GOP convention gets rowdy in rift over Ron Paul:Split in GOP ahead ?
|
|
|||||
|
13 votes
|
|
42% | ||
|
13 votes
|
|
42% | ||
|
5 votes
|
|
16% | ||
Convention in Tampa, Fla., on Tuesday, Aug. 28, 2012. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)
TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — Feeling slighted, supporters of Texas Rep. Ron Paul's presidential bid chanted and booed Tuesday after Republican convention delegates adopted new rules that could impede insurgent candidates in the future.
The brief uproar was a rare unscripted moment in a carefully-choreographed convention that organizers hoped would showcase Republican harmony over nominee Mitt Romney. After the voice vote on the rules, the next speaker was quickly called in an attempt to limiting the amount of time Paul's supporters had to chant "Shame on you."
The rules are designed to limit the ability of insurgent presidential candidates to amass delegates to future Republican conventions. They will bind delegates to the outcome of presidential primaries and caucuses, preventing a candidate like Paul from pushing up their delegate counts at state conventions.
Paul delegates saw them as a power play by the Republican old guard.
"If you're trying to win a presidential campaign and put on a show, you shouldn't poke a sharp stick in the eye of conservative activists. That's what happened," said Colorado delegate Dudley Brown, who leads a gun rights organization back home.
Paul didn't win a single presidential primary but he got 190 delegate votes during the roll call of states that officially nominated Romney Tuesday. Romney got 2,061.
Paul briefly showed up on the convention floor, signing autographs and posing for photos. As he left the arena, he declined to say if he felt his delegates were being treated unfairly. "I'll let you know when it's over," he said.
Paul later said in a broadcast interview that he has no plans to endorse anyone for president.
"I am endorsing, you know, peace and prosperity and individual liberty, the Constitution, and I'm more intense on that than I am on the politics of it," Paul told Fox News.
Supporters of the new rules say voters expect the delegate count to reflect the outcome of state primaries and caucuses. The convention's rules committee made some late revisions to the new rules to placate party activists who weren't necessarily Paul backers.
The new rules originally allowed presidential candidates to choose which delegates would represent them at the convention — taking that power from state parties. However, in a concession to local activists, party leaders agreed to remove the language. Instead, the rules say that delegates who support candidates other than the one they are obligated to support shall have their votes deemed "null and void."
"These rules will provide a strong governing framework for our convention and for our party," said former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, who headed the rules committee.
Mississippi Republican National Committeeman Henry Barbour said delegates shouldn't let a fight over rules distract from the goal of beating Democratic President Barack Obama.
"None of us want a campaign overreaching," Barbour said. "We want bound delegates to live up to their commitment."
Top Opinion
-
Brian ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/08/29 03:51:39
Ron Paul entered the race as a member and candidate of the wrong party.
Just like that, the Democrats need to kick the socialists out of their party. or change the name to Social Democrat or Communist, and let the few old line Democrats start a new Democratic Party.
Romney will win and everything will start working for the good of the country.
For me, both main parties can totally rot in the Lake of Fire (Hell). I've Lawfully changed jurisdictions without physically moving.
But I suppose "anything to win" is fine, but only if its your candidate.
Hypocrite - yes, Ron Paul is a hypocrite of the worst kind; wraps himself in the Constitution while voiding the peoples vote. He can sink no lower. My only concern is that he has managed to dirty his son with his hypocritical behavior - Rand seems to have a good head on his shoulders at this point.
Later, this is tiresome, Paul lost and we can thank God
Just stop, you are defending the indefensible.
Give it up, it just looks foolish now
Also I'm not about to just back down to someone that has constantly lied to me about romney's stances, even claiming he would support auditing the fed when he's never taken such a position. You're in no position to say anyone is in a fantasy land.
It is indeed a fantasy to think he could ever have won, he could not. He has been rejected by the voters for 13 years at this level. He lost, it is over for him and it was over when he started; there was no doubt.
Now, stop just stop - it is over for Paul. There is no reason for this at all, none. Have a good day
Rejected by voters? Or simply rejected by an establishment that changes rules and procedures in reaction to overwhelming popularity to a candidate in order to rig the election against him? Considering the fact that Even Iowa had its rules changed from the most open and honest of all caucuses to counting everything in secret, and all of this while Republicans heads were exploding in fear of a Paul victory inclines me to believe the later.
Done with this nonsense
He won open and honest conventions.
Open and honest conventions are a more reliable indicator of the will of the people as the votes cant be manipulated.
As Stalin said " those that cast the vote decide nothing. Those that count the votes decide everything". The GOP proved that.
and you can continue to believe this crap but he is a loser.
Now why should I vote for a party that violates its own rules? Why should I vote for a candidate who's campaign actively worked to oust delegates? why should I vote for a party that has no respect for what the voters have to say?