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

To: Dog Gone
I have mixed opinion over the "adherence to the platform", refered to as "Rule 43". I thought the ammended language was VERY POORLY worded, and because of that, I and most of SD17 delegation voted against it.

That being said, I think it is a positive for a candidate to state that he agrees/disagrees with specific portions of the platform. The time to find a candidate's opinion on platform issues is BEFORE the primary, not during the general election phase.

The attempt to force the "pledge of the platform" resulted in the poorly written language. Many of the SD17 delegates voted no, solely because they weren't clear as to the understanding and simply decided not to change the rule. It was this opinion where the motion to "indefinitely table" was made, even though that motion was defeated.

11 posted on 06/09/2002 8:58:56 PM PDT by PetroniDE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: PetroniDE
We have a serious RINO problem in the Party. That Rule was thought by some to fix it.
14 posted on 06/09/2002 9:21:20 PM PDT by BellStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | 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