58 votes

Steve Sebelius, LVRJ: What happens if Ron Paul actually WINS?

Now, they're openly mulling? Kinda.

What happens if Ron Paul actually wins?

By Steve Sebelius | Posted: May 9, 2012 | 2:03 a.m.

Before we leave the subject, while the supporters of Texas Rep. Ron Paul bask in their victorious takeover of the Nevada Republican Party convention, let's ponder a question.

What if Paul wins?

Yes, it's an extreme longshot, but one Paul fans vigorously embrace. It would require supreme organizational skill, incredible lobbying and deft changes to the rules allocating delegate votes. But what if Paul fans descend on the Republican National Convention and replicate their Nevada success?

For more news updates, post-our amazing weekend Delegate victories, please check out my compilation of MSM news blurbs that range from Ruling Class Freakouts, to the MSM trying to maintain some semblance of legitimacy & 'credibility,' just in case we do pull off the upset of the century, aka. their CYA (cover your a**) 'news' pieces, please click here.

================================================================

From one of the more fair-ish journos from LV, NV Anjeanette Damon breaking down RP delegate strategy to the 'uninitiated.' Was all good until she cited the "i" word, "isolationist!" Oye veh!

Does Ron Paul loyalists’ revolution have any ammo?

By Anjeanette Damon (contact) | Wednesday, May 9, 2012 | 2 a.m.

Confused by this weekend’s Republican convention?

No one blames you.

Yes, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won the Nevada caucuses in February, capturing 50 percent of the vote.

Why then, did this weekend’s headlines read that Texas Rep. Ron Paul won almost all of Nevada’s national delegates?

================================================================

And, from Grace Wyler, one of the few good ones at SEC fraudster/'banned from ever trading securities' Henry BLUNKhead-owned Biz Insider:

Ron Paul Is Still Racking Up Delegates — And Mitt Romney Is Finally Getting Nervous

Grace Wyler | May 9, 2012, 2:29 AM | 312 |

For several weeks I have been writing about Ron Paul's upset victories at district and state GOP conventions, and about the surprising success of his delegate strategy. Now, with Paul's delegate sweeps in Maine and Nevada, it looks like Mitt Romney and the Republican Party are finally starting to catch on to the trend.

Paul supporters swept this weekend's state GOP conventions, picking up 21 of 24 RNC delegates in Maine and 22 out of 28 delegates in Nevada. The twin victories come on the heels of Paul's surprise delegate wins at district caucuses and state conventions in Missouri, Minnesota, Colorado, and Louisiana, as well as a Paul-friendly takeover of the Alaska GOP.

Paul supporters have managed to stage these state-level coups despite significant resistance from local Establishment Republicans, many of whom are predictably reluctant to relinquish their power to the insurgents. So far, however, the Paul campaign has attributed most of the Establishment's "shenanigans" to local animosities.

Comment viewing options

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

I notice several media

I notice several media outlets also starting to use phrases that this delegate sttategy is something 'they have been telling you months ago' (literal quote by msnbc anchor with twith the goatieresembling sort of beard) what is up with that! Suddenly they knew all this and were benevolent by not telling anyone and ignoring paul? These people are not real good journalists to say the least..

Dutch Ron Paul blog: http://www.paulitiek.nl | Paul Campaign Google Maps: share the victories with your Friends! http://g.co/maps/rcw2y

Wow!

This paragraph is filled with bs to make us look like freakin bad guys....she uses words that are usually reserved for our government's lovely over seas operations:

"Paul supporters have managed to stage these state-level coups despite significant resistance from local Establishment Republicans, many of whom are predictably reluctant to relinquish their power to the insurgents. So far, however, the Paul campaign has attributed most of the Establishment's "shenanigans" to local animosities."

How deceptive she is...we're insurgents?!? really!?!? LAME...

So, Regarding Rule 38 and Abstinence They're Saying. . .

1. Rule 38 doesn’t apply to states that have binding caucuses, BUT it is still on the books; so Ron Paul supporters can viably argue interpretation.

2. As for abstinence, rules aren’t clear what happens after: (a) states vote in the roll call vote, and certain states are "skipped" because a majority of delegates in those states abstain; then (b) the skipped states get a second chance to vote, and the same thing happens again and again. This would create an endless “loop," and the convention would get stuck. Already the GOP is preparing it's argument that, because the roll call vote doesn’t allow individual delegates to shout out their votes from the floor, the delegation chair would be obligated to shout out the appropriate number of "bound" delegates from the original public vote (ex., in Nevada, the chair would shout out 20 votes for Romney and 8 for Paul).

At this point, it's time to refer back to point #1. Talk about a loop! Well, be prepared for the unexpected because you haven't seen anything yet. Go Ron Paul!

Where is this "Romney 20, Paul 8" garbage coming from?

Where is this "Romney 20, Paul 8" garbage coming from?

It's "Romney 14, Gingrich 6, Paul 5, Santorum 3".

(And that might as well be "Romney 14, Paul 14" for all the good it does Romney.)

From the GOP council's letter:

"... under the Delegate Binding Rules that the Nevada Republican Party submitted in its 15(e) filing, each delegate elected at the State Convention (including automatic delegates) must be assigned by the Nevada Republican Party Secretary a binding obligation to vote for a particular Presidential Candidate, and those 'assignments shall be proportional to the votes each Presidential Candidate received in the Presidential Preference Poll.' See Section 4.1 of the Nevada Party Delegate Binding Rules for 2012."

The 20/8 thing seems to be assuming the delegates are divided only between Romney and Paul. In fact they are divided among all four. So Romney only gets half of them. Since all that matters on the first ballot is whether Romney gets his 1,144 votes, the other 14 count against him whether they're voting for Paul, Gingrich, or Santorum.

If Gingrich and/or Santorum decide to release their bound delegates, they can RECOMMEND the delegates cast their votes for Romney but they can't rebind them to do so. Released delegates get to vote for whomever they want on the first ballot. That's Ron Paul (assuming the three from District 2 were assigned to Romney's quota - or Paul's B-) ) So it's a wash whether the others release their bound delegates or not.

Even if ALL THREE from District 2 were all bound to Rick or Newt AND released, AND vote for Romney, the most Romney can get from the Nevada delegation is 17. And the MSM (which is using the 20/8 split) is STILL getting it wrong and undercounting Paul.

(I bet it's the same in most of the other states that bind their delegates to the straw poll results, too.)

That's how I read it. Have I missed something?

= = = =
"Obama’s Economists: ‘Stimulus’ Has Cost $278,000 per Job."

That means: For each job "created or saved" about five were destroyed.

Rule 39

because the roll call vote doesn’t allow individual delegates to shout out their votes from the floor, the delegation chair would be obligated to shout out the appropriate number of "bound" delegates from the original public vote (ex., in Nevada, the chair would shout out 20 votes for Romney and 8 for Paul).

Per Rule 39, if 6 or more states demand a roll call vote - which I presume means calling on individual delegates - so it will be:

RULE NO. 39 Record Vote
If a majority of the delegates of any six (6) states severally shall demand a roll call vote, the same shall be taken of the states in the order hereinbefore established.

So if, say, the Nevada chair shouts out 20 votes for Romney and 8 for Paul, and then a roll call is demanded, what happens if for Nevada there are 2 votes for Romney, 8 for Paul, and 18 abstentions during the roll call? I guess Romney gets 2 and Paul gets 8!


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

They can still vote for paul

They can still vote for Paul bound or not. Some people might whine or cry, but once the vote is cast they can't do anything about it.

Timing is critical though

They have threatened to throw out all the Nevada delegates if they dont "play nice". This is why the Paul camp said they would recommend an abstain, just so they wouldnt kill the delegates before they ever got there.

Once they get there and the process is started Im sure it will be another story, but for now, Im fine with an abstain vote... either way, its a no vote for Romney... and when there are only two people running, obviously if you arent for Romney you are supporting Paul!

As I read it an abstain is as

As I read it an abstain is as much a violation of the binding as a vote for a different candidate.

(As much as I wish it were otherwise, I can't honestly read it any other way. B-b )

= = = =
"Obama’s Economists: ‘Stimulus’ Has Cost $278,000 per Job."

That means: For each job "created or saved" about five were destroyed.

.

.

.

.

Really???

This is going to be HISTORIC. I can barely contain myself.

Abstain Abstain Abstain

The gloves are off fokes!! They are not playing by the rules so its time to force the rules to be followed.

Delegates please abstain, object, do what ever it takes but Romney can NOT be the nominee in Tampa.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

Wow! GOD is in the details

Great catch on your part, Minarchist! More will be revealed. It is no longer a cake walk for the corrupt now that they have US and their very own rules to answer to. (((Smirk))) The plot thickens.