THIS IS DISGUSTING - MASS DEL OUSTED

[Veteran Citizen]

they take an oath to follow the Constitution. Not under penalty of perjury, though....

Let's have a count then, how many are willing to lose their freedom to protect the freedom of others,

Don't be a pussy, I've risked my life to save the lives of many others.

 

[DeMintConservative]

I disagree when it has monopoly preferences for ballot access granted by government. If those are taken away, fine.

Are you going to apply the same principle to any institution/collective person/individual that benefits from some form of government intervention?

Why not? It sounds exactly like a purity test from the rules committee. Can explain why you can't apply that concept to the rules committee?

Also, it sounds like you say you are NOT in favor of them following their own rules.

Maybe it's just me, but I tend to see "purity test" as related to ideological and institutional positions.

Say, if they were excluding the delegates merely because they were/are Ron Paul supporters, I'd agree with you. This is more of a technicality: they want the delegates that are bound to vote for Romney to make that personal commitment.

lol! I am much more literal to the words you were using than that. I mean those in place to make rules about how delegates are selected, in that instance.

And I prefer more people having a say but not if the information to them is filtered by those with an agenda. I can't make up my mind on this point, I am struggling with it right now.

Everybody has an agenda.

I hope he addresses it and says clearly, "I do not want any of my supporters who are elected as delegates bound to other candidates to break their pledge and vote for me on the first ballot. There is no effort on the part of my campaign for that to happen. As far as I know, there is no organized effort on anybody's part for that to happen. Any delegates who do that are acting independently and entirely without my blessing."

Fully agreed. I think he'll eventually say that.

 

[DeMintConservative]

Not in Minnesota. The GOP tried to pass this, but because we were the majority, we voted it down.

- ML

Yeah, but the Minnesota GOP is in shambles. And nobody was too worried about that. That's why I'm saying that things will change substantially if the convention is somehow disrupted and Paul delegates bound to vote for Romney go rogue. At some point, the MN party will get back together and find a way of voting this in a caucus or a primary. What was the percentage of the vote that Paul got in the MN caucus? 25%? Even if a few states keep this system, does it matter when all the others adopt the Ohio way to nominate delegates?


Mind you: what did the other two guys running for Senator did once Bills got the party endorsement in the convention? They dropped out of the primary and endorsed Bills.

If there is a faction of the party that isn't willing to reciprocate this kind of stuff, what exactly do you think the rest of the party will behave?

Ugh - I'm not. 90% of the people don't pay any attention to the candidates or their voting records or their positions on the issues. They vote for the name that they recognize. I like the idea of the activists getting a shot at steering the party.

Oh me too. I strongly dislike the primary system. I'd get rid of it and go back to the times of having the nominee picked by smoke-filled rooms. I think the more fundamental problem this country is facing is that there's too much democracy injected in the institutional mechanisms. Now it's going to be very complicated to put the genie back in the bottle.

My point is about what's going to happen.

 

[sailingaway]

Are you going to apply the same principle to any institution/collective person/individual that benefits from some form of government intervention?

I think disenfranchisement is a bit more serious, and that is what we are talking about, your subsidized 'green energy' company isn't keeping you from being able to vote and their deal with the state doesn't restrict voting for others. THAT is where the lawsuit lies, imho. Ballot access preferences essentially force you to vote for one of two parties on a regular basis and the perpetuation of that is what makes them the only games in town, and makes their 'private rules' have the effect of disenfranchising voters.


But yeah, I think govt should not be about favoring business interests.

They specifically added something not in the rules to oust our guys. Our guys were ELECTED, they didn't like the results, so they created something new with the entire purpose of only going after people who think a certain way. There is no way to spin that as right.

 

[zeloc]

This is absolutely outrageous and clearly illegal. I understand that there is a main lawsuit filed against the RNC in CA but shouldn't this be a separate lawsuit in MA against the Republican party of Massachusetts? What is the next step? This is clearly an abuse of power by the GOP of MA and a slap in the face to the voters of MA who voted in these delegates. If all these delegates were revoked then apparently the MA GOP is going to handpick the ones that they think should go which is against a democratic system.

I am not a delegate but what is our plan and how can I help? Someone posted an e-mail address of where to send feedback to the GOP but I think we are beyond that based on the brazen actions by the GOP. Can I be a plaintiff even if I was not elected as a delegate? I can't see how the GOP could possibly win this case based on the written rules and what transpired. Based on the significance of this case and how it affects constitutional rights I imagine that a suit with a large financial value could be filed against the MA GOP but law is not my area of expertise.

sailingaway, I urge you not to relegate this thread to Hot Topics like so many others that were salutary to Ron Paul and his campaign. While there are specious allegations of algorithmic vote-flipping and other baseless claims against the GOP, they have clearly crossed the line on this one and we should not take this lightly, especially when the right-to-vote is concerned.

 

[economics102]

As hard as it would be for me to do why don't we all just vote for Obama as a protest vote and give the GOP the finger?

I'm not above doing this. The only reason I wouldn't is if I either have some better plan for my vote or decide to write in Ron Paul.

In fact, Romney is the ONLY person I won't consider voting for. I'll consider writing in Ron Paul. I'll consider voting for Gary Johnson. And I'll consider voting for Obama as a FU to Romney and the GOP (plus, strategically it's better for our movement if there is a GOP primary in 2016). But I won't vote for Romney. No way, no how.

And even just straight-up politically, the GOP deserves to lose. The takeaway from the election needs to be "oops, maybe nominating a spineless moderate in the midst of one of the biggest upswings in conservative political sentiment wasn't a smart idea."

Of course, that will just lead to the rise of fake conservatives/horror shows like Bachmann, Santorum, or Gingrich gaining stature while real conservative/liberty candidates continue to be suppressed.

 

[Southerner]

...I'll consider voting for Obama as a FU to Romney and the GOP (plus, strategically it's better for our movement if there is a GOP primary in 2016). But I won't vote for Romney. No way, no how.

And even just straight-up politically, the GOP deserves to lose. The takeaway from the election needs to be "oops, maybe nominating a spineless moderate in the midst of one of the biggest upswings in conservative political sentiment wasn't a smart idea."

Of course, that will just lead to the rise of fake conservatives/horror shows like Bachmann, Santorum, or Gingrich gaining stature while real conservative/liberty candidates continue to be suppressed.

I understand, you WANT your cookie and you want it NOW, so you are going to throw a temper tantrum because you are gonna get your way. Life doesn't work like that, nor do the responsible adults in the room respond to it well. So you vote for 0bama, and instead of a cookie, you get gruel.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

so much for a fucking vote.freedom my ass.