Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kristinn
Until we get rid of open primaries this will be a common occurrence.

Paul has absolutely no reason to be in the primaries as a Republican.

9 posted on 01/09/2012 5:19:56 PM PST by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Irish Eyes

I can believe it would be the crackpots supporting Paul. I just saw a Santorum event on C-span at which Paul supporters were disrupting the event and screaming, “Paul doesn’t hate gays.” Why is this nut in a Republican primary? Why are “independents” allowed to vote in a Republican primary? Paul has no chance to be the nominee yet he and his supporters are crashing the primaries and skewing the results. And he’s deliberately avoiding attacking Romney as he rips Gingrich and Santorum apart. This guy is a malevolent, screwy, whack job. When he’s criticized in a debate and confronted about his lies as Gingrich did on the Saturday debate, he resorts to a fiendish, demented giggle. I think he’s certifiable.


18 posted on 01/09/2012 5:36:16 PM PST by WestSylvanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Irish Eyes
Until we get rid of open primaries this will be a common occurrence

The primary system has failed repeatedly and should be done away with.

In the meantime, accepting that primaries may continue for a few more cycles, the following rules MUST be in place:

1) Only voters registered as Republicans for at least one year before the primary may vote. No late registrations, no independents.

2) All delegate awards MUST be proportional. A state committee could elect a winner-take-all rule, but "winner" would require 67% of voting Republicans, otherwise, delegates would be proportionately assigned. The idea of declaring a "winner" who loses 70-75% of the votes is beyond absurd.

3) The size of delegations to the national convention should be determined by: a) number of votes for the Republican candidate in the last Presidential election: range in 2008 was 98 000 (Vermont) to 4 467 748 (Texas), for every 100 000 votes I would award 1 delegate ; b) number of Senators (R) - one, (10 delegates), two (25 delegates); c) Republican majorities in State Legislature - House (10 delegates ), both (25 delegates); d) Republican governor (25 delegates); e) Number of registered Republicans > 1 year, sliding scale with 10 delegates per 100 000 registered.

I would also mandate a primary calendar with the first primary on or after March 1 and the last on June 30, in inverse order of delegation size.

Really, through, the idea of a bunch of idiots choosing the candidate has to end.

36 posted on 01/09/2012 6:21:39 PM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Irish Eyes

YES, YES, YES.


51 posted on 01/09/2012 7:59:28 PM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Irish Eyes
Until we get rid of open primaries this will be a common occurrence.

Paul has absolutely no reason to be in the primaries as a Republican.

And neither does Romney.

62 posted on 01/10/2012 12:25:02 AM PST by meadsjn (Sarah 2012, or sooner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson