Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

GOP Rules Committee Rapidly Moving to Shut Out Grassroots at 2:00 p.m. Today (It's not over)
RedState ^ | Tuesday August 28, 2012 | Erick Erickson

Posted on 08/28/2012 7:31:55 AM PDT by Bigtigermike

At 2:00 p.m. today in Tampa, the Republican National Committee, led by Team Romney, is moving to shut down conservative grassroots activists. I’ve been on the phone with several individuals involved in the fight who tell me that the fight is not over, it is only just starting.

Specifically, the media is reporting that the rules fight is over because Team Romney is abandoning Ben Ginsberg’s effort to allow candidates to control delegates. Under an initial proposal, delegates would, in effect, be chosen by the presumed nominee’s campaign and not based on votes in the states and delegate selection processes in the states.

That issue appears resolved, but several people I’ve spoken to this morning make clear that Team Romney and the RNC establishment are using that compromise as a red herring to distract from two major rules change proposals that would decimate Republican grassroots and prevent upstart political campaigns.

Reports that the floor fight threat is over might be designed to calm the grassroots and get them to ignore what is coming at 2 o’clock.

The first rule to be proposed is one that would give the Republican National Committee the power to change rules between conventions with a three-quarters vote of the RNC. One source tells me, “With a Republican President, of course this is doable. Everybody will roll over if a President Romney asks them too. They’ll be able to get Ben Ginsberg’s proposal next year.”

In other words, if Team Romney prevails in this rules change, they don’t have to worry about Ben Ginsberg not getting his way today on the delegate changes. They’ll be able to do it later when the press and grassroots are not watching.

The second rules change would front load winner takes all primaries.

(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012rncconvention; benginsberg; benginsburg; bothparties; conservatives; corruption; damnedifyoudo; damnedifyoudont; dopers; ginsberg; ginsburg; globalist; gope; grassroots; libertarians; notjustronpaul; nwo; paulistas; paultards; republicanconvention; rino; rinomountsgop; rinorats; rnc; romney; ronpaul; tampa; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 521-533 next last
To: Bigtigermike
They keep using the "Ron Paul" lie as an attempt to shut down dissent. Only cowards use Alinsky tactics.

(Malkin)Floor fight: Grass-roots activists battle attempt to rig GOP convention delegate rules Updated: Party bosses offer olive branch; “tense,” “dynamic” situation; Palin: “direct attack on the grass-roots”

Let me stop here and say that this is NOT…REPEAT NOT a move by a bunch of disgruntled Ron Paul supporters. This is a group of long-time conservative activists, even “party regulars” and lots of Romney supporters, many who go back to the Goldwater days.
21 posted on 08/28/2012 7:52:15 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah

Why doesn’;t Paul nad his supporters have their own libertarian convention, nomination, nominee selection etc.

Keep hearing off the same posters that this is about shutting down the tea party etc but what about the Paulbots who want to not vote for Romney and vote for Paul.

Why onthis earth does the GOP have to let Paul into this process when he clearly is not a republican is beyond me, but saying that they also let queers in now to spew their own agenda.
Pathetic.

The process is done, I was no way a Romney supporter or voter and stil not keen on him but it;s now the convention and that is it.


22 posted on 08/28/2012 7:55:34 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

“WTF is with the distractions at the start of the convention??? They couldn’t have ironed all this out months ago?”

Get used to it. This is the hour for the Geriatric Old Plotters. This is the payback for the humiliations they received at the hands of Goldwater, Reagan, Palin and some others. They own it all now, and it will be their way or the highway.

As for me, my bags are packed, the tank is gassed and I am out the door.


23 posted on 08/28/2012 7:56:02 AM PDT by Psalm 144 ( "I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The party left me." Ronald Wilson Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

This is a preview of the danger that a liberal Republican President poses to the party and the conservative movement. The Democrat party can’t destroy the Republican party and the conservative movement - only the Republican party can do that.


24 posted on 08/28/2012 7:56:30 AM PDT by LaserJock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike
I am a Conservative - not a Republican. Rule changes like this are just another in a long string of “We don't want conservatives” by the GOPe.

I will be voting 3rd party at the top of the ticket and conservative down ticket.

I am a firm believer that the GOP has lost it's way and is no longer the party that supports my views. I will therefore use my vote to further the cause of conservatives by influencing the major / minor party outcome in accordance with the laws of my state.

I will not only join but will support and work for a 3rd party that is a Conservative party.

25 posted on 08/28/2012 7:56:40 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

Fear not folks. This will all be countered by ‘holding MRs feet to the fire”...

Sarcasm aside I welcome this. I hope he/they succeed. Because it will push more people into forming a viable 2nd party.

Of course the diehards will excuse this powergrab as usual.


26 posted on 08/28/2012 7:59:25 AM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

so if that’s the case why hasn;’t Newt, Sarah, michelle Bachmann, Rick your guy and my second, De Mint, Col Allen West , all conservatives like them got into this.

It’s now the convention, Romney is hte nominee, not my vote by a long way but I;ve only seen Paul’s lot going on about this and IMO who shouldn;t be there as Paul is not a republican


27 posted on 08/28/2012 7:59:25 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

There is really no difference in the heads of the Republicans than there are of those of the Dims. It is all about total control, total power, invested in them. To heck with the people. It is about them. Power. This is why there is really never going to be any real chance of this country ever getting back to the Constitution and state rights, and individual rights. It is all about total control to them all.


28 posted on 08/28/2012 8:00:11 AM PDT by RetiredArmy (The Scriptures clearly tell us we are in the last days, the end times. Christ is the only answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I will NEVER vote for Romney or any other establishment republican. They will not ever be kind to conservatives. They will smile only until they get votes and then stab us all in the back. They will not move this country to the right it will continue on the fast track to fascism and tyranny.

You will find that Romney will not undo any of the damage that has been done. He will most likely make it worse while telling us to stop rocking the boat. Hopefully he will prove me wrong but I doubt it.


29 posted on 08/28/2012 8:00:56 AM PDT by formosa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

I’m troubled by this move. This is something that could be a harbringer of something not so good to come. Why would these rule changes come up now unless they expected trouble in 2016? It is like they are trying to put in place an insurance plan in the event Romney disappoints and is challenged in the future. If Romney is going to govern as a conservative and cut the size of government what are they worried about?


30 posted on 08/28/2012 8:01:01 AM PDT by Maelstorm (Now lets return to our regular scheduled deprogramming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manc

Just do as you’re told and don’t worry about me.

Know any good jokes about democrat plantation dwellers?


31 posted on 08/28/2012 8:01:07 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike; All

I don’t care about the winner take all change. It makes sense if you win, you win.

That’s the way our election system works...

The other one I don’t like though, but that will likely be defeated as well. Contrary to the idea that conservatives are being surprised here, I have seen multiple posts mentioning this. Folks are aware of it, and it won’t happen, so I see no reason to freak out.


32 posted on 08/28/2012 8:01:41 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Royal Wulff

Explained here why 75% is not a “high bar.”

They try to sell this to people with the idea that it is a high bar (75%), but a few things:

1) As longtime conservative activist and RNC committeeman from VA Morton Blackwell points out, this is no safeguard, because the chairman generally gets whatever the chairman wants. No disrespect intended to Priebus in that, but who knows who the next chairman may be. He points out that the chair always has lots of favors to give away.

2) The RNC has never had this power before (with the minor exception limited to the fixing of the primary calendar issue in 2008 in order to coordinate w/various state governments and Democrats). Rule making authority has ALWAYS been with the convention…and it remains set for 4 years…so ALL campaigns or potential campaigns konw what the rules will be. If the RNC has this authority, it will soon become a battleground for various presidential contenders looking to monkey with the rules to give themselves a leg up over the competition.

3) If this is so necesary for some specific purpose, why not limit it to that purpose? Kind of makes you wonder…

http://michellemalkin.com/

Anything puting more power in the hands of RNC powerbrokers is bad for the grassroots.


33 posted on 08/28/2012 8:02:23 AM PDT by KansasGirl ("If you have a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."--B. Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins

No. It’s an over-reaction to Ron Paul.

Doesn’t make it right, as it does hurt conservatives in the process. But, this will all work out. They don’t want a floor fight at the national televised convention, or at least they shouldn’t.


34 posted on 08/28/2012 8:03:19 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
I agree that changing these rules would have long-term unintended consequences and would not be a good thing, but the original intent was to shut down an infiltration by dishonest people who are trying very hard to make trouble at the convention.

Unfortunately this is the precursor for tyranny, which is worse.

35 posted on 08/28/2012 8:04:07 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm
Its a replay of 1964 with another Romney trying the same stunt.

(1964) GOP warned to beware of extremists. May destroy republicans; Romney.

At upper left.
36 posted on 08/28/2012 8:06:51 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox
if Romney was really going after the Tea Party types he never would have selected Ryan.

Surely, you don't believe that! You are NOT seeing the devil in the details. It's OBVIOUS, yet some can't see it and haven't through this whole campaign!

37 posted on 08/28/2012 8:07:52 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

EXACTLY. Bush cartel in play here. Jeb is out doing Hispanic outreach.


38 posted on 08/28/2012 8:08:38 AM PDT by magna carta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

My thoughts exactly. This makes me really, really uneasy.


39 posted on 08/28/2012 8:13:55 AM PDT by KansasGirl ("If you have a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."--B. Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I’m sorry but the main proponent of these rule changes to wipe out Tea Party and grassroots opposition to the Establishment is Romney’s campaign lawyer, Ben Ginsberg. He wouldn’t be doing this on his own accord without the direct knowledge of the Romney campaign and Romney himself in fact. The TRUTH hurts but this is who we are dealing with whether he is President or not within 2 months


40 posted on 08/28/2012 8:14:35 AM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 521-533 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson