[old republic]

The Rule Change is still NO good. It still takes away the power of a delegate to nominate or vote for the best candidate. It says that if a delegate votes for anyone who the state party rules (as determined by an unstated entity), then they shall be removed as a delegate, and there vote will be counted as a vote for the person they voted against anyway. Not very democratic. This basically allows state party bosses to choose the delegates when it should be the grass roots republicans deciding this. Here is the text of the proposed "improvement":

Rule 16(a)(2). For any manner of binding or allocating delegates under these Rules, if a delegate

(i) casts a vote for a presidential candidate at the National Convention inconsistent with the delegate’s obligation under state law or state party rule,

(ii) nominates or demonstrates support under Rule 40 for a presidential candidate other than the one to whom the delegate is bound or allocated under state law or state party rule, or (iii) fails in some other way to carry out the delegate’s affirmative duty under state law or state party rule to cast a vote at the National Convention for a particular presidential candidate,the delegate shall be deemed to have concurrently resigned as a delegate and the delegate’s improper vote or nomination shall be null and void. Thereafter the Secretary of the Convention shall record the delegate’s vote or nomination in accordance with the delegate’s obligation under state law or state party rule. This subsection does not apply to delegates who are bound to a candidate who has withdrawn his or her candidacy, suspended or terminated his or her campaign, or publicly released his or her delegates.

[WOSG]

“still takes away the power of a delegate to nominate or vote for the best candidate. It says that if a delegate votes for anyone who the state party rules (as determined by an unstated entity), then they shall be removed as a delegate..”

primary winners have their delegates bound, ie, required to vote for the candidate based on who won the primary. The rule to allow candidates to remove delegates was overkill, but the problem being addressed was the RonPaul-ite problem of delegates stiffing the winner of the primary and refusing to do what is required by the rules. Removing a delegate who does not do what party rules REQUIRE of them seems a sensible solution to this problem.

“Not very democratic.” By forcing respect for results of primaries, it is actually more democratic than having an activist minority ‘take over’ delegate slates and then stiffing primary winners and refusing to abide by party rules regarding who they are to support in nomination.