 |
 |
How many are left?
Posted April 7th, 2008 by jshowell
output
If you've ever seen the movie Gladiator there is a scene where Russel Crowe "Maximus" yells to his fellow gladiators to stay close to him if they want to live. The smart ones link shields and survive the onslaught of spears, arrows and swords. The dumb ones run and get slaughtered.
So how many are staying on track to get Ron Paul at the convention in the fall? How many have run away for other candidates?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Did you know...
.. that most states "delegates bound" "rules" are actually STATE LAWS that apply generally to all parties and that a delegate that "revolts" is breaking state law and can PERSONALLY be open to civil litigation by the State?
If you lose a civil lawsuit you have to pay BOTH SIDES legal expenses AND possibly a large fine.
Delegates who "revolt" can also have civil cases filed against them by the party itself for breaking party rules.
Personally, I think it is important for any person who is advising a delegate to "revolt" to make that delegate aware of this issue. Don't you?
For example, here is the state law for Missouri that applies to ALL parties:
-------------------------------
Missouri Revised Statutes is the name for the codified laws of the State of Missouri.
The acronym for the Missouri Revised Statutes is RSMo.
Provided for your perusing pleasure is a searchable online database of the RSMo:
http://www.moga.mo.gov/st...
The following are Missouri Revised Statutes relevant to national convention delegates and delegates bound:
RSMo 1986 - 115.776. National convention delegates and alternates, selection.
6. Congressional district delegates and alternates shall be selected so that the proportion of the total district delegates and alternates that are committed to each candidate or are uncommitted equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote cast in the presidential primary selection in that district for each candidate and for the uncommitted position; except that votes for a candidate or for the uncommitted position which total less than fifteen percent of the district total shall be counted as uncommitted in determining proportions of district delegates awarded if the sum of all such votes exceeds fifteen percent of the district total.
7. At-large delegates and alternates shall be selected in numerical order from each slate so that the proportion of the total at-large delegates and alternates that is uncommitted or committed to each candidate equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote for that established political party that was cast as uncommitted and for each candidate in the state at large; except that, votes for a candidate or uncommitted listing that total less than fifteen percent of the total shall be counted as uncommitted in determining proportions of district delegates awarded if the sum of all such votes exceeds fifteen percent of the state total.
RSMo 1986 - 115.780. Delegates bound for two ballots, exceptions-pledge requirements.
1. Each national convention delegate and alternate shall be bound to vote for the candidate for whom he designated commitment, if any, when he was selected as a delegate or alternate until that or another candidate received the party's nomination, two ballots have been taken or that candidate withdraws, suspends his campaign, releases his delegates, or receives less than fifteen percent of the votes cast on the first ballot, whichever first occurs.
---------------------------------------
Have Missouri delegates been informed that they will be breaking STATE LAW if they "revolt" and that they will be PERSONALLY open to lawsuits by the state of Missouri? And also open to lawsuit by the GOP?
I sure hope so...
SGP has been warning people also. He said:
"I have never told anyone to vote for Ron Paul if they are bound for mccain and the very least that would happen is they will never be able to be a delegate again EVER."
and also...
"i have mad that clear on many occasions that there could be civil action should they defy party rules"
=)
IM not going anywere.Ron
IM not going anywere.Ron Paul or nothing, Screw this Bob Barr sh*t.
Fanstasy Unfledged-Please support local music.
www.myspace.com/realityis...
I'm with him.....
like white on rice!
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
It's not even a debate.
There is no choice, for freedom in our time, there is only Ron Paul and Revolution.
~I will never again accept the lesser of two evils.~
+1
+1
I am absolutley convinced
there is no other choice.
Ron Paul 2008
there is no other choice!
there is no other choice! get the nomination or die trying!
as for me and my home, we shall worship the LORD
Delegates Revolt!
Delegates Revolt! You have nothing to lose but your McChains!
Thank you all
This thread has proven to me one quitter can try to force his will on diehard supporters who want to fight.
I am sorry for the quitter who will not support Ron Paul and I do not know why they are on this forum.
You supporters have proven no matter how many times quitters post defeatist propaganda above your strong statements there is hope for Ron Paul.
How is..
.. expressing an opinion in a FORUM trying to "force my will" on anybody?
Hahaha!
Quitter = "don't revolt because you will be disqualified and permanently banned from future delegate work". Yes that's me.
People who revolt will be the TRUE "quitters" because I will be able to be a delegate and the revolters won't. What ya got to say about that?
YOU are the one encouraging PERMANENT quitting from the delegate process which CONTRADICTS what Dr. Paul is kindly asking us to do.
J.S. "True Quitter" Howell...
=)
Mart-THINK ..before it becomes illegal!
"A little rebellion now and then...is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” - Thomas Jefferson
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson
What good will it do...
...for you to be a delegate for the next presidential election? By then, Ron Paul will be 76 years old and probably won't run. Any "Ron Paul II" candidate will be in the same situation Ron Paul is currently, so you probably would be advocating the same course of action for that candidate as well. Using your "logic" there's no chance of us getting a good presidential candidate until at least 2016!
Ron Paul is NOT asking us to refrain from being delegates for him, in fact, he's asked the exact opposite.
Am I missing something here? Exactly how is sitting back and letting all the delegates be McCain supporters going to help the Ron Paul campaign and our causes in the long run? Exactly what IS your plan? And please be specific!
Please..
.. show me where I said to not become a delegate!!! I am saying not to "revolt". You have to be a delegate to not revolt! Why on earth would I tell a non-delegate to not revolt since that would make NO sense whatsoever?
Sheeez!
Did you know that "delegates bound" are governed by STATE LAW with the intent to make sure the apportionment of delegates represents the primary results?
Do you know what it means you "revolt" against STATE LAW? It means you are open to a CIVIL LAWSUIT from whatever State you are a "delegate bound" for.
The GOP can bring a civil suit against you too!
Do you have a lawyer and legal funds handy?
=)
Dude!
How many times do I need to tell you I'm running in a state in which NONE of the delegates are bound?! Multiply that with the fact Romney, not McCain, swept my state, and the product equals I can vote for whomever I like! Do you even know how to read?!
P.S. Please provide the details of your "let's abandon our preferred candidate and suck up to the neoconservative republicans instead" plan.
Mart, please show me some statutes
1
Mart, please show me some statutes and their text to back up your claims
Onward to the National Convention we go
Here ya go!
--------------------------
Contains citations from Missouri state law:
http://ago.mo.gov/opinion...
--------------------------
Citation of case law from a legal brief posted on the website of the Law Offices of David S Vogel concerning Wisconsin state law:
http://www.davidvogel.com...
"Six years later in DEMOCRATIC PARTY, the Court held that the Democratic Party of the United States (National Party) could, in order to protect itself from intrusion by persons with "adverse political principles," refuse at convention to seat delegates bound under state law to vote in a manner inconsistent with party rules. Delegate selection rules of the National Party provided that only those willing to affiliate publicly with the party could participate in the selection of delegates to the national convention. Wisconsin delegates were required by state law, however, to vote at the national convention in accordance with the votes of an open primary"
----------------------------
State-by-State Summary
http://www.gop.com/images...
----------------------------
Definintion of "Delegates Bound" at republican source.com referencing state law
http://www.republicansour...
"Delegates bound: Delegates to the national convention are required to vote for a particular presidential candidate as determined by primary results, caucus results, or individual commitment to a specified candidate in conformity with state party rules or state law. State party rules or state laws determine the number of ballots where the delegates are bound to support a particular candidate. State party rules or state laws may require delegates to be bound to support a particular candidate until the candidate releases his or her delegates."
---------------------------------------
"Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment." -- Ron Paul
=)
Thanks for providing this information
We do not want to be doing anything illegal, but I especially like the last line in your first reference "3. If the rules of the national committee of an established political party prohibit any delegate from being bound to cast his or her vote for a candidate, then the provisions of the national committee rules shall govern."
Since the rules are determined by the delegates, this can perhaps unbind even those bound "by law".
The Republican Party...
.. rules don't prohibit delegates from being bound. Matter of fact, the rules define "delegates bound".
And don't forget the state laws...
A quote from someone who didn't quit
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Mart- the cup is half empty-funcher!
Jeez!!! This is a positive thread and you are being the only one bringing negativity! How would you like someone to post contrary, negative, defeatist comments on every one of your gardening posts?
( I like the garden thread ) but what if after every garden tip you write someone said "oh that wont work" or "thats not right" or "your wrong"?
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson
Thanks..
.. for liking my garden thread!
*hugs*
(=
Repeatedly stating the same statement
of defeatist propaganda, without citations, or actual facts or anything tangible about some phantom fear you feel delegates should have is forceful.
You're alone, no one else here doesn't want to fight for Ron Paul.
Thank you for bumping this post. I'm sure more people want to blast you for your weakness.
You're welcome..
.. for the post bumps.
Quitter = "don't revolt because you will be disqualified and permanently banned from future delegate work". Yes that's me. I'm guilty!
People who revolt will be the TRUE "quitters" because I will be able to be a delegate and the revolters won't. What ya got to say about that?
YOU are the one encouraging PERMANENT quitting from the delegate process which CONTRADICTS what Dr. Paul is kindly asking us to do.
J.S. "True Quitter" Howell...
(=
Look at your post
No facts, no laws, not even rules from the RNC. Can you at least cite one thing that is real, besides your own fear? Why do you even post here? Are you trying to discourage delegates?
The fact is you don't have any facts. Look at SGP's post, learn Roberts Rules of Order. You aren't even a delegate.
Lead, follow or get out of the way: Words to live by.
Where are...
.. the "facts" that you've referenced? Other than a shower of ad hominems...
Counter anything I've said with "facts"...
Exactly
You have none. There are no laws to kick out delegates who don't vote for the majority. There are no rules delegates can't change at their conventions. You should read more and write less. Show us the law.
Oh yeah?
From:
http://www.republicansour...
"Delegates bound: Delegates to the national convention are required to vote for a particular presidential candidate as determined by primary results, caucus results, or individual commitment to a specified candidate in conformity with state party rules or state law. State party rules or state laws determine the number of ballots where the delegates are bound to support a particular candidate. State party rules or state laws may require delegates to be bound to support a particular candidate until the candidate releases his or her delegates."
-------------------------------------------
By "revolting" you are infringing on STATE LAW which means the individual person who decides to "revolt" is PERSONALLY open to civil lawsuit!
Are you ready to back up your "advice" and provide the funds for the legal defense of those who take your "advice" and run afoul of STATE LAW?
Also, no laws whatsoever are required by political parties to disqualify and ban participants who break the party rules and state law.
The entire spirit and reason for "delegates bound" is so the proportional support for a candidate in the caucuses and conventions reflects the proportion of the voting in the primaries.
Get a grip!
please provide some state laws
2
Mart, if you are so concerned about this,
please provide some citations to the statutes from a particular state (and preferably states plural) and the text of such statute so that we can all be enlightened.
Onward to the National Convention we go
Ok,
My legal research rate is $125/hr. I accept Paypal, credit card, and check..
;)
That's pretty cheap ... I'm
That's pretty cheap ... I'm only a legal assistant and my rate is $95/hr!
Unfortunately, I can't find anything in the MI state code on this :-(
Man, I wish we could all use facts!!
Well..
.. I'm not a "legal researcher". I'm just a computer systems developer (nerd).
Michigan is winner-take-all so all delegates are bound...
http://www.gop.com/images...
=P
D'oh!
YOU are correct, sir!! That completely slipped my mind. :-)
=P
*hugs*
In Case of Revolt Break the Glass of Truth...
Delegates have absolutely no "rights" in political parties. The party management can change the rules at the drop of a hat or on a whim in midstream if they wish. And no court of law in the US can touch them. The only penalty to the party being that if the persons participating in the party don't like the new rules they might very well get fed up and leave the party.
The leadership of the Republican Party at any time can say, "certain bound delegates are not following the rules and they are immediately disqualified and they are banned from any future participation" or they can say, "state conventions have caucused to unbind delegates and we don't like it and we are suspending all rules and declaring McCain the nominee". They have that power!
And no court of law would have any power or say in the matter. And this is precisely what is going to happen if a "revolt" is attempted. The Republican party has a "neocon deathwish" and the neocons want Hillary to win and they will not let Ron Paul get in her way.
If you think the neocons don't want Hillary to win then just listen to Bill Crystal on Fox (the son of the Father of the Neocons), and listen to Ann Coulter, listen to Rush Limbaugh, listen to Charles Krauthammer.
Dr. Paul wants to transform the Republican party from the inside-out. Being permanently banned from the GOP primary, caucus and conventions does NOT serve Dr. Paul's vision and plan.
He wants us to become friends with the GOP members, to become part of the GOP process and stay in it for future election cycles. He wants us to persuade the Reagan conservatives in a genial, friendly and respectful manner that the neocons are not real conservatives and that Ron Paul and his supporters have common ground with them and that the neocons are pretenders and that Reagan despised the neocons.
Support Ron Paul by not "revolting" and by instead doing what he is asking us to do. Which is to become part of the GOP process with the goals of electing Ron Paul Republicans and to work for change within the GOP looking towards the next presidential election cycle. It's what he is asking us to do and he doesn't need or want you guys to be kicked out of and banned from the process. Which is what WILL happen to the delegates that "revolt"...
I agree somewhat
Fortune Favors the Bold
but I don't think there is no recourse. If the GOP does blatantly violate their own bylaws, they are liable for ballot access suits, especially since in primary states they use state apparatus to conduct the primaries.
How would..
.. the GOP be liable for anything if they disqualified "revolters" for breaking the rules? Or if they changed the rules in response to "revolters" trying to change the clear intention and spirit of the rules (in this case "ubinding" bound delegates -- the whole "bound" delegate schema was meant to apportion delegates according to the popular vote in the primaries).
You said:
"If the GOP does blatantly violate their own bylaws, they are liable for ballot access suits, especially since in primary states they use state apparatus to conduct the primaries."
It's the REVOLTERS who would be liable for interfering with "ballot access" laws since the revolters would be the ones guilty of trying to alter the outcome of the people's democratic expression in the primaries!
No Way
If the republicans are going to be as arbitrary with the rules as you claim, there's no point in playing nice and becoming friends and being respectful and waiting until the next election cycles to transform the republican party. Time isn't going to matter. They're not going to be any nicer to us next time around. We need to take the party back to it's traditionally conservative roots, and obviously that's not going to be any easier to do two or four years from now than it is right now.
If we don't succeed, fine, let the republican party kick us out. Currently people are leaving the republican party in droves on their own, for reasons that have nothing to do with us Ron Paul supporters. If they decide they don't want us or anyone else besides neocons in their party at all, let's let the party die out!
I just received an e-mail from Ron Paul today, encouraging me to "continue my efforts." It said: "If you have been elected a delegate in your county or state, please continue your efforts as much as you possibly can. Go to your county, district, and state conventions...If you were not elected as a state delegate, contact your county party headquarters and submit your name for consideration as a state delegate alternate position." What am I supposed to make of that? I'm running for national delegate. Just try and stop me.
I wish..
.. people would quit conflating "don't revolt" with "don't be a delegate".
It's the same as telling your kid "don't play with your food" not meaning "stop eating food".
You said:
"If the republicans are going to be as arbitrary with the rules as you claim, there's no point in playing nice"
I said they would be arbitrary with the rules if there is a revolt. And nobody will come to the revolters defense. Not even Dr. Paul.
I am saying there is no point in playing dirty because in response the GOP will be arbitrary with the rules. Big difference.
Become delegates for the LONG TERM and play nice. Just like Dr. Paul is asking us to do...
I'll do my best to become a national delegate...
...but there's no way I'm voting for anyone other than Ron Paul, and there's nothing wrong with that because my state's delegates aren't bound! If that doesn't fit your definition of "playing nice," then I refuse to play nice.
Well..
.. if you are not bound then you can't "revolt" and therefore you will be playing nice!
*hugs*
=)
If everyone involved in the
If everyone involved in the process learned Robert's Rules of Order, much of this could be overcome. Robert's Rules combined with full knowledge of the GOP rules could be used against them in such a way as to bring us victory. IMHO I think the valid issues you have raised can be dealt with using those two set of rules as well as the things Dr Steve has been teaching us about the process. Bottom line: Don't give up....Keep Up Our Fight! Remember what Ghandi said...we are now in the "they fight us" stage. It's all good tho cuz from here we go to the "and then we win!" stage.
All the way and to...
the end. Ron Paul is the only candidate that is viable in my mind. We need to have a President that will actually follow our Constitution, and listen to We The People. God bless Ron Paul, and his supporters.
He is honest.
As usual there are no politicians anyone wants, who are running.
The whole process is designed to give you what you don't want.
No one wants McCain. No one wants Hillary.
I have been told we will get McCain because it will be exciting TV and the talking heads will go nuts explaining it.
The whole process is bogus!
Our RP grassroots movement is the only real thing that worries the puppet masters.
We need to focus on reaching out and getting support that equates to money, and we've done that.
That money reaches out more so we grow.
Small things like RP fliers and constitutional sheets left in Malls etc attract interest.
In a sense be become a persecuted minority that wave the flag and our Constitution.
The public is already pre-disposed to support this.
We can't get MSM support so we need to fight one Mall at at time.
If you have a printer and a computer you can start tomorrow!
The cheap, crappy ones don't do the microcodes on the paper to trace the printer. Pay cash!
Good luck.
***************************************************
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Watch and feel the power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rons my guy! Gets my money gets my vote.
***************************************************
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Watch and feel the power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He will never get it
Fartmuncher is a bit dense. He places greater stock in a "popular" vote that was media induced than he does in the politically active people who can lead this country. He does not see that the voters are looking for good people to lead, but are blinded by the media. He overlooks the fact that the "popluar opinion" was in favor of Guiliani just a couple of months before 2/5, and McCain was way behind at that time. We still have twice that amount of time before the RNC. He's concerned about overturning the people's choice and disenfranchising the voters, claiming this is illegal and unethical. He does not realize that the people are not even voting for President until November. Up to this point we have not been electing candidates for office. The primaries, caucuses, and conventions are just tools for the Parties (and these are private organizations) to determine the best candidate to run in the general election. Let's give the Republican Party a chance to give the American people a choice better than Moe, Larry, and Curly in the general election.
You are right!
I have been so STUPID (or "dense" as you call it). Having a small elite group of politically active people choose our leaders is MUCH superior to letting the majority of the People choose their own leaders.
I mean, come on. The average person is not very bright and has NO BUSINESS WHATSOEVER choosing their own leaders. Sounds quite dangerous. I mean really, stupid incompetent people choosing leaders. Man, that's FRIGHTENING!
Let's come up with a name for those citizens who are too incompetent to choose good leaders. Hmm, let's see. How about... "peasants". That name has been used in the past for the very same purpose and people can just relate to it. Perfect!
Now, we need some way to determine who the smarter more competent people are. Hmm. How do we go about that?
Well, people born to smart parents tend to be smarter than people born to dumber parents. I know! Let's find the smartest people and let them and their successive offspring be the "elite leader-choosers"! We could call them "royalty"! And like China and the old Soviet Union we could call the group of elite leader-choosers "The Party".
An alternative would be to allow only people with the best grades in college pick our leaders!
Man oh man! I'm getting so excited at this new sparkly idea! Makes me feel like swan diving into a huge pool of Freedom. The whole election thing and the democratic mechanisms detailed in the Constitution are just tired and old and in need of replacement and overhaul.
These sure are heady days we are living in! I just can't wait to experience the results...
MichaelB, will you be my leader-chooser? Please? You are SO smart. And I am so "dense". I need your help....
You've ignored most of my points
and you are wrong on the one you did address. Wanting leaders has nothing to do with intelligence. Most people are too busy raising families, and making a living to lead in the political arena. Most people will look to leaders to make decisions that they do not have enough time to fully investigate. That is why the mainstream media has such power. And a grass-roots organization of concerned citizens will have just as much, or more, power when it reaches a critical mass.
The "democratic mechanisms detailed in the Constitution" are very small. They do not even apply to the primaries and other methods of choosing candidates for the "general election". The Constitution originally only put a small percentage of the national governmental power in the hands of the people using these "general elections". At least half of the power was reserved to the States (10th Amendment, in addition Senators were originally appointed by the States). Of the remaining national government, the Judiciary was (is) appointed by our "elite leader-choosers" (your words). The Presidential selection process was much less democratic then, also. In fact, it was expected that the Electoral College would not usually have a majority, and the decision would be thrown to the House. Again, at this point we are only talking about a private organization (the Republican Party, which we are a part of) determining who their candidate should be.
The chances of Ron winning are slim, and we should be doing all we can to elect Ron Paul Republicans to other offices, getting out the message, etc. However, the stakes are way too high to just give up. Even if he does lose, all this work we are doing will go towards changing the direction of the Party to help take back our country.
"Please get out of the new road if you can't lend your hand; for the times they are a changin'". Bob Dylan
Delegates who...
.. "revolt" will not in any way aid "changing the direction of the Party to help take back our country." because they will be permanently banned from future participation...
He doesn't respond to some posts
He can't debate. If he can't figure a way he can be right he avoids your posts. You must have points that stymie his defeatism.
Haha,,
,, you're cute... sometimes.
Have you counted the number of my comments on this topic versus everybody elses?
*rolls eyes*
;)