Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Yes Donald, Colorado Did Vote…On March 1st
Conservative Review ^ | April 11, 2016 | Robert Eno

Posted on 04/12/2016 5:05:54 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

* From 1912 to 1988, and since 2004, Colorado used the current system for delegate selection, with no preference vote binding.
* Even in 1992, 1996, and 2004 delegates were bound by vote, but were free to vote conscience on second ballot.
* In 2012, Santorum won the non-binding straw poll but Romney received more delegates at conventions.
* A 2012 rules change at the RNC required any state that held a straw poll to bind their delegates, Colorado chose not to hold the straw poll, to enhance grass-roots participation.

If you’ve been on the internet this morning, you’ve seen the scathing headlines: “Republicans cancel presidential election in CO…” and “Fury as Colorado has no Primary or Caucus,” among others. The problem is that this is not exactly true. Colorado only briefly flirted with a binding primary, but even then the delegates were selected by a caucus-convention system. From 1912 – 1988, and 2004 to the present the delegates were not bound by a preferential vote. This year was no different.

In Colorado, a caucus is held to elect delegates to county assemblies and the county assemblies elect delegates to state and district assemblies where the delegates to the RNC are chosen. That is how it has worked over the past four presidential cycles, and it is nothing new for this year.

First, a little recent history. Conservative Review spoke to Florence Sebern, a member of the 2012 RNC Convention Rules Committee from Colorado. Sebern outlined how the Colorado Republican Party started holding non-binding straw polls to coincide with their caucuses in 2008. Sebern explained the process: “Prior to 2012 RNC rules changes, Colorado's presidential preference poll (instituted in 2008), did not bind delegates. Delegates could choose to pledge, via the National Delegate Notice of Intent form. A pledge bound delegates through the 1st round of voting.”

The New York Times description of the caucus system in Colorado in 2008 and 2012 confirms this account. In both instances they describe how the delegates are unbound from the results of the straw poll.

So why the change this year? According to Sebern, RNC rules instituted in 2012 said that any state that holds a preference poll in conjunction with their caucuses must bind delegates according to the results. The new rule was 16(a)(1):

Any statewide presidential preference vote that permits a choice among candidates for the Republican nomination for President of the United States in a primary, caucuses, or a state convention must be used to allocate and bind the state’s delegation to the national convention in either a proportional or winner-take-all manner, except for delegates and alternate delegates who appear on a ballot in a statewide election and are elected directly by primary voters.

“The caucus system was not fundamentally changed. What was changed was that a meaningless straw poll was not conducted — one that wouldn’t bind the delegates anyway.”

With the national rules change now governing, Sebern helped to lead the fight to end the short-lived presidential straw polls to keep the power of selecting delegates with the grassroots. Sebern wrote in an op-ed about the change:

Colorado’s caucus system is the way grassroots activists — We the People! — participate in and impact our political system.

Caucus is a meeting of neighbors, affiliated with a political party, who come together to discuss candidates, issues, ideas, elect leadership and delegates. It’s the basic building block of our Colorado political system. It’s an open door to local political activism. It’s an opportunity for all voices to be heard.

Caucus encourages one of the best aspects of politics: the opportunity to have a civil conversation with our neighbors who we may — or may not — agree with.

Caucus allows all voices to be heard and all concerns to be discussed.

In that same op-ed, Sebern explains that there were three short-lived primary cycles, and that the grassroots changed back to a caucus and saved the taxpayers money.

Colorado had a presidential primary in 1992, 1996, and 2000. We changed back to a caucus system and saved taxpayers $6 million dollars. Interestingly, voter participation declined during those primary years. Primaries may not be the only reason for a decline in voter participation (understanding the importance of civic engagement and quality candidates are certainly part of the “formula”), but they also don’t offer the neighborly experience that caucus does.

Donald Trump, and his media allies, have suggested that Colorado fundamentally changed their caucus system in the summer of 2015 to benefit Ted Cruz. In fact, the caucus system was not fundamentally changed. What was changed was that a meaningless straw poll was not conducted — one that wouldn’t bind the delegates anyway.

Even in 1992, 1996, and 2000 with the binding primary, delegates were selected by the caucus method. On a second ballot, at the national convention, those delegates could vote for whom they pleased.

Since the 2004 primary and caucus season — and from 1912 to 1988 before that — here is how the system worked: Republicans met in local precinct caucuses, which they did this year. People ran for delegate to the county assemblies (convention), often stating which presidential candidate they would support during the assemblies. The county assemblies picked delegates to district and state assemblies. Candidates running for national convention delegate could, optionally, bind themselves to a candidate or say what candidate they would support. The assemblies would elect the delegates.

In 2012, Rick Santorum won the non-binding presidential preference straw poll in Colorado. The result was: Santorum 40.3 percent, Mitt Romney 34.9 percent, Newt Gingrich 12.8 percent, and Ron Paul 11.8 percent. Romney ended up with more delegates, however; the delegate count was Romney 13, Santorum 6, and Paul 5.

The process described above is what happened this year. On March 1, thousands of Coloradans met at precinct caucuses. They elected delegates to the county assemblies. Those county assemblies sent delegates to state and district assemblies (conventions). There the delegates were selected. Exactly as they had been in 2004, 2008, and 2012.

Here’s how the chairman of the Colorado GOP explained it to Conservative Review, "The four step caucus process used this year was identical to the process employed in 2012 with the exception of the non-binding straw poll being eliminated," said Colorado GOP Chairman Steve House. "The process was open to all Colorado Republicans and all campaigns had ample opportunity to encourage their supporters to attend caucus, county assemblies, Congressional Assemblies, and the State Convention."

Donald Trump’s real fight is with the people way back in 2002 that fought to get rid of the binding primary, not Ted Cruz.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Conspiracy; Politics
KEYWORDS: cruz; delegates; tedcruz; trump; yellowjournalism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last
To: cba123

Don’t like it? Walk away, n00b.


41 posted on 04/12/2016 5:35:35 PM PDT by ScottinVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cba123
All you do it[is] post anti-Trump nonsense.

How is this article anti-Trump? His name appears twice in the entire article. This is just a fact-based article explaining the history of CO's delegate selection process. The only Trump reference is to his not knowing how it works.

If you want to start having people pay attention to what you post, then stop trolling.

How is his posting of this article trolling? Trolling is when people like yourself go to these articles and do nothing but attack the poster, and derail the entire conversation with worthless drivel.

Trump is the only GOP candidate who is a true winner.

Um, no? Until someone gets their 1237 delegate votes at the convention, no one is the winner. And if Trump can't manage that on the first vote, I doubt he'll make it after that.
42 posted on 04/12/2016 5:35:57 PM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

Dude! Haven’t you heard? There’s a WAR on!

Fight it fair. Posting pro-Cruz articles may get your goat but it’s NOT trolling.

Argue the substance of his articles (this one by the way is substance-rich). Or post your own pro Trump fact-filled articles to piss off OUR side.

But please lay off the indignant “shut up!” directives. You sound like the UC Santa Cruz Communist Party protesting a Mark Steyn speech, for goodness’ sake.

Now posting pro-HILLARY articles... THAT would be trolling.


43 posted on 04/12/2016 5:37:38 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (There is no "allah" but satan, and mohammed was his demon-possessed tool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Donald, NOR his handlers knew the rules, but Ted did.

I trusTED to protect our National Security. Donald doesn’t know what’s going on with anything.

Ted Cruz already picked Frank Gaffney to advise him on defense.


44 posted on 04/12/2016 5:37:38 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Apparently you missed the election that brought Hitler as President. Then once Hindenburg was coerced to make Hitler also Chancellor, Hitler dissolved the Reichstag.

The Colorado GOP just shortened things up to appoint Cruz for us.

Seig Whatever..


45 posted on 04/12/2016 5:41:44 PM PDT by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sun
It's beginning to look like Trump and his team DID know the fact, and set a boobytrap, for the Booby & his Colorado booblettes.

And now Teddie has got his fists buried in the Colorado Tarbaby...

46 posted on 04/12/2016 5:42:09 PM PDT by kiryandil (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Accounts? Just one and a post today about Game of Thrones. Everyone will welcome to participate.


47 posted on 04/12/2016 5:42:46 PM PDT by lulu16 (May the Good Lord take a liking to you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

Do me a favor. Don’t teach history.


48 posted on 04/12/2016 5:43:29 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

>> Not anymore snowflake.

Could you please tell me exactly who all is on this mysterious Committee To Convey And Withdraw Respect From Freepers?

Or is this one of those Double Secret Probation things with a secret shadowy member list and a secret handshake and other junior high school stuff?


49 posted on 04/12/2016 5:46:31 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (There is no "allah" but satan, and mohammed was his demon-possessed tool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

How’s your day been? Mine’s been grand.


50 posted on 04/12/2016 5:46:41 PM PDT by KC Burke (Consider all of my posts as first drafts. (Apologies to L. Niven))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

http://therightscoop.com/nobody-scammed-guy-who-burned-registration-card-out-of-his-vote-except-trumps-bad-planning/


51 posted on 04/12/2016 5:47:08 PM PDT by texhenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

Did you read the article?


52 posted on 04/12/2016 5:48:14 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; cba123

Thanks for posting this article.


53 posted on 04/12/2016 5:49:22 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

This is like what went on in the Jim Crow South, where the democratic party came up with all kinds of rules to limit and prevent Blacks from voting.


54 posted on 04/12/2016 5:49:44 PM PDT by TomasUSMC (FIGHT LIKE WW2, WIN LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

lol, is that the spin Donald is putting on his low-energy ignorance?

Donald’s spins are getting weaker and weaker.


55 posted on 04/12/2016 5:51:43 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Trump fumbled Colorado. His strategy seems to be to scream foul from here on out. I bet he goes indie before the big convention.


56 posted on 04/12/2016 5:52:29 PM PDT by right way right (May we remain sober over mere men, for God really is our one and only true hope.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick
But please lay off the indignant “shut up!” directives.

I said no such thing.

I just called him what he is.

Donald Trump Says Proposed Muslim Ban Would Not Apply to His Rich Friends
March 31, 2016 | Zak Cheney-Rice, Mic.com
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3416199/posts

Get a load of Mic.com, and Zak the Hyphenated, former Community Organizer:

http://mic.com/

http://mic.com/profiles/29788/zak-cheney-rice

I still laugh, thinking about that site...

57 posted on 04/12/2016 5:53:18 PM PDT by kiryandil (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TomasUSMC
This is like what went on in the Jim Crow South, where the democratic party came up with all kinds of rules to limit and prevent Blacks from voting.

You are aware that there were 2995 precinct caucuses where registered Republicans voted, right?

58 posted on 04/12/2016 5:55:00 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Breaking News:

Cruz the Cuban Communist of Colorado

wins 100% no votes!
59 posted on 04/12/2016 5:55:42 PM PDT by TheNext
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: right way right

That’s fine: He doesn’t have the liquid cash to run a national campaign and the deadlines for filing in many states have passed.


60 posted on 04/12/2016 5:56:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson