2 votes

Can delegates still vote for Ron Paul at the convention?

Im wondering if delegates can still vote for Dr Paul and will those votes be recognized?

Comment viewing options

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

Of course

They aren't going all that way to vote for Romney!

I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war. Ps 120:7
--
Better to be divided by truth than united in error.
--
The local church(not a building -a people) is the missing link. The time to build is now.

yes and sort of

All delegates who are not bound to Romney are allowed to vote for Ron Paul, even if he's not officially up for nomination. The delegates who are bound to Ron Paul are allowed to vote for him. The delegates who are unbound (including those who were originally bound to Santorum and Gingrich) are allowed to vote for him. His lack of 5 official states does not deprive any delegate of the ability to vote for him. All it means is that he is not officially allowed to WIN on that ballot. They'll probably keep track of the total that vote for him.

There are just barely under 1400 delegates that are bound to Romney. That leaves around 900 who are free to vote for anyone they want. Approximately 200 of those are Ron Paul supporters.

How

long is your nose now after that one?

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

What part do you disagree with?

.

...

You have had many chances to see the information from 2008 that a bound delegate at the RNC was allowed to cast his vote freely for someone else.

That only leads to one fact: binding delegates is an illusion to try to control. As that is true that means any delegates count is an illusion.

When Romney loses to Obama which he will I'm just going to laugh because there isn't any difference between them. For you to support Romney over Paul shows your critical thinking skills of which yours are severely lacking.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

You're still using that awful example?

The delegate you're talking about was bound to Romney. Romney released him. The state tried to get him to vote for McCain, but he didn't want to. It would be like a state trying to force one of the delegates that Santorum just released to vote for Romney. They cannot do that. This is the analogy to what happened in Utah in 2008. It wasn't someone bound to McCain by the vote that refused to support McCain. You do see the difference, right? You can try to argue some other way that delegates are unbound, but this case does not prove your point in the least.

And the keeper of that illusion

Is the delegation chair. Even if 100 Romney-bound delegates from Texas say they vote for Ron Paul, Rick Perry has the microphone, and is going to stand up and announce at least 108 votes for Romney.

Even if every Romney-bound delegates from Texas abstain from voting, Rick Perry has the microphone, and is going to stand up and announce at least 108 votes for Romney.

The bound part

that's just me.

It's not whether they can it's their DUTY

Ron Paul or the campaign did not elect Ron Paul Republicans into their delegate positions, state delegates did, presumably to do something specific - nominate Ron Paul.

If a delegate shows up and doesn't do their DUTY to their constituents who elected them, that delegate is just another slimey politician who says one thing to get elected then quickly forgets or rationalizes away their DUTY.

Yes, and I would expect Ron

Yes, and I would expect Ron to get about 300 votes.

Your point is irrelevant and weak rationalization.

The point is that a delegate was elected by people who elected them for a REASON. It is the delegates DUTY to those who elected them to fulfill the purpose for which they were elected.

It's as simple as that.

The original question that I

The original question that I was responding to was: "Can delegates still vote for Ron Paul at the convention?" I believe the original poster was concerned that since Paul won't be nominated from the floor that delegates wouldn't be allowed to vote for him. The question you're answering is a different and more interesting question. However, it is a question that wasn't asked. When I answer a question I try to answer the question that was asked and not make up a question that I think would be more interesting to answer. Obviously, on that we disagree.