A better alternative to delegate abstentionSubmitted by Brad.king92 on Sat, 05/05/2012 - 21:49
There has been a lot of talk about delegates abstaining and many people feel that this is the only option for Ron Paul to win. I have nothing against this strategy but I think there is a much better option that should be taken into consideration first. Rule No. 32 of the RNC states:
"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."
This means that if the majority of the delegates are Ron Paul supporters, regardless of who they are bound to vote for, they can vote to suspend the rules and unbind all the delegates. The reason I think this is the better alternative to abstaining is because it would clearly be justified by the rules, while abstaining can't. If the delegates abstain then prevent Romney from getting 1144 delegates, it will be very easy for the RNC Committee to justify denying Paul the nomination. But if we do it this way they can't do that because it has a specific rule to justify it. But if we fail to do this then we should abstain only as a last resort. Please let me know what you think.