From Reports on the ground, looks like most of Rand's supporters stayed after the initial vote

[Joeinmo]

Along with Rubio's, not very many Trump or Cruz folks did (kind of a 2012 repeat with Santorum voters)

Since Iowa does not bind their delegates and none have been chosen - look for Rand to pick up a lot more delegates than his 5th place showing when they are chosen in the months to come.

In addition, becoming a delegate no matter if bound to a candidate you like or not, is very important because it allows you to vote in most state conventions and change the leadership from the inside out.

The RNC establishment does not want you to become a delegate for that exact reason.

 

[Joeinmo]

As always, it's about the delegates

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

If memory serves correctly, Iowa changed after 2012 to bound delegates. I could be wrong though, but haven't we learned all ready that the delegate sneak strategy is dead on arrival? They wouldn't even seat many of our delegates in 2012, so what would make you think that would change this go around (never mind all the rules changes implemented after Rons strong 2012 run).

 

[parocks]

As always, it's about the delegates

Actually, no. You could say "as always, we pretend it's about the delegates." That's true.

Pretending it's about the delegates when it's not does allow you to pretend that some magical thing will happen at the convention long after you've been mathematically eliminated.

 

[parocks]

If memory serves correctly, Iowa changed after 2012 to bound delegates. I could be wrong though, but haven't we learned all ready that the delegate sneak strategy is dead on arrival? They wouldn't even seat many of our delegates in 2012, so what would make you think that would change this go around (never mind all the rules changes implemented after Rons strong 2012 run).

Right, I don't know the specifics, but right about "delegate sneak strategy is dead on arrival". Unless the plan is to be very unhappy and to march around for reasons that no one really knows except that march and chant naturally follows from unhappy but never leads to win.

 

[Joeinmo]

Actually, no. You could say "as always, we pretend it's about the delegates." That's true.

Pretending it's about the delegates when it's not does allow you to pretend that some magical thing will happen at the convention long after you've been mathematically eliminated.

When it comes to having power at the convention the delegates do matter on the second round of voting..If Trump and Cruz and Rubio split the vote and nobody has the magic number, Rand could be a compromise candidate or influence who is.

in addition, when people say no delegates are chosen, they mean that the delegates are chosen at the state convention - if they are Rand and Rubio, then regardless of who wins, the delegate can vote for their candidate at the convention 100% on the second vote or even on the first vote unless it's against state law.


No - no delegate is bound according to RNC rules at the national convention

more here on delegates

http://time.com/4059030/republican-primary-calendar-2016-nomination-convention/

 

[TheTyke]

In my mind, pursuing delegate and committee positions and wielding as much influence as possible is a worthy goal. Not only because they're only bound on the first vote, but because it's less about "the election is rigged" and more about the strategies to win the committees etc. The bad rules were passed because not enough fair minded people controlled the Rules committee, delegates could be thrown off because there weren't enough good folks on Credentials, and of course Nominations at lower levels helps determine who the delegates even are.

These could either make the best of a brokered convention if it happens, or pave the way for better rules and a more outsider-friendly party in the future. Of course, if they are going to be like some of the past committeepeople and leave the party after people work to get them elected, that's probably counterproductive.

The liberty movement should aim to be as visible and involved as possible - and not fade from sight where the media and establishment would like us.

 

[ds21089]

When it comes to having power at the convention the delegates do matter on the second round of voting..If Trump and Cruz and Rubio split the vote and nobody has the magic number, Rand could be a compromise candidate or influence who is.

That's assuming TPTB are unaware of this and dont have a plan in place to assure this doesn't happen. I highly doubt that is the case.

 

[Badger Paul]

"Since Iowa does not bind their delegates and none have been chosen - look for Rand to pick up a lot more delegates than his 5th place showing when they are chosen in the months to come.

"The RNC has instituted a new rule requiring states that have ‘presidential preference votes’ like primaries and caucuses to bind their delegates in accordance with the outcome of the voting. Because, democracy."

That's from the same Time article you linked to.The rules were change specifically to prevent what were doing the past eight years winning delegates in the back end of the process. This has been talked about already.

Enough already with these f'ing fantasies! At best we're entitled to one delegate from Iowa. That's it.

 

[ds21089]

"The RNC has instituted a new rule requiring states that have ‘presidential preference votes’ like primaries and caucuses to bind their delegates in accordance with the outcome of the voting. Because, democracy."

So essentially this country is done for and the only hope for anything is a standoff against govt after the economic collapse. You cant compete against billions of dollars, the media with hired psychologists writing their narratives and pathological liars as candidates. If this is the case, I might just vote Sanders to hasten the economic collapse before the gun grabs happen.

 

[erowe1]

As always, it's about the delegates

Hogwash. It's about winning the vote count.

Did people here learn nothing from 2008 and 2012?

 

[Badger Paul]

"Did people here learn nothing from 2008 and 2012? "

Apparently not reading from all the posts this morning.

 

[Valli6]

Good for them

It was smart for them to stay for the delegates. Could be useful later and if nothing else, it familiarizes them with how things are done and what type of shenanigans they need to learn to defeat in future elections.

 

[69360]

Please stop with the blowing sunshine up everyone's ass about delegates. Rand Paul is not going to be potus. It is over. Lessons learned the last 2 times are that delegates will just be unseated on a whim by the party.

That said it's good they stayed and got involved in the process. It can only help in the future to have good people in leadership roles.

 

[MarcusI]

Yes every state (including Iowa) with preferential votes has to bind delegates at least for the 1st ballot in some way since this election cycle. This was a reaction to Rons strong showing in the delegate game. There are exceptions: In the few states in which the delegates are directly elected by the voters, they are bound to the candidate for which they run (must be noted on ballot) if they dont specifically run as "uncommited" on ballot. For these state the candidate preferential vote is only to be used for binding the at-large delegates. (Pennsylvania i.e. iirc, probably some other states as well)

And then there are three states who decided not to hold any preferential vote (as a reaction to the new rules): Colorado, Wyoning and North Dakota. In these states caucuses elect delegates to the district and state conventions in which the delegates for the national convention are chosen. Again, delegate candidates in these conventions will have to file paperwork for whom they are running, and if they pledge for a candidate and not run as "uncommitted" they will be bound to that candidate for the 1st ballot.

 

[MarcusI]

It would of course still be possible to "smuggle" delegates into the national convention bound for any other candidate on the 1st ballot and hoping for a brokered convention. But this would require again massive tough work and high liberty outcome at numerous caucusses and state party conventions and it will be very tough to get 50% or close to 50% liberty delegates to the national convention so that they could prevent any further shenanigans.

 

[hells_unicorn]

Staying behind to fight over delegates, while it probably won't win the election, is still important because those who involve themselves more in the process tend to move up in the ranks of the party. This is going to be a generational battle for the GOP, and the people who are the real idiots are the ones who keep saying "it's over". Last time I checked, this was about changing the country, not just winning one presidential election. Apparently I was wrong, in which case I was right several years ago when all the fanatics began bitching about Rand endorsing McConnell, when I said "the Liberty Movement isn't ready for prime time".

 

[Valli6]

Staying behind to fight over delegates, while it probably won't win the election, is still important because those who involve themselves more in the process tend to move up in the ranks of the party. This is going to be a generational battle for the GOP, and the people who are the real idiots are the ones who keep saying "it's over".

"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." - Ron Paul, March 7th, 2008

 

[Joeinmo]

Actually, the RNC does not bind delegates at the national convention - delegates are bound at the state level, but unless it's against state law they can do whatever. See Nevada, delegates were bound and voted for Ron Paul anyway.

below are the rules

http://time.com/4059030/republican-primary-calendar-2016-nomination-convention/

in addition, becoming a delegate in most cases allows you to install your leadership in the state party and that means changing the RNC from the inside out

 

[erowe1]

When it comes to having power at the convention the delegates do matter on the second round of voting.

When's the last time that happened?

Whenever it was, "as always" was quite a stretch.