17 votes

Green Papers Commentary on Stealth Delegates (of value?)


Analyze and report! Anything we can do about this? Or is it just scare tactics?

I think we'll give them hell and no one knows for sure exactly how many stealth we have! For all we know, half of Romney's delegates could be stealth! XD (not likely though)

EDIT: Comments below are worth analyzing for verification!

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

holy crap I just figured a backdoor way to make bound delegates


As it turns out, if a delegate is contested, they cannot vote until they are cleared of their challenge in the credentials committee. So if let's say, we challenge all the alternates and delegates that Paul won in Massachusetts that are bound for Romney. None of these delegates can vote by Republican National Committee rules. When you are challenged, you are required to go in front of a challenge committee to state your case and answer questions by the committee, if you miss your interview time, you have to re-request an interview time. Of course usually you want to get this done immediately, unless you are a bound Romney delegate, pushing Paul :-)

(b) No person on the temporary roll of the national convention and whose right to be seated as a delegate or alternate delegate is being contested shall be entitled to vote in the national convention or in any committee thereof until by vote of the national convention the contest as to such person has been finally decided and such person has been permanently seated, except that any such person may be accorded the right to so vote, except in matters involving the credentials of that person, by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Republican National Committee or the Committee on Credentials.

Plz Don't Contest

There is a strategy that sofar has been extremely successful. Do NOT ATTEMPT to change in any way our successful bid to outplay the establisment.

You lost me on part (b)..

HOW does this help?

What are you fightin' for?
Caught in the middle?
Freedom is only for those with the guts to defend it!

try to make it easy

Obviously I think abstaining is legal, but for those Romney fans who don't understand the process and think bound must vote, Paul supporters could still use the nuclear option below.

using the rules in part b which is actual Republican Convention wording

If there are 40 Paul delegates and alternates that are bound to Romney, (the delegates would normally have to vote for Romney helping to give him the needed votes to win) , but if those delegates are challenged (let's say by a Stealth Paul supporter) they cannot vote by GOP National Convention Rules until they are cleared. So if they never show up to the credentials committee to (answer questions and make their case why the challenge is false) then they cannot vote for Romney until they get credentialed later (after the first vote that is!). this only works for places like Massachusetts where we have won the delegates and alternates, otherwise an alternate would replace the delegate.

But doesn't EVERYONE have to be credentialed before

the meeting can convene and proceed with business? It may be way past my bedtime, but this idea doesn't seem feasible to me.

What are you fightin' for?
Caught in the middle?
Freedom is only for those with the guts to defend it!

Only one problem

with the green paper joker theory.

The floor of the convention follows the Rules of The House of Representatives, not Roberts Rules of Order.

The House rules allow abstaining.

Second, the Convention Rules have to be approved by the body of the convention before any voting takes place or any other business can occur. If there are enough delegates to change the rules, or amend a rule into a new rule, then it shall be done.

He also forgets that there were 70 plus bound delegates to Ford that promised Reagan they woukd abstain if he needed the votes for a win, but even if Reagan had those he still fell short of the needed total, and thus Reagan gave in.

they held a roll call in 1976

and the final vote was 1187 for Ford and 1070 for Reagan. There were no abstentions. All bound delegates voted for the candidate to whom they were bound. That year the threshold was 1130 votes to get the nomination. So if Reagan had 70 supporters as Ford delegates who abstained, it would have been 1117-1070 for Ford on the first ballot, and no winner would have been named. On a second ballot, if everyone voted for the same candidates except for the abstainers, who then voted for Reagan, it would have been 1140-1117 for Reagan and he would have gotten the nomination.

Is this not accurate? Even though the gap between Reagan and Ford was larger than 70, Ford was not 70 over the nomination threshold.

Then why do different states have different rules?

I thought those rules applied to National. Some states say you have to vote 2 rounds before delegates can be released. Can't a state vote before convention about how they will vote at National?


They can. And it behooves all delegates in bound states to unbind themselves at their STATE convention before ever getting to national so we won't even have to deal with this stuff like abstaining etc.

The reason it is called a

The reason it is called a pledged delegate is just that

they have pledged to vote for whomever

We ALL know how pledges work in politics

presidents like Obama and Bush for that matter pledged an oath to the constitution and then they trample on it

This is politics

Nuff Said

To arms! To arms! The Redcoats are coming!

While my knowledge of parliamentary procedure barely

rivals that of a shrimp, it seems if they did this...and where he says the "Ayes" have it, then someone could make a motion or whatever the right word is for a written vote. And then we can watch them count it in front of millions of people on TV and photograph them using bowtie cameras.


That motion is called...

... a division.

Yes, that would be very cool to do.

And now you have just surpassed the knowledge of a shrimp! :) :) :)

Susie 4 Liberty's picture

Well ----

We shall see what we see

Susie 4 Liberty

Just found this and it could

Just found this and it could be how we can abstain even if this article is true.

"RULE NO. 32
Suspension of Rules
A motion to suspend the rules shall always be in order, but only when made by authority of a majority of the delegates from any state and seconded by a majority of the delegates from each of five (5) or more other states severally."

We are on track to get over 5 majorities in a state.


The wording

is like a tongue twister for the mind... lol

Technically, we would need majority of 6 states to pull this off would we not?

The Most Important & Relevant Speech of Our Time!
Just 2 steps, be the media!!!

No problem

We'll have it.

LOL! I googled him!

I did too

How many people have the exact same name--especially the doulbe "S" in Andersson? He's nothing but a music teacher.

Green Papers is just another blog with info about politics

It's not the "Law". Each state can vote on what they want to do before they get to convention. They can vote to change the rules. Mr. Richard E. Berg-Andersson sounds like he has an agenda.

So scare tactics?

That's what it seems to me. The RNC will be such a high profile event that I doubt they will be pulling crap right in front of the entire nation...

The Most Important & Relevant Speech of Our Time!
Just 2 steps, be the media!!!

You're kidding

When has that ever stopped them?