Posted on 03/30/2012 1:18:51 PM PDT by VinL
Newt Gingrich's campaign has asked the Tennessee Republican Party....to not seat Knoxville state Sen. Stacey Campfield as a Gingrich delegate at the national convention.
Campfield, who served as a state co-chair for Gingrich's campaign, abruptly switched his support to Santorum days before the March 6 "Super Tuesday" election.
"Please be advised that Stacey Campfield does not have the consent of the Newt Gingrich for President Campaign to be seated as a delegate at the Republican National Convention," wrote John Fluharty, the campaign's director of delegate access, in a Thursday letter to the state GOP committee.
"As a matter of information, Senator Campfield, while originally qualifying as a delegate candidate for Speaker Gingrich, waited until early voting had concluded in Tennessee to publicly disavow his commitment to Speaker Gingrich and announce his endorsement of another candidate for President.
"This mislead all the Tennesseans who voted early. His actions resulted in Tennesseans who supported Newt Gingrich erroneously voting for a delegate candidate they believed would support Speaker Gingrich throughout the nominating process. The campaign has requested that Senator Campfield resign his position as a delegate. He has chosen to refuse our request."
The letter further states: "I hope you will also agree that Tennessee Republicans deserve to have representation that respects the nominating process and will discharge their duties at the convention in a sober and reasonable manner.
"On behalf of Speaker Gingrich, I ask that you vote to remove Senator Stacey Campfield from the rolls of the Tennessee delegation so we may appoint someone who will vote in accordance with the wishes of the people of Tennessee. ... The people of Tennessee deserve to have their vote for the Speaker count at the Republican Nominating Convention. The only way to make that happen is by allowing us to replace Senator Campfield."
(Excerpt) Read more at commercialappeal.com ...
My sentiments exactly FRiend!
It’s time for all these childish, angry, insulting, mud slinging sessions to end. We are all better than that.
**************
Psych, far be it for me to question someone’s motives, but you wouldn’t be trying to sugar me up in advance of Witless Mittless, would you?
Because, if that’s the case, I’m just warming up. -:)
Please let us know how this unfolds.
I hope Newt succeeds.
I don’t think they can do this. If he won election as a delegate then he’s in.
I believe he is bound to vote for Gingrich on the first ballot; thereafter he can switch to Santorum.
Stacy is the guy who decided Santorum was a better candidate. Unfortunately, he was listed on the Gingrich forms as a Gingrich delegate, and therefore was picked as one of the Gingrich representatives.
I can’t find anything in Tennessee’s rules to suggest a different delegate could simply be “selected”, but maybe there is a process.
I would think Stacey is required to vote for Gingrich anyway. It would be the subsequent ballots where there would be a problem.
Time to face facts. They guy has won only 2 states and only even got second place in 6 others. He ain’t gonna be the nominee and there’s nothing more to say about it, the electorate has rejected him. So debating whether he could beat Obama or not is an interesting hypothetical, but pointless.
There is only one alternative to Romney who has any chance, Santorum. He’d have had a much better chance if conservatives would have united with him a couple months ago when it was clear he was the strongest running conservative by far.
Hell he was leading Romney in some national polls but still a lot of people here were trashing him and clamoring for Newt.
Sad situation.
There’s a reason you didn’t “know” that.
Interestingly, if you do a google search on “Stacey lobbied by Santorum”, the 1st-page google entries that match are all posts you made here at FR.
A link to a real news source might be helpful.
A link to a real news source might be helpful.
****************
And why would that be helpful to you?
You MUST be a Rick supporter - their posts stick out, below the curve - the only kind of support he can draw.
My thinking is neither foolish nor self-righteous.
And for the record, in 2008 I did not support Huckabee, Romney, Thompson, McCain, or Giuliani, for that matter. And when election day came, I voted for Sarah Palin.
Romney even said to Sean Hannity that he met with Newt, after Sean opened the interview with a question about it.
Newt went to deck the liar but Mitt was having his hair done.
Because then I could read the news story, and evaluate the information. Is it an official release, or a campaign worker talking, or some 3rd-hand friend of some anonymous source?
Hey, even knowng there was actually an article would be useful, because we’d know it wasn’t just speculation or a misunderstandng of something, or just a repeat of other misinformation (that happens a lot around here, you read something and start repeating it and nobody realizes it started with a vanity or something.
I don’t know what you are trying to prove to yourself by your continued failed efforts at critiquing my posts. I’ve tried to be courteous, but as I’ve indicated twice previously, you are becoming tedious.
In this instance, you have indicated that you made an extensive effort to research authority for my position on Campfield, but to no avail. Well, I just searched and immediately found that authority-
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/mar/04/super-tuesday-switch-gingrich-co-chairman-backs/
If you lack the intelligence to perform an elemental search, ask someone else to assist you- before attempting to impeach another poster’s credibility.
In any event, I will not reply to any of your future posts directed to me.
I don’t know why you found that so hard. I love to provide links to the news sources that confirm my statements, especially when people ask about them.
When you avoid providing links, it makes people wonder about the information, and I would think you would want to make sure people didn’t wonder about the information.
I’m not sure why you used the word “lobby”, but instead of “asked”, although I guess that’s just a semantic choice for a desired connotative effect.
I’m also not sure why, in context, you find the move to be untoward. According to the article you cited, Santorum spoke with the man and gave him a reasoned argument why it would make sense to switch. The idea that people should be “left alone” if they have already announced a candidate to support makes no sense to me, since the whole point of running for office is to change the opinion of people who will vote.
By giving me the link, you have helped all of us understand the context of your claim, and better evaluate the action, to see whether it really was as horrible as you claimed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.