"A Possible ROGUE Convention. GOP might have their own rules backfire in 2012."

This information was taken from a Daily Paul posting HERE--------->www.dailypaul.com...

"As set out in the Rules of the Republican Party, delegates have the ability to vote according to the delegates’ preference, even if that is contrary to the outcome of each state’s primary. According to one source, the legal counsel for the Republican National Convention in 2008 stated: “[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.” Thus, if a delegate were to challenge his or her ability to vote as a free agent, he or she would have grounds under Rule 38."

This comes from: www.fairvote.org...

RULE NO. 38
Unit Rule
"No delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any state or Congressional district to impose the unit rule."

Directly from: The Rules of the Republican Party
As Adopted
by the 2008 Republican National Convention
September 1, 2008

*Amended by the
Republican National Committee
on August 6, 2010

Please exercise your due diligence and obviously don't take my word for anything, but I just wanted to share what I thought was relevant.

To all of you, God Bless!

A pretty good summary of delegate rules and binding:

sites.google.com...

Yep, now they have Ron Paul supporters cheering that no one's vote mattered at all in the primary.

/facepalm

We're #ed.

reply to post by Ghost375


When people are brainwashed by false promises and hopeless ideals, tricked into voting death to this country time and time again, and at the same time the powers the run it all have to resort to dirty tricks to ensure that the "populace", including the dead, non-citizens, and non-existence people, vote for them - then yes, the popular vote no longer matters.

In the end, the popular vote will matter when it actually should - when voting for President, not when choosing which shill should be installed into the one, sorry, two party system we are forced to accept.

When the popular vote in the Republican primary boils down to herds of mindless people going to the voting booth and just voting for the guy the MEDIA has been pushing on them for months....then yeah....the popular vote doesn't matter. And as said before, the Primary Presidential Election matters more. Independents and Democrats can't vote in a lot of the Republican Primaries.

The people who are well informed of the political process are staying behind after the primaries/caucuses and are becoming delegates. I would consider anyone who eagerly becomes a delegate as the "more intelligent" voters in this Republican Primary process. They know a lot more then the "average sheep voter" that just shows up to the voting booth......then goes home to eat cheeseburgers and watch American Idol. The average populous DON'T GIVE A **** about politics.

What happens when you bring up politics at work? Usually you get a response that mirrors what I hear EVERYDAY on CNN, FOX, or MSNBC. OR you get this golden response..."I don't care about politics because they're all crooks anyway." People inherently feel like they are ****ed over by the government everyday. They are so apathetic they don't care how much the government rapes them anymore. They just say "oh well...the government sucks but what are ya gonna do?"

In 2012 we have ALOT of people becoming Ron Paul delegates. Why is this? Because they are well informed and see though the LIES and MANIPULATION and want to actually make a difference.

reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree


That's not what the unit rule states though. What the unit rule says that all delegates of a state must vote for the candidate that the majority of the delegates support. This is not how the delegate process works though. Even in winner-take-all states the delegates vote is not being bound because of the other delegates. It is being bound due to the results of a popular vote of the state's people. In other words there is no minority vote that is being ignored due to the majority.

This shines a whole new light on the bound delegates argument. Since there are apparently no bound delegates according to RNC rules, that raises RP's chances exponentially.

There's another thread with more info on the matter.
abovetopsecret

reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree


So what you're saying is that there is a majority whose vote shouldn't matter and a minority who are the only ones whose vote should count. It's amazing how Ron Paul can be for freedom and upholding of the Constitution while his supporters seem to want a totalitarian regime where only they have any political power.

In a sense that is what I'm saying but its not as ominous as you make it out to be. I could say you rather the country run by mentally challenged people if half the country had down syndrome and they were promised candy if they voted a certain way. They're vote counts too. In that hypothetical case....majority rules no matter how wrong it may be...but thats the problem with a Democracy. Majority rules no matter what.

America is a Republic not a Democracy. Take a moment and recite the pledge of allegiance.

This is reason why once you "wake up" its so frustrating to convince others to wake up. They're all still trapped in the cave.

The first 1:30 of this video explains to me why I'm not confident in the masses that support Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. But majority rules right?

It's a Republic not a Democracy.

I think that's all I really need to say.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree

 

So what you're saying is that there is a majority whose vote shouldn't matter and a minority who are the only ones whose vote should count. It's amazing how Ron Paul can be for freedom and upholding of the Constitution while his supporters seem to want a totalitarian regime where only they have any political power.

You're right that is what I'm saying....It's SO ridiculous that Ron Paul supporters want to the restore the Republic. Abiding to the Constitution first and foremost is exactly what a Republic is.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree

 

So what you're saying is that there is a majority whose vote shouldn't matter and a minority who are the only ones whose vote should count. It's amazing how Ron Paul can be for freedom and upholding of the Constitution while his supporters seem to want a totalitarian regime where only they have any political power.

That's what this is all about. The freedom of delegates to vote as they see fit. The Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with it because there is nothing in the Constitution about how delegates should vote. It's not totalitarianism, it's activism. RP supporters have organized and mobilized to put themselves in the right place at the right time. All is fair in war and politics.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree

 

That's not what the unit rule states though. What the unit rule says that all delegates of a state must vote for the candidate that the majority of the delegates support. This is not how the delegate process works though. Even in winner-take-all states the delegates vote is not being bound because of the other delegates. It is being bound due to the results of a popular vote of the state's people. In other words there is no minority vote that is being ignored due to the majority.

Yes, I know that...you know that...anyone informed knows that...but not the Ron Paul cult.

When the Ron Paul cult gets a new piece of dogma...there is nothing you can say to them to convince them otherwise.

But at this point...I support Ron Paul's efforts, no matter if they will succeed or not. The more chaos he can cause with the GOP the better.

reply to post by Ghost375


I guess that, by your logic, states that don't bind their delegates to popularity polls (and instead use caucuses) spit in the faces of the voters as well.

To put things simply, from what I can tell by this rule, the RNC holds caucuses, and the actual delegate's opinion, higher than the opinions of the masses who are too apathetic to take part in the process, and only gather to a booth to write on a piece of paper.

Apparently the RNC still wants actual supporters to do the electing.

reply to post by N3k9Ni


However, the delegate process is essentially a microcosm of the government as a whole. We choose representatives to represent our interests. The delegates aren't much different than Congressman and Senators. The people express their will in the form of a vote and the delegates are expected to represent that will at the National Convention. What Ron Paul supporters are advocating here are practices more akin to what actually happens at the Capitol. Practices I though Ron Paul and his supporters are against. Let me ask how is a delegate that votes against the will of the populace because it benefits his interests any different than the Senator that votes against the will of his constituency and in favor of big corporations because it benefits his interests?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by N3k9Ni

 

Let me ask how is a delegate that votes against the will of the populace because it benefits his interests any different than the Senator that votes against the will of his constituency and in favor of big corporations because it benefits his interests?

All good points but you still seem to be trapped in the "majority rules" way of thinking. Ron Paul and his supporters support the Constitution. The Constitution was written for the fair treatment and liberties of all.....there is no specific "interest group" that the Constitution covers. Ron Paul delegates are vying for the civil liberties of all people. They are not voting at the advantage of a small pool of rich fat cats.

reply to post by FreedomXisntXFree


HAHA! FreedomX, I don't know you, but I already like you.

Star and flag from me.

Democracy:

Involves the government ruling and making laws for the "greater good" of all people, they may abolish personal rights in doing so.
Democracy is government by and for the people. They may or may not be republics--that is, government limited by constitution or charter.
The tricky part of "democracy" is defining "the people" and then deciding what counts as "by the people" and what counts as "for the people." In a sense, that could be considered the content of democratic practice.
Citizens are expected to participate more actively in a democracy.


Republic:

Involves the government using and abiding by the constitution heavily. Personal rights are respected and cannot be taken away. This helps to avoid tyranny and mobocracy (the majority makes laws and governs by passion, prejudice, or impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences).
Republics are the common and "standard" type of governments found today, not democracies, despite what many people (who may not know the definition of either) think.
Just as democracies may or may not be republics, republics may or may not be democracies.


The difference between Democracy and Republic:
Democracy and Republic are two forms of government which are distinguished by their treatment of the Minority, and the Individual, by the Majority.

In a Democracy, the Majority has unlimited power over the Minority. This system of government does not provide a legal safeguard of the rights of the Individual and the Minority. It has been referred to as "Majority over Man".

In a Republic, the Majority is Limited and constrained by a written Constitution which protects the rights of the Individual and the Minority. The purpose of a Republic form of government is to control the Majority and to protect the God-given, inalienable rights and liberty of the Individual.
The United States of America is founded as a Republic under the Constitution.

,,,, the Philadelphia delegates specified that the runner-up in the election would become Vice President. Creating this new office imposed a political cost on discarded votes, and thus required electors staidly cast their second ballots.

We should go back to such a thing... maybe with the runner-up, being VP.
Perhaps, even, the VP should be prohibited from being a member of the President's political party.