GOP insiders: "Ron Paul rule" was just for 2012 and no longer exists

[Badger Paul]

"The delegates should have respected that, and they didn't. "

Because the delegates didn't trust them and with that crew, I don't blame em'. In fact I'm glad they told them to go screw themselves.

 

[erowe1]

"The delegates should have respected that, and they didn't. "

Because the delegates didn't trust them and with that crew, I don't blame em'. In fact I'm glad they told them to go screw themselves.

That's fine. But that doesn't change anything I've said in this thread. As I said in the post you first took umbrage with, it was the rule change that saved Ron from having to deal with getting nominated. The RNC was more on his side than his own delegates were.

 

[erowe1]

As I seem to remember there was some poor flunkie who was part of a national conference call a couple of weeks before the convention who let the cat out of the bag inadvertantly about their strategy was only to cause a huge outcry and cause Tate to come in on the call to say everything was still proceeding as planned.

You're right. And that conference call was just one of several instances. Yes, everything was still proceeding as planned. But, as far as Ron Paul was concerned, those plans did not include him being nominated at the convention. That plan was something both made and executed by other people who had no interest in whether or not it was what Ron Paul himself actually wanted. You say you're glad they didn't, and that's fine. I don't think we disagree about the facts.

 

[Badger Paul]

All I'm saying is that Ron could have put a stop to it himself, not let his surrogates or the RNC do so. And when I hear it from the man himself, then I'll believe it.

 

[erowe1]

All I'm saying is that Ron could have put a stop to it himself, not let his surrogates or the RNC do so. And when I hear it from the man himself, then I'll believe it.

But there was nothing for him to put a stop to. The RNC prevented him from being in that embarrassing position by their rule change.

 

[jct74]

Shep Smith weighs in on Rule 40(b) with a flashback to the 2012 convention



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sItMMKYD_AI

 

[jct74]

Newt Gingrich: ‘Zero possibility’ Trump, Cruz are ‘dumb enough’ to allow convention rule overhaul

By David Sherfinski
Wednesday, April 6, 2016




Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Wednesday there’s “zero possibility” Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz are “dumb enough” to allow rules changes for the summer GOP convention that some argue could open up the potential field of candidates.

“I think we have two people who are likely to be nominated: Donald Trump and Ted Cruz,” Mr. Gingrich said on Fox Business Network. “Under the rules that Romney imposed last time, you can’t get nominated unless you can earn the votes of at least a majority of eight states. You literally can’t even get nominated. If you’re not nominated, you can’t be counted.”

“So all this speculation about somebody magically showing up — it ain’t gonna happen,” Mr. Gingrich said.

...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/6/newt-gingrich-zero-possibility-trump-cruz-are-dumb/



Doug Wead agrees with Newt

Strange bedfellows: Why Trump and Cruz need each other now

by Doug Wead
April 2, 2016

Today the airwaves are full of false reports from experts telling us how the Republican National Convention might become open and might nominate a new name. Karl Rove claims that this might happen. Respected pundits speculate about it. But it simply will never happen and let me explain why.

To put another name into play will not only require the betrayal of Donald Trump, it will require the betrayal of Ted Cruz. And while the Republican Party will not likely survive the former it certainly cannot survive both.

Here’s how it works. Rule 40b requires that a candidate must have a plurality of delegates in eight states to be nominated. This is the so called “Ron Paul Rule” put in place by Mitt Romney, John Sununu, Ben Ginsberg and others seeking to block Ron Paul from being nominated in 2012. When Ron Paul actually closed in on a majority in eight states they contested some of his duly elected delegates and threw them off the floor of the RNC. This so saddened the Governor of one of the states involved, seeing these GOP young people disenfranchised, that he protested the action and walked out with these young people.

At present, only two candidates have reached the eight state threshold for the 2016 RNC. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. Under the current rules they are the only candidates who can be nominated. Thus reports today that some will vote for Rubio on the first ballot or that Kasich is surging among delegates is irrelevant. If delegates vote for a candidate that is not nominated, and because of State GOP rules some will do so, they won’t be counted. Thus Sharon Johnson of Arizona voted for Pat Buchanan in 1992 but it did nothing.

Ahhh, you say. But what if the Rules Committee votes to change Rule 40b? What if they changed it to a one state requirement to nominate? Or to no states and allow nominations on the floor?

To do that the Rules Committee would have to be controlled by delegates who want that to happen.

...

It ain’t gonna happen.

...

https://dougwead.wordpress.com/2016/04/02/strange-bedfellows-why-trump-and-cruz-need-each-other-now/

 

[jct74]

some interesting discussion of Rule 40(b) with RNC Rules Committee Member Randy Evans - Fox Business 4/5



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lwxhf4p278

 

[CPUd]

some interesting discussion of Rule 40(b) with RNC Rules Committee Member Randy Evans - Fox Business 4/5



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lwxhf4p278

1:00 motherfuckin THANK YOU