Posted on 02/03/2012 11:37:06 AM PST by VinL
You did not misread the headline; and it’s not just a truism about Mr. Gingrich’s political orientation, I mean he’s correct—that Florida’s winner-take-all primary system isn’t fair.
According to Republican National Committee guidelines, all contests held prior to April 1 must allocate delegates proportionally. But Florida, not wishing to change procedures or fall behind other states, decided to flout the RNC rule, which means that Mitt Romney will get all 50 of its delegates. Mr. Gingrich—who came in second—will get none. Under a proportional system, Mr. Romney would receive 23 and Mr. Gingrich 16.
Not only that, NPR has calculated that Mr. Gingrich would currently be leading his rival 39 to 32 overall (New Hampshire plus South Carolina plus Florida), if delegates were allotted proportionally.
Mr. Gingrich’s campaign, which has surely done the same math as NPR, has complained to the Florida G.O.P., and consequently left me in a rather unfamiliar position. For perhaps the first time in my life, I completely agree with the former House speaker and future moon colonist.
Mr. Gingrich might have raised this issue before the Florida primary, when some polls suggested he could eke out enough of a plurality to benefit from the winner-take-all system. I doubt he would care about the RNC guidelines if he’d managed to win, and I doubt Florida’s delegates will be instrumental in determining whether Mr. Romney or Mr. Gingrich earns the G.O.P. nomination.
But the point is that a candidate in a two-person, winner-take-all primary could get 49.9 percent of the votes, and receive no delegates, and that’s not right. As our editorial board has said many times, both parties’ rules should be rewritten to guarantee that the number of delegates a candidate receives accurately reflects his percentage of the popular vote. (snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at loyalopposition.blogs.nytimes.com ...
That's total B.S. After Cain dropped out of the running, Rush said on many different shows that there were THREE conservatives in the race: Bachmann, Santorum, and Perry. You and I may disagree, but Rush apparently doesn't consider Newt to be as conservative as he does Santorum. Rush made it pretty obvious who he would be voting for in Florida on Tuesday during one of his last comments of that day's show. He said, "I won't vote for who I think is the most electable today. I will vote for who I agree with the most." Everything he's said on his show througout this primary makes it very clear that, for Rush, that person is Santorum. And any regular listener will know that Rush thinks Romney is a full-tilt liberal, and whatever Rush's issues with Newt are, he has much more respect for Newt than he does Romney.
Check out what Newt said about it last night on Hannity...
http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=10421
Me neither, DJ. The country is going to hell in a handbasket but by not voting for Mittens, I will at least feel good about myself for not going along with the GOP-E sheeple and taking orders from the RNC.
I will not vote for the despicable man,,,EVER!
I wish I hadn’t told some GOP “friends”(not wise Freepers) this though. Two of them went postal on me...and now I’m on the “no call” list, which I suppose isn’t a bad thing!
future moon colonist.
_________________________________
If you think you dont like this is sarcasism against Newt
just wait till they start on Willie Mitty and his belief that he will be the “future owner of his own planet besides the reigning colonist”
FUTURE FUN...
Newt is right! Why have rules if you can break them? Are we all Democrats?
Rush made it pretty obvious who he would be voting for in Florida on Tuesday during one of his last comments of that day’s show. He said, “I won’t vote for who [sic]I think is the most electable today. I will vote for who I agree with the most.” Everything he’s said on his show througout [sic] this primary makes it very clear that, for Rush, that person is Santorum
*******************
That’s fine with me, if that’s how he feels. Then, let’s hear him come out for Santorum. We’re on the precipice of irreversible socialism— time for Rush to worry less about his ratings, and more about the country.
#1 - NYT and NPR obviously want Gingrich to be the nominee.
#2 - Liberals do this all the time: change the rules when they don’t like the results.
The demand is thoroughly undemocratic. Sore Loser-ism seems to always happen in Florida.....
If Newt had won in Florida, Republicans would not be “arguing that rules and laws should be changed after the fact” and the losers should get a share of the delegates. Republicans did not demand that debate moderators should allow applause, catcalls, etc. when such had been disallowed to level the playing field. Republicans never attacked capitalism before.
“I do not want to play by your rules when they do not favor ME, ME, ME,” said the Angry Muffin Top.
Republicans did not do these things, but Newt did. And they’re all out of the leftist playbook.
So, if Florida had held their primary after April 1, Romney would have 50 more delegates. Doesn't this make true conservatives happy? Does anything?
Rush and Newt are not close friends. Rush supports Romney because his rich friends support Romney, and Rush, who every so often stands up to the republican establishment, will not stand up against his rich friends and support Newt. His dinner party invites might suffer.
No they aren’t, and that meme won’t fly.
ANd NO, we won’t vote for ROmney.
I learned alot about Rush when Mark Levin’s book came out, and Newt hit the two homeruns in the SC debates..
On the same broadcast, Rush talked about Newt’s standing ovation, but he could only do that for 1-2 minutes, without going into 5 min of “he was really delivering my CPac speech” and went on and on about his CPac speech, how it touted conservative values.
Later, that same broadcast, he talked about Mark Levin’s Ameritopia coming out, and, again, in 1-2 minutes then went on a long detour about how people are always telling Rush to make a book of his past monologues, how his first book was 20 years old now... yada yada...
He just can’t talk about anyone’s accomplishments without one-upping them. I could see minimizing Newt’s answers, he doesn’t support Newt. but Levin is supposed to be his friend, and Levin is definitely Limbaugh’s intellectual superiority.
It it getting worse with Rush as he ages.
It sounds like they buy that because he has an “R” behind his name that means he isn’t liberal. I’m sorry your friends aren’t wiser. A lot of people don’t have enough info. The MSM likes it that way.
Of course, he shouldn't be -- unless the only other option is Barack Obama.
The rule is posted on the RNC website:
(2) Any presidential primary,
caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the
purpose of selecting delegates to the national
convention which occurs prior to the first day of April
in the year in which the national convention is held,
shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a
proportional basis.
Why the heck don’t they follow their own rules? Oh, wait ...
Open a can of STFU and drink the whole thing and GTH away form us.
Just what I was thinking! That old slime box across from the bus station is getting ready to do an editorial in favor of abolishing the electoral college (if they haven’t already).
Thanks! thought the deal was they gave up half the delegates in order to move their primary UP but no rule change on the election outcome on awarding the delegates
Rush and pretty much every other commentator.
Meanwhile, one of the possibilities they urge me to "get behind" is a person so craven that as governor, with the governor's pen with an official proclamation, endorsed and encouraged a movement that "reaches out" to kids as young as junior high schoolers in "gay youth pride" celebrations where they either declare themselves gay and proud of it, or embrace open homosexuality in their peers. (NOTE: I've been mistaken in posts of late citing it being aimed at a specific middle school -- my memory was faulty, as I learned when I went online to find the original information to link -- it's worse than that; the "Gay Youth Pride" events involve adults AND children)
Vote FOR a guy so craven and depraved that he used his political office to promote the open embrace and self-declaration of homosexuality among children?
People can rationalize it all they want -- "B-b-b-but Anybody But Obama!" or "What about the Supreme Court justices?" (to which I say, go do some online research on Romney's judge picks in Massachusetts, most of which were activist liberal Democrats) or the hysterical cry, "Bbbbut .. we can't survive another four years of Obama!"
EXCUSE ME -- if we can't survive another four years of a Socialist Marxist Democrat, we'd certainly find ourselves cursed ten times worse if we voted FOR a Republican who has engaged in such depraved evil as condoning open homosexuality among schoolchildren.
Republican leaders want me to get behind that?
Count me out. I'll have enough to answer for on Judgment Day.
IIRC, the NY Slimes endorsed Juan McInsane four years ago. So much for their editorial judgement. They’re happy as long as Republicans are at each others’ throats, not focusing on defeating the Kenyan socialist.
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.