Posted on 05/07/2012 7:45:57 AM PDT by IbJensen
Despite what you may have heard from the mainstream media, Mitt Romney does not have the Republican nomination locked up. In fact, he is rapidly losing delegates that almost everyone assumed that he already had in the bag.
To understand why this is happening, you have to understand the delegate selection process. Each state has different rules for selecting delegates to the Republican national convention, and in many states the "voting" done by the public does not determine the allocation of delegates to particular candidates at all. And the truth is that delegates are the only thing that really matters in this race.
In state after state, the Ron Paul campaign is focusing on the delegate selection process with laser-like precision, and it is paying off big time. At this point, there is still a legitimate chance that Ron Paul will be able to win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot at the Republican national convention in Tampa. If Romney does not have the 1,144 delegates that he needs on the first ballot, then it becomes a brokered convention and anything becomes possible at that point.
Sadly, most Americans have no idea how this process really works.
For example, originally we were all told that Mitt Romney won Iowa.
Then, later on we were told that a mistake was made and that Rick Santorum actually won Iowa.
Well, it turns out that Ron Paul actually won 20 out of the 28 delegates in Iowa. That is because the process of actually selecting the delegates occurred long after the voting by the public was over.
So what happens if the Ron Paul campaign is able to produce similar results in state after state?
The Ron Paul campaign is very organized, very motivated and they understand the rules of the game. As a recent Politico article detailed, there are huge amounts of unbound delegates out there that are still up for grabs....
There are roughly 30 states and territories where delegates aren’t bound to a particular candidate. The majority of the other states, according to a number of party officials, call for delegates to be bound for a first round of balloting but not the ensuing rounds.
“The dirty little secret is: At the end of the day, these guys and gals can vote any way they want,” said a Republican who has attended national conventions for decades. “Each state has different (laws) on pledged delegates.” In many states, the "official" results of voting done by the public mean next to nothing. The talking heads on television often tell us how many delegates are "projected" to go to a particular candidate, but as we have seen in Iowa and in so many other states, those "projections" are basically meaningless.
A recent Salon article discussed how the delegate selection process really works and how the Ron Paul campaign is using these rules to shake up the game....
In many caucus states, the “official” results that most people saw this winter were from nonbinding straw polls conducted in conjunction with precinct-level caucuses. But when it comes to choosing national convention delegates, the real action is at district caucuses and state conventions. In the past, this distinction hasn’t mattered much, but for the Paul forces – who lack the numbers to win statewide primaries but have the devotion to pack any room, anywhere, at any time – it has offered an inviting loophole. When turnout is small and no one is looking, the Paul folks can win, and that’s what’s been happening in a number of states.
To Paul die-hards, this will all culminate in a surprise for the ages in Tampa, with the political world suddenly realizing that Romney actually doesn’t have the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination, thereby allowing Paul to extract major concessions or even steal the nomination for himself. So could Ron Paul really deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination?
At this point, nobody really seems to know what the real delegate count is.
Websites such as The Real 2012 Delegate Count are more accurate than most sources in the mainstream media, but even that site has been underestimating the true number of Ron Paul delegates.
Right now, Mitt Romney is not anywhere close to having the number of delegates that he needs for the nomination and Ron Paul just keeps picking up more delegates with each passing week.
For example, a Washington Post article that was posted on Sunday reported that Ron Paul just achieved a stunning delegate victory in Nevada....
Despite former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s overwhelming victory in the Nevada caucuses, Texas Rep. Ron Paul has won a majority of the state’s delegates to the party’s national convention later this year in Tampa, Florida.
Thanks to organized Paul supporters, who have been working to increase their candidate’s support at state conventions around the country, 22 of the 25 Nevada delegates up for grabs will be Paul supporters. (Another three are automatic delegates.) That was a state that Romney supposedly "won".
It looks like Romney has a real problem.
In state after state, Ron Paul is gobbling up delegates. The following are quotes from a recent Huffington Post article about what the Ron Paul campaign has been able to achieve in the past few weeks....
-"Sure enough, Paul has already won 20 out of the 24 delegates allocated in Minnesota, by winning a majority of the congressional district contests."
-"In Louisiana, Paulites "dominated" the congressional district caucuses this past Saturday, according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune. Paul's supporters carried four of the state's congressional districts, and are guaranteed at least 17 of 46 delegates in the Bayou State, with the potential to pick up more at the state convention on June 2."
-"The other state that Benton likely has his eye on is Colorado, where the Denver Post reported in mid-April that Paul supporters and Santorum backers combined forces to win a "stunning upset" at the state convention, guaranteeing that about half of the state's 33 delegates will be for Paul in August."
And look what just happened in Maine according to USA Today....
In votes leading to the close of the two-day Maine convention, Paul supporters were elected to 21 of the 24 delegate spots from Maine to the GOP national convention in Tampa, Fla.
So Ron Paul is definitely accumulating a huge pile of his own delegates, but even many so-called "pledged delegates" for Romney could end up playing a huge role for Ron Paul.
In some states, Ron Paul supporters have been getting elected into delegate slots that are supposed to go to Romney. This is highly unusual, and it could really shake things up at the national convention. As a Salon article recently explained there will be quite a few Ron Paul supporters that will actually be going to Tampa "disguised" as Romney delegates....
Besides the pledged delegates he’s won so far and the extras he’s collecting through caucuses and state conventions, Paul will also have some supporters disguised as Romney delegates.
To understand how this works, just consider his campaign’s mischief in Massachusetts, where Romney won 72 percent of the primary vote – and with it, a monopoly on the state’s pledged convention delegates. But to determine who would fill those pledged delegate slots, the state GOP held caucuses recently, and the Paul crowd came out in force, gobbling up 16 of the 19 available positions. In how many other states will this happen, or has it already happened?
But those delegates are required to vote for Romney, right?
Not so fast.
The Ron Paul campaign could actually ask those "disguised" Romney delegates to abstain during the first round of voting in Tampa. If Romney did not win on the first ballot, those delegates would then become unbound and would be able to support Ron Paul.
In fact, Ronald Reagan considered using this tactic against Gerald Ford in 1976. The following is from a 1976 article entitled "Reagan Forces May ‘Steal’ Ford Votes"....
“In secret strategy sessions, Reagan aides have toyed with the idea of asking delegates to abstain as long as their state laws require them to honor the primary verdicts.
This would prevent the President from riding up an early-ballot victory. Then, in subsequent ballots, they could legally switch to Reagan.
Delegates have abstained from voting before. Back in 2008, at least 14 delegates abstained from voting at the Republican national convention.
So what would happen if the Ron Paul campaign was able to get 100 or 150 "Romney delegates" to abstain from voting during the first ballot in Tampa?
That is a very intriguing question.
And remember, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich also have significant numbers of delegates pledged to each of them.
So Ron Paul does not need to accumulate 1,144 delegates himself to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot. He just needs to keep Romney from getting to 1,144.
The race for the Republican nomination is not over.
You can find a state by state breakdown of delegate voting rules right here.
It is not too late to get involved.
If nobody gets to 1,144 on the first ballot in Tampa, it becomes a "brokered convention" and anyone can become the nominee - even someone that is not running right now.
So if you are not satisfied with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee, don't lose hope yet.
The game is still being played.
It would be a challenge, but if his supporters get energized enough, it certainly is possible that Ron Paul could still win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination on the first ballot in Tampa.
And if that happens, anything is possible.
In other words, you can’t refute a thing I’ve said.
“....but at the same time argued that the federal government should not interfere with the states in passing laws on abortion.”
Then he’s not pro-life. End of story.
See, I don’t care about signing pledges, stirring speeches, or books that make Paultards say “Oooh and aaaah”. I care about what people have actually done to advance the pro-life movement. Ron Paul has done nothing.
When you say something worth refuting, I’ll do so. A jumbled clump of disjointed and inaccurate hyperbole with only a passing glance at grammar deserves once derision.
Wrong again. I WAS one of Ron Paul’s Useless Idiots. I’ve read all the crap from Screwy Lewy Rockwell, Thomas Di Lorenzo, Thomas Woods, and others from RuPaul’s circle. Ron Paul is an anarchist, not a Conservative. Even the whackos at the LP have distanced themselves from him. If you’ll note Gary Johnson is the Libertarian Party’s candidate, not Jew hater Ron Paul.
The problem certainly isn’t the Conservative Movement, it’s RuPaul and his desire to have mentally ill homosexual perverts serve openly in the military. (He voted to repeal DADT). The problem isn’t Sarah Palin, the problem is Ron Paul’s desire to support the building of the Ground Zero Mosque. The problem isn’t the “neocons” who want to defend the country from Islamo-Nazi agression, the problem is RuPaul and his Code Pinko allies wanting to allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.
OK-— Let’s try it another way. Name one socialist program that RuPaul has abolished. Has the Federal Reserve been audited or abolished ? NOPE. Has Ron Paul led the charge to get rid of the EPA or the Department of Education ? NOPE. Where was Ron Paul on Obama’s birth certificate ? If he’s Captain Constitution as you claim, he would have been the first one to question whether the Kenyan should be in office, right ? And another thing, if Ron Paul thought that George W. Bush waged illegal wars in Iraq and Trashcanistan, (which they’re not-—Congress approved both wars, which satisfies the requirement for declaring war. The Constitution has no precise langue that must be used to declare war.) why didn’t he lead the charge to have him impeached ? (It would have been fun since Paul voted for the war in Afghanistan.)
Ron Paul is just another useless bureaucrat who used his office to sell coffee mugs, t-shirts, and unreadable books. He’s no better than Romney and is nowhere near the Constitutionalist Newt Gingrich is and he certainly doesn’t have the track record of success that Gingrich has, either.
“Having military bases in 137 Countries out of 179 and playing globo-cop is ‘not’ being Imperialist?”
Nope. And you insult the memories of those who died in hell holes like Guadalcanal, Okinawa, and Iwo Jima by saying so.
If you’ll note, in Germany, they use the Euro not the dollar. They also speak German, not English. In Japan, they use the Yen and speak Japanese. If the US was truly “imperialist” as you non-cons suggest, Japan and Germany would have become US territories instead of being the independent nations they are today.
And no, I don’t approve of going around the world and righting every wrong.
I wrote and posted this at FR:
**************************************
We Won. Yippee.
The One and Only FRee Republic | 8/22/11 | Alan Levy
Posted on 08/21/2011 9:49:41 PM PDT by Absolutely Nobama
As of this writing, Libyan dictator Mommar Qadaffi has flown the coup. The rebels have taken Tripoli and this stage of the Libyan Civil War is over, thanks to the United States, mostly.
In the coming days, Chairman Obama’s sycophants in the arrogant and lazy press are going to paint this as some sort of “great victory for Democracy”. Chris “I’ll Have Another Drink” Matthews (H/T Mark Levin) will get thrills up both his legs, rather than one. Rachel Maddcow will tell us tales about how our Dear Leader stood up to those pests Congress who kept insisting that the United States should concentrate on the two wars it’s already involved in. I’m sure Keith Olbermann will be doing his happy dance for all eight of Current TV’s viewers. Happy days have returned to the People’s Republic of Progressivakia! Seig heil, Fuhrer Obama! All hail Progressivakian Imperialism! Hope and Che for all! 2+2=5!
Now, let me be among the first to ask this very, very important question: Exactly what did we win ?
Sure, the victims of Pan Am 103 get some justice. I’m all for that. Mommar Qadaffiduck was a state sponsor of terror and a vile piece of excrement that the world doesn’t need in power. There’s no question that the world is .0000000000001% safer with Qadaffiduck not in power. But the answer to the question above is:
Nothing. We have won nothing.
Despite this “victory”, unemployment will still be at 9.2% for the foreseeable future. The housing market will still be dead. Gas prices will still be absurd. The stock market will still be as schizophrenic as Ron Paul’s cyberstormtroopers. American troops will still risking their lives in Iraq and Trashcanistan. Uncle Sam will still be drowning in red ink, and oh yes, the American people will still be oppressed by the Big Mommy Regime in Washington DC.
In other words, nothing will change, other than fact that America will be footing the bill for all kinds of goodies for the Libyan people. The American tax payer will be paying for roads, bridges, schools, and kinds of “shovel-ready projects” in Libya that they will never use or benefit from, much like in Iraq and Trashcanistan. (While I support the wars in both places, I do not support the way they are being fought. Either fight to win or don’t bother fighting. This winning “hearts and minds” crap is one of the big reasons The War on Terror is entering its 10th year. I don’t blame this on the brave men and women who are serving in those hell holes, I blame the squeamish politicians who are directing the war. Yeah, I know, I’m a heartless “neocon imperialist”. Blah, blah, blah. Yadda, yadda, yadda.) The American taxpayer will have his taxes raised so his wealth can be redistributed to the “worthy” Libyans.
We won. Yippee.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2767107/posts
Name one socialist program Ron Paul has voted for. You rail against him when it’s the duplicity of others you should be pissed at.
I’ll ask you again: What great accomplishment can Ron Paul hang his fake eyebrow on ?
I rail against Paul because he’s a Jew hating, homosexual agenda pushing fraud.
Nobama is going to get Obama again. Wow talk about angry little puppy.......yip yip yip.
Don’t think you are going get thru to him he has it so under control lol
Who you voting for gobama, oromney?
He has never voted for an expansion of the FedGov. He has never voted for a violation of Art 1 Sec 8 express limits on Federal power.
As for Jews and fags...
Eric doesn’t like him but even he admits Ron is neither overtly pro-gay nor anti-Semitic.
Don’t be stupid. I know it’s tough for you... But please try...
No. I know. I’ve seen Alan’s type many times here. Varying issues, but no less a moron than Troofers, American Socialists, or those who insist we never went to the Moon...
"No Way!"
Well, it’s not going to be homosexual agenda pusher Paul. And it’s fairly apparent by my screen name, it sure isn’t going to be the Kenyan in the White House. If you’ll take a look at the posts I’ve on this thread, you’ll see I’m not exactly keen on Romney, either.
However——
I’m in the Anyone But Obama camp. He’s a Marxist pig who has to go. Cut and Run Paul can’t do it, and neither can Gary Johnson. Romney might have a shot if he can keep his “independent progressive” comments to himself. (Along with his socialist impulses like Romneycareless.) It sucks that we’re in this position, but reality is reality. I voted proudly for Newt Gingrich, campaigned for him, but in the end, he lost. I’m bummed, but we have to turn our attention to saving the Republic from the disaster that is Obama. The country can’t take another 4 years of this. We are on the edge of complete and total disaster.
Do I trust Romney ? No. Do I care for his campaign strategy ? No. Do I like the fact that he had murderer and lib hack Ted Kennedy help him write Romneycareless ? No. Do I think he’s a crony capitalist ? Yep. He’s a member of the GOP-E, which puts him in the same category as losers like Lindsay Grahamnesty, John McLame, and Susan Vodka Collins.
As disgraceful as the above is, it’s nowhere near the satanic damage Obama has done to this country. If you choose to follow Ron Paul on his fool’s errand, you’ll be helping dog eater Obama stay in office. Again, it sucks but reality is reality.
I may write in Sarah Palin. Who knows ?
Hey, if you want to have a debate, fine. Don’t get all snippy and personal.
By the way, I’m waaay smarter than you. I’m not the one singing the praises of the OWS candidate. You are.
Get through to me to do what, vote for a miserable old Jew hater who couldn’t get himself elected as dog catcher if he ran unopposed ?
You Paulbots are a hoot.
LOL, and I even tried! ;-)
All kidding aside, I think Romney is horrible and I’m terribly disappointed that Newt Gingrich didn’t win, but reality is reality. There is a point where we have to say, “Yeah, this sucks, but the primary is over. Let’s get that Kenyan Usurper out of the White House.”
This doesn’t mean Romney has my support. He doesn’t. If the MSM lets him win, I’ll be watching him like a hawk. I also plan to campaign very hard to make sure that Conservatives take the House and the Imperial Senate. We the Conservatives should make sure Romney is surrounded by Conservatives....whether he likes it or not.
Or I might write in Sarah Palin. Who knows ?
So in other words you don’t know what to do, no plan. You might even vote for Romney. Brilliant! Hopefully we won’t all get what you deserve.
Well... With all those extra "a"'s in "way"... I guess you may very well be more "special" than me. For certain.
As for OWS, no one here is singing Obama's praises. Of that you can be assured.
Look, support Romney if you must. Just be honest about it. Or, if you aren't supporting either Romney or Paul, be open about your support for Obama.
Just be honest. If you can...
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.