20/28 Nevada Delegates Bound to Romney, but can vote freely on bylaws

[Jeremy]

There's a reason NV won't be colored yellow. Ron didn't win it because the delegates we won are still bound to support Romney.

 

[RPit]

The 'bound' results were 20-8 correct?

 

[Jeremy]

The 'bound' results were 20-8 correct?

Yeah, so NV isn't one of the 5. There are obviously many benefits in winning the convention, but it doesn't count as a Ron win for the state.

 

[MRoCkEd]

The 'bound' results were 20-8 correct?

Correct. 20 of the 28 delegates are bound to Romney. However, they are free to vote as they wish on rules, bylaws, platform issues, etc.

 

[twomp]

Correct. 20 of the 28 delegates are bound to Romney. However, they are free to vote as they wish on rules, bylaws, platform issues, etc.

How about the VP slot?

 

[TrishW]

if we go two ballots... they are Ron's people!

 

[anewvoice]

So even without the 1st ballot victory we've gained leverage heading into Tampa. And an opportunity for the RNC to make asses of themselves, which one has to figure CNN will jump all over.

 

[Agorism]

if we go two ballots... they are Ron's people!

Ya...without Paul's name as an option to vote for!

And the people who abstain in round 1 may be replaced by alternates...possibly.

 

[Jeremy]

By the way, I posted this because there was confusion about NV. A lot of people don't seem to know what it means for us now. The thread title was made a little more positive, though.

The bottom line is Ron does not win NV delegation plurality. After today Ron has 2 out of the 5 states he needs (MN and ME). LA in the future, of course, but only two after today.

 

[smartguy911]

I saw this on other site. Any truth to this?

According to the National GOP rule book, All voters can abstain from the vote on the first round as they are not controlled by the state or party conventions. Rule 38.

Nevada delegates are bound by the state's results on the first ballot. However, rule 38, allows bound delegates in NV to refrain from voting in the first ballot, thus making them unbound in the second round if Romney is unable to acquire the necessary 1,144 votes to win the nomination

 

[Jeremy]

I saw this on other site. Any truth to this?

I'm not sure about that, but it sounds like it could be true.

Although this sounds like it could be true too: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ly-on-bylaws&p=4403028&viewfull=1#post4403028

I was considering the needed five states, though:

Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of the candidate for nomination.

Someone PMed me that they think plurality doesn't consider bound delegates. I don't see how that's possible, though. Can't find any clarification on what "plurality" entails.

 

[Rafi]

My dream: Romney gets up to deliver the keynote address in Tampa. All our delegates, bound to him or not, get up in unison and chant President Paul. Romney leaves the stage.

It would be rude, but it would make me smile.

 

[Dogsoldier]

Why in the world didnt they try to unbind the delegates?

 

[69360]

How about the VP slot?

Every delegate is free to vote as they choose for VP, bound or unbound.

You need a plurality in 6 states to nominate VP from the floor. 1 to motion and 5 to second.

 

[69360]

Why in the world didnt they try to unbind the delegates?

So they could vote for Ron. Isn't that obvious?

 

[Okie RP fan]

So, 20/28 are bound to vote for Romney, does that mean the other 8 aren't and are ours?

 

[Jeremy]

So, 20/28 are bound to vote for Romney, does that mean the other 8 aren't and are ours?

Correct.

 

[defe07]

So, if you could breakdown the delegates from Nevada, between Romney and Ron, after the re-calculation of Newt and Santorum's delegates, how does it go? Is it still 20 for Romney and 8 for Paul? How many of Ron's delegates are pledged to vote for Romney, 14?

 

[Okie RP fan]

Correct.

Hey, that's better than nothing at all, right?

 

[Dogsoldier]

"So they could vote for Ron. Isn't that obvious?"

But they are bound to Romney...They can't vote for Paul...if they obstain its likely a Romney supporter alternate will get to vote in their place.

If this isn't right then what am I missing?