Official GA GOP Convention thread

[juvanya]

For some reason I had us with 25 delegates and Rommel with 21. That is his based on the rules, but maybe that 25 of ours is state dels...or maybe CDs?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkX_x2RkgEE

Hes so shiny. :O

WE pay our dues every day of our lives assholes. No mercy, will are coming for them and coming in NUMBERS

THIS

Based on the delegates and alternates read at this convention we only secured three alternate slots. With that said we have unofficially, 13 delegates and 1 alternate going to nationals from the district conventions.

Do you know what and where?

3) As pointless as resolutions are, we can very, very close to having a resolution pass that said roughly "The GA GOP does not support any candidate who voted for or supports the NDAA". It would have passed if some congresscritter (I'm pretty sure she was some elected official) hadn't opposed the motion by saying that the NDAA does not apply to American citizens and that it is a big fat lie that it does apply to US citz and the going on about how the NDAA is good for us.

Well the NDAA has been passed for decades. Its required by Article I Section 8 Clause 12 of the Constitution. The majority of the bill isnt bad per se (unless you are antiwar), but there was the ID provision added in, which is what everyone is fussing over.

Finally, I think one of the reason why so many of the establishment here showed up was 1 very simple reason: to hear Newt speak.

Brilliant. But is it really a surprise that he would be there?

 

[CPUd]

This is the video from today where the thing about NDAA happened. It starts around 11:54.

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/22702482


Here is the approx 12 minute section :



the last couple minutes he explains why he can accept the withdrawal without a vote.

 

[ProLibertate]

I was there as a Delegate for Coweta county. We didn't get what we wanted, but considering that Georgia had 5% popular vote for Paul in the primary, our roughly 25-33% showing at the convention was impressive.

The establishment folks had the numbers and were also better organized. They had "vote leaders" standing at the front, holding up green and red cards during each vote. Green card meant establishment votes yes (i.e. for the slate ramrod rule, rule #7), red cards meant vote no (i.e. for any pro-ron paul votes).

I spoke my peace, as I was able to get to a mic and inform folks that Romney did in fact support the current NDAA at the (South Carolina?) GOP debate.

With just a little bit more numbers and organization, liberty-minded people can be running the show in Georgia for Rand in 4 years. Thanks to all the leaders (Stephanie, especially) who kept us delegates informed and motivated.

 

[peluski17]

This is the video from today where the thing about NDAA happened. It starts around 11:54.

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/22702482


Here is the approx 12 minute section :



the last couple minutes he explains why he can accept the withdrawal without a vote.

Start this video at 2:00 - Watch... the delegation passes the amendment stating that the Georgia GOP will not endorse a candidate that voted for or supported the NDAA sections in questions (Section 1021 and another one). Then, on discussion of the main motion the establishment people went up to the mics and said...we can't pass amendments that will not allow us to endorse a candidate. The Establishment then were asked if they knew if this amendment would stop the Georgia GOP from supporting the nominee (in their minds Romney). Then, one of theirs motions to Reconsider the Amendment whereas there is a second. A lady of ours, however, mentions that only someone who voted AYE to the amendment can reconsider it. It was unclear if this gentleman supported the amendment, yet the Chair said he had SOMEHOW determined he had supported it. It is highly unlikely he did. Then, of course, they withdraw the resolution.

 

[LostNFoundNTx]

I would have had to be there to see how the details were handled. Here are three things to look at:

1. How/why was the original (unamended) resolution presented to the assembly, and when was that resolution given to the platform committee?
2. If the support level for the resolution was above 2/3 of the room, at the point where the motion was withdrawn by the committee it would be in order for a member to make a motion to suspend the rules in order to continue debate on that motion.
3. The person who originally presented the resolution to the assembly should have known that the resolution was not allowed by the rules. If they started the presentation with a motion to suspend the rules in order to bring a resolution before the assembly regarding NDAA, they would have been fine. The amendment would likely hold as well since it would take a 2/3 vote to reconsider when only 1/2 was needed to pass it.

 

[gte811i]

The Sergeant At Arms folks at each of the four mics had their people run up to the mics and they would actually tell them exactly what to say. In one incident, one of the guys didn't move away from the mic and he was used to close discussion on a couple of the motions. Georgia is a tough place to take over currently, but we are well on our way.

I thought the resolution actually passed, but couldn't quite remember. I did not realize they had one guy up who never sat down ready to close discussion. So it was controlled discussion; give the illusion of being fair-allow people to debate a little bit, complain a little bit, bring up points of order, but ultimately they said we have the majority and even though you are a third we will still squash you like a bug. That is how Randy Evans controlled the convention so that he was able to get the majority of delegates to believe he was being fair - he manipulated the convention delegates feelings. He is such a snake in the grass.

 

[gte811i]

Well the NDAA has been passed for decades. Its required by Article I Section 8 Clause 12 of the Constitution. The majority of the bill isnt bad per se (unless you are antiwar), but there was the ID provision added in, which is what everyone is fussing over.

Sure authorizing expenditures for the military is a legitimate function of government. It's section 1021 and 1022 that were bad with indefinite detention of US citizens. Now I read that something changed in the most recent bill that was passed just 2 days ago . . . . I haven't had the chance to look and see what is different.

 

[gte811i]

Such corruption in GA. I can't confirm, and I hope it's not correct, b/c I can't remember all the names but I've been told that John Padgett was on the GA National Delegate Slate. So the Credentials committee throws out the Athens-Clarke County delegates but yet John Padgett - the chair who railroaded things threw- is rewarded by getting a National Delegate slot.

I can't hear what the GA GOP is saying b/c your actions speak so loudly. What a bunch of corrupt sobs.

 

[BenMuldowney]

Such corruption in GA. I can't confirm, and I hope it's not correct, b/c I can't remember all the names but I've been told that John Padgett was on the GA National Delegate Slate. So the Credentials committee throws out the Athens-Clarke County delegates but yet John Padgett - the chair who railroaded things threw- is rewarded by getting a National Delegate slot.

I can't hear what the GA GOP is saying b/c your actions speak so loudly. What a bunch of corrupt sobs.

and the local ron paul leadership sits on their hands and condemns their grassroot volunteers for "heckling" and "booing."