RNC might block entire Nevada delegation over Ron Paul delegate mischief

RNC might block entire Nevada delegation over Ron Paul delegate mischief
By Justin Sink - 05/03/12 08:53 AM ET

The Republican National Committee is warning the Nevada GOP that if supporters of Ron Paul are allowed to take too many slots for the national convention, the party may opt against seating the state's entire delegation.

"I believe it is highly likely that any committee with jurisdiction over the matter would find improper any change to the election, selection, allocation, or binding of delegates, thus jeopardizing the seating of Nevada’s entire delegation to the National Convention," said John R. Phillippe Jr., the chief counsel for the RNC, in a letter obtained by the Las Vegas Sun.

The RNC is concerned that the Paul campaign will game the state-level convention this weekend that selects delegates to the national convention. While Mitt Romney should be awarded 20 of the state's 28 delegates, based on his dominating win in the state's primary, it's possible that Paul supporters could exploit their strength in the Nevada GOP to get named to some of those delegate slots.

The national party is apparently concerned those delegates would then ignore party rules that would bind them to vote for Romney on the first round of balloting.

"If a prospective delegate’s name is certified to the RNC but has not been approved by an authorized representative of the candidate he or she professes to support, grounds for a contest may exist," Phillippe wrote. "In any case, to the extent a prospective delegate is purportedly elected in excess of the number of slots allocated to his or her preferred candidate, such delegate will be bound to vote at the national convention for the candidate to whom that delegate was allocated."

The national Republican organization is increasingly anxious over the ability of the Paul campaign to take over state-level organizations, especially in states like Iowa and Nevada that have outsized importance on the nominating process. National Republicans worry that if grassroots party loyalists aren't supporting the presumptive nominee, the party could struggle against President Obama's fundraising and organizational efforts. But Paul supporters say they should be credited for their ability to organize and win all-important delegates.

The congressman himself said Monday that his campaign was "doing very, very well" by exploiting some of the party's more obscure delegate selection rules.

"Just look at this last week. The news is very favorable to us. We could even end up winning Iowa, ironically enough. In Minnesota, we're doing well, and Maine, Nevada and Missouri. We're doing very, very well. Some of the states we could very well win or come up very much because the delegate process is completely different than these straw votes," Paul told Bloomberg TV.

"We're pleased. ... It's another month or so until they count all the delegates and we find out where we stand."

"Just exactly what tactics did they do that were wrong? As you said, the guy knew the rules. You sound like a party hack trying to disenfranchise people who want to participate in the political process and don’t tow the party line. I can guarantee you the state GOP hacks were standing in front of the polling places handing out their fliers of who to vote for in many districts. They’re there most of the time I go to vote doing that. Why in the world shouldn’t supporters of another candidate be allowed to do the same? And if he is allowed to advocate for his candidate only 10 feet away, how far away were you standing when you were “campaigning” against his preferred delegates?"

Jedi - Sorry not to get back to you. I've been away.

Clearly if the county election officials told the fellow to move further away from the polls, he was not in compliance. Personally, I have no objection to anyone making their case for any candidate or candidates. However, I believe that citizens who are voting have the right to know the source of that advocacy, especially when it concerns delegates who are not committed to proportionately representing the will of the voters at the convention. I made no effort to dissuade voters; I only let them know the source of the recommendation. When a campaign omits that information, I have to ask why they are unwilling to disclose it. All the other campaigns were clear in their funding and advocacy so that voters could make informed decisions.

As to myself, I was there as a GOP committee representative. As such, I am in an elected position, and I represent the local GOP. I don't personally agree with every recommendation or every action. I do my best to provide sources of information to our citizens so that they can make their own informed decisions. I have put together newsletters to constituents and created extensive website links to campaigns on the GOP side. Included were campaigns of candidates that I didn't personally support, in addition to the list of endorsements. I make a point of this out of respect for the voters.

In addition to the above, I stand at the polls on election day, greeting voters and providing guidance for those who seek it. Yes, I hand out the flyer with our local committee's recommendations. You consider me a hack for that; OK. You have your opinion. It's not my favorite activity, but it's part of the role. The flyers are clearly marked with the source of funding, and I let people know what it represents. I also point out the full ballot, which is clearly on display - often in more than one location. I have spent time with many citizens explaining to them what is on the ballot, and what to expect in the voting booth. Many of them come to the polls not knowing what will be on the ballot apart from the most visible race. I don't pressure people, and I can say that most of my Dem counterparts are very polite and also do not pressure voters. At the end of the day, we're all still neighbors, and most of us remember that.

You may not like what you term political hacks. I understand the distaste for those you think do whatever the higher-ups tell them regardless of what's best. To some extent this is the nature of large organizations of any kind. We take up our differences internally, and we have many debates. Our committee has gained more conservative members in recent years, and we're having an impact. These changes don't come as fast as some of us would like, but the internal change is a necessary part of the picture. With unity we can raise awareness of candidates and engage the citizens.

In our precinct, the winner of the senate race was not the state and locally endorsed candidate, by the way. The voters managed to ignore the printed endorsement and support a more consistently conservative candidate. They also turned out in solid numbers for a primary race that, once again, they were probably too late to affect.

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.