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.

 

RNC must allow Ron Paul to speak at Convention

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
chicago.cbslocal.com...

Dr. Ron Paul must have the right to speak at the RNC's Convention in August. He has deserved that right on so many levels.

Can you imagine the damage that will be done to the Republican Party just before the election if they don't allow him to have his final say?

chicago.cbslocal.com...




posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ChicagOpinion
 


The title of the article is a bit misleading... it's simply arguing that Ron Paul should have a chance to speak, not that he technically should be allowed to speak.


To be automatically given a 15- minute slot to speak at the podium, a candidate must have won a plurality of delegates in five states. As difficult as the facts are for staunch Paul supporters to accept, Paul has only won four such states which are Iowa, Minnesota, Maine, and Louisiana.

That's interesting... there was an Examiner article the other day reporting he did win a plurality of delegates in five states.


Presidential hopeful Ron Paul does have a plurality in five or more states (Nevada, Maine, Minnesota, Louisiana, and Iowa).

RNC confirms Ron Paul will be up for nomination

I guess their report was completely wrong then?



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


Paul has Nevada too If I am not mistaken...

Source


That's the 5th one this new article isn't counting..

I am unsure of the meaning of a "plurality of delegates in five states." Sounds like it means more than one delegate (plural) in 5 states.. It must mean something else though..

edit on 7/19/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
The fact of the matter is that Ron Paul indeed qualifies, whether or not the RNC wants to break their own rules to shut him up (why would we even be surprised?) is really up in the air and mostly depends on Mitt Romney and his campaign. After all, it is him and his campaign that has been setting up the election fraud in the various states thus far.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


Paul has Nevada too If I am not mistaken...

Source


That's the 5th one this new article isn't counting..

Wow... well that's a real bombshell imo, if it's true... and it certainly appears to be true. So basically you guys are saying he technically should be allowed to speak unless the RNC rules are broken? If all this is true, then it appears the OP's article is nothing more than disinformation designed to mask the truth whilst pretending to challenge the morality of denying him the 15 minutes to speak...



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I don't understand the ambiguity of whether he has 5 states or not, is it that hard to figure out? Why would Rachel Maddow not know that he has Nevada?




Go Ron Paul!



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Ok, I'm starting to build a picture of what is going on here... things aren't as simple as they appear on the surface. There is still a chance.


Republican National Committee rules allow a candidate's name to be placed into nomination if that delegate has a plurality of delegates in five states, i.e. more delegates than any other candidate in those states.

According to Ben Swann, a night-time news anchor at Fox 19 in Cincinnati, Paul has a plurality of delegates in at least six states, including Virginia, Nevada, Louisiana, Minnesota, Maine and Iowa.

According to state rules, those delegates are bound to support Paul on the first ballot in Louisiana, Minnesota, Maine and Iowa. The delegates from Virginia and Nevada are bound to former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney, but a plurality of those delegates are Paul supporters due to the Paul campaign overtaking Romney in district and state conventions in the Old Dominion.. (Note: Paul won three bound delegates from Virginia thanks to his victory in U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott's gerrymandered Third Congressional District.)

Based on conversations with high-ranking RNC Rules Committee members, Swann said that although the Virginia and Nevada delegations are bound to vote for Romney on the convention's first ballot, that does not preclude them from placing Paul's name in nomination.

If five state delegations place Paul's name in nomination, all of the delegations would have two choices on the first ballot.

If Paul's name is placed into nomination, then he is allowed 15 minutes to address the convention.

Will Ron Paul get to speak at GOP convention?



The first argument, is that Paul already won five states, but that the RNC simply refuses to acknowledge this fact. It should be noted that this is not an argument being made by Paul himself. It seems strange that Paul’s followers would be willing to advocate a position that their own candidate will not, but such is life within the Ron Paul revolution.

Assuming Paul most devout followers are correct, a large assumption but let us move forward with the analysis, they still must get the RNC to recognize and agree with their argument, even though the Republican Party is doing everything in their power to consolidate support behind Mitt Romney at the moment. Finally, even if the RNC conceded Paul followers’ point and allowed Paul to be nominated and to speak, Paul would still have to convince a large amount of delegates committed to Mitt Romney to switch their votes in the final hour.

Which leads us to the second argument of Paul followers; many of the Paul faithful are now putting their hope in a lawsuit filed against the RNC by Lawyers for Ron Paul. The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that all delegates at the national convention are unbound, and that they must be free from threats or coercion.

The lawsuit appears to have some legal merit, in that it simply seeks to have a judge declare the current law the law, but it fails to recognize to significant political realities.

Ron Paul followers still hold out hope despite recent loss



So as I understand it, yeah there are [5] states that Ron Paul has a plurality of delegates but those delegates are bound to vote for Romney on the first ballot. To my knowledge it doesn't prevent Ron Paul's name from being submitted for nomination by rule 40.

Doesn't Ron Paul already have 5 states?

edit on 19/7/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join