5 votes

In my quest for Rule #38 clarification, I found THIS!

It is a Newt Gingrich forum that is talking about utilizing Rule #38 to unbind delegates. It would seen their logic is along the lines of what ours is, they are just unrealistic in their ability to have the majority in Tampa.

Any who, I found this particular part VERY interesting - "If you have to pretend to be a Ron Paul person to get elected, so be it. If you have to pretend to be a Romney person to get elected, so be it. If you have dress up as a chicken to get elected, do it. Do whatever it takes. Just get your buts in there and get elected to the national delegation slate, or to get solid Gingrich people."

Here's the link to the full post - http://newtgingrich360.com/group/intercessors-for-newt/forum...

Comment viewing options

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

In 2008

Did the state of Utah bound or is it Bind? their delegates? That was the reason why rule 38 had an interpretation by the party heads , Ironically in favor of Romney and against Mclame. Utah if memory serves me.?
I'm sure they know and have a plan. I'll find out soon enough.

the delegates were bound to Romney

because he won the popular vote in a landslide. When he dropped out and released his delegates, the state committee tried to re-bind them to McCain. But technically, after Romney dropped out, they were unbound, so the RNC told the state they couldn't enforce that re-binding.

Nice hehe!

Who's gonna say "I used to support Ron Paul" though??

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

The point is is that we are

The point is is that we are doing this and have been since 2008. Gangrean was a day late and an hour short as always... Newt the mute.

Well, for the four or five

Well, for the four or five people who might actually try to do this.... good luck.

Perhaps chickenhawk would be the more appropriate costume

Ron Paul: "I went."

Admit ignorance here... can someone explain?

This was also at that site: "I will also add that you MUST get the national campaign staff for Ron Paul and Mitt Romney off the premises. They should not be allowed to SPEAK OR OBSERVE."

I'm new to this whole delegate process, and I'm confused. Why at this point, with Gingrich not in the race and with his having endorsed Romney, are his people still looking for delegates?

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

His subjects

still hold the hope that he can deliver the great upset he promised. It was said that Paul would be the spoiler, but in fact it was Gingrich and Santorum that were there to spoil it for Paul. They split the Conservative vote three ways.

The establishment knew Romney would lose if Conservatives consolidated behind Paul.

Thnx

I get it. BTW, I read your comment re AJ. I appreciate certain things he's brought to my attention, but he does sensationalize things. He's really lost credibility with me. I was especially angry, though my own fault, that I'd immediately passed on info to others in the form of an "Action Alert" re Nancy Pelosi supposedly having said she wanted to amend the First Amendment to take away our right to speech. I only afterwards looked into it myself. At issue was corporations enjoying Constitutional protections intended for "persons." I AGREED WITH HER. (It was Kalle Lasn's book Culture Jam that enlightened me as to a misguided Supreme Court decision 100 years ago (Santa Clara County...) that set a precedent counter to what our founders intended: they didn't like big government, NOR big corporations - like the East India Company!) You're absolutely right. Not unlike our government, Alex uses fear tactics. "Fear is a mind killer." P.A.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir