Skip to comments.GOP rule could sink Gingrich, Paul at contested convention [Reince Preibus notes its importance]
Posted on 03/21/2012 12:18:31 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul's slim hopes of winning the Republican presidential nomination depend primarily on their ability to triumph at a contested convention in August. The idea is that if front-runner Mitt Romney falls short of the 1,144 delegates he needs to secure the nomination outright before the convention, his rivals will seize the opportunity to win over the Republican faithful during the convention process.
That long-shot strategy depends on Gingrich and Paul actually getting on the convention ballot. And it now appears that may be a problem. The Atlanta-Journal Constitution has noticed a little-known rule - No. 40(b), to be exact - that would seem to keep the two candidates from being able to participate in a floor fight.
The rule was adopted in 2008, and here's what it says: "Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination."
It's possible that even if Gingrich or Paul's delegates can't vote for their candidate on the first ballot, they could do so on subsequent ballots if Gingrich and/or Paul garners the support of a plurality of delegates from at least five states during the fight on the convention floor. Under Republican National Committee rules, Gingrich or Paul would need to be formally nominated after the first ballot for this to happen, and demonstrate their support in five states when this happens. It's an extremely unlikely scenario, though technically possible......
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I don’t understand why people are still pushing for Newt to drop out. That is the surest way Romney gets to 1144. If Newt were to drop out about half his support goes to Rick and half to Romney. A draw.
And people would get mad if someone said there was no difference between the Pubs and the Dems.
I think you’re wrong. If the idea is somehow to stop Romney, Santorum’s people have to support Newt in Louisiana, to get him to 3 states, and then support him in two other places, maybe North Carolina and Arkansas, to get him to 5. This way, Newt’s current delegates aren’t washed down the drain since the guy cannot be nominated.
As for getting Ron Paul to 5, first, I don’t think it can be done. They may be lost, right now, to Romney, and they be no way of stopping Romney. But, maybe Santurom’s people can work with Paul’s people in five of the caucus states to give Paul the plurality. If we can get Paul to 5, then they’ll have to vote for Paul on the first ballot, and this too will help prevent Romney from locking up the nomination.
Correct. There is no reason for Newt to withdraw.
He can continue giving sound policy speeches (collecting delegates) and be the VISIBLE symbol that the GOP-e has screwed the conservative base (60% of the Party).
BLOCK Romney from his 1144 and make the Party Elite carry Mitt to the nomination on their shoulders at the convention for all the base to watch.
Maybe that is what it will take for the conservatives in the party to see them for who they really are... it may even be too late for that - as 47% of the Tea Party voted for Mitt in IL.
As far as Tampa, I believe the bigger the mess, the more hope there will be for a conservative revival, a real one...
A very interesting idea!
Sad, isn’t it, that the guy people say has the best policies is not the guy they are willing to vote for.
The question is, how can we force all these people to vote for the guy you know is the best candidate, when they keep voting for the other candidates instead?
There has to be some way you can make the people of Illinois not vote for Romney, Santorum, or Paul more than Gingrich. But how?
Seriously, I’ve always said (and you might remember me saying this when you were a Perry supporter), that in the end, a candidate is responsible for attacting actual voters to vote for him. Gingrich has largely failed to do that. Makes no difference WHY — you might have fun arguing why a team doesn’t win a game, but excuses don’t change the final score.
We don’t put the person with the best ideas into office, we put the person with the most votes. Figure out how to get Gingrich the most votes, and maybe he’ll turn this around.
If the last 3 weeks here at FR are any indication, it is clear that attacking Santorum isn’t going to achieve the desired result.
This primary has shown that the candidate with the money can bury his competition in negative ads and then waltz his way to the convention.
ALL the conventional wisdom was warning everyone BUT MITT, not to go negative. Can’t have that! Oh no! But those same pundits and talking heads NEVER, ever criticized Romney for his dirty hands.
As Adopted by the 2008 Republican
National Convention September 1, 2008
*Amended by the Republican National Committee
on August 6, 2010
RULE NO. 40 Nominations (a) In making the nominations for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States and voting thereon, the roll of the states shall be called separately in each case; provided, however, that if there is only one candidate for nomination for Vice President of the United States who has demonstrated the support required by paragraph (b) of this rule, a motion to nominate for such office by acclamation shall be in order and no calling of the roll with respect to such office shall be required. (b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination. (c) The total time of the nominating speech and seconding speeches for any candidate for nomination for President of the United States or Vice President of the United States shall not exceed fifteen (15) minutes. (d) When at the close of a roll call any candidate for nomination for President of the United States or Vice President of the United States has received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the convention, the chairman of the convention shall declare that the candidate has been nominated. (e) If no candidate shall have received such majority, the chairman of the convention shall direct the roll of the states be called again and shall repeat the calling of the roll until a candidate shall have received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the convention.
Its Huckabee bullheadedly plowing ahead of Thompson by sheer belief in his own holiness all over again. The story always starts out the same: Conservatives get a credible alternative to the Establishment front-runner, and he starts getting attacked.
Then the SoCon who stayed under the radar (Huckabee then, Santorum now) becomes everyones plan B, because the guy who could have won (Thompson, Gingrich) was unloaded upon by the GOP-E money machine. Then the smug supporters of the upstart underdog all thump their chest and say NO.....YOUR GUY SHOULD DROP OUT!!
Then the vote is already split, the credible candidate becomes non-credible because of vote-splitting, and the upstart winds-up in second place because folks trying to beat the Establishment liberal switch to plan B because the smug voters of the only holy candidate make it loudly clear that theyre going to support the holy upstart candidate even if it means the Liberals win.
It JUST KEEPS HAPPENING.
In reality, what needed to happen was for Santorum to drop out early, when it became apparent that there was someone who could lead Romney in the polls for a long time, and when it was clear he had a friggin LITANY of ballot and delegate issues. Even if it was not Newt at the time (heck, replace Newt with Perry), Conservatives should have united around a single candidate with a full organization and little to no ballot and delegate issues, and there SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A PLAN B. Conservative should have been forced to STAY united, learn to DEFEND their candidate rather than defect because the rich, Establishment Liberal was able to smear the credible Conservative with overwhelming cash.
If there had been no Santorum, Newt would be leading right now. He would be leading because we would have been united against Romney from day one, and there would have been no defections based on the fact that - by simply running under the radar - someone else rises because they havent been unloaded on.
We CANNOT keep doing this. We CANNOT keep Santoruming and Huckabeeing ourselves based on some sick notion of the holiness of a politician. We cannot keep some broke one-percenter in the race because they were able to show well in Iowa after living there for two years and facing almost no attacks because of their low polling. We cannot keep rewarding these guys for throwing Hail Mary passes when we have a chance to defeat the Liberals. No more shoestring campaigns, no more one-percenters who surge in time to do well in Iowa, no more long-shot dreams based on the notion that some candidate is the mostest Christianest candidate of them all.
No more Huckabees, no more Santorums. No more long-shots who surge in Iowa. Rule them out before they ruin another Primary season. Santorum was never going to get 1144 delegates - it was NEVER going to happen. The fact that people bull-headedly refused to waver from him KILLED us - and then they turned around and taunted Newt and Perry voters for voting for Santorum in desperation, citing the vote count as if nobody knows what was actually happening.
No more Santorums, no more Huckabees. No more long shots, period.
and it's about time we had one!
They pulled this rule out of where exactly?
>> he really has no legitimate purpose to continue in this race <<
Dunno about that. Maybe it’s completely legit to keep one’s face and voice before the public, whether to sell one’s books, increase one’s speaking fees, or whatever. And as Hume pointed out last nite on FNC, those who have dropped out no longer have the huge amount of public attention that Newt still commands.
THANK YOU for bringing that post to this thread.
I’m not so sure. Remember that all that needs to happen for a contested convention is to deny a first ballot victory to anyone. This releases up *all* the delegates.
From there, it turns into a free for all, with the five state rule just preventing the convention from turning into a favorite son slug fest. This means that any and all candidates will have to make “backroom” deals to make the five state minimum, to show that they have a functioning bloc big enough to matter.
Then anyone and everyone who can muster five states, a theoretical 10 candidates, but practically only two or three, will go up for the second ballot. And this is when it gets interesting.
That is, the second ballot will still likely be just Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich. But that will just confirm the stalemate, so new candidates will have to come forth.
That's what I've been saying here for the last 10 years about repealing the 17th amendment.
The media cash in every 4 years, but the mid-terms are also crazy now. Eliminate 33 Senate elections every 2 years, and you take a LOT of money away from the media.
One more reason to expect that this is the last national election for Republicans. It is high time Conservatives stop hoping for them to change things in any meaningful way.
Boehner is a crybaby, McConnell is a whiner; heck, even Ryan’s hated budget would run trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. The Tea Party candidates we fought to elect have been mostly ineffective, if not openly hostile to those that got them elected in the first place.
The GOP is nothing but another wing of the BOHICA Party that makes deals that are meant to put on a show, much like wrestling. And the outcome is just as preordained.
I like your thinking but with so many delegates “unpledged” and with those others once “released” after the 1st ballot (some have other rules) vulnerable to their state’s “extra” delegates’ influence, it will take some kind of “revolution” (delegate backbone) in thinking for a groundswell against the Establishment (now that they have control of the process and from what I’m finding the delegates).
It’s time for someone like Sara Palin to ignite a base rumble.
And the fools threw themselves around Santuckabee in a 24 hour period because Romney launched a campaign of lies against Newt that he did not have the money to fight.
The damage has been done and we are now forced to live with the outcome. But we can figure this out, and will not stop fighting until we get this right. The biggest problem is, we are still stuck with this new form of fickle conservatives, who have proven to be seriously unloyal as well as unpredictable. It's very hard to plan a party effort around that.