30-2012, 09:14 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-30-2012, 06:00 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-27-2012, 06:57 AM
  4. GOP officials accuse Romney of ‘power grab’
    By angelatc in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-26-2012, 11:30 PM
  5. How's this for power grab?
    By awake in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 08-01-2009, 12:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •