Is the GOP Nomination Fixed or Setup To Prevent The People From Having a Real Choice/Voice?

Hello ATS,

I did some reading last night after the CNN debate after a friend of mine reminded me about the superdelegates during the GOP nomination process. If we remember the battle between Obama and Clinton during the democratic nomination process in 2008. This was a big deal because Obama and Clinton were going tit-for-tat until the end. We already know how much of an impact Superdelegates can have in the nomination process. The election in 2008 is a prime example on how it can tilt the nomination process which in turn could void the choice of the people. Here is some info for the 2012 nomination process and how many superdelegates there are and the superdelegates that could overturn a front-runner's chance at being the GOP nominee!

What are Super-delegates? (For the GOP/RNC they are just called Pledged Delegates)

Wiki Linkage

At the 2008 Democratic National Convention the superdelegates made up approximately one-fifth of the total number of delegates. The closeness of the race between the leading contenders, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, led to speculation that the superdelegates would play a decisive role in selecting the nominee, a prospect that caused unease among some Democratic Party leaders. Obama, however, won a majority of the pledged delegates and of the superdelegates, and won the Democratic presidential nomination.

For Republicans, in 2012, there are potentially 3 unpledged delegates in each state, consisting of the state chairman and two RNC committeemen/women. However, certain states either don't have superdelegates, or they do, but the votes are bound by the results of the state vote. In 2012 there are a total of 132 Republican superdelegates.

States that have winner-take-all rules. any of these states not mentioned in this list have superdelegates that don't have to vote for the winner. they can vote for anyone they want.
Linkage

Superdelegates from the following states: AZ, DE, FL, GA, KS, MI, MO, NH, NJ, NV, SC, VT. are bound by their state's results, and therefore are not included in the list. Their names can be found in a separate table after the break.This leaves a total of 132 GOP superdelegates

Thats 12/50 states that are forced to vote for the states winner on the caucus or primary day. that leaves 132 superdelegates up for grabs. They can vote for any candidate they choose. Is the election fixed?

I cannot answer that question because technically it is up in the air. 12/50 states reflect the winners while the rest people can cancel out the peoples choice. So I guess you can say in a way yes it is fixed, but not completely. only 132 Superdelegates are up for grabs which leaves a majority of the say up to the people but the race that we are witnessing now is a close one just like in 2008. (Dejavu) meaning regardless of the popular vote for each state's winner in the end if it remains close the choice can still be up to the RNC no matter how fractured the GOP is. We all heard of the 'status quo' and the 'establishment' buzz words flying around and these superdelegates could be the reason why they are used. because the people really don't have a say about it. its an 'insider' paradox. Its there but we don't know which way these delegates can swing... and by the looks of it Mitt Romney has a lot of pledged delegates already and the ATS favorite Ron Paul have Zilch, Nada, 0.

In the end, based on my understanding is that irregardless of the peoples choice in the end and if its close, the peoples voices and say could be nullified by these delegates in the end. This could go for any candidate on stage right now.

Example: (please note this is just an example and not reflective of the real delegate map... this is to just give you an idea.)

Lets just say there are 2 candidates left. Mitt Romney & Ron Paul. Lets just say for the sake of argument that their delegate tallies after the 50 states have counted their voter selected delegates.

Mitt Romney: 1225

Ron Paul: 1275

Now lets go to the national convention. Lets just assume Romney takes the Bulk of those superdelegates. remember there are 132 in total.

Mitt Romney receives 100 SD's and Ron Paul gets the rest. That would leave us with this total.

Mitt Romney: 1325

Ron Paul: 1307

This means Romney will take the nomination although (This is still hypothetical) Ron Paul would of won the peoples choice for the GOP. Since Romney received those delegates (which are not reflective of the people.) this would wreak of a setup right? This was the same worry on these boards during Obama fever in 2008 and now they may dominate this election process as well.

The reasoning behind these superdelegates or unpledged delegates is to prevent radical or extreme candidates from receiving the nomination for their respected party. In other words if the elected officials (who have delegate powers) don't like the peoples choice and if the elections are close, they can always flip the election to what the establishment wants to prevent the status quo from changing.

if anyone else has anymore information on these delegates, please feel free to add it. Thanks for reading.

Don't have any credible evidence but I would say after the Bush recounts and Gore pronounced President on TV then all is recalled, not to mention the many other recounts and the fact that the popular vote means nothing in an electoral vote I would say yes they have it rigged, fixed or any other word that mean BS. S+F

i agree and if you put electronic voting into that equation the peoples voice inevitably dies out in the end

If you think it's bad that the primaries are rigged, do some digging into the actual presidential elections...the electoral college system of voting is rigged even worse! No votes count for many states.

reply to post by ugie1028


I read somewhere that it takes 1150 total delegates to secure the nomination. That means the 132 that you refer to are more than 10% of the needed number, and a very effective tie-breaker or spoiler vote.

Is the vote fixed? I don't think so, but the campaigns and press coverage are certainly fixed!

I believe it is up to the people to overcome the influence of the MSM and party politics and actually do some research, watch the debates, and vote their consciences instead of following the popularity contest on TV.

If the people do that, I believe they can get a fair shake at the voting booths.

double post, right one is below *sorry*

Well being that the media controls what the population hears get this...Mittins Romney owns Bain capital which owns clear channel, who pays the media SO...

reply to post by getreadyalready


Oh yea, I am definitely hoping the people can get to the polls so that doesnt happen.

Also agree the media has been setup to cater to a certain candidate (mitt.) because of his links to baine, and baine owning news media outlets.

if they can just get to the polls to nullify the upset vote then yea, this would not matter, but yea... there is room for a spoiler. This is why I dislike these super-delegates!) A delegate vote by one person could equal to thousands of regular votes. This does not feel like freedom of choice at all.

reply to post by ugie1028


Someone mentioned it earlier, but the electoral college is similarly flawed.

Back 200 years ago when you might have to travel a week by horse and buggy to get to your nearest polling place, it made sense to have the delegates and the electoral college to expedite the election process. These days the polling can be done instantaneously all over the nation and results transmitted electronically, and people get dedicated time away from work to go vote. There seems to be a shrinking need for delegates or electorates.

It seems, in this day and age, we could just have a popular vote, nationwide, all at once, and there wouldn't be a need for the special rules and delegates and electoral college.

reply to post by getreadyalready


It would take a lot of convincing to get this kind of change done. Do you know if this has been brought up recently, or any attempt to change this process so it matches with the time we are living in?

reply to post by ugie1028


I've seen it brought up on ATS and other blogs back in 2010, but I can't remember ever seeing it in a mainstream mention.

It would take a very bold, or very confident, or a little crazy politician to bring it up for the first time, but once the case was made, and it had some time to marinate in the people's minds, it should start to make perfect sense!

reply to post by getreadyalready


thats was me that mentioned that another ats member metioned it somwhere else hypothetically the electronic votes are very easily altered in comparison to ink and paper.

reply to post by coreytheconspirator


I disagree about the ease of altering electronic votes. I think Ron Paul said it last night, but it could have been Newt, but one of them said they would endorse an ID card for immigrants if the system was run by the people that run Mastercard/Visa/Amex, etc. They said the government isn't good at running anything, but others are very good at it, and could make it secure.

I think the same could be said for voting. Let American Idol producers run the election. LOL!

It could be done, it could create new jobs, and probably save money, and make the vote more fair, and eliminate the party politicians from influencing the few super-delegates or electorate college voters!

I don't know enough about it to be more specific, but I have full confidence that it could be done, and there is no way it could be less secure than the current hanging-chad, dead voters, no ID required systems.

reply to post by ugie1028


In answer to the title . . .

Is the sky blue in NM and AZ?

Is the Pope Roman Catholic?

Do bears do it in the woods?

As the CIA reportedly told Jesse Ventura . . . they've been controlling all SElections for many decades.

The serfs and slaves are only allowed the fantasy of a voice . . . long enough to keep them quiet until they can be carted off to the FEMA camps . . . and stacked like cordwood.

If RP does win the people's vote, the super delegates will have be very careful about messing with him. If they flip the vote in Romney's favour, RP is very likely to just say 'screw you, let the poeple speak' and then run independently. He could destroy the GOP's chances of the White House completely.

RP needs to get as many delegates as he can and try and be an influence - that way some of his policies may get through, and he could set his son up for a good run in 2016.

Truthfully, RP has very little hope of actually winning the nomination.

reply to post by UKTruth


I don't think I'd vote for the son. I'm not that big of a Rand Paul fan. I'll have to wait and see how he grows on me, but as of right now, I wouldn't vote for him just on namesake alone.

reply to post by getreadyalready


same here too. I couldn't vote for him just yet. I need to understand where he stands compared to his pops.