Election Infiltration

and

Here Comes Paul Revere!
.

Some Shocking Realizations

Let’s put the shocking news bluntly:

• • Primaries and the binding of delegates, which media pundits are presently analyzing agonizingly, are not democratic necessities in elections, but may actually be harmful to the democratic process, making it uber-susceptible to manipulation.
• Primaries and the binding of delegates have been introduced illegitimately into RNC rules by progressives, in order to hijack the Republican Party. This quasi-militaresque infiltration of the Republican Party by liberals been ongoing for several decades now, pretty much under the radar. It resulted in the nomination of Mitt Romney, to the dismay of millions of conservative Republicans in 2012.
• Now this infiltration is being challenged by a modern day Patriot who is as determined and as courageous as was Paul Revere in 1775,  as he rode across the country warning the Colonies that the “British were coming.”

As the new Paul Revere exposes the truth and suggests possible remedies, we must all decide whether to heed his alarm or whether to let progressives continue their take over of the Republican Party.

BTW: Don’t blame the Republicans
later if you don’t lift a finger
to help their conservative contingent during the present battle.

Have You Lost Your Marbles, or is this the Story of the Century?

Now some will want to question the sanity of the above suggestion-  that Republicans have been succumbing to grand scale election manipulation by outsiders for several decades -but give this a paragraph or two more, and see what your common sense tells you after that.

Most conservatives will willingly acknowledge that liberals have slowly and clandestinely penetrated many other crucial elements of our society, from universities, to Hollywood, to the media.  Examples of clandestine infiltration of one’s enemy can be  also be seen throughout history-  from the Trojan Horse stories of 11th century BC to the widespread  infiltration of political movements today. Reports abound of Alinsky tactics used by today’s progressives, which include detailed instructions on the infiltration of opponents with intention to disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize conservatives.

In the present political climate, with the President of the United States enforcing laws selectively, with Supreme Court Justices overriding the will of the American people on the definition of marriage and on ObamaCare, with elected Republicans abandoning conservative platform values and chumming up and selling out to the opposition, with Secretaries of State committing grossly dangerous  national security email violations and a socialist candidate who is just one opponent’s FBI indictment away from becoming a major contender in the US Presidential race, is it really so unreasonable to consider whether a decades- long monumental hijacking of Republican nominations has taken place by clandestine liberals, and whether true conservatives who actually support the (still-conservative) Republican Platform are on the brink of losing the Republican Party altogether?

Are You Sold?  Or At Least Curious?
Then Read On…

If you are prepared to accept the possible infiltration of the Republican Party’s nomination process by progressives in recent decades, and want to hear what our modern day Paul Revere has to say about what he has unearthed and what can be done about it, read on.

So Who Is This “Paul Revere?” and later, What is He Saying?

Who is raising the alarm on the infiltration of the Republican presidential nomination process?
Our modern “Paul Revere” is Curly Haugland, a member of the Republican “Establishment.”

“Aha!” you say- “Establishment Republican!” “One of those nefarious people trying to thwart the wishes of the American people, who are trying to sneak in Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio or John Kasich into the Republican convention!”

Actually, NO.

Curly Haugland is as conservative as they come– he wrote GOP Field Must Use 2016 to Force Conservative Primary Reform for Breitbart in December of 2015.
This bears repeating- Use 2016 to Force Conservative Primary Reform!

Curly Haugland is an unbound delegate, a senior GOP official.  He is a national committeeman of the North Dakota Republican State Committee, from 2004 to the present.  He is President of the North Dakota Policy Council, from 2006 to the present.  He was on the RNC Rules Committee since 2009, and was RNC State Chairman for the North Dakota GOP from 1999-2001. He has the common “humble American can make it good” story that so many of us have and that inspires so much love for the Constitution and for the United States in all of us.

So What Did Curly Say?

Curly said he has found hard evidence that Republican delegates are ALL unbound, and are all free to vote their conscience at the Republican Convention in Cleveland in July.

Curly announced his findings in a letter to the RNC.
Not one member of the GOP, not even Chairman Reince Priebus, has contradicted Curly’s findings so far.
Curly states in his letter:

Binding delegates to the results of presidential preference primaries first appeared in the Rules of the Republican Party in 1976. ….. And, 1976 was also the last time delegates have been bound by convention rules to cast their votes according to the results of binding primary elections………“Select, allocate and bind. The fraudulent addition of these three words to the Rules of the Republican Party in the 2008 Convention, as detailed in Chapter One, is the political equivalent of “spinning straw into gold”. Without the use of force to bind the votes of delegates to the results of the primary process, primaries are nearly worthless “beauty contests”.

So Curly has produced the hard evidence showing that the “binding” provision was added to the RNC Rules fraudulently, and that Republican delegates were only “bound” for one Republican convention in 1976.
All the rest has been smoke and mirrors, with progressive infiltrators of the Republican Party trying to use “binding” to obtain control over the Republican nomination process for several decades.

The Corollary

A corollary is something that follows unavoidably and logically from a given fact.
So what follows unavoidably and logically from Curly’s fact finding that Republican delegates are not bound?

What follows, is that all this talk of bound delegates, committed delegates, plurality and majority of votes, “winner take all” and most importantly, of 1237 delegates and “presumptive nominee” is just that – talk. And speculation.
If  all delegates are free, it’s impossible to know whether anybody has 1237 delegates until the first vote at he Convention has been cast.

The corollary is that the Republican Party selects their nominee for President at the Convention, and not during the Primaries.  The Primaries are advisory in nature, and give the Party an opportunity to see and to consider what the public thinks.
But the Primaries are not binding in any way on the Republican Party.

That Sounds Like They’re Trying to Get Rid of Trump!

The facts that Curly Haugland has found are just historical facts and rules.
Those facts may be used by many people for many purposes.
Curly Haugland started his search for facts way before Donald Trump was ever thought to be a serious candidate.
Curly Haugland was actually searching for information on following one’s own conservative conscience when your party is besieged by progressives.

These Facts Might Make it Possible for Conservatives to Take Back the Republican Party with an “Outsider” like Ben Carson, or Carly Fiorina.

These new findings, that State delegates still have the rights that our American system first gave them, the same rights that Senators and Representatives and General Election Electors have, the rights that  counterbalance the primaries (which are often very skewed by voter fraud and by deep pocketed donors)- Curly’s finding that delegates are permitted to use their common sense and conscience to ensure that candidates are faithful to the Republican Party Platform, are very exciting.

These findings open new doors for nominating very conservative candidates — candidates like the 65% conservative Republican candidates who first ran with Donald Trump, and who were eliminated by the primary money game, while 65% of American voters were still backing them. The conservative voters of America should not be punished for the fact that so many conservative candidates came forward.

In fact, Curly, as a member of the Rules committee, will be proposing a Rule change to return more power to the Convention, where the delegates from 50 States and the territories represent the wishes of the States (as opposed to the Primaries, which often reflect the depth of the pockets of candidates).
Curly is proposing the reversal of the Mitt Romney Rule change of 2012, which allowed liberal Mitt Romney to kick conservative Ron Paul out of the Convention before it even started.  Curly’s new proposed rule allows any candidate who won any delegates in the State primaries to enter the Convention, so candidates with shallow pockets and no wealthy donors (like Ben Carson) are not punished at the outset.

God Bless Donald Trump’s Heroic Heart, He May Still Win- But Even The Donald has to Follow the Age-Old Rules

It is still premature to nominate Donald Trump, until it can be demonstrated at the Convention that he has won 51% of the Republican vote.

The entire history of the United States, starting with Federal elections and continuing with political party rules, is based on arriving at a candidate who has 51% of the people behind him or her.
This design is crafted very purposefully and carefully, to ensure that candidates are not punished when many people run, and to ensure that our nation is not governed by someone whom 65% of the nation does not want.

When there is a legitimate 51% backing of one candidate in the nation, that candidate is nominated.
But this year, with 17 candidates, the conservative vote was split between as many as 16 candidates.  Just because Donald Trump got one third of the nation behind him does not mean that the conservative voters whose candidates dropped out will back Donald Trump.

Donald Trump, no matter how loud he sells his case, must follow the rules.

And those rules have always been that if a person does not get 51% of the vote, or 1237 delegates, that person has to run off at the convention against other candidates, to give the people a final say.
And now we find out that the 1237 cannot be counted before the first ballot at the Convention.
This may not even be an issue, unless Donald Trump actually gets 1237 votes– but even then, who gets to estimate the number of delegates?

Aren’t the RINOS going to Take Advantage of the Brokered Convention?

Yes, there will be some  RINO progressive “establishment” types who may try to use these findings to their advantage, to re-introduce people like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio, Mitt Romney or even Paul Ryan at a brokered convention.

But there will also be CONSERVATIVE “establishment” types like Curly, people who were elected and sent by their States, people who represent voters, not the Washington Republican elites, conservatives who are just as determined to reclaim the Republican Party and to stick to it’s still-conservative platform.

The Battle MUST Be Fought

This battle between the progressive and conservative Republicans MUST be fought out at the Convention, and it is wrong for Donald Trump, and the media, including Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, to declare that Donald Trump represents the will of the people when he does not have a majority, and thus to hand control of the Republican Party over prematurely to someone like Donald who is only partially conservative and who may not support the “social” conservative aspects of the Republican Party Platform, which represent the Judeo-Christian values that most of us Americans professes to hold.

Isn’t Curly Cheating Donald Trump of a Legitimate Win?

No, Curly is not cheating Donald Trump of anything.

Neither Donald Trump, nor some voters, nor Rush Limbaugh, nor Sean Hannity, seem to realize that there is a big difference between a plurality and a majority, that Donald does not have the majority, he just has the plurality, and that there are whole fields of mathematics and political science which calculate the fairest way to run off competing candidates in an election.  Those principles have been incorporated into our General Election Rules, into the RNC Rules, and into Roberts Rules of Order which governs the RNC.  We need to continue following those rules in 2016.

Shame on Some

One alarming aspect of the 2016 Election is that some very big players have not only failed to do their homework and to understand the rules of the game, but they have also recently started discussing “riots” and “violence” if the 35% of Americans who support Donald Trump do not instantly get their way.

Donald Trump, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity have referred to the “riots” that they claim will result if Donald Trump does not get the Republican nomination.  Suggestion of riots by such nationally known figures are tantamount to inciting of riots, and shame on Donald, shame on Rush, and shame on Sean for abusing their status and talking this way.

Those of us who are fair-minded may be happy to vote for a President Trump in November, but we don’t like to see our conservative colleagues using the left’s Alinsky scare tactics, nor do we want to be deprived of the chance that a brokered convention could very legitimately produce a staunch conservative President like the ones produced by two other brokered conventions – Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan.

Aren’t Republicans Trying to Thwart the Will of the People?
Some May Be, But Some are Trying to Win Back the Conservative Platform

These developments do not mean that the Republican Party is thwarting the will of the people.

In fact, they would be out of business pretty quickly if they tried to thwart the will of the people, as evidenced by the disillusionment of the electorate with the nomination of Mitt Romney in 2012.

Yes, there is a civil war going on in the Republican Party between conservatives and progressive infiltrators, but progressives have won only a few battles, and many conservatives are not giving up the fight.

So why should we give up the battle before it has even started?

Watching Reince Priebus sweating out a stuttered answer about Curly’s claims on Sean Hannity yesterday is all we need to know, to gauge our chances of success in reclaiming conservatism through a brokered convention.
Don’t let the fear-mongers push us into premature nominations!

May God bless and guide America!

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

• Battle over Maine delegates
• Maine Governor threatening to boycott convention
• Battle over Oklahoma delegates 
• Republican activists challenging 20 Ron Paul delegates from Maine 
• 160 convention delegates sued the RNC to be freed from voting for Romney
• Louisiana’s GOP delegate count is being challenged (8-13-12)
• Arguments continue over GOP convention delegates

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:

• Life: 2/3 of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion
• Liberty: more Americans support religious leaders on upholding religious freedom than those who support Obama’s trampling of religious freedom, and 2/3 of Americans want reduced government control of our daily lives
• Marriage: 2/3 of American states have passed amendments protecting traditional marriage.

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 6^th.

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