Syte Reitz

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world…….

Browsing Posts tagged what is a brokered convention?

The Truth About Brokered Conventions

or

Media (and other) Efforts to Steer the Republican Nomination

xxx

What IS a Brokered Convention?Slide1

The news has recently been filled with alarmism about the possibility of a Republican brokered convention occurring this summer. But since brokered conventions have been relatively rare in our nation’s history, few voters know just exactly what a brokered convention is. The media (as well as some campaigns)  feel free to define, re-define, misrepresent and mold brokered conventions into anything they would like them to be.

What a wonderful opportunity for progressives to attack and to discredit conservatives!

Progressives – both in the media and elsewhere – have managed to portray standard Republican in-party conflict resolution rules  (like the brokered convention) as something new- as rigging and manipulation by the Republican “establishment,” with a goal of excluding certain candidates or otherwise circumventing the will of the American people.

Note that all the same issues- the susceptibility of any potential brokered convention to manipulation by various groups at war for power, the relevance of primaries, and Party control by superdelegates – these issues exist as well in the Democrat Party.  Yet when it comes to these issues, media attacks seem focused primarily on the Republican Party, which is undergoing an inner battle over the preservation of conservative Judeo-Christian values. The Democrat Party actually has more authoritarian undemocratic mechanisms in place to preserve the status quo than do Republicans, yet it seems relatively protected from viscous media attack.

RNC RulesAside: The characterization of Party Rules and policy as vile and authoritarian is a “progressive” (more accurately “regressive”) view.  But defending the right of a private political group to maintain their conservative values can be defended on the basis of our system of government, a democratic republic, which was actually carefully designed with the protection of certain fundamental rights in place, safe even from election manipulation.  More on that later!

So let’s examine this question of the brokered convention- how it has been portrayed or misportrayed, why is it misportrayed, and what is a brokered convention, really?

Aside #2 : see also the previous related article,Have We Ditched Democracy? Was the Colorado Primary Rigged?, which discusses the similar misportrayal of the primary system by media and by some candidates, in an effort to damage the credibility and reputation of the Republican Party.

Portraying a Brokered Convention as a Malicious Tool

Some in the media portray the brokered convention as a malicious tool broken out by the Republican “establishment” to take the Republican nomination away from front-runner candidates whom they do not like.  They even go so far as to say that the purpose of the brokered convention is to get rid of Donald Trump.

If this were to be the case, Republicans would have to be pretty far-sighted, since brokered conventions are as old as the election of Abraham Lincoln.  The brokered convention, a tool for settling conflict methodically, is an old and fair tool and not a recent invention.

Slide2It is not highly likely that Lincoln and his colleagues were already plotting against Donald Trump when the brokered convention was first implemented! 🙂

So, no, a brokered convention was not invented for the purpose of getting rid of Donald Trump, as Newsweek would have you believe.

Portraying a Brokered Convention as an Authoritarian Throwback

Even some relatively conservative media sources are critical of the brokered convention and they imply that the implementation of these old Republican Party rules reflects the global return of authoritarian regimes worldwide.  No, you did not read that wrong, we kid you not, a  Fox News article  just juxtaposed brokered conventions with a piece on authoritarianism ‘gone global!’

finger-wagRecently, when Republican Rules Committee member Curly Haugland clarified the Rules of the Republican Party on binding of delegate votes, much of the media jumped to claim that the authoritarian Republican establishment was again trying to get rid of front-running candidates by allowing delegates to abandon the will of the people as expressed in the primaries and caucuses.

And many well educated good Americans are surprised to hear that their vote may not be binding in a Primary.  These rules of civics are no longer taught in schools, and few understand why these rules might actually be useful in protecting democracy. These rules are particularly useful in protecting the Republican Party from election fraud, which is a common technique these days, exercised by Democrats and taught by Barack Obama when he was a professor.  See Have We Ditched Democracy? Was the Colorado Primary Rigged?
.
So no, authoritarian control of America is definitely not the purpose or goal of a brokered convention. No more than traffic lights or any other rules of law and order that have been adopted in this country to provide order.  So many Americans really don’t understand the purpose of a brokered convention!

Using RNC Rules and a Brokered Convention as a Campaign Tool

And it’s not just the media.
Many politicians misrepresent brokered conventions to their own advantage.

Donald Trump misrepresents brokered conventions and the Rules of the Republican Party.  Since we doubt that the Donald is simple-minded or that he has failed to do his homework on the Republican nomination process, that leaves the option that Trump could be misrepresenting facts to suit his campaign purposes.Slide2

Trump casts the routine Republican practice of reviewing and revising the Rules of the Republican Party at the start of each convention as an effort to cheat him of his “right” to be nominated.
Despite the fact that RNC rules governing whether the 2016 Convention will be brokered have been available to everyone since 2012,  Trump portrays a brokered convention as a recent plot to unseat him from what he feels as his entitled place as the Republican nominee.  Trump insists that he must be the nominee because he is the front runner at the moment (the race is not yet over), and ignores the fact that he does NOT have the 51% in eight States  that is required by RNC rules since 2012 to even enter the Convention, forget about being the only and “presumptive” Republican nominee.

Trump wants to redefine the rules to suit himself, to run the Republican nomination process like a horse race, where the leading horse can win by a nose, regardless of the margin.  Trump refuses to acknowledge that Republicans have never handled the Presidential nomination like a horse race, but have evolved rules over the years, similar to General Election rules, that require a candidate to win the favor of 51% of America before he/she can be President.  As of now, Donald Trump has won only 37 percent of Republican votes and is regarded unfavorably by more than 60 percent of general election voters.

Donald Trump has even gone so far as to suggest that his supporters will riot if  the Republican nomination is not awarded by the horse race mechanism. Sad to say, these tactics resemble Democrat Alinsky tactics more than they do those of the conservative Republican that Donald a Trump claims to be.

Slide1Most recently, Donald Trump’s campaign is accusing the Primary Process of not being democratic.  Despite the fact that Primaries are now routinely sabotaged, and some States have begun to lean toward trusting their delegates who support the Party Platform rather than trusting the results of primaries which are susceptible to outside manipulation by Democrats in 24 States – despite these facts, and despite the fact that the Republican system (and even more so the Democrat system!) have safeguards built in to retain control of the Party within the Party- Donald Trump’s attitude is to arrive, to take advantage of the Republican Party infrastructure to gain support for his campaign, to fail to educate himself on the system (or choose to ignore the system), to assume that the system was built that way to make life difficult for him, and to proclaim the system crooked for not agreeing with him. Or, at least, so he claims.Slide1

Donald Trump forgets that the Republican Party is a collection of like-minded conservative individuals who have banded together to nominate an individual who represents their values, and they have the right of free speech to nominate a person consistent with their values.  Donald forgets that he himself embodies only a portion of Republican Party Platform conservative values, and has waffled dangerously on many other Republican values, including freedom of religion, abortion and gay marriage.  Donald forgets that he himself for decades has supported people and groups who oppose Republican values.  Donald forgets that he has still failed to win the support of 51% of the American people.
Donald forgets all this, and accuses the Republican Primary process of not being democratic.  

Donald also forgets that despite his complaints, the Republican delegate system has actually given Trump a 22 Percent Bonus, according to NBC News.

Donald Trump’s outrage is contagious, is spreading to his supporters, and is very useful as well for getting free media coverage for his campaign.

The squeaky wheel often gets oiled, and so The Donald has many Americans persuaded that the Primary system is rigged.  It’s not.  See Have We Ditched Democracy? Was the Colorado Primary Rigged?

Donald is actually playing the age-old and primitive, yet effective sympathy card-  the “my dog ate my homework, the smart kid in the class is an apple-polisher (that would be Cruz), and the mean teacher (the GOP) is out to get me” routine.

Portraying the Brokered Convention as a DirtyBack Room Deal

Slide2Even reputable publications like The Atlantic have succumbed to misrepresentation of the brokered convention.  The Atlantic states that nominating Trump is better than a brokered Republican convention, and entitles their article The Convention the GOP Does Not Want.

In the article, The Atlantic not only promotes nominating Donald Trump, but also goes on to suggest that Mitt Romney is the one who is suggesting that Republicans need a brokered convention.
Mitt Romney?
A brokered convention is not held when one famous politician thinks one should be held!

Has The Atlantic not done it’s homework?

So if a Brokered Convention is Not a Dirty Deal, What IS a Brokered Convention?
Slide3

A brokered convention (related terms include contested convention, open convention) is a mechanism designed for arriving at one nominee when Party members cannot agree during the Primary season. It’s a scripted process of elimination that is based on serious mathematical theories, calculated and predetermined rules designed to be fair to everyone involved.  The brokered convention is a sort of Geneva Convention that spells out the rules of gentlemanly conduct when factions of the Party are at war.

Depending on the degree of turmoil or conflict in the party, the brokered convention can help to zero in on one of a few leading candidates, or, if there is a stubborn tug of war between two sides, the brokered convention has mechanisms for introducing a compromise candidate.

A Compromise Candidate- Isn’t that Bad?

Conflict resolution mechanisms similar to the brokered convention are used everywhere when people cannot agree, and where civilized folks want to script the battle to be fair.  Some even speculate that Pope Francis was chosen as someone who was not the favorite of either “side,” of conflicting groups.  Sometimes these “compromise” candidates can turn out to be the greatest men of history-  like Presidents Lincoln and Reagan, and Pope John Paul II.Slide1

When the Brokered Convention is Used in American Politics

In American politics, a brokered convention is held on the relatively rare occasion when Republicans simply cannot agree on a nominee throughout the primary season, when the primary votes are insufficient to finalize the choice of nominee, and when further rounds of voting are required to get 51% of Republicans behind one candidate.
A brokered convention is held when the Party is obviously split, or when the Party has too many candidates. There are measures or litmus tests of just how split the party is- these are the 1237 delegate estimates or the Rule 40(b) estimates (plurality in 5 States before 2012 and majority in 8 States since 2012).

When the primaries fail to produce a candidate supported by half ( yes half, not one third) of the Party, a brokered convention is held to follow specific rules for resolution, so that the Party would not split in half, thereby handing victory automatically to the opposing Party, the Democrats.

Slide1And speaking of the opposing Party, the  Democrat Party rules are actually less “democratic” than the Republican Party rules.  Democrat Rules are more “authoritarian,” and they have a larger proportion of unbound super delegates.  They also have brokered conventions when races are too close, and Party leadership also holds a considerable amount of power. This is not a dirty deal in either Party- why would you want to allow outside forces to take over and control a private organization, which both the Republican and Democrat Parties happen to be?

Isn’t It Unfair to Have Delegates and Superdelegates for Whom I Did Not Vote Determining the Nomination?

Well, first of all, why would you or I assume that there exists some magical source of people available to serve us, to become delegates, attend conventions, pay their own expenses, campaign, give up their free time, and otherwise participate in the giant mechanism that is the United States Presidential Election, without pay and without assistance from you and me?Who me?

If you or I were very invested in politics, we should be doing all the above things.  And if we were very active in our State’s Republican Party, we probably would have more say in choosing the delegates, or even become a delegate ourselves.  For people like me, who insist on our “Independence,” and neither belong to nor participate in the Republican Party (other than spending 15 minutes to run into a voting booth once every four years), we are lucky that they let us vote and take our opinion into account at all. Our “right to vote comes in at the General Election, and not at this private group’s nomination process- either Republican or Democrat.

Running for President is Complicated- and it’s Not Paid for by the Government

Those who are very invested in politics have to run for office, collect a million signatures, and fill out a myriad of complex application forms to be listed on the ballot in each State– a new set of complex applications and procedures in each of 50 States and 6 territories, and then they have to travel the United States campaigning for votes.

OR,

Slide1Those interested in running for the Office of President can find a private political organization like the Republican Party, or the Democrat Party, which has done all of the above for them, and which has collected lots of money to boot, and they could try to piggyback on the Republican/Democrat Party and on its reputation, which has been built by active Republicans/Democrats for decades.

If We Don’t Belong to a Group, and it’s Not a Government Group, Why Should That Group Let Us Control Them?

Those of us who do not join a political party and who do not run for political office ourselves should not be too fussy about how much power Republicans give us in return for our optional 15 minutes in the election booth.  Basically, people who are not active in an organization can have no gripe when they don’t like the decisions that have been made.

Don’t We Live in a Democracy?

It may seem fair that voters should decide everything in a democracy.  But there are very good reasons for limiting a democracy, and that’s what we have in the United States- a limited democracy, a democratic republic.  That’s something else that should be taught in Civics class in grammar school – the difference between a democracy and a democratic republic.

A democratic republic is, strictly speaking, a country that is both a republic and a democracy. It is one where ultimate authority and power is derived from the citizens, and the government itself is run through elected officials.
It is presumed that the elected officials are the experts, akin to our doctors, lawyers, architects and other experts who know more about a subject than we do and who help us ignoramuses (ignorami? 🙂 ) make good decisions in our lives.Who Rules

We citizens choose the experts whom we trust to carry out the complicated business of government for us when we cannot do everything ourselves.  And in a Presidential Primary, those experts are the delegates and superdelegates.

In a democratic republic, popular vote can choose the broad direction that citizens want to pursue, such as a conservative or liberal government, or the specific direction the government takes, like reducing federal regulation of individual lives, or expanding federal regulation of economy.  But how these general principles play out and how conflicting priorities can be resolved are things that require highly specialized and professional elected officials to work out.

The choice of candidate who will best serve the interests of a particular political party and it’s platform is not something that can be left to a popular vote, with 24 States allowing Democrats and Independents to vote in a Republican Primary and vice versa.

The Bottom Line

So the bottom line is that our nation is divided right now.  Not only between conservatives and progressives, but even within each party.

The friction, split, and superabundance of candidates in the Republican Party today is exactly the type of confusing situation for which the brokered convention was designed. We NEED and must have a brokered convention, and this is a good thing.

Slide1Those who assume that Republican liberals will win the scripted battle of the brokered convention fail to realize that there is at least an equal chance that Republican conservatives will have the opportunity to reclaim the Republican Party at the brokered convention.

.

If if you shy away from a battle, you cannot win it.
That bears repeating:
If you shy away from a battle, you cannot win it.

What to Expect at a Brokered Convention

What do we expect from a brokered convention?
We expect the unexpected.
Nobody can predict the outcome of a war, civilized and scripted or not.
But seriously, there some predictions we can try to project.

So here are some generalizations that will probably hold true for Republicans as we approach the very probably brokered convention in Cleveland in July:

  • It is likely that no candidate will get the majority of 1237 (estimated) delegate votes.
  • It is likely that no candidate will satisfy the present Rule 40(b), and will not have a majority (>51%) in 8 States.
  • Therefore, NOBODY will qualify to enter the convention.Slide1

Since a convention cannot be held with NO CANDIDATES, the RNC Rules committee will be forced to change Rule 40(b) in order to allow candidates into the convention.

  • NOTE: the Party members are not doing this to be mean, authoritarian, or to exclude anybody.  They are doing it so that somebody, instead of nobody, could be considered for nomination at the convention.
  • NOTE #2: The people on the RNC Rules committee are NOT mean “establishment” Republicans, but a mix of all kinds of Republicans, including the ones who support conservatives and the ones who support Donald Trump.

Possibilities:

Curly Haugland, North Dakota

One long time member of the Rules Committee already announced a year ago, before many candidates had even announced their candidacy, a fair proposal for the Rules Committee. Curly Haugland, superdelegate from North Dakota, proposed that if nobody clears the bar of 1237 or majority in 8 States, that all candidates who received even one single delegate should be included in the first vote.
That would include in the first vote at this  point Trump (954), Cruz (562), Rubio (171), Kasich (153), Carson (9), Bush (4), Fiorina (1), Huckabee (1), and Paul(1).

There will be at least a first vote.
Since it has been established that all Republican delegates have the free will to vote their conscience, the counting of delegates can only be estimated.
Nobody can say for sure how many delegates a candidate has until after the first vote at the Cleveland Convention.
So there has to be a first vote.
And in 2016, the first vote could bring some surprises that are impossible to forecast at any point before the first vote occurs.

If anybody wins 51% in the first vote, Republicans will have a nominee.
If nobody wins the first vote, additional votes are held until one nominee gets the required majority.  Delegates can change their votes, responding to input from candidates, party leadership, and political maneuvering.Floor Fight

After the first vote, additional names can be proposed and added to the list of candidates, including individuals who did not run in the primaries.  So in 2016, for example, somebody could propose adding Sarah Palin to the list.  Scott Walker, who did not collect a single delegate before his early suspension of his campaign, could easily be returned in to the running.
It is possible that a party, gridlocked between two candidates, say Trump and Cruz, could compromise and shift votes to a compromise candidate, who could be anyone- Carson, Santorum, Fiorina, Walker, Bush, Ryan, Palin,………….or anybody else.  Candidates who have not yet been damaged by the highly combative and money-driven primary process, and who could yield an historical leader like Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan, could enter the Convention as a conservative “compromise” candidate.

Alternative Surprises
Mr. Squeaky Wheel Trump is already declaring himself the Presumptive Nominee today, after yesterday’s victories in several east coast states.  Between his derision of the GOP for their 51% rules, and his accusations of rigging if he does not automatically get the nomination with 37%, who knows whether Mr. Trump could succeed in intimidating the GOP to change rules in such a way as to hand the nomination to him. Stranger things have happened in the last 8 years with Barak Obama’s Presidency, with a President taking legal liberties that never could have been imagined or forecast previously.

More Information

For more excellent information on brokered conventions and their history, see the non-partisan political information source BallotPedia on brokered conventions.

ballotpedia2-630x286

What Are Our Conservative Prospects?

So no, the brokered convention is not a dirty back room deal, but an opportunity to reclaim America and make it great, with or without Donald Trump as the Republican nominee.  One word here about Donald Trump- in order to be that leader of the future whom we are seeking, he would have to get on board with the conservative “social” issues of religious freedom, abortion and marriage, which are actually ethical, not “social” issues, which are encoded in the Republican Party Platform, and which are supported by the majority of the citizens of the United States.  We would need a “conversion of St. Donald,” or, in Donald’s language, a HUGE deal, in which Donald sold his soul to God, as most Americans do.

And, speaking of back room deals, Mitt Romney’s supporters were the ones who used a dirty back room deal in 2012 to avoid a brokered convention, in which Mitt Romney would have had to enter a fair fight to win his nomination which so many conservative Republicans opposed at that time. The Big Rule Switch of 2012 was engineered by Mitt Romney supporters, was engineered to exclude Ron Paul from the 2012 Convention, and was the real dirty back room deal that is now actually complicating life for Donald Trump, as he tries to qualify for nomination.  Romney’s maneuver also caused 4 million Republican voters to choose not to participate in the 2012 election, with the consequent sad outcome for Mr. Romney.

There is a fight going on for the soul of the GOP.

.God the Father Cima da Conegliano
Depending on what Americans choose, both in the presidential nominations and the General Election, will determine whether the Judeo-Christian principles that built America prevail, or whether regressivism and the eradication of respect for our creator, God, will win.

 

 

 

The Presumptive Nominee

0r

The Secret Insurrection

Mitt Romney, Presumptive Nominee

Presumptive: based on presumption or probability; affording reasonable ground for belief.

Presume: take for granted, assume, or suppose; assume as true in the absence of proof to the contrary; undertake with unwarrantable boldness; undertake without right or permission; take something for granted; act or proceed with unwarrantable or impertinent boldness; go too far in acting unwarrantably or in taking liberties.

The Point: Presumptive  is a pretty loaded word.

Mitt Romney is the Republican party’s Presumptive Nominee for President of the United States.

 

Romney as Presumptive Nominee: Reasonable Status or Unwarranted Supposition?

The questions must be asked: is Romney the clear front-runner?  Does Romney have a sufficient lead to gain the nomination at the Republican Convention at the end of August?

On the surface, Romney does appear to be a pretty clear front-runner.  He does, after all, have 52% of the popular vote from State primaries at this point, according to Wikipedia’s count, which is based primarily on the Associated Press count.    And the Republican Party “establishment” has recognized Romney as the Presumptive Nominee.

Finally, the mass media, with a few exceptions, certainly seems to be on board with calling Romney the presumptive nominee.
Doesn’t that make Romney a clear winner?
The fact that the conservative Wall Street Journal and Drudge Report did not jump to presume Romney to be the nominee gives us a clue that there may be some doubt about the security of Romney’s position.

Problems with Counting Chickens Before They Are Hatched

There are a number of reasons why Romney should not count his chickens before they are hatched, particularly in this 2012 election:

  • In 2012, a huge conflict is going on within the Republican Party between moderate “establishment” Republicans and the new more conservative “tea party” members, and has motivated a number of conservative groups to attempt unseating Romney, who is way too liberal for their taste.  There is a secret insurrection going on.
  • In 2012, there seem to be new strategies emerging that involve changing delegates’ minds after the primaries, effectively nullifying the results of the primaries and challenging the concept of “bound” candidates.
  • Probability tells us that presumptive candidates are often displaced during the Republican convention– about 43% of the time.  Romney is not immune to this possibility.
  • History also shows us that whenever the presumptive nominee was displaced in the past, the replacement nominee was more likely to be successful in defeating the Democrats in the general election.
  • Delegate votes at the Republican Convention do not reflect the popular vote directly, so delegate votes at the convention may surprise us despite Romney’s 52% of the popular vote.
  • Delegate counts such as AP’s are only estimates, and these have been challenged, the media has been accused of misrepresenting them, and the numbers are under constant change, particularly in 2012.

The Republican Internal Conflict: Why Romney Might Be Challenged

Romney has struggled to inspire a passionate following among conservatives because of his liberal leanings, and much of his early success in primaries was attributed to his campaign’s prolific spending.

Romney’s early struggle in primaries

Prior to his eventual accumulation of 52% of the popular vote in the primaries, Romney struggled to compete with the conservative candidates opposing him.  Lean economic times often cause more voters to be conservative.  Most people have the common sense to realize that during a shortage one must conserve, not spend or waste. Conserving is the root of conservatism.

It has become pretty clear that now in 2012, the Republican “base” includes an increasing number of voters with conservative fiscal and social philosophies, who are not at all happy with Mitt Romney, author of RomneyCare, previous supporter of abortion, and present supporter of gay Boy Scout leaders  and gay adoption.  Some have even challenged Romney’s commitment to one set of values and have accused him of shifting his values in accordance with political advantage.

Although Romney was the front-runner during the primaries, he was also the only liberal candidate.  Since the conservative vote was split among numerous conservative candidates, Romney appeared to be leading, but in actual fact, the total number of conservative voters was outnumbering Romney supporters.  Many of these conservative supporters voted for Santorum in the primaries.  When Santorum suspended his campaign due to his daughter Bella’s illness, these voters were left with nowhere to go other than Romney or Ron Paul.  And Ron Paul’s extreme attitude towards foreign policy, defense budget, and legalization of drugs scared many voters off.  Many voted for Romney because their favorite conservative candidates had suspended their campaigns.  They voted for Romney despite their lack of enthusiasm for Romney.  Romney was the not-Obama.

Ron Paul – Mitt Romney

Things were also complicated by the fact that Ron Paul has refused all along to withdraw from the campaign, and still remains in the race, so Romney cannot claim victory officially.  According to Convention rules (and depending on who is counting or estimating the delegates), Ron Paul still has a plurality of delegates in five states, and his name can be presented for nomination at the Convention.  Romney is still taking this threat very seriously; his supporters are still attempting now in August, to unseat Maine’s Ron Paul delegates – Maine Public Broadcasting Network.  Romney supporters would not be wasting their time if no threat existed.

In fact, three candidates have enough delegates (a plurality of delegates in five states) for their names to be presented for nomination: Paul, Romney, and Santorum.   This opens the door for at least several people to challenge Romney.

What About Paul Ryan? Isn’t He Going to Save the Romney Team?

Paul Ryan joins the Romney ticket

Romney was lagging in some polls against Obama, making establishment Republicans nervous about his ability to carry the election against Obama.  A rightful concern, with so many conservatives still unhappy with the “un-Republican” Romney, who has in the past virtually admitted himself that he was Republican in name only (RINO).: “My R doesn’t stand so much for Republican as it does for reform.”

Many conservatives, particularly in the wake of Obama’s recent abysmal failures to keep his word, are very nervous about the reliability of Romney’s new promises, particularly considering Romney’s previous flip-flop or Etch-a-Sketch reputation.

Republlican Party energized

So Paul Ryan was added to the ticket.  The addition of such a bright, energetic conservative to the ticket has energized the Republican Party dramatically.  The initial reaction has been one of enthusiasm, new focus, strength, and has led to success in changing the agenda; from one of defense against Obama’s fallacious attacks on Romney, to one of challenging Obama on his policies and on his shameless dishonesty.  The addition of Paul Ryan has been very positive, very beneficial, and has been very fruitful in the fundraising department.

Paul Ryan is Too Good

However, something will eventually dawn on people- that if Paul Ryan is so noble in character, intelligent in policy and charismatic in personality that he can transform Romney’s campaign overnight, why is Romney, and not Paul Ryan at the top of the ticket?

It would be tempting for conservatives to rearrange the ticket, putting Paul Ryan at the top, if that is at all possible at the convention.  As Vice President, Paul Ryan’s position and power are not secure.   Ryan could swiftly be demoted by Etch-A-Sketch master Romney into a powerless and peripheral position immediately after the general election.  Already, Mitt Romney is distancing himself from Paul Ryan, claiming that he, Romney, has an economic plan that is “not Paul Ryan’s.”

Mitt Romney would be naïve not to realize that Paul Ryan is a threat to him; not by design, but by Ryan’s inherent likeability, charisma and character; characteristics Romney is lacking.

The fact of the matter is that numerous conservatives like me, who have never committed to one political party, yet who are devoted to unseating the anti-colonialist Barak Obama, are sitting out the Republican internal insurrection to see who wins.  We will support any candidate produced by the GOP convention by virtue of his/her being not-Obama, including Mitt Romney.  But we do have our favorites, and Romney is not one of them.

Is Paul Ryan Enough to Placate the Republican Insurrection?

Many non-Republican conservatives (such as the Tea Party) are not sitting out the insurrection as I am.  They are actively trying to unseat Romney as the presumptive nominee.  (More on specific efforts below.)

Ryan has certainly energized Romney’s campaign, and will help Romney do better in polls against Obama, but Ryan may have little effect on internal Republican battles before the convention, because people realize the “demote-ability” of a Vice President.

If Romney survives convention attempts to unseat him, then Paul Ryan’s presence on the ticket will definitely help Romney against Obama in the general election.  Let’s just hope Ryan does not get demoted to a position of little power and influence after the election, as some Vice-Presidents have been in previous administrations, including George Washington’s, who did not include John Adams in cabinet meetings. The current Vice President, Joe Biden, has virtually been assigned the role of court jester.  In this case, however, his own behavior has contributed to his undignified position; presumably Paul Ryan would fare better than Joe Biden has.

The Case for Nominating Romney Versus Not Nominating Romney

The Republican Party has found its success during previous increasingly liberal decades by compromising repeatedly with liberals.  They have thus slowly drifted away from staunch conservatism.  The seasoned “establishment” Republicans want to continue this trend with the nomination of Mitt Romney, arguing that he will help to capture moderate votes, and perhaps even some liberal votes, helping Republicans to unseat Obama in the general election.

However, the tide of history can change, and has changed in the past.  The Tea Party movement is one indication of a possible change of heart in the American people, driven by economic problems and by the need to face reality.  Economic austerity often motivates philosophical corrections and a shift toward conservatism.  The Republican establishment agenda of compromise and of seeking moderate votes will not attract votes when Americans are drifting towards conservatism.  Instead, it will frustrate people who want true change. When the base gets alienated, they will not go to the polls, and the reduced voter participation will cancel out any gain that was made by compromising to get moderate votes.

Do We Court the Moderates, or Do We Go For a Bold Course-Correction?

The History of Republican primaries and conventions also indicates that the nomination of moderates or liberals (like Romney) often disappoints the Republican base, and leads to defeat in the general election.  Republican Convention historian Dr. Barbara Haney, a RNC convention delegate from Alaska herself, discusses the surprising history of Republican conventions, a history which seems to indicate that the unseating of a lukewarm presumptive nominee by a more conservative alternative during a convention actually improves the chances of winning the general election against the incumbent Democrat.

The enthusiatic rally of support observed this week for Paul Ryan indicates that America might be ready for such a course correction towards conservatism.  A moderate candidate like Romney gets half-hearted, lukewarm support, while a strong, principled conservative like Paul Ryan reenergizes the Republican party overnight.

What Hands Can True Conservatives Still Play?
Can We Learn from History?

The new energized conservatives, including evangelical Christians and the Tea Party, may play any hand available to them at this convention, to nominate a true conservative in place of Mitt Romney.  This might actually be a good idea, based on Barabara Haney’s historical analysis, which showed an 88% chance of success in unseating an incumbent Democrat following the vetting process of a brokered convention, compared with a paltry 31% chance of success in unseating the Democrat incumbent following an uneventful first-ballot nomination of a presumptive nominee like Romney.

Lincoln and Reagan, products of the “brokered convention;” NOT “presumptive nominees.”

 

Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln are examples of the 88% successes, which illustrate Barbara Haney’s historical analysis and theories, on the beneficial nature of brokered conventions.

So it boils down to: do you play chicken, compromise, court the moderate vote, and risk having only a 33% chance of defeating Obama, or do you boldly embrace the uncertainty of the brokered convention, nominate a candidate capable of energizing the general election (like Reagan or Lincoln), and go for the 88% chance of defeating Obama?  And do you put your energizing candidate in the Vice President slot, or in the President slot?

“Establishment” Republicans are making a fallacious assumption in promoting Romney; they are assuming that a conservative candidate of strong character will not attract liberal votes.  Abraham Lincoln disproved that fear, Ronald Reagan disproved that fear, and, incidentally, Paul Ryan has already disproved that fear in his home district of Janesville, Wisconsin, which is liberal, yet has elected conservative Paul Ryan for seven consecutive terms, because of his integrity, his character, and his reliably.

Jim Thorpe testimony on Paul Ryan’s character and popularity:

Incidentally, Paul Ryan is not the only Republican with the character and integrity capable of attracting liberal and moderate votes; add to that list Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and Michelle Bachmann, among others.

The UK Guardian offers the following analysis:

The Romney campaign chose him (Paul Ryan) to deliver the Republican base vote amid fears that die-hard conservatives could cost him the White House by staying at home on election day rather than turning out for a candidate they are ambivalent about….

But that strategy was not working. The US is so polarised that there are, according to the polls, few undecided voters left. Compared with 2008, when about 25% of the electorate had still to make up their minds at this stage in the election, only about 5% are undecided. Both the Democratic and Republican strategists have concluded that the winner on 6 November will be the campaign that fires up its own supporters, that gets its base out, rather than the one that wins over the independent swing voters….

Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said: “It is base v base. There are hardly any independents.” At the cost of winning over a percentage of that small group in the centre, the campaigns risked alienating their core support, he said.

This analysis supports my arguments and the historical findings of Barbara Haney; that a conservative candidate may secure more votes than a moderate at certain times in history.  2012 is one of those times.

Is It Too Late To Change Our Minds?
Aren’t Delegates Committed to Voting for Romney?

Apparently, it’s not too late to change our minds, and Republican historian Barbara Haney indicates that in the last 21 Republican conventions where the nominee, like Romney, was not an incumbent President, 43% of presumptive nominees were unseated at the convention.  Romney, too, can be unseated.  There is historically a 43% probability of that.

How Can Somebody Who Has Over 51% of the Delegates be Unseated?

Here comes the next surprise:  RNC convention rules contain some surprises.

Whether it is by the wisdom of our predecessors or by fluke, RNC convention rules appear to allow for delegates to change their minds about candidates between the primaries and the convention.  Although there has been some dispute over this, the 2008 convention raised this issue for a delegate from Utah, and the RNC Legal Counsel Jennifer Sheehan  upheld the freedom of delegates to change their minds, writing:

The RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.
and
The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.

More details on this controversy on Rule 38 at Rule 38.

Why would the architects of democracy allow such uncertainty and reversibility in RNC primary and convention rules?  Presumably they assumed that delegates will be honorable and will not to change their minds frivolously; that they will make a serious effort to vote (in the first ballot) for the candidate they were “bound” to by the primaries. But ultimately, they are allowed to consider events and developments prior to the Republican Convention, and are allowed to change their votes, or to abstain from voting, if they feel it is in the best interests of their constituents.  It could be argued in 2012 that the majority of primary voters wanted a solid conservative to represent them, and Mitt Romney is not that solid conservative. We have the unusual case where delegates could honestly believe that they will be more faithful to the wishes of the people if they abandon Mitt Romney.  It is such an eventuality that would motivate the architects to include some flexibility into the system.  After all, our elected Representatives and Senators are not bound to vote the party line after their election either, and are allowed to use their best judgment in response to developing events.

What Could Motivate a “Bound” Delegate to Change Their Vote or to Abstain?

Internal tension within the Republican Party is undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory.

Ben Swann, a Fox News anchor from Cincinnati, Ohio, produced a segment of Reality Check, explaining why he believes that internal tension within the Republican Party may be undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory. According to Ben Swann’s Reality Check, The Liberty Movement (conservatives who support Ron Paul) is taking over the GOP. Reality Check suggests that the Republican Party might be winning the Texas battle at the moment, but could actually be losing the primary war to conservatives. Some claim that Ron Paul may have recruited as many as 1,000 delegates going into the Tampa convention, reducing the support Romney thinks that he has:
Ron Paul’s not-so-secret plot for the GOP convention
– ABC News

Fox Reality Check is not alone in their suspicions.  Newt Gingrich also acknowledged that Ron Paul is the “biggest danger” for Romney in Tampa.  As Ron Paul wins over delegates Romney thought he had, it becomes difficult to make any projections about the convention at all.  For example, 1,144 delegates become only 144 delegates if somebody wins over 1,000 of them.  Extreme example, but illustrates the point.

Very recently, a conservative movement has surfaced issuing an appeal to 20,000 RNC members and delegates at the Convention called DumpRomney.   They propose that dumping Romney would be accomplished by “bound” delegates conscientiously abstaining from voting in the first ballot.  When Romney does not get the required 1144 votes in the first ballot, then all delegates are released to vote their conscience in subsequent ballots, and new candidates can be added to the list of contenders.  Not only can previous contenders like Santorum, Gingrich, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann be added, but new names can also be added.  Sarah Palin? Scott Walker? Paul Ryan?  Anybody’s guess.  DumpRomney does not advocate any particular candidate; they simply advocate the dumping of Romney at the RNC convention.

Ron Paul’s campaign has claimed to have won over 500-1,000 delegates. The DumpRomney folks may or may not have success in persuading delegates to abstain in the first ballot.  This split in the Republican Party makes Romney’s nomination in the first ballot very uncertain.

The Battle Is Still On

The present battle for delegates is (not surprisingly) not covered by the mainstream media, who would love to see liberal Romney as the Republican nominee.

The Republican Party is also not advertising the conflict.  Public show of division is rarely wise.

But the battle rages on:

Battle of Gettysburg by Currier & Ives

 

Why Haven’t We Heard This in the Media?

  • Most of the Media is liberal and would love to run against Mitt Romney, who would be challenged to offer anything different from what Obama has offered.
  • “Establishment” Republicans are not in a rush to advertise disunity to their opposition.
  • Conservatives hoping to make a course correction in the Republican Party are not in a rush to advertise their plans and their tactics.

But now, for those of us who are rooting for a brokered convention, for a replacement of Mitt Romney with a true conservative, for the election of the next Ronald Reagan or Abraham Lincoln, this, 1 week before the Republican Convention, when the plans have been laid and the agenda is set, is a good time to remind everyone to have an open mind and a positive attitude toward the possibility of a brokered convention.

This Convention is Bound to Be Very Exciting

There is no question that this Republican Convention is bound to be very exciting.
It also holds the potential to alter the course of history dramatically.
Let’s presume little: historically speaking, Mitt’s odds are 57:43.
Much is going on behind the scenes that the media is not telling us about.
However, if Mitt does get the nomination, our chances of beating Obama are reduced by a factor of about three.

Can Romney Still Redeem Himself?

Can Mitt Romney convince Republican conservatives that he is capable of the kind of leadership that the fiscal and moral challenges of 2012 demand?

Mitt Romney has already pledged to repeal ObamaCare (which 2/3 of America opposes) and to oppose abortion.  He claims that he will balance the budget, something that is high on American list of priorities.

Romney could also pledge to uphold the values that close to 2/3 of Americans hold:

 

Mitt Romney could sign the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life Pledge. He is one of the few Republican candidates who have refused to sign the pledge so far.

Mitt could promise to uphold religious freedom, a freedom that is under threat for the 25% of Americans who are Catholics.

Would Promises Be Believed?

There was a time when political promises carried more weight.   But a new era of political dishonesty has been inaugurated with Obama’s demonstrated ability to about face, and to thumb his nose at his own previous promises.

The lies, reversals, security leaks, and imperial mandates characterizing the Obama administration have led many into shock and disbelief that so much could transpire in less than four years.  Obama rules by issuing mandates each time Congress and the Senate fail to approve the legislation he wants.  No FBI, police, or security force has materialized to challenge Barack Obama on his actions, to label him a traitor, or to drag him off in chains.

The head of the Department of Justice, Eric Holder, panders to Obama’s wishes, fails to protect and enforce the Constitution of the U.S. and it’s laws.  He has been held in contempt of Congress, yet the Department of Justice refuses to prosecute him.

The Department of Homeland Security similarly neglects it’s duties, and seems to be headed by a “liberal sisterhood of plundering hacks” who are consumed in an Animal-House style sexual harassment scandal.

In the past, the news media would also have kept presidents and politicians accountable for their promises.  In 2012, they don’t.  The media clearly has a political agenda, an extremely liberal one not shared by the majority of Americans,  an agenda which 2/3 of America opposes, and the media misuses their profession to misinform the public, attempting to steer them towards liberalism.  Liberal Presidents and politicians get away with more and more lying.  No behavior on the part of liberals shocks the media; neither lies (Obama) nor incompetence (Biden) shock anyone.  Media now actively covers for the liberal politicians whom they favor. They excuse any behavior by candidates who continue to advocate lower and lower standards of morality and accountability in our society.

In this atmosphere, it will be difficult for Romney to acquire the credibility to energize the Republican base and to get them to the polls.  His recent statements in support of gay adoption and gay Boy Scout leaders do little to improve his credibility as a conservative or as a Republican.

Previous to 2012, Romney might have had a better chance to redeem himself.

But today, an alternate, more principled nominee with a history of strong character is more likely to be believed, and would serve both the Republican Party and our nation much better in 2012.

May God Bless, Help, and Direct America!

May God bless, help, and direct America… starting with the Republican Convention on August 27- 30, 2012.
Numerous moral and ethical leaders have indicated that this election is the most important election of a lifetime, an election which will determine the future character of America; strong, responsible and autonomous nation, or bankrupt dissolute welfare state.  The movie 2016 predicts disaster for America if Barack Obama is re-elected on November 6th.

What’s at Stake: Can the People (2/3 of America) Be Highjacked by Media and Politicians (Democrat and Republican), or Does Our Democratic System Still Work?

Related Subsequent Articles:

The Missing Link – Redefining How We Approach Politics  

AND

Elections 2016 or Taming the Black Swan or Selling Out vs Sticking to Principles


 

 

 

 

All Posts