Skip to comments.Texas GOP to call an Emergency SREC Meeting to go back to Winner Take All. Texas has 155 Delegates
Posted on 04/05/2012 2:08:19 PM PDT by TexasConservativeRepublican
Texas Republicans are calling for an Emergency Texas GOP meeting to go to winner take all. Texas is tired of being overlooked and not having a voice in Presidential Races. This might keep Romney from getting 1144 delegates and force a Brokered Convention!
(Excerpt) Read more at hardincountyconservatives.blogspot.com ...
Texas would have already voted for the GOP nominee if it weren’t for redistricting issues.
So. Now instaead of 03-06-12, we vote on 05/29/12.
IMO.... Romney will have wrapped it up before then.
LOL Mittens getting outplayed would be awesome.
The FACT that one of the most POWERFUL states in the Union has 0 play in selecting the nominee is LAUGHABLE.
It’s time the East Coast RINO’s where moved to the back...
Oh, to be a fly on Leticia’s and Sheila’s walls today.
this is really going to shake things up.... hehe
There is no reason to allow a candidate the winner take all rule if that candidate can not clear the 50% +1 hurdle of the total vote cast.
Thus far Romney hasn’t even come close to doing that.
Awesome post! Thanks!
Texas SREC have their thinking caps on at least.
I did post a comment to the blog report, rather in favor of the proportional arrangement.
I get it that Texas needs to make a difference at the national level to be a force, but with demographics changing rapidly and some risk of a future SREC run by liberals one day, I think I would appreciate having a protest block of delegates in the mix.
How else do we stop the GOP-E from ignoring conservatives and throwing RINOs at us, complete with jillions of dollars and DC support.
The little guy would have less of a chance, it seems to me.
I am a little concerned that rule changing in a condition of justifiable rage with Romney could come back to bite Texas conservatives.
The changing demographics and the risk of a different SREC in the future is a risk when locked in to a winner-take-all arrangement, which leaves no room for say a conservative protest block of delegates to count, as in the proportional universe of delegates.
Primaries are ridiculous and should be abolished.
If they MUST continue, I’m OK with winner take all, as long as “winner” is defined as >67% of the vote.
The idea that you can be a “winner” when 65% of the voters vote against you is so absurd, it doesn’t even bear discussion, except to point out - again - how stupid the stupid party really is.
Not giving your blog a hit
I would also restore the 67% threshold to be nominated.
The PURPOSE of the nominating process is to produce the strongest candidate, and in a situation where 49% or 40% even of the party can't live with the choice, the choice will fail.
It sure looks to me like we’ve got one person with two
user names pimping the same blog crap with excerpts:
Isn’t that curious?
Does anyone care to explain that? The pimping, the scumminess, the filth?
They must think ORomney has a good shot of winning Texas now, so it’s safe to go back to winner-take-all, now that he’ll win it.
Is Rick Perry still on the ballot in Texas? ;
So, even in MIchigan the Mitbots have to cheat ~ just like in Virginia.
I am in favor of the proportional arrangement. I would even give some thoughtful consideration to changing to winner take all, but not when the “let’s change the rules” comes up during a presidential election year..
If it came up in 2011, or 2009, I wouldn’t have a problem with having a discussion about it, but not this close to the primary.
Next thing you know someone will suggest we have Super Delegates, and a Texas Two Step like the Dem’s had in the 2008 Texas Primary.
Good news. I hope all this nonsense with the bullies trying to get everyone else to drop out before Romney has reached 1144 delegates will get conservatives even more fired up than we already were. Obviously they are very scared that their ObamaClone Romney won’t be able to get to the magic number.
Works for me.
Just wishful thinking ;D
The only “hope” for the GOP, is for an open convention to occurr (I have been told “brokered” is not the correct term). IF the delegates can vote with their heads then hopefully someone other than Romney will be the nominee. I WILL NOT vote for Romney in a general election...So, IMO, getting another candidate, although it still probably won’t be a conservative is what I want.
Now is this Blog accurate. Someone savvy of Texas politics needs to weigh in. However, it would be a joyous moment for me if Santorum were to beat Romney in Texas and get ALL of their votes. It would derail Romney. Then we have a good chance to get a better pick. I would prefer Newt, but I don’t think that probable in an open convention. I don’t think Santorum will win it either. However, I don’t think Romney will win in the open convention scenario. Also, I think Newt or Rick will have a shot at being VP. Question is who would be the person an open convention would pick?
What is the Fuss about?
I know David Bellow and I have been following his Texas GOP info blog for a while now. When he posts an important blog article but is too busy to spread it around the internet that is where I come in an post it up to get the word out while he takes care of other business.
Is that wrong? It is not like David cannot post his article up himself because he can.
He just gets busy so I help hin out and post articles up when he does not have the time. Today he was on the phone with the Texas Tribune and Daily Caller and the Texas GOP. I thought he was not going to have time to get this article up on FR so I did it for him. Would you rather he post the article up himself? He could post the articles up himself if you want. He just gets busy sometimes and cannot do it. Breaking news is not breaking news if David has to wait until much later in the day to post the info.
I don’t understand what the problem is?
It is laughable. Texas should have a say. The race is not over. I am glad the Texas GOP is trying to become a player in the game.
David Bellow is on the board that governs and manages the Republican Party of Texas. He knows what he is talking about
Changing the rules in midstream isn’t right. We opposed it when Romney and the VAGOP did it in Virginia when they changed the requirements to get on the ballot after all the candidates submissions were sent in.
To support such a thing makes us no better than Romney or Obama.
But then, I had no illusions about Santorum. This is just the sort of hypocrisy I’d expect. All in the name of the Lord, of course.
I am reading about changes to both Dem and Rep state party leadership here and there. Something is up.
Romney steal delegates like 0bama in 2008? What, who fills the role of “we who are about to die salute you”?
Now that’s just funny. LOL...
I’m love eating g popcorn on this one.....
“David Bellow is on the board that governs and manages the Republican Party of Texas. He knows what he is talking about”
Well, here’s to hoping it does happen.
No, it's deliberate.
RiNO's and 'Rats holding hands and making common plans to screw over the voters of Texas.
Well, no, they don't have to .... they just do it out of a sense of obligation, a sense that others are watching and that they need to promenade their style, their many excellences, their drivenness that earns them their birthright and showcases their entitlement, to rule as rulers over the rest.
Don't you agree?
<Do I need the /s tag?>
Since Mar 27, 2012
Since Mar 27, 2012
It's also an amazing coincidence that your screen name is the same as the name of his blog.
Fascinating as well is the fact that you lavish fawning praise on him.
Methinks you are busted, dude.
I think Rosey got to do all the "posting up" of the articles they wrote.
duh. Of course we signed up on the same day. As I told you before, I post articles up when he is too busy to. That is what I do. That is what I signed up for. When he does not have time to spread his articles that is when I get online and do it. I have never tried to hide anything and I was completely honest when asked about it.
What is the big deal? It is not like I am posting the same article twice. It is not like he is posting an article and then I post the same article. We do not double post the same article. I only post something when he is busy and cannot to do himself. Is there something wrong with that?
There is no cheating going on. I am not doing something that he could not do himself. Every post I have put up he could have easily done himself. We are not getting around any rules. I am just posting things up when he is too busy to.
someone please tell me how that is wrong?
So basically he’s Batman and you’re Robin?
It’s not wrong and appreciate knowing what’s happening in Texas from a source other than MSM.
I tend to think if the media doesn’t get back on track the only truth we’ll EVER get will be from bloggers!
>> I dont understand what the problem is?
Don’t excerpt content you own.
Basically, we don’t like being pulled away from FR. We also frown on those that exploit FR to promote their websites. If you have something to contribute, do so without the commercialization.
Welcome to FR. Currently, the best damn place on Earth!
So basically hes Batman and youre Robin?
Not that I give a damn but I’m betting it’s Batman and Batwoman, like husband/wife.
Or maybe more like Lance and Bruce driving down the HIV lane on the Hershey highway.
Citing displeasure with the MSM as your reason for reading blogs is
like citing your dislike for cold beans as your reason for eating dog turds.