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 -
Progress, oh yes progress.
We now are merely democrat lite. Really makes me one to pound the pavement for voters. Our great country in the hands of an unstable man with a big ole’ bag of dirty tricks.
What treasures will he have in store for us mere conservatives that seek to protect this country?
It might really surprise you to learn that maybe they hate conservatism and that is why he may not be popular.
The media hates conservatives, the media tries to control elections by their spin. So, therefore, you see no good reports of conservatives such as Thompson, Bush, Cheney. Now that Romney is the most conservative left standing - we have fly-by-nights posting here trashing him with every post.
Wonder why that is????????? Could it be merely more conservative hatred and liberal dirty tricks?
manipulating the results to thwart the public?
ok, but then, how about dishonorable? Definitely that.
I’m for Huckabee. If Huck drops I’d go McCain. Can’t stomach Romney. Putting in place a $50 copay for abortions in a universal health care program isn’t the way to get social conservatives or economic conservatives on your side. Nor is appointing homosexual activists as judges. Nor funding and creating a commission to implement pro-homosexual propaganda in the schools. Or supporting, personally, the right of homosexuals to be Boy Scout Masters. Romney is the worst guy that ran on the Republican side, bar none, and including Guilianni and McCain.
Maybe they are his “friends” because that is who he is - a democrat catering to the dems.
And, we, stupid GOP, elect him to be president so we can moan and groan for all the travesties he exerts on conservatism in the next 4 years.
Funny how you see trash posts against any man other than the one that will do the most harm to the conservative movement, McCain. I believe we too here are being assaulted by libs.
Voters don’t like him because they are too stupid to see what a conservative is.
Negative campaign? Why those are the tactics of McCain, Huckabee - is Romney to be goody-goody and give them the election?
No one that knows anything about McCain and is conservative will want McCain - they know the man. Romney has class, is stable, has strong experience with economics.
What is McCain going to do for conservatives? Nothing. What is McCain going to do about immigration - nothing.
You may be happy but I expect the government to stop the illegal invasion and it won’t happen with Huckabee or McCain.
Well, I'm not going suicidal like a lot of "principled" folks, if that's what you mean.
When Reagan lost in the '76 primaries to Ford, he went out and campaigned hard for him. And Ford was worse than anybody running now, in my opinion. The people who think Reagan is the ultimate conservative Republican role model should remember that.
Gee - how whiney. Can’t expect a candidate to run his campaign can you.
What about McCain - what about Huckabee? I have not seen positive campaigns from them. You are right payback - we will see payback.
You are the whiner.
Or too smart to trust someone who has been a social conservative for a shorter time than my PreSchooler has been alive and *never* at a time when it was to his disadvantage..
Not dishonorable either. Just smart politics. If you were a McCain supporter in W. Virginia at the caucus and were an honest supporter of McCain, who would you have chosen yesterday before the super-Tuesday results came in: Romney or Huckabee? To me, it’s obvious that Huckabee was the natural choice since Romney had been making noise that he would be able to win California and turn it into a two man race. Romney portrayed himself as the threat and the McCain camp bought it. So they helped Huck, who is now back in the race. Huck will be more so if he can win Louisianna or Kansas in the next round of primaries. It’s a common sense result and there is nothing dishonorable about it. Don’t buy into the whining or accusations.
Nuh uh.
Agreed. It's amazing that Romney has been given such a free pass on his politically expedient flip-flops by those who would anoint him "true conservative."
Now as you’re more or less honorable, I think as a big boy this is a cookie crumble. The real cry should be why winner take all.
Let me explain how I feel about this. It’s the scheming that I object to. If I was a McCain supporter and decided this, fine.
But it didn’t happen that way. No, it was a backroom power scheming bargain to thwart the process and that was dishonorable and dishonest.
I don’t agree.
Romney is not one that will stab us in the back, he has strong economic skills and he is stable.
Part of what went on in Mass. was because Mass. is a very liberal state electing a conservative for his financial abilities. The Mass. law caused a lot of your complaints. But, he is against abortion so stop your whining about the $50 copay for abortions. That was probably the liberals or the law.
We’ll disagree. Those people were attending a caucus. They were people just like you and I and were free to vote their conscience.
You should not have to explain honor, fairness, ethics to a poster on FR claiming to support Huckabee.
He doesn’t care.
“Whatever happened to honor?”
In politics? Politics has ALWAYS been dirty.
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.