Heck...Why not a RUMP NATIONAL CONVENTION...backed by the military?

[SteveMartin]

Heck...Why not a RUMP NATIONAL CONVENTION?

I think we need a rump national convention along the lines of what the RP supporters in Louisiana did. It is obvious that our "democratic process" has been thoroughly rigged. And, based on the media malfeasance and manipulation in the current electoral cycle (as well as blatant vote fraud, polling fraud, etc., etc.) Ron Paul has a right to declare this neocon-twisted Republican nomination process null & void. I think he would receive the backing of a vast majority of the military if he declared a rump national convention!

We all know that when people hear RP's message the majority of them are drawn to it and wind up supporting it. Only party hacks seem not to go for the message, because they are the ones who will be replaced. People have been denied the right to hear his message, the right to vote for him, blatantly false information regarding his level of popularity--you name it!

That having been said, it is my opinion that this election cycle has been thoroughly tainted by the MSM, and that we need Congressional hearings and a rump national convention.

To do so, we will need this petition to get at least 20-30,000 signatures as one bullet in the chamber of any such effort--preferably 100,000 sigantures-- (currently at app. 6550 signatures right now):

"A Petition for Fair and Equal Treatment in the Media of Dr. Ron Paul's Presidential Election Campaign":

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/487443841

 

[morlhzd]

A rump national convention would signal the end for the GOP as a valid party - so maybe just keeping the threat out there will help.

Either way I'm in.

 

[SteveMartin]

Now, I am only suggesting "backed by the military" in the sense that we are allowed to peaceably assemble and conduct our business with their assistance and protection. We would likely need it.

No one is suggesting a military coup here...

 

[Libertytree]

If this could be tied in with the March on Washington, it might present a very strong message. A lot of coordination and pre planning would have to be put into this. Maybe this is the answer to what to call the "march/protest"? Signatures for the petition could be taken the day of the event and delivered to the appropriate place(s).

Just thinking and throwing the spaghetti against the wall and seeing what sticks....? I do like the concept Steve.

 

[SteveMartin]

LT,

Thanks!

Yep...we will need to get some stuff going soon if we are going to plan it right and have it be successful.

Who else is on board? We can use all the people who want to help on a planning committee...starting with conference calls?

 

[Libertytree]

There's lots of folks who are yet to chime in w/ their idea's, so let's keep formulating idea's etc...it can only be made to be better.

I think Torchbearer will have some first hand experience and new idea's to throw at this, because he's involved in the first Rump Convention at the state level.

Integrating the petition, both online and actual handwritten signatures and delivered by each and everyone of us involved in the "march" is a definite statement.

Keep thinkin'!

 

[Revolution9]

Can you explain to the readers what a Rump Convention is. This ain't no booty call for a rap video..so just what is it and its advantages within the system context?

Best
Randy

 

[billjarrett]

Can you explain to the readers what a Rump Convention is. This ain't no booty call for a rap video..so just what is it and its advantages within the system context?

Best
Randy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_Democratic_National_Convention

Is that what you were looking for Randy?

 

[thoughtbombing]

A rump national convention would signal the end for the GOP as a valid party - so maybe just keeping the threat out there will help.

Either way I'm in.

GRAND. I'm in.

 

[Banana]

The real question would be whether RNC has systematically broken its own rules, which would be news to me.

We had a rump convention in LA because they changed their own rules and fudged the bets, and resisted against being called out. The folks in LA played by the rules and therefore had a case.

I don't think RNC has done anything similar to LA GOP, so at that point, a rump convention would be more like a meetup for sore losers, unless we can show that RNC pulled a LA GOP act in several states.

As Bradley in DC would say, learn the rules, play the game.

 

[Libertytree]

I look forward to seeing where this thread has progressed when I return from work. I have a couple idea's to bounce around but need to refine them until later.

Great concept though.

 

[Libertytree]

Well, the GOP allowing the media to ignore/blacklist the most conservative candidate is certainly grounds IMHO. The GOP has been negligent in their duties to the party and to the American public.

 

[Banana]

Pretty sure that GOP can't just go to media and say, "Hey, turn your camera to Ron, please!"; after all, media are private companies and can do what they want.

Even if they were negligent, I'd imagine we'd need more solid evidence. See, they can just say we're a bunch of sore losers because same thing happened to every second tier candidate before Ron Paul.

In LA, GOP set rules and deadlines. The people there followed the rules and as a result, was most organized. The GOP didn't like that, so they changed their own rules to give other candidate a sporting chance (HA!). The people there made note of that. Then they did it again by taking in 500 provisional ballot, denying RP delegates' eligibility, even if they were holding a certificate of eligibility. Because of that clear-cut infractions, they have a solid case.

It has to be something really concrete; fuzzy finger-wanging over the media blackout isn't enough, IMO.

 

[nate895]

Pretty sure that GOP can't just go to media and say, "Hey, turn your camera to Ron, please!"; after all, media are private companies and can do what they want.

Even if they were negligent, I'd imagine we'd need more solid evidence. See, they can just say we're a bunch of sore losers because same thing happened to every second tier candidate before Ron Paul.

In LA, GOP set rules and deadlines. The people there followed the rules and as a result, was most organized. The GOP didn't like that, so they changed their own rules to give other candidate a sporting chance (HA!). The people there made note of that. Then they did it again by taking in 500 provisional ballot, denying RP delegates' eligibility, even if they were holding a certificate of eligibility. Because of that clear-cut infractions, they have a solid case.

It has to be something really concrete; fuzzy finger-wanging over the media blackout isn't enough, IMO.

If they admit any delegates that violated any of the rules it is possible. If they admitted the LA delegates from the regular convention, or if they admitted the delegates from states that decided on how to apportion their delegates after September, or any other rule pretty much.

 

[burningfur]

Now, I am only suggesting "backed by the military" in the sense that we are allowed to peaceably assemble and conduct our business with their assistance and protection. We would likely need it.

No one is suggesting a military coup here...

but bring your guns, so they know you're serious.

 

[Banana]

If they admit any delegates that violated any of the rules it is possible. If they admitted the LA delegates from the regular convention, or if they admitted the delegates from states that decided on how to apportion their delegates after September, or any other rule pretty much.

That's a good example. This will be hard to call us sore losers because we can point to their own rulebook and say you didn't follow that rule.

But still need to find out if there is even a provision for a rump convention (can't imagine having one as there is nobody else to appeal to above national level?), and what threshold it is (e.g. if just one state, it should be done within that state's party; going to national is stretching it, but if more than just handful, then yes, good case).

 

[jblosser]

To whom are you going to appeal to get your convention recognized as the real one? The RNC who is holding the one you are objecting to?

The nomination process that the national convention is part of is to select the person that the national party will tell the state chapters is the person they should submit to their state to be put on the ballot using the access they have secured. This is all part of the internal workings of what is essentially a corporation. Yes, they are bound by rules, but that's not the same as law. It meets the law when it's a matter of what name goes on the ballot.

That's not to say it's not possible to make a case for this somewhere inside the party but I'm not sure people are understanding what a rump convention is or why it's a possibility in LA. "Not being fair in the media" is not typically a recognized justification.

 

[nate895]

That's a good example. This will be hard to call us sore losers because we can point to their own rulebook and say you didn't follow that rule.

But still need to find out if there is even a provision for a rump convention (can't imagine having one as there is nobody else to appeal to above national level?), and what threshold it is (e.g. if just one state, it should be done within that state's party; going to national is stretching it, but if more than just handful, then yes, good case).

A rump convention at a national level would mean that the state parties would have to decide which convention is right and who gets on the ballot, sometimes both get on the ballot as the same party.

 

[liberteebell]

Pretty sure that GOP can't just go to media and say, "Hey, turn your camera to Ron, please!"; after all, media are private companies and can do what they want.

Even if they were negligent, I'd imagine we'd need more solid evidence. See, they can just say we're a bunch of sore losers because same thing happened to every second tier candidate before Ron Paul.

In LA, GOP set rules and deadlines. The people there followed the rules and as a result, was most organized. The GOP didn't like that, so they changed their own rules to give other candidate a sporting chance (HA!). The people there made note of that. Then they did it again by taking in 500 provisional ballot, denying RP delegates' eligibility, even if they were holding a certificate of eligibility. Because of that clear-cut infractions, they have a solid case.

It has to be something really concrete; fuzzy finger-wanging over the media blackout isn't enough, IMO.

I certainly see your point about actual rules broken and I agree.

But I also have some issues with ethics and some questions. What about party control of the debates? What about party officials openly dogging one of their own, ironically, the one with the most conservative credentials? Didn't the RNC chairman endorse juan mc100yearwar a couple of weeks ago? That would certainly disenfranchise lots of voters who had not yet had their primary or caucus and it sounds unethical to me. (not that these people have any ethics in the first place).

Didn't some of the same things happen in WA state as did in LA?

At any rate, count me in for anything that challenges The Establishment.

 

[nosebruise]

uh...

and exactly how would you get "backing" by the military?

you wanna call the FBI/CIA and see if they'll back you up too?