Before a convention convenes, the Rules Committee meets and writes the rules for THAT convention.
In 2012, the Rules Committee met and wrote Rule 40 (b) for the 2012 convention. There was never any intention of it applying to future conventions.
The Rules Committee has yet to meet for the 2016 convention. And they will write the rules that apply to the 2016 convention.
It has been this way since the beginning of time...
Does that happen in the April meeting, or the week before the convention?
Correct, with the caveat that, at the start of the Convention, the delegates can vote to change those rules.
Yes in 2012 they changed the rules for that election to protect their golden dud, Romney.
The problem is, there are a LOT of newcomers to the political process... This has been how parties have operated since created.
The same with the majority delegate requirement. That rule has been in place since the GOP was founded.
Thank you for injecting some common sense and sanity into this thread. The standing rules for a convention are adopted at the start of that convention and apply for that convention only. At least that's the way it's been at the conventions I have attended over the years. I have been a delegate to many conventions--not conventions of political parties, but conventions nonetheless--and that's the way it works.
So the Committee could come out with a new rule that states candidates who win a majority of delegates in more than 5 states are INELIGIBLE (in the cause of White Privilege no doubt) and we should be fine with that?
Any rule that just happens to exclude Trump is a good rule, eh ?
Maybe they’ll make a rule that only candidates who have previously held some national elected office are eligible for the party nomination ? That would exclude Trump and put Cruz, Kasich, Rubio, and Jeb back in play.
The RNC keeps reminding everyone that the PARTY has the right to nominate whoever they like, which makes the Primary process inclusion of voters a farce. If that was going to be the case, the voters deserved to know from the beginning. Trump would have run 3rd Party and the GOP would have Jeb and Cruz and Kasich fighting it out and still losing in national polls to Trump running as an independent.
Way back at the beginning, Trump extracted a promise from the RNC to “treat him fairly” in exchange for his promise no to run 3rd Party. If the RNC throws away its honor, the GP is FINISHED.
If that happens, Trump should demand immediate action from all the State election boards to allow late filing for Independents and get his name on all ballots. GOP voters will vote for him just out of spite for what the RNC has done. The GOPe candidate will have the distinction of the lowest vote count in history.
Nice for all those candidates working hard, spending money, and upsetting their family’s lives. Are the Dems this bad too?
You are looking down your nose at your betters and it makes you look like a cheap pompous fool.
You haven’t discussed nor researched the motive for the rule change for 40b in 2012. You’ve done nothing but convey an elementary school attitude of you-know-better, when it is clear to everyone with a modicum of intelligence in the forum of what rules are meant for.
Because there are many intelligence posters who know the rules and what they intend, and who are disapproving of the GOP establishment making rule changes, THEN IT FOLLOWS they must know something you don’t! This is why you look foolish!
You did not bother to do any research on the subject and contributed ZERO information to the discussion other than insert your pompous nose into the thread. Here is an example of what you failed to do:
SUMMARY OF THE 2012 RULE CHANGE
“Rather than only requiring a candidate to have a plurality of the delegates from five states in order to have one’s name placed into nomination, the rule was changed to require a candidate to have a majority of delegate votes in at least eight states as a prerequisite to nomination.”
MOTIVE FOR THE RULE CHANGE
The rule change was made to head off Ron Paul’s dirty manipulations. Paul had won 4 states with a plurality of votes and had INSTALLED DELEGATES IN 4 OTHER STATES THAT ROMNEY HAD WON, delegates who would cast votes for Paul regardless.
If Paul were to achieve 5 states at the convention, he would then be eligible for the nomination, his name would be on the nomination ballot at the convention. This would lead to a divided acrimonious convention, a contested convention.
CURRENT MOTIVE FOR AN INTENDED RULE CHANGE
Current reports of what the corrupt GOP establishment is doing for Cruz via their de facto chief, Mitt Romney reveal they are attempting to INSTALL DELEGATES IN STATES THAT DONALD TRUMP HAS WON, delegates who will cast their votes for the GOP establishment-backed Cruz.
By changing rule 40b, the rules committee ensures Cruz will be a nominee on the convention ballot, thereby leading to a contested convention.
CONTRAST AND COMPARISON OF 2012 AND 2016
In 2012, the rule was changed to STOP A CONTESTED CONVENTION FROM HAPPENING.
In 2016, the rule change is planned to CAUSE A CONTESTED CONVENTION TO HAPPEN.
In 2012, the Non-GOP-backed Paul campaign was known to be INSTALLING DELEGATES IN STATES THAT FRONTRUNNER ROMNEY HAD WON.
In 2016, the GOP-backed Cruz campaign is known to be attempting to INSTALL DELEGATES IN STATES THAT FRONTRUNNER DONALD TRUMP HAS WON.
SUMMARY
In 2016, the corrupt cast of characters that comprise the GOP establishment is doing the same dirty manipulations to Donald Trump that Ron Paul was doing to Romney in 2012. The roles have reversed! The shoe is on the other foot!
What this indicates is there are persons in the GOP leadership who have no principles and no integrity. They lack even the minimum of ethics. They lust for power and will do anything to attain and retain it. These people are not what republicans and conservatives across the country want in leadership. They must go!
Furthermore, Ron Paul’s delegate total was behind that of frontrunner Romney in 2012. Whereas, Ted Cruz’ delegate is behind that of frontrunner Donald Trump in 2016. The difference is the GOP corrupt establishment was NOT backing the loser Paul in 2012, but IS backing the loser Cruz in 2016.
CONCLUSION
Changes contemplated for Rule 40b in 2016 are motivated only by the desire to stop the frontrunner Donald Trump from being the GOP nominee and not for any reason of fairness or desire to ensure a smooth and united convention. Therefore, the change will be a cause of tremendous anger to voters who intended to vote for the GOP frontrunner.