38 votes

Nebraska Recap

Laura Ebke, RLC-Nebraska

Since people seem to be interested (to say the least) about what happened in the Nebraska today, I think I'd post a little recap.

If you're interested..

Our numbers--we believed going in--were at about 40% of the total delegates. As I told many people, we didn't have the majority. I also told a number of people that how well we did would probably depend on how well the Romney forces were organized, and how many folks in rural areas decided to stay home and irrigate their corn instead of coming to the convention. Based on the credentials report, attendance was at about 96% of the elected delegates--an extraordinary number, really. Of course that made our job tougher, since we looked to be behind by about a 60-40 split.

We wanted to see how much firepower we actually had--we had a credentials challenge, and a rules challenge. We lost both by voice vote, and called for a division, which resulted in standing votes. In one instance, we lost 58-42%. In the other, we lost by about 62-38%. In other words we were in trouble.

In normal years, having 40% of the vote voting as a bloc would have allowed us to take most of the convention delegates, because the "slates" would typically have been very week, and "suggestions" rather than "demands" from the campaign. This year was different, as our Governor, as a result of the national media attention, the assorted "threats" of press/observers/crowds coming into the state (which thankfully didn't occur), and an earlier run in we'd had with him on another issue--decided to exercise more control over the slate than usual. He *personally* called delegates (and apparently *personally* chose the Romney slate, in large part) and told them to vote ONLY the slate. I don't know the details of what he said, but it appears to have worked--their slates held together as well as ours did--except that they typically had a 50-60 vote margin difference for the delegates on their slate, over the delegates on our slate.

We won in the 2nd District, and displaced the Romney slate there--because we had superior numbers there. But that's the only place where we had superior numbers.

There was no cheating. The voting process appeared to all who observed to be very clean. The question of the "official slate" had nothing to do with the campaign. The RLC was the de facto campaign in the state (although we did occasional have contact with campaign staff, and one was in Nebraska on Saturday). When the State Chair called me up and told me that they were offering both campaigns the option of having their "official slate" on the ballot, I declined. That may or may not have been a strategic mistake, however given that the "establishment" would have then seen the names on our slate, and that they had the majority to begin with, I judged that NOT showing our hand till we got there made sense--in hopes that we might coalition with some other groups for delegates.

The ballots were paper ballots, marked like any "scantron" type of test sheet. The voting process was organized, ballots were placed in locked boxes on the floor, and "official" observers (myself, one of my folks, or the campaign staff) accompanied the ballots to the counting room, where they were unlocked and put into the reader.

Given that there were 130-some odd candidates for delegate, and we were to choose either 3 or 23 (depending on CD or At-Large election), counting machines made sense.

If we had reason to believe that there might have been fraud of some sort, the numbers eliminated that concern, really. Our slate candidates all got between 120 and 135 on all at-large votes (and votes closely correspondent to the number we had confirmed as "ours" in each CD). The Romney slate numbers were consistent, as well--ranging in the 185-210 range.

We believe that it was a clean convention. Perhaps not ideal processes, but pretty good, and fair. We just got beat--they organized, too, and we didn't have the numbers.

Laura Ebke

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Debate is great

But using conventions of a few hundred people to overrule the votes of tens or hundreds of thousands is not. If the approach at a convention is "I realize that it is impossible to change the outcome of this nomination process, and we are going to follow all the rules regarding binding if we win, but we also want to encourage the party to move in a different direction ideologically", then we're in a state where a good debate on the issues can go forward. Too many people are trying to debate about which candidate to pick, and the time for debating that question is long past.

Thank you for your hard work, lady patriot!

And thank you to all of our Nebraska State Convention Liberty delegates!

While I know that we picked up 2 National delegates, how did we do on the alternates? Thanks.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Thanks for your fairness. That is all we can ask. HOWEVER,

just because the scum of the earth played fair WHEN THEY KNEW THEY WOULD WIN doesn't make me respect them.

It's Difficult to Believe that the Scum of the Earth Played Fair

The Washington Post had their story up on the convention -- replete with accurate counts -- way before there was a count.

I was a delegate in CD1, and

I was a delegate in CD1, and knew we were out numbered right away when we had some early votes to determine our numbers.

Everything was legit, like Laura said, were just outnumbered and the Romney force united together strong against us and were prepared.

I do know for a fact that the media hype over the last couple weeks played a huge role. I had many people in my local community talk to me (as they knew I was a respected RP supporter in the community) and many 'bought in' to the hype there was going to be chaos.

However, I had some new people come out and root for us as well, as it has woke up the state to the message of Liberty!

I look forward to the future of the movement in this country!

Thanks for all the hard work

we got screwed in my State

ytc's picture

Many thanks for the calm & sober recap, Laura E!

How ironic that *IF* there were no publicity at all, esp that Rachel M's widely watched contentious one, you *might have* lucked out with sleepy lazy regular party-line-towers staying home.

Well, well, we were so hungry for any media coverage: the only effective one in the last few weeks worked against us. . . such is life.

It was thanks to your hard work that you did manage to send in 40% - strong RP delegation to the state convention! Great job, Nebraska liberty lovers!

michcrow's picture

Thank you for the post

It's not the news I wanted to hear. But I thank you for taking the time to provide the info.

Two shorten the road.

I think most states and rules

I think most states and rules makes it illegal for the elected governor to get involved in a party election. Ours does.

If it didn't, it means the government would be controlling the election, instead of the election determining the government.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

RNC Rule 11 and NEB. REV. STAT. § 32-1524 (2005)

It is unfortunate that the RP Nebraska delegates were not told, nor were they aware, that electioneering is wrong and illegal. First there's RNC Rule 11 (See http://www.dailypaul.com/232271/reince-priebus-rnc-rule-11-a...).

Then there's NEB. REV. STAT. § 32-1524 (2005): "No person shall do any electioneering, circulate petitions, or perform any action that involves solicitation on election day within any polling place, any building in which an election is being held, or two hundred feet of such polling place or building."

According to Rule 11, the vote count in any and all states, in which Romney and the RNC have worked together without the written and filed prior approval of ALL GOP State Committee members of those states, is INVALID. Romney is NOT to be recognized by the RNC as the nominee in any of those states. Period.

Jeffrey Liberty of WatchTheVote 2012 is Appalled

He is appalled that educated people once again bought into the computer vote count and assumed it was "clean."

He says: "YOU CANNOT KNOW if the voting machines were counting accurately unless you HAND COUNTED THEM. That's the only way. 'Oh we trusted the numbers because they were about what we thought they would be' is abdicating one's responsibility to MAKE SURE THE VOTES WERE COUNTED.

"Just because you lost a division on two other issues was NO reason not to make a motion for a hand count. The Hand Count motion should have been unanimous FOR IT because if you had a division you would make note and SHAME anyone who voted against it. Why would they vote against a hand count unless there was reason to hide something. You probably would have wont that division and the entire result could have been far different. You cannot assume the votes were counted properly in the machines. We have enough experience with this stuff around the country to know they were probably counted by the software fraudulently and Ron Paul might have had far more delegates than he ended up with.

"If the Governor picked a slate and coerced delegates into voting for it, that is a crime. It is vote fraud. Anyone having knowledge of it has a civic duty to report it and to file an affidavit laying out their knowledge of it."

If there had been a motion for a hand count, and if it had been voted down, then at least it would be on record that transparency was requested and denied. Without actually calling for the hand count, no one can say with absolute certainty that it would have been voted down; that is just an assumption, and it "feels" as if the RP delegates just gave up after only two motions that didn't go they way. There is value in making these types of challenges and in having them go on record.

I think that our Nebraska Liberty patriots...

... are looking to their future within the Nebraska GOP, and did not want to burn bridges for no good reason. Calling for a hand count would have:

1. Prolonged the proceedings, and would have been viewed as a pointless delaying tactic.

2. Insinuated, without any supporting evidence, that the State GOP was engaging in blatant cheating. We might think, "well, duh!," but this isn't Illinois, or Louisiana, or South Carolina, or New York. The people of the Northern Great Plains (think Iowa and Minnesota, and I imagine that Nebraskans feel the same way) pride themselves on being trustworthy and fair, and this extends to their politics. To imply vote stealing, when all the available evidence (as reported by our delegates who were there) shows that the rules were followed to the letter, would be seen as an insult.

Our Nebraska patriots are working toward gaining control of their state's GOP, just as their neighbors in Iowa and Minnesota have already done. This requires winning people over, and so "Midwestern nice" is very much the appropriate way to behave. Do I have it right, Nebraska Liberty patriots?

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

We all know

how appalled he was. He was crying about it the whole time on the social stream and people were turning it off because of it.

Thank You for the Detailed Report

and for your efforts for Ron Paul at the Nebraska convention. If Ron Paul is not nominated for President in Tampa then I will be supporting Gary Johnson, the Libertarian.

Still Ron Paul 2012 and

Still Ron Paul 2012 and thanks to all the Nebraskan delegates who fought hard to try and win.


For dedicating so much time, hope we can build a majority for the next cycle.

thanks for posting.