That all sounds fine, but exactly how is that being done? What rules are being changed to make that more likely? I mean, I'm sitting here as a guy who voted for Newt in the primary. He lost, okay. Now, everyone without an axe to grind acknowledges that Romney is going to be the nominee, and he certainly did get the most votes in the primary.
So what specifically is happening that is causing the problem? I'm reading that so and so got booted off some committee. Well, what practical difference is going to result as a consequence of that? There is simply not enough detail reported on this stuff for me to figure out why I should care. Maybe I disagree with these people who are getting the boot, because nobody is saying what those people are advocating that is getting them the boot.
Honestly, this just sounds like fighting between party officials. Maybe it's more, but a lot more context would be helpful.
In essence, it is this: in 2016 Romney would be able to choose what delegates are seated at the convention. The states would no longer do that. If Romney doesn’t like the delegates the people of a state choose i.e. they choose to vote for someone other than Romney, then he can replace them with those that are for Romney.
Now what that boils down to is, no matter what the people say, no matter who they vote for, the fix will be in. We will be turning into an aristocratic and not a democratic republic. All nominees will chosen, not by the people, but by a select group of elite which will tow the line or be destroyed. And the people...well they can vote for our guy or vote for the other guy, who has also been chosen by similar elites.
You haven’t read the comments or you would know.