• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Texas delegates planning floor mutiny over RNC rules changes

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
TAMPA--On Monday morning, at a meeting of more than 100 Texan delegates and alternates at the Saddlebrook Resort 20 miles north of Tampa, one topic got the crowd more fired up than any other. Delegate Melinda Fredricks read aloud a letter condemning recent changes to the national Republican party's rules that would allow the GOP presidential candidate to veto and replace state delegates.

The new Republican Party rule? Replace delegates that were selected during the primary process and replace them with delegates friendly to Romney? Uh uh. This is not the old Soviet Union. This is America, dammit. I support this floor fight. Yes, even with the proper delegates in place, Romney is still going to be nominated, but these delegates were chosen by the people, and deserve to be seated.

Seat the elected delegates, Comrade Romney.

This floor fight makes me proud to be living in Texas. I'll toast them with a Shiner Bock, and wave the Texas flag in their honor. :)

Article is here.
 
Last edited:
The new Republican Party rule? Replace delegates that were selected during the primary process and replace them with delegates friendly to Romney. Uh uh. This is not the old Soviet Union. This is America, dammit. I support this floor fight. Yes, even with the proper delegates in place, Romney is still going to be nominated, but these delegates were chosen by the people, and deserve to be seated, Comrade Romney.

This floor fight makes me proud to be living in Texas. I'll toast them with a Shiner Bock. :)

Article is here.

Rule changes like this happen every single convention.
 
Rule changes like this happen every single convention.
Rule changes are common, but the extent to which these are happening are very rare. The last time it happened and was this extreme was in 1860?
That is how Lincoln got elected of course. But yeah, they shouldn't be happening in 2012.
 
Rule changes are common, but the extent to which these are happening are very rare. The last time it happened and was this extreme was in 1860?
That is how Lincoln got elected of course. But yeah, they shouldn't be happening in 2012.

Don't take this wrong but...can you source that stat please?
 
Don't take this wrong but...can you source that stat please?

I can give you this, from the article.........

Indiana delegate and Romney supporter James Bopp wrote in an email to RNC members that it's "the biggest power grab in the history of the Republican Party." Fredricks, a Romney supporter, says only 30 people of the more than 300 Texan alternates and delegates support Ron Paul, yet the delegation is "united" in its opposition to the rule.
 
Has this kind of thing happened before? I'm not big on convention etiquette or history, but it seems to me that the entire purpose of the primary was to choose delegates for the convention. There's little point, if they can be dismissed by the presumptive nominee. May be business as usual but it sounds exceedingly shady to me, and reeks of smoky back rooms with elections being decided by the chosen few instead of the voters.
 
Don't take this wrong but...can you source that stat please?

lol - your fav president isn't all that honest. How do you think he really go his name?
1860 Republican National Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lincoln Wins the Republican Nomination in 1860
Finally, the third day arrived. One thousand Seward men marched behind a smartly uniformed brass band. They wound their way noisily through Chicago’s streets, playing the song “Oh, Isn’t He a Darling?” and finally arrived triumphantly in front of the Wigwam. To their horror, they found that they could not get in: the Lincoln men, admitted with their counterfeit tickets, had taken their seats.
They locked the doors and didn't let all the 'real' delegates in.
 
Last edited:
Has this kind of thing happened before? I'm not big on convention etiquette or history, but it seems to me that the entire purpose of the primary was to choose delegates for the convention. There's little point, if they can be dismissed by the presumptive nominee. May be business as usual but it sounds exceedingly shady to me, and reeks of smoky back rooms with elections being decided by the chosen few instead of the voters.
Yes. I've said it before, I'll say it again. The true 'revolution' going on is enlightenment. There is and always has been shady deals at elections and conventions. The difference is that this year at the Republican convention, they are not hiding it. It is in plain site. But alas, the MSM will not even touch it even though it is very important stuff.
 
Yes. I've said it before, I'll say it again. The true 'revolution' going on is enlightenment. There is and always has been shady deals at elections and conventions. The difference is that this year at the Republican convention, they are not hiding it. It is in plain site. But alas, the MSM will not even touch it even though it is very important stuff.

The MSM is pretty useless, actually. They're all too busy being the third arm of their political ideology's PR campaign to give out any, you know, useful information. I don't really have a dog in this race. I hate the GOP and the Democrats equally, think they are the left-and-right hands of power-corrupted greed, and the last thing either party cares about are the actual citizens of the country.

Thanks for the reply. It does seem a blatant display of chutzpah, but if there is a floor fight, the media will be hard-pressed to ignore it, since every media source in the country has eyes and ears on the convention floor pretty much 24/7.

@Dana: Thanks for this thread. It will be interesting to see what happens.
 
Will they wear eye patches and have parrots perched on their shoulders? 'Cause I'd totally watch for that.
 
Will they wear eye patches and have parrots perched on their shoulders? 'Cause I'd totally watch for that.

I think the real pirate here doesn't have a parrot on his shoulder, but a dog on the roof of his car. LOL.
 
I have a hard time with guilt by association. Nobody applies it equally.

Is Romney asking them to stop? Of course he isn't. Yes, he is responsible.
 
Is Romney asking them to stop? Of course he isn't. Yes, he is responsible.

Did Obama tell Ayers he never should have tried to bomb ****? No? Well then he's just as guilty of domestic terrorism.

See how that works?
 
Is Romney actually proposing the rule change?

Per the OP article, it was Romney's lawyer and former MS Gov. Haley Barbour who proposed the delegate rule change.

I'm trying to fully understand where the problem is here. If party delegates are selected at the state level, don't the candidates already know how many delegates they have prior to the party convention? And if so, why would there be a need for a rules change unless the issue is removing delegates the presumptous nominee believes won't vote for him/her. I ask because of this part from the article:

The changes could allow a candidate such as Mitt Romney to boot out any delegates who are assigned to vote for him and replace them.

Doesn't a vote for him (the candidate) mean a vote affirming his nomination? Unless it's a typo or I'm missing something, I don't see why any Republican candidate would want to boot any delegate who wants to vote for him. I'd think he's want to boot those who would vote against him, i.e., not want him as the Republican nominee.

Can someone who understands the pre-delegate vote process clarify this matter for me? I really would appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
The MSM is pretty useless, actually. They're all too busy being the third arm of their political ideology's PR campaign to give out any, you know, useful information. I don't really have a dog in this race. I hate the GOP and the Democrats equally, think they are the left-and-right hands of power-corrupted greed, and the last thing either party cares about are the actual citizens of the country.

Thanks for the reply. It does seem a blatant display of chutzpah, but if there is a floor fight, the media will be hard-pressed to ignore it, since every media source in the country has eyes and ears on the convention floor pretty much 24/7.

@Dana: Thanks for this thread. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Me too, DiAnna. I am more than tired of this from both parties. What it is is the system averting change? Real change will not come from Obama. It will not come from Romney and it damn sure won't come from Democratic or Republican Parties. Real change can only come from the People. Texas sounds as if it has become fed the hell up with corpgov. Whether they will be successful or not remains to be seen. The real test will be the strength of their resolve. Dallas may sell out the rest of Texas. We shall see.

I don't have a dog in the fight either. One way to render both parties null and void is to quit voting for the sumbitches.
 
Did Obama tell Ayers he never should have tried to bomb ****? No? Well then he's just as guilty of domestic terrorism.

See how that works?

Obama - Ayers? You've got to be kidding me. This is Romney's actual campaign managers.
 
Back
Top Bottom