Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santorum Backers Look to Change Texas Primary Rules
The Texas Tribune ^ | April 5, 2012 | Jay Root

Posted on 04/05/2012 6:40:06 PM PDT by Engraved-on-His-hands

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last
To: AmericanInTokyo

While a huge thrill in combat, the winner-take-all arrangement for Texas overlooks future risk for short term gain and satisfaction.

Consider the changing demographics in Texas. Consider the Establishment keeps financing RINOS, who enter the race with all the odds, all the money and all the support.

Where is Texas in the next election, should the SREC be composed of a minority of conservatives instead of a majority of conservatives? Winner-take-all leaves conservatives without a protest block of delegates to say a RINO.

I am not so quick to buy into the national arguement that 150 delegates gives Texas clout. It may give them heart ache also.

In that case, proportional rules allow for a protest block of delegates who can go all the way to convention.


21 posted on 04/05/2012 8:57:57 PM PDT by RitaOK (LET 'ER RIP, NEWT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Engraved-on-His-hands
"Santorum has noted in recent days that some Texas party activists are waging an uphill battle to change the rules of the May 29 primary so that whoever wins would get all 152 delegates up for grabs in the contest. "

What happened to the other three delegates?

22 posted on 04/05/2012 9:11:09 PM PDT by matthew fuller (The Magic Mormon is now in position to re-elect the Magic Negro.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK
"I am not so quick to buy into the national arguement that 150 delegates gives Texas clout. It may give them heart ache also. "

What happened to the other 5 delegates?

23 posted on 04/05/2012 9:27:47 PM PDT by matthew fuller (The Magic Mormon is now in position to re-elect the Magic Negro.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: matthew fuller

I round. :)


24 posted on 04/05/2012 9:35:40 PM PDT by RitaOK (LET 'ER RIP, NEWT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Engraved-on-His-hands

This election is making me sick. It’s (unfortunately) going to come down to d-bag ‘A’ vs. d-bag ‘Romney’.

Can we bring back 1980?


25 posted on 04/05/2012 10:22:24 PM PDT by digital-olive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Engraved-on-His-hands

This will do nothing to warm my heart toward Santorum. Winner-take-all contests are an open invitation to machine politics IMHO.


26 posted on 04/05/2012 11:01:46 PM PDT by GVnana (Newt 2012 - He Speaks for Us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marcella; onyx; katiedidit1; Mariner; All; Antoninus; Lazlo in PA; napscoordinator; ...
10 posted on Thu Apr 05 2012 21:21:32 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Marcella (Vote Newt; Newt needs money): “Read the whole article. I have a reason.”

Was this the reason?

“The change might also require approval from the U.S. Department of Justice.”

If that statement is correct, President Obama gets a vote in setting the Republican Party primary rules.

11 posted on Thu Apr 05 2012 21:43:29 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by katiedidit1: “Would love to hear what Gov Perry has to say about that...and of course the Bush family. Santorum will never take Texas.”

I am no expert in Texas Republican politics but I would agree with Katiedidit1 that I'd love to know what Perry and the Bush family think about this change.

Perhaps the most important question is what the Gingrich campaign thinks about this rule change. My guess is that much will depend on what happens in Pennsylvania.

This campaign is very close to being over. Unfortunately, if Mitt Romney is the nominee, the general election may also be over. I would certainly hope that conservatives who are strongly opposed to Mitt Romney would concur that stopping Romney is something worth fighting for.

Barring a radical game change -- an obvious example would include a late decision by Gingrich and his two endorsers, Perry and Cain, to publicly call for a Santorum vote to stop Romney -- this race is probably over. A win by Santorum in Pennsylvania could generate the momentum required to win in Texas on May 29, and that could put California's June 5 primary into serious contention.

I'm going to share something from what may be considered ancient history. In the 1980 presidential campaign, Michigan Gov. Bill Milliken was so upset by what he considered to be the likely victory of an unelectable candidate that he pulled out all the stops and mobilized all the resources at his disposal to deliver Michigan for a last-ditch candidate who he considered to be the only hope of a Republican victory in the 1980 elections against a deeply unpopular Democrat. In Gov. Milliken's mind, and that of many others in Michigan Republican Party leadership, the nomination of the frontrunner would pull defeat from the jaws of victory and it was worth the effort to keep the frontrunner from winning.

Who was that longshot last-ditch candidate? George H.W. Bush, the moderate Republican who won Michigan but was then defeated by a massive Reagan victory in what was then a winner-take-all California primary.

Nearly everyone on Free Republic believes Milliken was wrong in fighting Ronald Reagan. My point is that the Mitt Romney wing of the Republican Party has been willing to fight last-ditch battles before -- and I think Romney is fully aware of his own family's history in fighting last-ditch battles when he believes losing the presidential race to a Democrat is at stake.

FYI, here's the remaining primary schedule from Election Central:

http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-republican-primary-schedule/

April 24, 2012
Connecticut 28 delegates (Primary)
Delaware 17 delegates (Primary)
New York 95 delegates (Primary)
Pennsylvania 72 delegates (Primary)
Rhode Island 19 delegates (Primary)

May 8, 2012
Indiana 46 delegates (Primary)
Thanks to a recount reversing the previous report, Rick Santorum will indeed qualify to be on the Indiana ballot. See this report from the Indy Star on the recount of signatures.
North Carolina 55 delegates (Primary)
West Virginia 31 delegates (Primary)

May 15, 2012
Nebraska 35 delegates (Primary)
Oregon 28 delegates (Primary)

May 22, 2012
Arkansas 36 delegates (Primary)
Kentucky 45 delegates (Primary)

May 29, 2012
Texas 155 delegates (Primary)
Due to litigation regarding redistricting, the April 3 date for the Texas primary has been changed to May 29. See this report.

June 5, 2012
California 172 delegates (Primary)
Montana 26 delegates (Primary)
New Jersey 50 delegates (Primary)
New Mexico 23 delegates (Primary)
South Dakota 28 delegates (Primary)

June 26, 2012
Utah 40 delegates (Primary)

27 posted on 04/06/2012 3:24:38 AM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: matthew fuller; Engraved-on-His-hands
22 posted on Thu Apr 05 2012 23:11:09 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by matthew fuller: “(quoting Engraved-on-his-hands): ‘Santorum has noted in recent days that some Texas party activists are waging an uphill battle to change the rules of the May 29 primary so that whoever wins would get all 152 delegates up for grabs in the contest.’ What happened to the other three delegates?”

Engraved-on-his-hands can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the three additional delegates are the state's superdelegates who, according to Republican Party rules, are selected by virtue of office and are not bound to vote for any candidate.

28 posted on 04/06/2012 3:32:17 AM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Engraved-on-His-hands

It seems like it would be fair to do this. Isn’t the primary late enough that it should be winner-take-all? Wasn’t Florida so early that it should have been proportional?

Isn’t that the general rule: if early, proportional, if late, winner-take-all?


29 posted on 04/06/2012 3:40:28 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina
Perry and the Bush family

They are not allies within the party; Bushes look down on Perry.

30 posted on 04/06/2012 8:06:57 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Past is prologue: The American people have again let us down in this election cycle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
YES!!!!!!!!...I'm in Texas visiting right now and I've brought along my SANTORUM bumper sticker AND a big ole sign !!!!!

I'll do my part!!!

31 posted on 04/06/2012 8:39:23 AM PDT by Guenevere (....Whom God calls,... He equips......Press On Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: matthew fuller

“What happened to the other three delegates?”

They are super delegates not bound to any candidate.


32 posted on 04/06/2012 10:15:52 AM PDT by Marcella (Vote Newt; Newt needs money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: matthew fuller

“What happened to the other three delegates?”

They are super delegates not bound to any candidate.


33 posted on 04/06/2012 10:17:42 AM PDT by Marcella (Vote Newt; Newt needs money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.; All
30 posted on Fri Apr 06 2012 10:06:57 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Theodore R.: “They are not allies within the party; Bushes look down on Perry.”

Yes, and that's why this could get very interesting if Perry decides he wants to change the rules and GHW Bush doesn't.

I'm very much aware that Perry endorsed Gingrich. Will he change that endorsement? Will Gingrich endorse Santorum to stop Romney? I don't know the answers to those questions, and I don't know Texas politics well enough to even guess, but I would think the rule change won't happen without its supporters being seen as being de facto Santorum supporters.

A decision by Perry and/or Gingrich to endorse Santorum would sent an extremely clear message to Mitt Romney that he does not have the support of the base of the Republican Party, and to the Republican establishment that significant parts of the party leadership are not willing to accept Romney without a major, major fight.

The Republican Party already has a civil war going on internally between the RINOs, the establishment, and several different categories of social, economic and national defense conservatives, but Romney's massive use of cash in the campaign has disguised that civil war in public because he's been able to destroy his opponents’ polling numbers.

The difference between party regulars and primary voters is that the party regulars have firmly decided what they believe and the attack ads aren't going to work in most cases. Yes, many party regulars are what we like to call GOP-e (i.e., elitists). But that isn't the case at the precinct and county level in many cases, Romney needs that type of supporter to win, and a major revolt in Texas will telegraph a message to the rest of the country, not just the people paying attention on Free Republic, that the conservative movement is not at all happy with Romney and lots of people are refusing to follow in line to back the presumptive nominee.

What will happen in Texas is anyone’s guess but I suspect nothing will happen if Santorum loses Pennsylvania.

34 posted on 04/06/2012 10:44:49 AM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Marcella

Thanks.


35 posted on 04/06/2012 11:01:53 AM PDT by matthew fuller (The Magic Mormon is now in position to re-elect the Magic Negro.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Redmen4ever

That’s because Florida and Arizona before April 1st. Texas was originally set to vote March 6th, but due to delays in redistricting got shoved back to May 29th where a proportional primary makes zero sense.


36 posted on 04/06/2012 4:20:45 PM PDT by Keyes2000mt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

Welcome ...We are so happy to have you visit.


37 posted on 04/09/2012 6:26:51 PM PDT by DallasSun (Courage~Fear that has said its prayers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DallasSun

Thank-you!—I love Texas!!!


38 posted on 04/09/2012 8:25:08 PM PDT by Guenevere (....Whom God calls,... He equips......Press On Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

And Texas loves you, Guennie! We would love to have you visit San Antonio someday. If you do, try to visit the missions, esp the Mission San Jose with the Rose Window. It is beautiful, as they all are.
Also, I am praying for the Santorum family, esp that precious child.


39 posted on 04/10/2012 7:59:05 AM PDT by DallasSun (Courage~Fear that has said its prayers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DallasSun
I'm in West Texas right now, but have visited San Antonio twice....to see the Alamo.

It's an awesome, chill bump testimonial to patriotism, bravery and conviction.

...and being from the Volunteer State of Tennessee, we sent quite a few of our guys there to help out.

Their blood and ashes are mingled with those of Texas.

40 posted on 04/10/2012 8:55:56 PM PDT by Guenevere (....Whom God calls,... He equips......Press On Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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