Are you talking about the delegates that should have been sent but were denied because of RETROACTIVE rule-changes to the primary?
OneWinged —
If by “RETROACTIVE” rule, you mean a rule that shouldn’t have to even exist telling people to not do what severely ethically wrong? Paul made a point of inserting his representatives as delegates even though they were representing other candidates.
The whole point of delegates not being “bound” to one candidate, is so that if compelling information should surface immediately before the primary, then those delegate are free to change their votes.
Those delegates WERE NOT allowed to be unbound so that an an entirely unethical and corrupt campaign might, by subterfuge, entirely overthrow the intent of the primary process!
And that is why all the Paulites that say that Paul was robbed should be shot, because they have no regard for the election process. What Paul and his supporters intended, assuming they accomplished it (because no one knows for sure), would have not only made a mockery of the whole primary process, but also the election as well.
That’s not the way any ethical group goes about restoring faith in legitimate government. Hell, rather than all the subterfuge and wasted time in primary efforts, perhaps we should just pick a General or Admiral and support a military coup.
Let’s face facts here: by mid June Paul was saying he had as many as 200 delegates. However confirmed official delegate counts at that time were the following:
Romney 1,480
Santorum 267
Gingrich 138
Huntsman 2
The entire total of Republican delegates was 2,286.
Romney not only had a plurality of the delegates, but a majority! In crossing the threshold of 1,144 delegates, for a majority, Romney became the Republican candidate. There is no possible (legitimate) means that Paul was going to get the Republican candidacy.
And I say this all while having no love for Romney. In fact, for the first time in my life, I did not vote in that election because I was so disgusted that Romney could be the GOP candidate at a time when ObamaCare was (and remains) such a gross violation of the Constitution. Contrary to some mistaken beliefs, it is no more legitimate under the Constitution and our unalienable rights for the State of Massachusetts to assume ownership of each citizen’s body in that state. I would say that there could not be a worse candidate than Romney, but given Paul’s conduct, and his Middle East foreign policy, that clearly would not be true.
What Paul and his supporters intended to do is unconscionable, unethical, and does not come close to finding any justification even by reference to a “retroactive rule change.” As a result of what they fully intended to carry out, without batting an eye at killing what little faith remains in the election process, I cannot even stand listening to Paul any more. And frankly, they did a good job of tainting Rand as well.