Republican or Progressive? Time to Choose!
Convention? or government sponsored public opinion surveys? (AKA primaries)
Gaslighting Republicans began two years ago with a mission to educate the delegates to the 2024 Republican National Convention about Critical Primary Theory, a political movement invented by the Progressive party in the early 1900”s that created primaries with the stated purpose to “nominate candidates, in lieu of caucuses and conventions.”
As we lurch ahead in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination process, it is now time to choose. Republican or Progressive.
“How to Stop 2024 From Looking Like 2016” headlined Karl Rove’s March 16 op-ed in the Washington Post which elicited this response from Norman S. Moss, of Apopka, FL:
“After reading Karl Rove’s op-ed regarding the manipulation of the primary schedule…I am more convinced that the primaries are a waste of time and money that render the eventual party conventions useless.
I enjoyed the old system of infighting and bargaining when the convention delegates actually chose their party’s standard-bearers. Today, I usually don’t tune into the conventions, as they are meaningless assemblage of partygoers and saber-rattlers living it up on the party’s dime. Let’s do it the proper way, without all the expense and hype of the primaries, by letting the convention delegates do the heavy lifting.”
In the first paragraph of Rove’s piece, he parrots the progressive narrative with academic precision:
“Many Republicans wonder of 2024: Will they see a repeat of 2016, when a vast field of contenders allowed Donald Trump to win a majority of delegates with a plurality of votes in early contests?”
Karl Rove has evidently chosen “Progressive”!
You can’t line a bird cage anywhere without that paragraph appearing there in printed words written by nearly every political writer in the WORLD!
And, thanks to the nearly unanimous media flocking to the Progressive side, previous mentions of Fox News parroting the the Progressive platform on Cavuto Live, Fox and Friends, and The Story with Martha MacCallum was repeated today on Special Report when Brit Hume assured viewers “Trump can win the nomination with a string of plurality showings in primaries”.
The Republican National Convention of 2016 stopped 2024 from looking like 2016.
Rove and most of the other parrots know, or should know, that the Republican National Convention of 2016 has undeniably stopped 2024 from looking like 2016.
We explain how in this previously posted open letter:
Dear Mr. Trump,
This is to request your personal endorsement and acknowledgment of the Republican National Convention of 2024 as the official and only authority to nominate the Republican candidate for President of the United States in 2024.
As I am sure you will recall, during the presidential nomination process in 2016, the political industry, collectively, did successfully gaslight most Americans into believing that “winning” delegates according to the process prescribed in Rule 16 of the Rules of the Republican Party would determine a “presumptive” nominee that the delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention would be forced to actually nominate.
You may also recall that many Republicans defended the First Amendment protected freedom and right of the delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention to vote for whomever they wished, without regard to the results of the primaries in the various states, unless and until the delegates to the 2016 convention voted to “bind” themselves to vote according to the primary results.
While the advocates of Critical Primary Theory succeeded in creating the illusion of the primaries picking the winner, it was actually the work of the two lawyers hired by your campaign that actually “sealed the deal” in 2016.
As you know, these two Jones Day lawyers were hired because of their experience and knowledge about the fact that a majority vote of the individual delegates in a secret ballot was actually the only way to clinch the Republican nomination.
William McGinley and Don McGahn successfully guided the 2016 Convention Rules Committee that resulted in the “binding” of delegates in 2016.
According to a Politico article by Meredith McGraw on 7/11/22, in 2024, “the presidential nominating process remains identical to 2016”, thus, the same rules will attempt to again create the illusion that Rule 16 binds delegates to vote according to pre-convention primary results.
Now, however, the work of your campaign in 2016 confirmed the premise of our 2016 book, “UNBOUND”, which made the case that only the convention delegates themselves could effect any “binding” provision.
Other campaigns are wiser now than they were in 2016. Every candidate smart enough to be a good President of the United States will be aware of the fact that the primaries in 2024 will have no binding effect on the delegates, prior to the convention itself.
I know this may sound contrary at first reading; however, I also know that Mr. McGinley and Mr. McGahn can confirm the facts presented here.
Should it be your decision to seek the Republican nomination to run for President in 2024, I respectfully request that your announcement to do so be coupled with an acknowledgment that the Republican National Convention delegates will choose the candidate. Primaries, in states where they continue to be conducted, would simply indicate voter “preferences”, and not be binding upon convention delegates.
Trump should now endorse the Republican National Convention as the only option in 2024 because….
Just found this NPR interview from 2016. “Play it again, Sam”!
Delegates May Vote Their Conscience At GOP Convention, Delegate Says
April 14, 2016 5:10 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition
Just how far could Republicans go to deny Donald Trump the party's nomination?
A delegate to this summer's convention in Cleveland asserts that the GOP gathering could do anything it wants.
Curly Haugland, a GOP national committeeman from North Dakota, told Morning Edition on Thursday of his interpretation of party rules. Not for the first time, Haugland declared that party rules do not bind any delegate to vote for any particular candidate. He argues that even delegates who are "pledged" to Trump or other contenders due to state primary results are, in reality, free to do as they like.
Custom, Haugland said, may dictate that delegates should support the winners of their state primaries. But the reality of the rules is that primary votes are "absolutely irrelevant" come convention time.
"No matter what the popular belief might be," he said, "there is no connection between primaries and the actual convention."
In our interview and in other conversations, Haugland has cited the GOP's convention Rules 37 and 38. He interprets these convoluted rules to mean that delegates may "vote their conscience." The rules do not explicitly say this. Rule 37 is a detailed explanation of the procedure for roll call votes. However, Rule 38 does say that no delegate may be "bound" by the "unit rule," meaning that delegates from a state can't all be forced to vote the same way.
Haugland's interpretation is by no means a unanimous view. It's more widely accepted that delegates currently pledged to Trump, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, or others must support them at least on the first ballot. But if no candidate received a majority, delegates would necessarily vote in different ways on later ballots in order to resolve the impasse.
Another of Haugland's points is indisputable: "When the convention convenes," he said, "the delegates adopt their own rules, which haven't been adopted yet." There is a standard template for conventions, but delegates could tweak the template, changing the game in any way that they want. The only real constraint is that their actions would be publicly known and therefore open to criticism.
The latitude afforded delegates explains why it's considered significant that Senator Ted Cruz has outmaneuvered Trump in several states, ensuring that as many delegates as possible are Cruz supporters.
Haugland says his personal goal is to adopt a rule that assures delegates the chance to choose from a wide range of alternatives, including candidates such as Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio who have suspended their campaigns.
As the Republican Party grapples with its complex rules guiding the allocation of delegates to presidential candidates, Steve Inskeep talks to an unbound delegate from North Dakota, Curly Haugland.
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Presidential candidate Donald Trump has seized the headlines again.
RENEE MONTAGNE, HOST:
And he's pretty good at that.
INSKEEP: He is repeatedly capturing the spotlight with provocative claims.
MONTAGNE: This time, though, the claim is different. It's about how Donald Trump has been losing ground.
INSKEEP: He's been outmaneuvered by Ted Cruz for many of the convention delegates who choose the Republican nominee, which Mr. Trump does not like.
(SOUNDBITE OR ARCHIVED RECORDING)
DONALD TRUMP: These are dirty tricksters. This is a dirty trick. And I'll tell you what - the RNC, the Republican National Committee, they should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this kind of crap to happen.
INSKEEP: Republican Party chairman Reince Priebus says the nomination process has been known for more than a year, and campaigns, he says, should understand it. We've reached out to a Republican delegate. He's Curly Haugland , who joins us from his home in Bismarck, N.D. Good morning, sir.
CURLY HAUGLAND: Good morning, Steve.
INSKEEP: Is it a dirty trick if Trump gets a lot of votes in primaries but doesn't get many delegates?
HAUGLAND: Well, what happens in primaries doesn't have a whole lot to do with what happens at the convention, no matter what the popular belief might be.
INSKEEP: Well, let's try to understand that because Trump has won a lot of primaries and some caucuses. He has won, we're told, a lot of delegates who go along with that. Isn't there a rule that requires them to stick with Trump?
HAUGLAND: No, there is no connection between primaries and the actual convention. When the convention convenes, the delegates adopt their own rules which haven't been adopted yet, but they're typically the same as the rules from the previous cycle with a few minor tweaks. But a long-standing tradition in the Republican Party that began in 1880 or earlier is the fact that all delegates to the national convention are free to vote their conscience.
INSKEEP: At all times - on every ballot?
HAUGLAND: On every ballot.
INSKEEP: You're telling us something different than something that's been repeated in the media many times. It's been said that Trump at least has the delegates that he has through the first ballot, and after that, anything can happened. You're telling me that based on your reading of the rules, you believe the delegates could do anything at any time.
HAUGLAND: Yes. Well, it's on the plain reading of the rules by anyone who would dig into it. (Laughter) It's hiding right in plain sight, as I say. And it's been there since 1880, when James A. Garfield actually wrote the language that's still almost word-for-word in Rule 37.
INSKEEP: That delegates can vote their conscience?
HAUGLAND: That's exactly what it says. It doesn't say it in so many words, but the history and the testimony of the various delegations over the last 136 years validates the fact that that's the intention and that's what it does. It protects the right of every delegate to vote freely their own conscience at the convention.
INSKEEP: Well, now you point out another fact about political conventions that people probably haven't thought about because there hasn't been a contested one in generations. The first thing the convention does is they show up and vote on their own rules. So essentially, these delegates could do anything, right?
HAUGLAND: Well, they certainly can. But it's - you know, it's always within reason. And most of the things are pretty consistent. They're basically taken out of "Roberts Rules Of Order" - how do you run a convention of delegates?
INSKEEP: Well, let me just ask you because I've heard that you want to propose a rule - perhaps other delegates do, too - that would open up this process and make it possible for you, the group of delegates, to vote for a very wide number of people for president beyond those who are still contending.
HAUGLAND: No, not that - what I've proposed is a way to honor the votes of the primary people. Even though we have no duty to do so, I have suggested that it would be very wise for us to recognize the inputs of the voters in the primaries and the caucuses. And the only way to do that is to deem every person who has participated in primaries and caucuses, and as a consequence has won even a single delegate, to be deemed to have been nominated and therefore eligible to be considered by the convention.
INSKEEP: So do you want someone other than Donald Trump?
HAUGLAND: I want a fair and open process. And I want the convention delegates to have a lot of choices - as many choices as is reasonable to expect. I don't like primaries to begin with. I'll be frank about that. But since we have them, and since there is a wide acceptance of the concept, well, let's at least honor the results of those primaries. What I'm proposing would result in eight candidates being on the first ballot.
INSKEEP: Anybody who got a delegate, in effect?
HAUGLAND: Yep. That would be Bush, Carson, Cruz, Christie, Kasich, Paul, Rubio and Trump.
INSKEEP: Just got about 30 seconds left - is there an argument to be made that the person who gets the most votes in the primaries just ought to be the nominee?
HAUGLAND: Absolutely not - 1,237 is not a mythical number. It's a simple majority of the permanently seated delegates.
INSKEEP: What about just the most votes of people in primaries?
HAUGLAND: Absolutely irrelevant.
INSKEEP: Well, there you go. Mr. Haughland, thanks very much.
HAUGLAND: You betcha (ph).
INSKEEP: Curly Haugland is a Republican National Committee member. He's from North Dakota and also a delegate who's expecting to go to the Republican convention this summer.
And from the Washington Post…
By Niraj Chokshi
March 16, 2016 at 4:33 p.m. CT
Curly Haugland, a Republican National Committee member, says the nomination process is pretty straightforward: The party, not the voters, chooses the nominee.
In an appearance on CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Wednesday morning, Haugland, a North Dakotan and current member of the RNC's Rules Committee, said that any assumption otherwise is misguided.
"That's the problem: The media has created the perception that the voters will decide the nomination," he said. He went on: "Political parties choose their nominee, not the general public, contrary to popular belief."
Technically, this is true. The nomination is decided by delegates to this summer's convention, not directly by voters. But it's probably not a terribly helpful argument to make at a time when Republican establishment types are openly talking about wresting the GOP nomination from Donald Trump at the convention. Trump has said doing so could lead to "riots."
And the RNC said in a statement to The Washington Post that those delegates must represent the voters.
Meet the Press
TRANSCRIPT from Meet the Press, March 26, 2016
CHUCK TODD:
But these delegates have a mind of their own. I want to play a quick interview we did with Curly Haugland out of North Dakota, a G.O.P. delegate and sort of a long-time member of the R.N.C. Here's what he said, Ben, and I’d like to get you respond.
(BEGIN TAPE)
CURLY HAUGLAND:
Well, here's another thing that's not very well understood. The priority of rules and authority in the Republican party is the convention first. The convention is the highest authority. And so the convention rules govern everything.
(END TAPE)
CHUCK TODD:
Ah, the convention rules. And guess what? We don't have convention rules yet, do we?
BEN GINSBERG:
No, we do not.
CHUCK TODD:
That's the point of this that Donald Trump yet doesn't understand.
BEN GINSBERG:
They must be passed by each convention for that convention. There will be a lot of Curly Hauglands out there who have great ideas of their own on what can be done.
CHUCK TODD:
This is going to be madness. I'm going to stop there, sneak in one more break, endgame time in less than a minute. More on the battle for the women’s vote, if it is a Trump/Clinton contest.
***COMMERCIAL BREAK***
Rolling Stone
“All that matters are rules, and the RNC’s rules, according to Haugland — who has pored over them with painstaking attention to detail — offer a surprisingly large amount of leeway when it comes to how the 2,472 ” Republican delegates must act in Cleveland come July.
— Rolling Stone, May 11, 2016
Politico
“Incredibly, Republicans at the highest level can’t quite dismiss Haugland’s arguments. Even last week, three days after Reince Priebus declared Trump the presumptive nominee, the party chairman couldn’t quite bring himself to dismiss the possibility that the convention could nominate someone other than Trump.
— Politico, May 9, 2016