It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Newt Gingrich to challenge Florida primary (RNC violated its own rules)

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Report: Newt Gingrich to challenge Florida primary


ORLANDO, Fla. -
The Florida primary may not be over just yet because the Newt Gingrich campaign is gearing up to challenge the primary based on the Republican National Committee's rules, according to a Fox News report.

The RNC's rules state that no winner-take-all primary may be held before April 1 and Florida happens to be a winner-take-all state.

The winner of Florida's primary, Mitt Romney, was expected to gain all 50 of the state's delegates, but the Gingrich campaign demands to split up the delegates based on percentage, the report says.

A warning was sent to the Republican Party of Florida by the RNC stating that a winner-take-all state couldn't have a primary until April 1.

The RNC responded to Gingrich Thursday saying that Florida violated the rule and is already being punished for it.

The RNC does not have the ability to intervene any further unless Gingrich files a proper contest , according to the RNC memo.



edit on 2-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I was going to say im tired of hearing from people who seem to be sore losers, however in this case I have to agree with Newt. It looks like the Florida Republicans violated their own rules. Apparently if a Republican primary is held before April 1st, the delegates are divided between the top winners (1st, 2nd, 3rd).

Any primary after April 1st can be winner takes all. Since Florida, who used to be a winner take all before they moved their primary up, they failed to adapt the divided up requirement.

The RNC already agrees with newt, so the formal challenge is just down the road. I am curious what impact, if any at all, this might have on either campaign. At the rate we are going its starting to look the the last Democratic primary between Obama and hillary. Taking it down to the final day of the convention with multiple floor votes.

The Democrats get a pass because of Obama.....
The Republicans get a pie fight...



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
I was going to say im tired of hearing from people who seem to be sore losers, however in this case I have to agree with Newt. It looks like the Florida Republicans violated their own rules. Apparently if a Republican primary is held before April 1st, the delegates are divided between the top winners (1st, 2nd, 3rd).

Any primary after April 1st can be winner takes all. Since Florida, who used to be a winner take all before they moved their primary up, they failed to adapt the divided up requirement.

The RNC already agrees with newt, so the formal challenge is just down the road. I am curious what impact, if any at all, this might have on either campaign. At the rate we are going its starting to look the the last Democratic primary between Obama and hillary. Taking it down to the final day of the convention with multiple floor votes.

The Democrats get a pass because of Obama.....
The Republicans get a pie fight...


Newt did very well in Florida with 32% of the vote.

Lets do the right thing and divide up the delegates!

Mitt Romney / Gordon Gekko just shot himself in the foot. Doesn't care about the poor?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


I agree with dividing the votes up, and my best guess is that will happen. The RNC backed themselves into corner on their won in this case.

As far as Romney and his comment, it is being taken out of context, and he did clarify his comment when the moderator asked him about it. The clarification is conviently being ignored...

His comment was in reference to things in government that needs to be fixed. He made the comment about the poor, referring to the safety net, or assistance programs already in place, that does the job. He went on to state that if holes are found in that safety net, he would fix it.

His comment was about the programs and not poor people themselves.

It would be like saying Im not concerned about vehicle safety. Its not that the person doesnt care about safety, its because the safety features present work and does the job they are intended to do. Now, if the safety standards slip and adverse effects come from it, then they would get involved to make sure that breach was fixed.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


I agree with dividing the votes up, and my best guess is that will happen. The RNC backed themselves into corner on their won in this case.

As far as Romney and his comment, it is being taken out of context, and he did clarify his comment when the moderator asked him about it. The clarification is conviently being ignored...

His comment was in reference to things in government that needs to be fixed. He made the comment about the poor, referring to the safety net, or assistance programs already in place, that does the job. He went on to state that if holes are found in that safety net, he would fix it.

His comment was about the programs and not poor people themselves.

It would be like saying Im not concerned about vehicle safety. Its not that the person doesnt care about safety, its because the safety features present work and does the job they are intended to do. Now, if the safety standards slip and adverse effects come from it, then they would get involved to make sure that breach was fixed.


It doesn't matter. David Axelrod has tears of joy running down his face.

Mitt Romney is the perfect richest 1% poster boy for the liberals.

You should have seen them on MSNBC this morning. It was like Christmas!

They will milk this clip for all that it's worth.

Romney doesn't care about the poor!!!!!!

---------
The GOP will run with Obama calling Americans lazy.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
I was going to say im tired of hearing from people who seem to be sore losers, however in this case I have to agree with Newt. It looks like the Florida Republicans violated their own rules. Apparently if a Republican primary is held before April 1st, the delegates are divided between the top winners (1st, 2nd, 3rd).

Any primary after April 1st can be winner takes all. Since Florida, who used to be a winner take all before they moved their primary up, they failed to adapt the divided up requirement.

The RNC already agrees with newt, so the formal challenge is just down the road. I am curious what impact, if any at all, this might have on either campaign. At the rate we are going its starting to look the the last Democratic primary between Obama and hillary. Taking it down to the final day of the convention with multiple floor votes.

The Democrats get a pass because of Obama.....
The Republicans get a pie fight...



Pie fight, indeed. This is a riot. Romney has no idea how much of a dogfight he's going to be in with Newt. Gingrich knows all the angles, and he won't roll over. He's got a case.
"Ken doll" Romney will continue to reveal how plastic he is if he keeps on making these comments which insult "the poor" and working class ( what's left of it ) people.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by QueSeraSera
 


You had to know Romneys handlers just slumped in their chairs when Mitt shot

shot himself in the foot. " I don't care about the poor."


Noooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

You can't unring a bell. It's over.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
It doesn't matter. David Axelrod has tears of joy running down his face.

Mitt Romney is the perfect richest 1% poster boy for the liberals.

You should have seen them on MSNBC this morning. It was like Christmas!

They will milk this clip for all that it's worth.

Romney doesn't care about the poor!!!!!!

---------
The GOP will run with Obama calling Americans lazy.


Yeah and whats funny is when you compare all the presidential candiadtes on both sides of the aisle, Mitt Romney by far gave the most to charities... Conveiently left out of the conversation by the left.

As far as the post just above this goes, there is no bell to unring. The left is purposely taking it out of context and is also leaving out the follow up question for mitt to clarify what he meant. It was about the programs and not the people themselves.

This is why polotics irritate me to no end. People seem to forget we are one country with many different views. The Democracts and Rebuplicans seem to have lost that concept, giving into the our party must be in power before we do anything because we know whats best for America.

At this point im almost ready to throw in the towel and go back to singing God save the Queen.
edit on 2-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Yeah and whats funny is when you compare all the presidential candiadtes on both sides of the aisle, Mitt Romney by far gave the most to charities... Conveiently left out of the conversation by the left.

Any chance Ole Mitt was able to deduct those donations from his tax base?
Kinda changes the effect a bit.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Yeah and whats funny is when you compare all the presidential candiadtes on both sides of the aisle, Mitt Romney by far gave the most to charities... Conveiently left out of the conversation by the left.

Any chance Ole Mitt was able to deduct those donations from his tax base?
Kinda changes the effect a bit.


Any charitable donation is tax deductible. It doesnt negate the fact he gave more to charities than any other contender on either side of the aisle.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Any charitable donation is tax deductible. It doesnt negate the fact he gave more to charities than any other contender on either side of the aisle.

Ya ok, Mitts a swell guy.

What are your thoughts on his stance:

"Corporations are people"



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Yeah and whats funny is when you compare all the presidential candiadtes on both sides of the aisle, Mitt Romney by far gave the most to charities... Conveiently left out of the conversation by the left.

Any chance Ole Mitt was able to deduct those donations from his tax base?
Kinda changes the effect a bit.


Any charitable donation is tax deductible. It doesnt negate the fact he gave more to charities than any other contender on either side of the aisle.


But he has 10x the money than everyone else!

The guy with ten thousand dollars gives one thousand to charity; the guy with 500 dollars can't give that much.

Simple math.

Although it does speak better of Romney giving to charity, it would not surprise me if his motivation was tax write-offs.


ETA: Back on topic:

Although i probably dislike Newt more than Romney, i think they should be divided (same as with electoral votes). It's only fair.
edit on 2-2-2012 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Any charitable donation is tax deductible. It doesnt negate the fact he gave more to charities than any other contender on either side of the aisle.

Ya ok, Mitts a swell guy.

What are your thoughts on his stance:

"Corporations are people"


Simple - Even though it comes from OWS, its one of the rare times I agree with them.


edit on 2-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Fair enough.

Thank you for your prompt reply.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Tw0Sides
 


I think you might be mistaking my post and defense on the donations as me supporting Mitt Romney for President.

So there is no confusion, I am not voting for Mitt Romney for President. However because im not voting for him doesnt mean I would ignore Inaccuracies that are linked to him. Ive taken up the defense of Obama on the same grounds.

I view myself as an independent and I vote for the person who most closely matches my ideals allowing for compromise to account for the fact the US is not all Republican or Democrat.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join