The Myth: Must win 5 States

[RPit]

Its been repeated often, especially after every contest we lose..

Argument: "Ron must win 5 States to get the nomination".

And what is meant by the 'win', or at least what these people 'intend to mean' and understand it to mean is that Ron Paul MUST WIN 5 States, as in the popular vote, as in a 'win' reported by the media.

This is a myth.
And I would like to put it to rest.

Here is the Republican National Committee Rule pertaining to this:


RULE NO. 40
Nominations


(b) 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
that candidate for nomination

Source: http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf
(scroll down to Rule No 40)

That is, in order to be eligible for nomination, we must ENTER the convention with more DELEGATES than others in 5 States...

No where does it require us to win 5 states by 'popular vote'.. what we do need is 5 States where more of the delegates support Ron Paul.



PS: Did someone say its all about the delegates? (I agree a win is needed for momentum, turnout, and donations though)

 

[opinionatedfool]

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!

+rep

 

[JasonM]

But in which states do we actually have a majority of delegates? Any idea WHEN we will know this? Sources?

 

[tsai3904]

But in which states do we actually have a majority of delegates? Any idea WHEN we will know this? Sources?

People already answered your question and gave you links to where you can find information for each state.

 

[PolicyReader]

Its been repeated often, especially after every contest we lose..

Argument: "Ron must win 5 States to get the nomination".

And what is meant by the 'win', or at least what these people 'intend to mean' and understand it to mean is that Ron Paul MUST WIN 5 States, as in the popular vote, as in a 'win' reported by the media.

This is a myth. And I would like to put it to rest.

Here is the Republican National Committee Rule pertaining to this:


RULE NO. 40
Nominations


(b) 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
that candidate for nomination

Source: http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf
(scroll down to Rule No 40)

That is, in order to be eligible for nomination, we must ENTER the convention with majority of the DELEGATES in 5 States...

No where does it require us to win 5 states by 'popular vote'.. what we do need is 5 States where majority of the delegates support Ron Paul.



PS: Did someone say its all about the delegates? (I agree a win is needed for momentum, turnout, and donations though)

You have been HARVESTED

 

[JasonM]

People already answered your question and gave you links to where you can find information for each state.

Not every state's convention was listed in that link. For example, S. Carolina, Florida, Arizona and Michigan.

 

[tsai3904]

Not every state's convention was listed in that link. For example, S. Carolina, Florida, Arizona and Michigan.

Try this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/docs/2012 RNC Delegate Summary.pdf

Also not every state allocates delegates at their state convention.

 

[giovannile07]

Great info!

 

[PolicyReader]

Not every state's convention was listed in that link. For example, S. Carolina, Florida, Arizona and Michigan.

Those are all states that assigned delegates more directly, tho if you click the sub links for the state it will take you to a page that has more information

 

[JasonM]

Thanks!! This helps out immensely!! Now all that's got to be done is to put all this stuff on a calendar of some sort.

Now i can start finding out how we did as these things happen.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

Its been repeated often, especially after every contest we lose..

Argument: "Ron must win 5 States to get the nomination".

And what is meant by the 'win', or at least what these people 'intend to mean' and understand it to mean is that Ron Paul MUST WIN 5 States, as in the popular vote, as in a 'win' reported by the media.

This is a myth.
And I would like to put it to rest.

Here is the Republican National Committee Rule pertaining to this:


RULE NO. 40
Nominations


(b) 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
that candidate for nomination

Source: http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf
(scroll down to Rule No 40)

That is, in order to be eligible for nomination, we must ENTER the convention with majority of the DELEGATES in 5 States...

No where does it require us to win 5 states by 'popular vote'.. what we do need is 5 States where majority of the delegates support Ron Paul.



PS: Did someone say its all about the delegates? (I agree a win is needed for momentum, turnout, and donations though)

Not a majority.. Only a plurality... Just more than anybody else in each of 5 states.. Which in effect can mean a lot less than 51%.

 

[fatjohn]

So for now probably Minnesota, Maine and Washington where we have the greatest chances for a plurality, right? Super tuesday will give the fourth and fifth so that's pretty much in the bag.

/thread

 

[Alternative 336]

^ Don't forget Iowa!

 

[Liberty74]

But in which states do we actually have a majority of delegates? Any idea WHEN we will know this? Sources?

None. Why? Because states like Iowa, MN, Maine, WA where people say we "might" win the delegates there have yet to elect delegates at their state conventions. I remember reading that some of those conventions occur in March but cannot recall which ones.

 

[tbone717]

Honestly this is not so much of a "myth" as it is a promotion of misinformation from people on this forum. This was corrected by folks posting the exact text of the RNC rules back before Iowa voted.

As it stands today, only Romney has his 5 states (AZ, FL, MI, NV, NH). Each of those states have party rules that bind the delegates to the winner.

 

[69360]

None of this matters. You can't enter the RNC with enough delegates to win the nomination from only caucus states where you take the majority of delegates but not the straw poll. Gingrich and Santorum will fold at some point and their delegates will go to Romney.

 

[tbone717]

None of this matters. You can't enter the RNC with enough delegates to win the nomination from only caucus states where you take the majority of delegates but not the straw poll. Gingrich and Santorum will fold at some point and their delegates will go to Romney.

Correct, or another scenario is that they drop out of the race shortly and endorse Romney which allows him to win more than enough bound delegates to win on the first ballot outright.

I think the most honest analysis of the campaign is this: our strength should have been in the caucus states because of our often touted organization and enthusiastic base. There have been 7 caucuses, and we won none of them in terms of the popular vote. Paul needed to put wins on the board in these caucus states to create viability for the campaign going into the main leg of the primary season which starts Tuesday. He was unable to do so, and in the minds of most voters is now a non-factor.

I believe that we have grossly overestimated our level of support.

 

[soulcyon]

Apart from caucus states, how will we stay competitive without Gingrich and Santorum in the race? I can't imagine how Ron Paul can win any of the primaries at this rate.

 

[tbone717]

Apart from caucus states, how will we stay competitive without Gingrich and Santorum in the race? I can't imagine how Ron Paul can win any of the primaries at this rate.

If you look at the primaries historically, they are a whittling down process that starts with the Ames Straw poll and goes all the way through Super Tuesday. As candidates fail to perform they drop out, and that is what happened so far. The money dries up, they accept the reality that they are unable to win and they withdraw. Note that the only three candidates remaining (with the exception of Paul) won one of the first three contests. Everyone else dropped out, and rightfully so.

Typically, a candidate like Paul would have dropped out after SC, but Paul does have a unique phenomenon in his very enthusiastic grassroots base. We keep donating and volunteering, even though the campaign has yet to produce a win - particularly in the states that they touted as being ones they have a very good chance at winning. So Paul stays in the race as he did in 08, long past the time that any other candidate would have dropped out.

 

[69360]

Correct, or another scenario is that they drop out of the race shortly and endorse Romney which allows him to win more than enough bound delegates to win on the first ballot outright.

I think the most honest analysis of the campaign is this: our strength should have been in the caucus states because of our often touted organization and enthusiastic base. There have been 7 caucuses, and we won none of them in terms of the popular vote. Paul needed to put wins on the board in these caucus states to create viability for the campaign going into the main leg of the primary season which starts Tuesday. He was unable to do so, and in the minds of most voters is now a non-factor.

I believe that we have grossly overestimated our level of support.

In the average GOP voters mind he's not a factor in the primary, no. In the general he sure is. If the RP voters don't support the GOP nominee Obama wins. Everyone knows it and it's the elephant in the room.