Posted on 02/06/2008 7:50:37 AM PST by Congressman Billybob
The first state results to be reported on Super Tuesday came from the Republican Caucus in West Virginia. The result was that Mike Huckabee got all the delegates from that state to the Republican Convention. What makes the story really interesting is, HOW he got those delegates.
From the report I have, here’s how the delegates voted in round one:
* Romney 464 * Huckabee 375 * McCain 176 * Paul 118
Ron Paul, who got the fewest votes, was dropped from the ballot for the next round of voting. The results then became:
* Huckabee 524 * Romney 479 * McCain 11
Anyone who can count to twenty without removing his socks can see what happened. McCain’s operatives saw that they were going nowhere in West Virginia. So they instructed their people to give the state to Huckabee. And most of their delegates obeyed that order.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ran this title on the story: “Wild and Wonderful Win for Huckabee.” That title is false. This was a “Down and Dirty Win for McCain.” Huckabee is going nowhere. Eventually, at the Republican Convention if not before, Huckabee’s candidacy will fold like a cheap lawn chair. At that point, who will get those West Virginia delegates?
If you guessed Mitt Romney, I’ll allow you another guess. John McCain has just stolen the votes of West Virginia by giving them, temporarily, to his ally in the theft, Mike Huckabee. By the way, national convention delegates must vote as they were pledged when elected, depending on state laws. I understand that none remain bound beyond the third roll-call vote.
As the saying goes, politics ain’t beanbag. What was just done in West Virginia is entirely legal. But it smells as bad as a dumpster full of day-old crab shells behind Phillips Crab House in Ocean City, Maryland, in mid-July. Believe you me, that is REALLY rank.
If the delegates from West Virginia are enough to put McCain over the top, then McCain has just stolen the nomination. Right in front of God and everybody.
Well, has anything similar happening among the Democrats? Just by coincidence, it has.
In order to preserve the special status of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, the Democratic National Committee required that no other state conduct its Democrat primaries before a certain date in 2008. Democrats in Florida and Michigan decided to move their primaries up in violation of that limit.
The DNC then “stripped” the delegates from both states for the Convention. No delegates were then elected in the “beauty contest primaries” in those two states. Democrat candidates had also pledged not to campaign in those states, and in Michigan, Hillary Clinton was the only major candidate to leave her name on the state ballot.
Well, Hillary Clinton won both of those states. After those non-delegate elections, she wrote a letter to the DNC demanding that delegates for her from those states be seated at the Convention. The rest of this discussion is somewhat obscure, but I guarantee it is correct. I speak as the former Parliamentarian for a national political convention. (The convention was for Ross Perot’s Reform Party. But the principles of operating a convention are the same, regardless of the candidate’s chance of winning the coming election.)
When the Democrats meet in Convention in the summer, initially no delegates from Florida or Michigan will be seated. But let’s say at that point that Hillary Clinton has a majority of the seated delegates, but not the absolute majority of all authorized delegates which is required for nomination. You with me so far?
Who gets to decide whether Hillary Clinton delegates from Florida and Michigan get seated? Why, it’s the delegates who are already seated, that’s who. In that circumstance, Hillary can use her plurality on the floor to steal the delegates from those two states. Having done that, she will have stolen the nomination. Right in front of God and everybody.
In short, there is a possibility that the 2008 presidential election may be unique in American history. Before 2008, nominations have been stolen. Elections have been stolen (recall the Hayes-Tilden race of 1876). But never before have two candidates, both of whom stole their nominations, faced each other in a general election.
If the vote tallies are tight at both the Republican and Democrat national conventions, it is possible we might see that unique circumstance, two election thieves facing each other with one guaranteed to win, between John McCain and Hillary Clinton.
Sorta makes you proud to be an American, don’t it?
- 30 -
About the Author: John Armor practiced in the US Supreme Court for 33 years. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu He lives in the 11th Congressional District of North Carolina.
- 30 -
They denied what they were doing and we’ll see what Huck is to receive for his cooperation.
LOL . . . the “born-again Romney.” They don’t know the outlet of their gastrointestinal system from a hole in the ground.
How did they deny what they were doing? What did they say and why don’t you believe them? They are caucus voters . . . folks like you and I but in West Virginia. Voters.
119 didn't vote or were their ballots "misplaced", not counted, or shoved in a drawer.
While we're playing dirty politics, I'm sure that will just be overlooked as well.
John McCain: Foot soldier of the Reagan Revolution who went AWOL
_________________________
Funny!
So you look at this as funny? Our likely nominee is endorsed by the pro-choice wing of the party. Cutesy comments don’t change that fact. Pro-lifers are going to get dismissed by this candidate, while you joke.
A coalition of pro-lifers could have been built IMO. Immature and naive folks have prevented that.
McCain is much more reliable on abortion than Romney. $50 copay for publicly funded universal healthcare in Massachusetts. Kennedy at the signing. I cannot believe that so many internet conservatives have been suckered by this guy.
ForgetaboutsellingRomneyasasocialconservative.
McCain will not be reliable on abortion. When brought to the floor he voted pro-life, but he did everything procedurally possible to try to keep those votes from coming up. Pro-life Senators have recounted this.
You can think what you like and call me every name in the book, that’s your right. But, you will continue to remain naive. Vote McCain when your man is discarded. You will see how far the cause of pro-life advances (not at all).
Comparing actual public statements by Romney and McCain on abortion and what they’ve actually done I vote Huckabee.
Good luck to you. Huckabee will never win.
My pro-life man is gone a long time ago. I now have to make practical decisions. I will not vote for McCain. He has great disdain for social conservatives. It’s been that way for years.
Good article John.
1. Those of you Romney supporters incensed at McCain’s tactics in WV need to research history a bit more. This is actually the way presidential nominations used to be determined in our Republic on a routine basis before our present primary system began to gain favor around the turn of the 20th century. To date there are still some holdover states who still determine delegates using the caucus method such as WV. All McCain did was play politics. Dirty yes, but legal, and is in fact the way the game used to be played. He simply outmaneuvered and outflanked Romney, nothing more and nothing less. Romney could have done the same to McCain in a caucus environment but failed. If you don’t like this outcome blame West Virginia for not changing the system there.
2. If you think the caucus method is unfair then you are in effect saying Lincoln should have never been nominated as that is EXACTLY how he won the nomination in Chicago in 1860. FYI: “New York senator William H. Seward was the favorite going into that 1860 convention. On the eve of the presidential balloting, however, the campaign staff of Abraham Lincoln, as well as some members of the Illinois delegation, bartered with key delegation leaders to secure Lincoln’s nomination....,The third ballot gave Abraham Lincoln of Illinois 231 1/2 votes, with 233 necessary for nomination.” (Just as the 2nd ballot in WV gave it to Huckabee). Back to 1860..”the Ohio delegation changed its four votes from Salmon P. Chase of Ohio to Lincoln and Abraham Lincoln was nominated”...giving him the remaining votes necessary.
http://cpl.lib.uic.edu/004chicago/timeline/firstconv.html
http://www.chicagohs.org/history/politics/1860.html
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/Hx/NomProcess.html
The caucus system may be unfair but its an old system and WV apparently wants it so deal with it. Want some cheese with your wine?
Funny how you criticize Romney but ignore McCain’s tactics.
This is politics and you will not win unless you can show the differences between the candidates.
Get real.
There is nothing wrong with showing a person’s record. And, no one expects other candidates to do him favors.
I can tell you - I know nothing of Romney but I have been impressed by his campaign and his debates. The man states his case clearly, shows intelligence and ability.
I know McCain and am scared to death of the man, I have watched Huckabee and find him unknowledgeable enough on our world situation to handle the presidency. So - Romney for me - but again, “they” have chosed McCain for us gopers.
Okay, I’m no fan of McCain, but is this something illegitimate, or is this just politics?
Just politics - read my post #112.
You have to be kidding or a “plant”.
McCain has done nothing but act to further McCain all these years and the White House has been his goal all along.
What a pity he chose to cozy up to the dems rather than the conservatives over the years - might have made this a little easier on him.
Yet, he is playing the politics of “don’t worry about them - they have no where else to go”. But, he might find out conservatives have a little more power than he thinks.
But, what else is new in politics? Deals have been made in back rooms for generations. I just hope that McCain comes to the realization that he cannot win against Hitlery or Obama without the conservative vote and, somehow, Fred Thompson or some other REAL conservative (Newt?) has some influence at the convention. McCain would look more attractive to me if Fred was his running mate--NOT the Huckster. Like I said, he's dirt.
Maybe I just like his way of pandering better than the tactics of a “snake in the grass” McCain who is unstable, has an anger issue, has proved we can never trust him as he turns on us every time we need him.
Or, his pandering and the fact that Romney has impressed me with his abilities in getting things done, his economic abilities and the way he has handled himself in the debates and this election.
Thanks - this is also a learning process for many of us.
I have always appreciated kind freepers who gently teach me rather than calling me stupid, etc.
I fail in that regard when I run across some dummies posting as I generally think they are pulling something rather than just ignorant of the way things work.
Keep up the good work.
I just don’t get the “economic” reason to support Romney when he put in place universal healthcare in Mass.
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.