3 votes

Nevada Did Not Unbind! Why Not? Post Your Thoughts?

Why did the Nevada Ron Paul Campaign decide not to unbind?

Are they leaving it to the individual delegates, thereby not giving the GOP the ammunition to pre-emptively take action?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

How to allocate bound delegates

Bind the six Romney delegates to vote for Paul.
Bind two Paul delegates to vote for Paul.
Bind the rest of the Paul delegates to Romney, but abstain from voting.

Afterall, if the delegates are bound to the preference poll, then who says that a Romney supporting delegate must vote for Romney. How the bound delegate votes are allocated to the delegates is not set in the Rules.

Since we have a supermajority over greater than 2/3rds of delegates supporting Ron Paul, we can force the six Romney supporters to bind their vote to Paul. Then the remaining delegates who are bound to Romney will all be Paul supporters and they can simply abstain.

This way we can force 0 delegates for Romney out of Nevada.

Unbinding violates RNC rules...

As bad as I want to see the delegates of all the states unbound, it seems the RNC rules are pretty clear that it cannot be done:

Rule 15(c)(12):

"No delegates or alternate delegates shall be elected, selected, allocated, or bound pursuant to any Republican Party rule of a state or state law which materially changes the manner of electing, selecting, allocating, or binding delegates or alternate delegates or the date upon which such state Republican Party holds a presidential primary, caucus, convention, or meeting for the purpose of voting for a presidential candidate and/or electing, selecting, allocating, or binding delegates to the national convention if such changes were adopted or made effective after October 1 of the year before the year in which the national convention is to be held."

I'm not sure what the "punishment" is, but this seems pretty cut-and-dried to me.

Unnecessary compromise

If Nevada didn't have the numbers to unbind, okay. But if it was done for strategy it sounds pretty weak. It's not breaking the rules to unbind as it's the state party's decision as embodied by the convention. The media is already portraying Maine as "chaos, insane", etc. so no matter what we did in Nevada it would be portrayed as a hijacking. The RNC and Romney campaign will undermine or disqualify the delegation however they can whatever Nevada decided. And the RNC convention chairman will likely ignore any abstentions of bound delegates and count them as they were pledged (as some state party rules explicitly require).

In short it makes little sense to offer the establishment an olive branch that ties up one hand while they are getting ready to sucker punch us.

could

could having them bound help get romney to 1144 on the first vote? in other words, can we afford to have them bound in the first round? help me understand.

well?

well?

Three Reasons...

1. We did not have the required 2/3 vote to do so.

2. Even if we did have the required number of people (2/3) to win the vote, the RNC would have ruled the delegates could not be seated and there is no way we will have enough delegates in Tampa to overturn the chair.

3. (And most importantly) The Ron Paul campaign spoke from the podium at the Nevada convention this morning and asked the delegates NOT to vote to unbind.

However, this is still a huge victory, as the poster below said, even bound delegates cannot be told how to vote in all of the committees etc.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

Even bound delegates have much power

Avoiding the abstaining, etc., they can get some influence on platform and national spots I believe. I also believe that they can vote up or down the VP choice. I don't think that would be a rubber stamp with this crowd? I'd be tempted to pull the lever if Rand was VP, and whatever your views on that question it would be great to force him on to the ticket.

The chairman

Said why. "Ron Paul delegates follow the rules"
Simple as that

Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams

My take

I think it was the right move. All along we said we are going to play by the rules. We would get crucified in the media (more than usual) if we were painted as people who "stole the votes", since Nevada was an actual primary.

As far as the abstaining aspect, I think we need to be very strategic. Again, it is a matter of perception. If we are sure Romney will not get the 1144 needed in the first round, the only thing abstaining with do will paint us as the bad guys. For instance, it would be the difference between these two CNN Lead-ins:
"Ron Paul supporters broke the rules and attempted a guerilla coup of the RNC this morning by abstaining from voting for Romney, which they were bound to do by their state's rules. Leaders are now trying to figure out a way to uncertify the rogue delegates." Then pundits yell incessantly about us being deceitful bastards and not real Republicans.
OR
"Mitt Romney fails to win the required number of votes at the RNC this morning, falling only 24 votes short. For the first time in 40 years there will be a second round of voting - details will be coming soon as to who is on the ballot. Ron Paul had many more votes that orginally expected, but gained those delegates through the caucus process and made the difference". Then pundits yell incessantly about us being deceitful bastards and not real Republicans.

A small difference, but a different perception would be created and might allow us to get the empathy of the viewing audience who we will need in November.

This is all assuming we will have an unbound plurality in 5 states....

Now.....if we are not sure if Romney has the votes or not. We do what we must to represent the truly involved and educated citizens and save the country.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

abstaining

abstaining for the nevada delegates is not an option. at that point an alternate would be called in to vote and pretty much all of the alternates are romney people.

What does an unbound vote give Paul on the first round ?

Answer - not much

Does Paul need a 5th state to be put his name in nomination - No he already had the the 5th state

Will the unbound delegates get Paul to the 1100 plus on the first round, no

Could the NV delegation have gotten disqualified, yes

Can the NV delegates abstain? Yes

If they abstain, Romney still does not get the votes.

I don't see the need to unbind and risk having the National GOP do something that creates difficulty getting the delegation seated.

but,

could having them bound help get romney to 1144 on the first vote? in other words, can we afford to have them bound in the first round?

Great Responses

You guys are dead on. Strategy is very complicated and evolving daily. The unbind rule can be played to public perception. It also is an Ace in the Hole for the Paul relative to all the upcoming dirty tricks.

After all, we saw what happened in Nevada. Very dirty stuff.

I trust the campaign.

I trust the campaign.

- Grow Mushrooms at Home
http://subfarms.com

Trust the Campaign

Exactly.
They have shown to this point you can give them your trust.

National rules

It was determined that National RNC rules rule over State rules. If the delegation voted to unbind, it would prove their non-devotion to Romney and wouldn't be recognized as unbound at the RNC anyway.

There is no reason to unbind

There is no reason to unbind and Nevada DELEGATES no why, I don't think we should talk about this any further. Don't worry is all I can.

Why not discuss it?

Why not discuss it, why suppress speech?

With You?...Surely You Jest!

Your main focus has been for some time now to run
a 3rd Party Candidacy...Has it not?

Your screen-name is most encouraging...NOT!!!!

Get off this soapbox..it's not productive...
IT's DIVISIVE !!

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

Good catch Danton.

Good catch Danton.

Tks!

Tks!

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

I think that it's because the

I think it's because the Nevada GOP rules does not require their delegates to vote according to straw-polls, so any delegate can vote for any candidate he/she thinks is fit.

I think this was posted a while ago here at DP.

Great Response!

This sounds like fairly good reason. If so, it makes sense in wasting political fuel. However, it would seem that the unbind issue needs a much broader understanding by delegates from other states.

My guess is the lawyer who

My guess is the lawyer who came to bully them managed to make them worry enough to go for the back up strategy. So yes, fear of pre-emptive action, and saving the big brawl for the big show in Tampa. Can't have the fight if we don't have the people. We might have prevailed regardless, of course. Who knows.

Run, Ron, Run!

Another Great Response

Thank you. I would love to be a fly on the wall and hear what the lawyer said. Clearly, the lawyer had very clear points to make, probably making a wide array of unannounced strategic options. Nonetheless, hearing what he said would speak loudly to some potential options to expect, though the RP campaign cannot speak to it.