Delegates are not bound!!!! - according to Republican National Rules of 2008, 2010.

If delegates were to so conspire, the fallout would be tremendous. A good portion of Ron Paul supporters are ex-obamanites, and to quickly wash their hands of their last mistake, they push fiercly to adapt their next. This small group of voters is so confident in their political prowess and awareness that they are ready to disenfranchise the very group of voters that saw through the glitter of obama's false fassad. Any act by the delegates would be aimed at destroying any cohesion that conservatives might share, and an absolute sham directed at the re-election of obama.

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by openminded2011
Please consider this info before deciding.


img.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 6-5-2012 by openminded2011 because: (no reason given)

I don' know whether to call that misleading or just blatant lies. Paul is the best thing that has happened to politics in a very long time! What he is really about is taking the power away from those who use it to control all and give it back to the people! Nothing more, nothing less! Anything else you see and hear not following along that basic guideline is false prophecy, plain and simple!

edit on 6-5-2012 by ajay59 because: to amend

False prophesy? Thats the first time I have heard a quasi religious term used to quell political criticism.

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
I hope this is true sot hey can vote for Ron Paul. With all the corruption going around even if it was against the rules, I hope they still vote for RP.

It seems to be black and white that delegates can not be bound according to the National Convention regardless of what the state conventions say.

This may be true, however, it probably isn't really relevant. If the state, such as Florida, is awarding all delegates to a primary victor the victor gets to provide the slate. I would presume that Romney would not provide a slate of Ron Paul supporters. So, unless there are a ton of Ron Paul supporters posing as Romney delegates I would imagine that most of the "bound" delegates will stay "bound" since they will be Romney's people.

It is interesting that they are free to vote for whomever they want and I am sure that will throw the stupid network numbers more askew. That will be cool. I love to see their noses rubbed in their sh!t

Originally posted by Bakatono

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
I hope this is true sot hey can vote for Ron Paul. With all the corruption going around even if it was against the rules, I hope they still vote for RP.

It seems to be black and white that delegates can not be bound according to the National Convention regardless of what the state conventions say.

This may be true, however, it probably isn't really relevant. If the state, such as Florida, is awarding all delegates to a primary victor the victor gets to provide the slate. I would presume that Romney would not provide a slate of Ron Paul supporters. So, unless there are a ton of Ron Paul supporters posing as Romney delegates I would imagine that most of the "bound" delegates will stay "bound" since they will be Romney's people.

It is interesting that they are free to vote for whomever they want and I am sure that will throw the stupid network numbers more askew. That will be cool. I love to see their noses rubbed in their sh!t

Maybe I have it confused but I think your wrong..... Ron Paul puts forward a "Slate" and so does Romney.... then they vote on Delegates so if a state has 23 slots and Ron Paul wins 21 then Romney only got 2 of his picked people for that state..... so it is relevant because in theory if 18 are "supposed" to vote romeny then at least 16 of those "supposed" voters are Ron Paul supporters...

Which makes it very relevant because the Ron Paul people are pissed off at the way they have been ignored, I believe this will go down in history and possibly be the beginning of americas next civil war....

Its the people that vote.... they do not get selected by the Romney camp alone

reply to post by Doalrite


Well, that depends.

A slate can be any combination of delegates, in a caucus state. It can have some from each candidate, or all from one, or 50/50, or whatever is worked out.

Now, I would presume that the names on these slates from these caucus states are people who the campaign has identified as loyal followers. If not I doubt they would be delegates. So, if Romney's campaign (the local one, not national) listed someone as a Romney delegate the chances are that person is a tried-and-true Romney supporter. Same with Paul delegates. So, in a caucus, the caucus goers all get to vote on these slates.

In a "winner takes all" state, there is no caucus vote. The winner gets to name all the delegates.

So, I would again presume that Romney made sure that he picked Romney ppl to be those delegates. I guess one or two may change their minds, but I doubt it. Not unless they are completely overrun in the National convention and cave.

Originally posted by SeenMyShare
reply to post by DelMarvel

 

Once again, what have you done on the ground to promote and support your candidate? Ron Paul people feel strongly enough about his candidacy to DO something about it. They do more than just push a few buttons and sit back and wait.

If other candidates had such a following Ron Paul supporters would not be taking the delegates by storm. The other candidates just do not have that passionate a following.

I don't have a candidate, not the current POTUS and certainly not any Republican. Paul sounds attractive in pure theory but in reality Libertarianism simply gives even MORE power and control to large corporations. Just look at American history.

And once again, if Paul were winning the popular vote in these primaries and Romney's people were coming in afterwards and selecting the delegates the Paul contingent would be screaming bloody murder about the voice of the people being suppressed. This isn't about the moral principles of how the nomination process should work, it's about winning no matter what even if that means going against the will of the primary voters.

This one guy on the news actually just said mitt may quit to save embarassment from his actual delegate count. Rons delegates will pound his 40 real delegates.What an embarassment for Romney,,Time to put it to Obama..

I'm a Ron Paul supporter, so of course I'm delighted that this could mean good news for Ron Paul.

On the other hand...

Why is this even possible? What is the point of my voting at all, if my vote, as proven by this tidbit of news, absolutely does not count for BEANS? Not only do I have to contend with voting machines that can be "manipulated" to give anyone the most votes, but now my suspicion of my vote not meaning squat, is PROVEN..AGAIN.. TO NOT MEAN JACK SH.

Honestly, the system bothers me to no end. Yay Ron Paul. Yay for him having a "fair" shot. But WTF man..

reply to post by danj3ris


Yeah, it's called a Representative Democracy. The Electoral College is an even bigger question mark because they elect the President, not the voters. I believe it was Ronald Regan that proposed getting rid of the EC during his first campaign....the idea didn't gain much traction. A direct democracy seems more fair in principle and might help to restore some faith in the political system.

I think this bounding of votes is highly suspect and elections should be free and secret (except the vote count of course). Why is it that one has to register as a voter for one of the partys and not just go to the ballots and cast your vote in secrecy, without anyone presumably knowing beforehand which candidate you will give your vote?

reply to post by UKTruth

Did you see that Paul wiped the floor with Romney in Nevada - 22 to 3 delegates.

Its happening all over the country - Romney is toast if there are rules that can unbind. Remains to be seen.

IN Nevada they are close to calling a motion to unbind and change the state rules

And did you know thos Ron Paul delegates will just be voting for Romney???

They didn't unbind...because they know they can't...and they aren't going to abstain...because they know they can't do that either.

reply to post by bacci0909

Quick question: did you already know all of that? Or did you research it just recently, in wake of all this delegate talk and how it applies to Ron Paul's situation?

No, I didn't already know all this...just having to look a lot of information up because of all the false information coming from Paul supporters.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by UKTruth

 

Did you see that Paul wiped the floor with Romney in Nevada - 22 to 3 delegates.

Its happening all over the country - Romney is toast if there are rules that can unbind. Remains to be seen.

IN Nevada they are close to calling a motion to unbind and change the state rules

And did you know thos Ron Paul delegates will just be voting for Romney???

They didn't unbind...because they know they can't...and they aren't going to abstain...because they know they can't do that either.

You mentioned in a previous post that these "bound" delegates are "legally bound."
Could you explain what criminal or civil penalty there is for someone exercising freewill and voting their conscience....(oops, that was editorializing on my part) my guess for an electoral voter they would be thrown from the party and anyone can be sued civilly for anything, BUT prevailing or even surviving summary judgement is remote for a case of voting for who you want.
They signed some "pledge" or "oath"?.....I could sign a notarized pledge to you to never eat chicken again, and then eat a bucket of extra crispy in front of you....what are you going to do? Sue me for breach? What are your remedies? money damages? specific performance, too late, I ate the chicken. (too late they cast their vote)
So, tell me what these "legally bound" delegates face if they vote anyway they damn please.
Can you imagine the odds that any jury would convict an American patriot? (any decent attorney will have the jury wanting to drape the voter in the American flag.)

So, again........."what is the penalty either criminally or civilly, for a "legally bound" delegate who votes for whom ever they feel like it?"

reply to post by Nobot


I saw where the votes will be sent to Spain to be counted before we see them . I feel really good about that , nothing could go wrong there.

We got bound delagates talking about abstaining from voting to keep Romney from getting to magical 1144 number.

We got talks of delagates not even being bound in the first place....

We got people from the Ron Paul camp discussing a last minute third party run to shake things up.


and much much more.

They distort the system by using technicalities and legalities against us. This time it might just backfire on them.

Either way I think this is going to be a fun convention.

Prayers of Power to Ron Paul. If you were ever going to support anybody anywhere, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME.

Ron Paul 2012.

Originally posted by Res Ipsa


You mentioned in a previous post that these "bound" delegates are "legally bound."
Could you explain what criminal or civil penalty there is for someone exercising freewill and voting their conscience....

The lawyers at the Republican Nation Convention have ruled and defend in the past that delegates can't be bound... this is the official rule.

Disregard everything OKS says, he is wrong.... here is a new newscast addressing OKS' argument and showing OKS is wrong:


Start at minute 2 if you are in a hurry, but listen to the whole thing if you have time, its good.

ETA... to answer you direction, nothing. The Republican and Democratic parties are private clubs.