132 votes

RNC Cheats Ron Paul And "the Unit Rule" Unbinds All Delegates!

Comment viewing options

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

The "unit" in the "unit rule"...

the unit is a state. Whether individual delegates are bound/unbound becomes irrelevant because the entire state will be voting as one unit.

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

"Unbounds"

The verb is "bind."

Try "The unit rule releases all delegates!"

Thanks, jg1029.

Schyy?

The GOP establishment have proved in the past that they add/change rules as they see fit.

Should we keep this down a bit before the convention?

Can't change rules until the convention

At each Convention they adopt/amend rules for the NEXT Convention. The rules for this convention were established in 2008

matt larson

matt larson lol

This is good to see, in a weird way...

SORRY... MEANT TO POST THIS IN RESPONSE TO AN EXCHANGE BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE BELOW.
Assuming that both of you support the cause of Liberty (which your posts indicate that you do), it is nice to see us arguing amongst ourselves. Why? Because you are arguing about HOW TO FOLLOW THE RULES! This is fantastic! The name-calling is forgivable, though not my particular preference.
To weigh in on what you're discussing, I have now seen Rule 38 in print several times and I think the wording is pretty clear. Having just read Rule 15, however, I didn't see anything that provides specifically for the binding of a number of delegates from a state. There are plenty of mentions of electing, selecting or binding delegates, but only in the context of other procedural matters.

Unlearning and self-teaching since 2008. Thanks, Dr. Paul!

Regardless of the rules, and how the RNC intends to

usurp them, they are obviously very nervous about Ron Paul. That's a good thing. Now, Ron Paul needs to bust out the RNC for their cronnisms by publicly demanding transparancy to the cozy Mittens connection - prior to nomination. Make them squirm a little more.

alan laney

Does Rule 38 apply to the 2012 RNC?

Ben Swann reported it applied in 2008 and 2010. Is it still valid this year?

I predict the rule will come

I predict the rule will come to vote on the Convention floor. It will be a test of strength vote for the Romney and Paul campaigns.

There is recourse in this.

The courts are bound to enforce contract law and the rules governing the RNC are in fact a contract.

As a matter of equity - redress could include compensation outside of just monetary damages - such as making the RNC apologize to the RP campaign, etc.

I'M GETTING SICK OF THE B.S.!!!!!

If everybody whose telling you we can win is wrong why don't we all just take our ball,go home,and let Obummer,or Mittens finish the job of finishing of the country.Get rid of the trolls,and get your heads on straight or this thing is over!!!!!!

Some see things as they are and say why,but i dream things that never were and say why not. Robert F. Kennedy

you can go home

and we'll let you know how it goes - and you can thank us later

Calm down we are all learning

Calm down we are all learning here

people hear things from random sources and believe they are right and fight for what they believe in

The same arguments for and against abstaining caused alot of controversy

And within a couple days it all worked itself out

Smile and learn

To arms! To arms! The Redcoats are coming!

United States Constitution, Article XV, Section 1

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.

abridge - lessen, diminish, or curtail; "the new law might abridge our freedom of expression"

servitude - the state of being under the control of another person, Lack of personal freedom, as to act as one chooses.

Nuff said.

Joined the Liberty Movement in Anchorage, Alaska, 1977. Ron Paul supporter since 1983.
In Liberty from the Pacific Northwest.

Primaries are not elections to an office

so the constitution has no relevence here.

This is a private club picking candidates for the election. The election covered by the constitution is the general election only.

My apologies for being Debby Downer

My apologies for being Debby Downer but this must be discussed and I'm hoping people smarter than I can find a solution. The first minute of this broadcast states a plain and simple fact. This is a private party and the rules are not laws. Therefore they can break the rules however, whenever they want without consequence. This means they can break all the rules and just declare mittens their boy.

Who is going to count the delegate vote? That is the group that will decide who will be the nominee. We have seen voter fraud in every state. Why wont they just bring it to Tampa? Why won't they just declare all Ron Paul supporting delegates as void, because they said so? They media wouldn't cover it, we already know that.

So what is our game plan for when they fix the vote at Tampa?

Again my apologies for being debby downer but I can't get past this idea.

The rules are a legal

The rules are a legal contract. If they break their own rules, they violate that contract and the Paul campaign can take them to court.

Agreed but...

Agreed. The discouraging aspect of this is that following the rules and procedures and winning fair and square has not really "worked" in all instances, so why should we expect it to work at the highest level? The only counterpoints that I can think of are:
1) This will be a bigger, televised event that achieves an audience far more broad than the YouTube videos we are all posting/watching. I don't want to put TOO much faith in average John/Jane Conventionwatcher, but it will be hard to ignore the sort of outcry for leadership from the people that has been so evident in the caucus videos. May not help, but the sunlight shed upon the situation can't hurt!
2) While the rules of the RNC are not laws, they are, in fact, part of a contract. All of the money and "establishment" resources that come with being the nominee for President of the Republican Party - and these clearly make all the difference in the world - are provided based on this contract. So, is there a suit to be filed? Absolutely! Aren't WE all Republicans? Haven't some of us paid party dues and made contributions? Basically, the guys who run the club that we're in are stealing resources from all of us by breaching our contract. What do we get from this? Let us hope that the Judicial branch is less partial to the machine!

Unlearning and self-teaching since 2008. Thanks, Dr. Paul!

The truth sucks sometimes but it needs to be said.

All you're doing is laying out a potential outcome, a true one. Yes they could just do what they want most likely but they will also be killing themselves... at that point they'd give us little recourse. I'm not gonna mention what those are, I'm sure you can figure that out but just remember.. As long as we're all willing to continue the fight, it isn't over and I'm not talking about "2016".. I'm talking about this election cycle.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Amen

I hear you loud and clear... You aren't alone. Let's just hope there are enough of us who feel the same.
Seeing these caucus videos has been so eye-opening. This is the closest thing to the American Revolution that has happened since the American Revolution... and talk about RADICALS! Those guys make us "fringe" libertarians look mainstream!

Unlearning and self-teaching since 2008. Thanks, Dr. Paul!

tasmlab's picture

I net out to the same place

I don't think there is anybody even to sue if the campaign wanted to.

The only thing that would hold the leadership in check is their membership. That's where their power comes from. If there were no members of the party, it would essentially be as ineffectual and powerless as the Libertarian party (not to offend anybody).

But I don't think anybody knows how this works. Going to the caucus was personally very illuminating. I told this experience, for example, to my father-in-law who has been a republican for 40 years and he stared at me like I had extra eyes. I don't think he even believes me that the caucus existed.

So, yea, the party can just change the rules willy nilly and I don't think anybody cares except for us.

Currently consuming: Harry Browne, Free Domain Radio; JT Gatto and Holt; Wii U

Also, read the section on

Also, read the section on voting. There are no rules instructing rnc delegates to vote a certain way.

Yes, the national convention does not allow the unit rule

In general no bound candidates allowed, mainy earlier posts on this

How so?

Here is Rule 38:

"No delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any STATE or CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT to impose the unit rule."

Is the RNC or a state republican party a "state" or "congressional district? Does Rule 38 prevent the RNC or a state delegation's leadership from invoking the unit rule? It plainly doesn't.

The "unit rule" is mentioned nowhere else in the rules. If the unit rule is not allowed then why is a rule necessary restricting only two specific groups from invoking it?

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

Yeah...

I wish this were true but I have doubts.

The unit rule, I believe, is making ALL the delegates from a state vote a certain way... as one unit.

This is perhaps different than the state primaries giving out delegates.

For example: If in the primary vote Romney got 70% and Paul got 30%, then wouldn't the unit rule be used if someone tried to make 100% go Romney or 100% go Paul? ... I'm talking about bound delegates only, not the unbound like in caucus states.

This certainly requires more looking into.

Pottawattamie County Iowa

"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism." -Dr. Ron Paul

UNIT RULE : A rule of

UNIT RULE : A rule of procedure at a national politcal convention under which a state's entire vote must be cast for the candidate preferred by a majority of the state's delegates.

Again..

No delegate or alternate delegate shall be
bound by ANY ATTEMPT OF ANY STATE or CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT to impose the UNIT RULE.

What all this means is that they may DO IT but it is NOT binding.. it is only structure. You are free to do what you want.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Out of context

I hate to say that Neverquit is correct on this one. "No delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any state or congressional district to impose the Unit rule."

The key phrase is "bound... by any attempt... to impose the Unit rule." There is nothing in #38 that prevents delegates from being bound due to other reasons.

The phrase "unit rule"...

only occurs once. And only in Rule 38. And it restricts only two specific parties:

1) states
2) congressional districts

Does Rule 38 disallow the unit rule from being invoked? No, it only restricts "states" and "congressional districts".

Which of the following are "states" or "congressional districts":

1) GOP
2) RNC
3) delegate leadership for each state party
4) state parties

Answer: none of them.

Does anything anywhere in the rules prevent any of those in the list from invoking the unit rule for a state's delegation? It plainly doesn't...

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

rp4pres is right...

but for the wrong reason. Because people vote they technically can vote their conscious and vote anyone who is nominated at the convention..
http://www.fairvote.org/response-to-a-rogue-convention-how-g...

The unit rule is saying if an entire state delegation is compelled to vote for only 1 candidate through binding, even though more than 1 was running and got votes in that state (thus not being a fair representation of the voters) than you can't be bound to that 1 candidate. i.e. - winner take all states are illegal and any state Romney took all the delegates proportionally BY THE STRAW VOTES...So Massachusetts = Unit Rule (straw vote), Florida (winner take all) = Unit Rule, Wyoming (won delegates at state convention NOT by the straw vote) NOT the unit rule.

Does that make sense? :)

The only problem is if the state has a tricky way of selecting delegates that makes sure Romney people get all the spots we are still not going to be represented...but there aren't many states like that!

"If you put a gun to my head and said vote Romney/Gingrich/Santorum...I would say pull the trigger!"