Acclamation...The RNC's Answer To Ron Paul Mischief

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 2 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by hoochymama
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
Your starting to sound like a "Party Expert" sent from above. I mean, all the Rules you know off the top of your head. The topic was "sound" until you included a Youtube video with Hillary Clinton involved. This is ATS you know. Just like anything, conditions are different. This isnt 2008 or 2004 or 1988.

edit on 2-5-2012 by hoochymama because: (no reason given)


I like politics...it's a hobby...I know a bit about both parties.

But to imply I'm part of the GOP...that is just insulting to my liberal senses.




posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 
The only thing in this "acclamation" scenario that is different, is that the 100 or so RP supporters at this Convention must be as loud as possible to drown out the 44,900 Romney Supporters.

That shouldnt be that hard.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by gwydionblack
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Where did I ever say they COULDN'T vote to suspend the rules?

They certainly can.

IF THEY HAVE THE MAJORITY OF DELEGATES FROM SIX - Count them -

One, two, three, four, five, SIX STATES - to approve suspension of the rules.
edit on 2-5-2012 by gwydionblack because: (no reason given)




No need to shout...calm down...Ron Paul never really had a chance anyway so no need to get angry.

For you to think that Romney doesn't have 6 states is hilarious.

If we listened to you...we don't even need a convention...Ron Paul has so much support...we should just crown him king...I mean...at least 99% of the people support him....right???



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
Thats why I brought up Gary Johnson in an earlier thread. I will pull that one up if I need to.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by hoochymama
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 
The only thing in this "acclamation" scenario that is different, is that the 100 or so RP supporters at this Convention must be as loud as possible to drown out the 44,900 Romney Supporters.

That shouldnt be that hard.


Did you just say 100 people can be louder than 40,000 people???

Even if Ron Paul had 5000 ( and that is being completely illogically generous) they couldn't drown out 40,000 people.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


You aren't even worth the effort because you are a troll.

Your logic DOES NOT WORK.

Abstaining - which means choosing NOT to cast your vote, does not break any current rules. In fact, it is arguably supported by the rules in which they state that delegates "MAY" cast one vote, but no more than one. The term "MAY" giving the option of choice, choosing to do or not to do.

Acclamation - which means breaking a dozen rules and ignoring a dozen more, is a different system of choosing a candidate than described in the rulebook - therefore it requires a suspension of the original rules to even happen.

What abstaining does not? Because it does not interfere or break any other rules - acclamation DOES - tenfold.




Now if you don't understand the difference here, or you choose to downright ignore what I have told you - that is your choice and I am done because you clearly do not understand reason and the basic fundamentals of basic human logic.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by gwydionblack
 


So they suspend the rules...by acclamation.





posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by gwydionblack
 


So they suspend the rules...by acclamation.



Wahahahaha

There's no rule against suspending the rules.

Paulhead at convention...I object you have to follow the rules to suspend the rules

Boehner... What rules? We are under no rules at this time. They were suspended as the first order of business by acclamation, which the original rules we were under at the time had no provision against doing.

Hahahahaha



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
So your saying he might have 5K?? Not bad considering there all against him.

I would bet it would be more.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Considering Romney is a media darling, can you show me any media sources where the majority of any states delegates have openly pledged SUPPORT for Mitt Romney?

Because I can show you a couple for Ron Paul, and the media dislikes him.

After all, you are the one that likes to go off "the information you have" and "not make assumptions" yet here you are... assuming that Romney has this magical support that is yet unheard of.

All he has are a bunch of numbers that we have, if anything, proven to mean nothing in the wake of this shambled delegate system. If anything, we have proven the fear of Ron Paul's delegate selection by even bringing up the though of acclamation, but then for you to openly lie about how apparently "simple" of a process acclamation is to achieve and then continually try to defend it with the same old arguments... it really is sad.

Ron Paul certainly doesn't have the support of anywhere NEAR 99% of the people. But he doesn't need it. All he needs, and all that he certainly well may have, and I think you should come to terms with this... is the support of 51% of the delegates. If Ron Paul has that number... then sorry pal... Ron Paul is going to become the candidate and the only thing that will stop him is assassination or flat out denial of the RNC rules and guidelines.







So they suspend the rules...by acclamation.



You don't even make sense anymore, and you solidify yourself as the useless troll that you are with each post you make.


I have made my point and you have done nothing to offer rebuttal. Your continuous failures to defend your points using your own described logic of "non-assumption" and "providing sources" seems to fall short in the line of your own hypocrisy, and the fantasy world of Ron Paul supports, if such a thing ever existed, pales only in comparison the the fantasy ego you holed barred in the chasm of a head of yours in which you continuously try to elevate yourself above all others, when in fact you are in the minority.You are wrong just as much as you are right if not more, yet you delude yourself each time Ron Paul gains a victory into making more excuses as to why such progress is false, lucid, or lacking or reality.

The medicine is indeed this - we live in a reality where a small but effective group of people have hijacked a broken and dilapidated system and controlled from the inside using its very own rules. They have had the foresight to see every obstacle to come so far and battle it with the utmost ease, blocking the disregard by the media, the downplay by fellow candidates, and the assured destruction of ones beliefs. They realize this system because four years ago they were a part of it then as well, and they realized exactly how it works - and today they manipulate it for the benefit of all, because that is the only real chance Ron Paul will have in order to face Barrack Obama in a general election for the presidency.

And what you also fail to realize is that Ron Paul has been shunned and held back on the stage of debate and should the time come for him to face off against the talking piece that is Obama, he will destroy everything that our President has to offer and bring Americans a new sense of reason because no longer will the media be able to deny that fact.

That is the reality that COULD happen and is happening. I admit that there are those that will stop at nothing to prevent that from happening, but when it comes to the rule book and dealing with things legally and forthright, there is no way that Ron Paul is going to lose this race. I guarantee you that.

Good night and good riddance.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by gwydionblack
 


Can you show me in the rules where they aren't allowed to vote to suspend the rules by acclamation???

You keep repeating this 6 stat majority, which Romney probably has anyway...but since you deny bound delegates are really bound...it is worthless talking to you about it.

But where does it say in the rules that they can't poll for suspension of the rules by acclamation? Who decides if the "ayes" have it during a vote of acclamation? You got it...John Boehner.

So a vote to suspend the rules by acclamation...check...a call to nominate by acclamation...check and mate.


Provide the rules that says they cannot do any of this by acclamation.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by gwydionblack
 


And the GOP through Boehner will do just as you posted the Paulheads do,



they manipulate it for the benefit of all


Sorry but Paulheads were not manipulating anything for my benefit, nor for the majority of voters who did not vote for him.
On the other hand when the GOP does as you posted,


they manipulate it for the benefit of all


The GOP will have actual vote counts to point to to say who they were doing it for.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Lets put the rules aside for a moment. Lets put your opinion aside for a second.

Why on Earth would we want our children to bear the burden of this debt we are creating for them. The wars, the bad policies and the complete disregard for the common person that the current establishment has been showing is really concerning.

Things need to change, I'm not sure why its so hard for you to understand that. Maybe you are comfortable in the current system and don't want it to change. You are the minority. Have you thought about other people at all?

I understand your blind faith in your ways of thinking and it will be your demise. You cannot sustain this type of system. You can't get rid of debt by spending money.

In addition, let people believe in whatever candidate they want to. You force yourself into every Ron Paul thread here, I feel sorry for you. If my life was entirely dedicated to proving my points right while keeping my eyes closed to all other options I'd prolly be just like you.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by litterbaux
 
Grassy Ass.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by gwydionblack
 


Can you show me in the rules where they aren't allowed to vote to suspend the rules by acclamation???



Provide the rules that says they cannot do any of this by acclamation.


To get a suspension of the rules, they would have to go by the default rules of the convention, The US House of Representatives Rules, which require a vote of 2/3 of the delegates.

RULE NO. 30
Rules of Order
The Rules of the House of Representatives of the United States shall be the rules of the convention, except that the current authorized edition of Robert’s Rules of Order: Newly Revised (“Robert’s Rules of Order”), shall be the rules for committees and subcommittees of the convention, insofar as they are applicable and not inconsistent with the rules herein set forth; provided, however, that the convention may adopt its own rules concerning the reading of committee reports and resolutions.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I wonder what angle your running.

1) Your a lefty
2) You want Obama to win
3) Romney has Zero chance of winning
4) Your taking this way to far to be just an average observer

It seems like your running some kind of psych-ops, that or your an emotionally/psychologically abusive person. Because that is what your obsession with Ron Paul is boiling down to. You use every bit of wiggle room to emotionally attack Ron Paul supporters with a kind of sick glee.


edit on 3-5-2012 by korathin because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Unfortunately I could see this happening.. S&F to you sir



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   
Guys come on now. These threads keep popping up and its all just a bunch of arguments with people for and against Ron Paul, and very little facts. No one here knows exactly what is going to happen in November. You may think you did your research and you can forsee the outcome but the truth is that anything can happen. Luckily it is only 6 months away so we will all know soon enough.

Sorry OP I'm not bashing your thread, it was well written, it is just a shame that people get so emotional over these topics and it turns into people bashing other people page after page.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
Im still unsure why you have such an unhealthy fascination with ron paul supporters. do you really have nothing better to do with your life. It seems all you do is sit on ATS and attempt to smear ron paul.

sounds fun


i agree with the above quote... get a life



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   
Outkast is speaking logically on the subject, RP supporters generally don't. And this is coming from someone that voted for RP.





top topics
 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join