Not a Single Republican Delegate Is ‘Bound’ to Donald Trump

[Mesaclone]

Really?  Which one?

There's only one that I know of. Perhaps you are familiar with many more. If so, more power to ya.

Gospel of Thomas says it best:
"If those pulling you say to you, 'Look, the kingdom is in the sky,' the birds of the sky will go before you. Or if they say that it is beneath the ground, the fish of the sea will go in, preceding you. And the kingdom of God is within you and outside you. Whoever knows himself will find this and when you know yourselves [you will know that you are children of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you are in poverty and you are the poverty."

And Buddha nails it quite well also:
It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell.

But the larger point, is that the wisdom of god and his presence can be found everywhere one looks...if one is looking. But then again, this has nothing to do with politics, and as such reveals the wisdom of our founders in keeping religion and politics free of overt influence from each other.

[RoosGirl]

lets put this Democrat fantasy to bed:

Thanks to Paul supporters trying this game before, this rule is in still effect until new rules are voted on by the full body of Delegates.

RNC convention rule 16(a)(2). It says that faithless delegates will be punished for violating state rules if they try to vote against a bound candidate .

    (2) For any manner of binding or allocating delegates under these rules, if a delegate (i) casts a vote for a presidential candidate at the national convention inconsistent with the delegate’s obligation under state law or state party rule, (ii) nominates or demonstrates support under Rule No. 40 for a presidential candidate other than the one to whom the delegate is bound or allocated under state law or state party rule, or (iii) fails in some other way to carry out the delegate’s affirmative duty under state law or state party rule to cast a vote at the national convention for a particular presidential candidate, the delegate shall be deemed to have concurrently resigned as a delegate and the delegate’s improper vote or nomination shall be null and void. Thereafter the secretary of the convention shall record the delegate’s vote or nomination in accordance with the delegate’s obligation under state law or state party rule. This subsection does not apply to delegates who are bound to a candidate who has withdrawn his or her candidacy, suspended or terminated his or her campaign, or publicly released his or her delegates.

This subsection is about enforcing state binding rules. It says at the top that a delegate who does not vote as the state directed them to will be discharged, and their vote will be recorded as the state initially directed.

Current National Convention rules specifically DO enforce state binding rules. This Rule is in force for the Rules committee when they meet. Until the Convention Delegates vote affirmatively on a proposed rule out from the rules committee this rule governs their conduct in the Rules committee. Thus any #neverTrump activity by any member of the Rules committee is automatically a resignation and voided. This would happen before any votes on any proposed rules would happen.

RULE NO. 42
Temporary Rules

Upon the adoption of the report of the Convention Committee on Rules and Order of Business, Rule Nos. 26-42 shall constitute the Standing Rules for this convention and the temporary rules for the next convention.

Checkmate.

You said it yourself, "this rule is in still effect until new rules are voted on by the full body of Delegates." and this will happen the week prior to and at the convention.  So it's going to matter who has done a better job of getting delegates in place.  From what I have been reading, even though Cruz suspended his campaign he's still got loyal people working in the states to get themselves elected as one of the state delegates.  I'm sure Manafort is working on it also on behalf of Trump, but he didn't come into the picture until May, and I don't think Trump had the experience or knowledge to understand that getting delegates loyal to him seated was important.  All we can do is wait and see what happens.  The point of the article is that the rules are such, and so the possibility exists, that they do allow for a huge Trump upset.  Personally, I think Trump will remain, but I acknowledge the possibility of Trump being replaced because technically the rules allow it.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Checkmate.

Not so much.

What you quoted is from the 2012 rules, which have been amended four times since then. (April 12, 2013, January 24, 2014, May 9, 2014
 & August 8, 2014)

That rule now reads as follows.

RULE NO. 16
Election, Selection, Allocation, or Binding of Delegates and Alternate Delegates

(a) Binding and Allocation.
(2) The Secretary of the Convention shall faithfully announce and record each delegate’s vote in accordance with the delegate’s obligation under these rules, state law or state party rule. If any delegate bound by these rules, state party rule
or state law to vote for a presidential candidate at the national convention demonstrates support under Rule 40 for any person
other than the candidate to whom he or she is bound, such support shall not be recognized. Except as provided for by state law or
state party rule, no presidential candidate shall have the power to remove a delegate.

There will be no removal or automatic resignation of delegates based on their vote unless the national delegation votes new language into that rule.

Current National Convention rules specifically DO enforce state binding rules.

Yes, they do, but they also prohibit forcing any delegate to vote as a unit with his state delegation. Regardless, the Rules Committee can propose changes in their report to the national delegation, which can do whatever it wants with the rules.

This Rule is in force for the Rules committee when they meet. Until the Convention Delegates vote affirmatively on a proposed rule out from the rules committee this rule governs their conduct in the Rules committee. Thus any #neverTrump activity by any member of the Rules committee is automatically a resignation and voided. This would happen before any votes on any proposed rules would happen.

No, Rule 16 does not govern meetings of the Rules Committee. It governs how the Secretary officially records votes cast by delegates for presidential nominees. It does not govern "activity" before the national delegation votes.

RULE NO. 42

Temporary Rules

Upon the adoption of the report of the Convention Committee on Rules and Order of Business, Rule Nos. 26-42 shall
constitute the Standing Rules for this convention and the temporary rules for the next convention.

Note that Rule 16 is not between 26 and 42.

[Mechanicos]

You said it yourself, "this rule is in still effect until new rules are voted on by the full body of Delegates." and this will happen the week prior to and at the convention. So it's going to matter who has done a better job of getting delegates in place.  From what I have been reading, even though Cruz suspended his campaign he's still got loyal people working in the states to get themselves elected as one of the state delegates.  I'm sure Manafort is working on it also on behalf of Trump, but he didn't come into the picture until May, and I don't think Trump had the experience or knowledge to understand that getting delegates loyal to him seated was important.  All we can do is wait and see what happens.  The point of the article is that the rules are such, and so the possibility exists, that they do allow for a huge Trump upset.  Personally, I think Trump will remain, but I acknowledge the possibility of Trump being replaced because technically the rules allow it.

During the week before the Convention when the Rules committee meet Per rule 42 every delegate member of the Rules committee subject to and under Rule 16. To do what you hope thy do will trigger subsection ii. That's automatic resignation, ejection,nullification and reversal for anybody who even tries it. The National is the enforcer of the rules governing the conduct of the rules Committee. You can thank Paul supporters for this draconian  rule set that is in force NOW and will stay in Force during the meeting of the Rules Committee the week before the Convention. Its designed specifically for that since the Paul people tried the same thing with a rules committee - its why these rules exist.

[Mechanicos]

Not so much.

What you quoted is from the 2012 rules, which have been amended four times since then. (April 12, 2013, January 24, 2014, May 9, 2014
 & August 8, 2014)

That rule now reads as follows.

There will be no removal or automatic resignation of delegates based on their vote unless the national delegation votes new language into that rule.

Yes, they do, but they also prohibit forcing any delegate to vote as a unit with his state delegation. Regardless, the Rules Committee can propose changes in their report to the national delegation, which can do whatever it wants with the rules.

No, Rule 16 does not govern meetings of the Rules Committee. It governs how the Secretary officially records votes cast by delegates for presidential nominees. It does not govern "activity" before the national delegation votes.

Note that Rule 16 is not between 26 and 42.

Rules 1-25 are not called out as "temporary rules." These are overall party structure rules, state delegation selection and binding rules for the next convention, and contested delegation rules. These are the rules that are in force now.

https://ballotpedia.org/Rule_16_and_its_impact_on_the_2016_Republican_National_Convention

Mine is the Current Rule and its a standing Rule that governs the Rules committee which has no power to change it unless the entire delegate body votes their proposal in. Rule 16 stops your game. Still Checkmate. You omitted the language of the current one which I quoted

[BuckeyeTexan]

Rules 1-25 are not called out as "temporary rules." These are overall party structure rules, state delegation selection and binding rules for the next convention, and contested delegation rules. These are the rules that are in force now.

There are no rules. There are only guidelines until the national delegation votes in a set of rules.

As I said, Rule 16 doesn't govern any activities by committees or delegates before the vote. It governs only how the Secretary records the votes of individual delegates for a presidential nominee.

[Mechanicos]

There are no rules. There are only guidelines until the national delegation votes in a set of rules.

As I said, Rule 16 doesn't govern any activities by committees or delegates before the vote. It governs only how the Secretary records the votes of individual delegates for a presidential nominee.

The Standing rules do not go way until new rules are voted in at the convention. The rules Committee can only propose changes. Its still under the Standing rules. Like I said Paul people tried this before, Its not a grey area.

[Bigun]

The party governs itself, and according to the rules it has implemented, there is only one convention where the delegates were truly bound: 1976’s, when Gerald Ford fended off a challenge from Ronald Reagan. In every other Republican convention ever held, every delegate has been free to vote their conscience.

That is a fact! Like it or not!

[RoosGirl]

During the week before the Convention when the Rules committee meet Per rule 42 every delegate member of the Rules committee subject to and under Rule 16. To do what you hope thy do will trigger subsection ii. That's automatic resignation, ejection,nullification and reversal for anybody who even tries it. The National is the enforcer of the rules governing the conduct of the rules Committee. You can thank Paul supporters for this draconian  rule set that is in force NOW and will stay in Force during the meeting of the Rules Committee the week before the Convention. Its designed specifically for that since the Paul people tried the same thing with a rules committee - its why these rules exist.

They don't even have to vote against Trump.  Like I've said before, all they have to do is change the rules to say that the candidate needs 75% (for example) of the delegates to win instead of a simple majority.  Trump doesn't have that.  It goes to second ballot.  If we go with the belief that most delegates are bound only on the first ballot here is the scenario where they are unbound.  Of course, changing to something like a 75% delegate count is the challenge and why your statement, that I got on to you about for not having any proof of, is important to the conversation.

[BuckeyeTexan]

https://ballotpedia.org/Rule_16_and_its_impact_on_the_2016_Republican_National_Convention

Mine is the Current Rule (...) Rule 16 stops your game. Still Checkmate. You omitted the language of the current one which I quoted

Again, not so much on the Checkmate. Ballotpedia? I didn't omit anything. Try using the rules to which the GOP officially links from its website:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/prod-static-ngop-pbl/docs/Rules_of_the_Republican+Party_FINAL_S14090314.pdf

It's not my game. I'm discussing what the rules actually say versus what you claim they say.

[r9etb]

In every other Republican convention ever held, every delegate has been free to vote their conscience.

Yes and no -- as French points out in the article there can be state rules that bind the members of their delegation to some degree.  The "no unit" rule weighs against this to some extent, but the latitude of individual delegates to vote their conscience may well be constrained.

However, much as the rules for the '76 convention allowed delegates to be bound, it is possible ... possible ... that the rules for this convention might be set up so as to allow members to abstain over matters of conscience.  (As opposed to actively voting for a candidate different from the one to whom they are bound.)

Whether this is a reasonable hope, I don't know.  But it seems plausible to me (a non-lawyer).

[BuckeyeTexan]

Yes and no -- as French points out in the article there can be state rules that bind the members of their delegation to some degree.  The "no unit" rule weighs against this to some extent, but the latitude of individual delegates to vote their conscience may well be constrained.

However, much as the rules for the '76 convention allowed delegates to be bound, it is possible ... possible ... that the rules for this convention might be set up so as to allow members to abstain over matters of conscience.  (As opposed to actively voting for a candidate different from the one to whom they are bound.)

Whether this is a reasonable hope, I don't know.  But it seems plausible to me (a non-lawyer).

Individual delegates are bound only to the extent that the national delegation binds them when adopting a set of rules to govern the convention. No other rules apply to the convention whether state party rules, state laws, or otherwise.

For the record, I fully expect to Trump to win the nomination on the first ballot.

[Mechanicos]

They don't even have to vote against Trump.  Like I've said before, all they have to do is change the rules to say that the candidate needs 75% (for example) of the delegates to win instead of a simple majority.  Trump doesn't have that.  It goes to second ballot.  If we go with the belief that most delegates are bound only on the first ballot here is the scenario where they are unbound.  Of course, changing to something like a 75% delegate count is the challenge and why your statement, that I got on to you about for not having any proof of, is important to the conversation.

Thats why I mentioned Rule 16 (2) subsection ii (and iii) which are about any actions inconsistent. So a if they try to sabotage the Nominee it kicks in. It covers what Paul's people tried to do which was very similar to what is proposed here. Its why the rule exists.

[r9etb]

For the record, I fully expect to Trump to win the nomination on the first ballot.

Alas, so do I. 

We're screwed.

[Wingnut]

It ain't over till it's over.  A lot could happen to a man as unstable as Donald Trump.  A whole lot.

[r9etb]

It ain't over till it's over.  A lot could happen to a man as unstable as Donald Trump.  A whole lot.

That's what I keep hoping.  But he's kind of like Rasputin, though .... how many fatal wounds can the guy self-inflict before he actually kicks the bucket?

It won't surprise me if and when Trump finally makes his One Last Mistake; if it happens before the convention, the question becomes one of whether or not the Convention is brave enough to remove him from consideration.

When it comes to matters of party bravery, however, my expectations are not high.

[GrouchoTex]

It ain't over till it's over.  A lot could happen to a man as unstable as Donald Trump.  A whole lot.

People ask me if I am going to vote for Trump, to stop Hillary.
I say "Yes, I will vote to stop Hillary, or Bernie, or Biden, or Warren, whoever gets that nomination.
I do not know whether I will vote for Trump or not".
This drives some people crazy, and I instantly become a closet Democrat, etc.....
As crazy as it sounds, he may not be the Republican nominee anymore, on that glorious Tuesday morning in November, and maybe by his own choice.
You just can't tell.
You can't count on Hillary being there, either.
Either way, I'll know in November who I will be voting for, and it will not be a Democrat.